At some point in life, most of us come to a realization—one that is both sobering and liberating: most people don’t really care about everything we are going through. Not because people are cruel, but because they are consumed with their own lives. The modern workplace, however, is experiencing a cultural shift that pushes against this reality, encouraging leaders to absorb the emotional burdens of their teams under the banner of psychological safety and empathetic leadership.
The question is: does this make the workplace stronger or weaker?
The Oversharing Culture and the Illusion of Care
Social media has conditioned many to believe that because others engage with their emotional struggles—through likes, comments, and shares—it must mean they deeply care. But much of what appears to be empathy is actually something else: voyeurism, distraction, and self-comparison. People engage with others’ emotional stories not necessarily because they care, but because they are curious, entertained, or evaluating their own lives in contrast.
This confusion—mistaking voyeuristic interest for deep concern—has spilled over into the workplace. Employees increasingly expect their companies and managers to provide emotional validation, not just professional support. They don’t just want to be heard; they want their emotions to be held. Workplaces that validate this expectation risk reinforcing a distorted view of the world—one where people expect organizations to function like surrogate families, absorbing personal burdens rather than cultivating personal resilience.
The Clash Between Emotional Caretaking and Mission-Driven Work
The mission-driven management style depends on cultivating individuals who self-manage, self-regulate, and thrive in structured autonomy. It is built on the idea that individuals should be responsible for their own emotional states, rather than expecting their managers or teams to carry the weight for them.
Yet, the Western workplace has increasingly moved toward redistributing the emotional burdens of individuals across the team, or specifically onto management. Leaders are expected not only to drive business outcomes but also to act as emotional anchors, absorbing stress, uncertainty, and personal struggles on behalf of their teams.
The problem? When emotional dependency replaces self-regulation, does the workplace become more resilient—or more fragile?
A strong team should not crumble under pressure because individuals have been conditioned to offload their burdens onto leadership. Yet, if an organization ignores emotional health entirely, it risks burning out its people in pursuit of relentless efficiency.
Wellbeing Without the Illusion
If we accept that people should self-manage their emotions, then where does wellbeing fit into a workplace that also wants to empower individuals?
Wellbeing should not be about providing constant emotional validation—it should be about equipping people with the tools to manage themselves effectively.
- Resilience Training – Teaching individuals how to handle stress, setbacks, and pressure without external validation.
- Cognitive Tools – Encouraging structured thinking, mindfulness, and self-awareness techniques that improve emotional regulation.
- Boundaries Over Emotional Absorption – Creating an environment where managers lead with empathy without becoming emotional caretakers.
- Workplace Wellbeing as an Individual Responsibility – Making wellbeing resources available, but leaving it to individuals to engage with them on their own terms.
The Question We Must Ask
If businesses are meant to be mission-driven organizations rather than emotional support systems, how do they strike a balance between embracing reality and offering wellbeing tools that strengthen individuals rather than weaken them?
- Where do we draw the line between a supportive workplace and an enabling one?
- Can we empower individuals to self-manage their emotions without making them feel unsupported?
- Should managers be expected to absorb emotions, or to cultivate emotional independence in their teams?
The workplace is evolving. But the ultimate question remains: are we creating stronger individuals, or just more dependent ones?
…