The Hidden Cost of Fear in the Workplace: Why Generational Optimism Isn’t Enough

The hidden cost of fear in the workplace Intimidation may secure compliance, but it robs companies of creativity, loyalty and long-term growth

In the evolving corridors of corporate India, a quiet paradox persists. While boardrooms echo with optimism about fearless young professionals reshaping workplace culture, the undercurrent of intimidation remains stubbornly intact. The belief that generational shifts alone have diluted hierarchical fear is not only premature—it risks masking the deeper, systemic issues that continue to erode organisational health.

Praveen Purohit, Deputy CHRO at Vedanta Resources, recently asserted that “today’s workforce is made up of young, fearless minds… which has drastically reduced the culture of intimidation compared to earlier times.” While this sentiment reflects a hopeful trajectory, it oversimplifies a complex reality. The truth is, intimidation in the workplace has not vanished—it has simply evolved. And unless organisations confront it head-on, they risk trading short-term compliance for long-term stagnation.

The Myth of Generational Immunity

Purohit’s assertion rests on the assumption that younger employees, by virtue of their confidence and rapid career progression, are less susceptible to intimidation. It’s true that the age gap between managers and subordinates has narrowed, and that Gen Z and millennial professionals often challenge traditional norms. But confidence alone does not inoculate against fear.

In fact, intimidation today wears subtler disguises. It manifests through exclusion from decision-making, passive-aggressive feedback, or the silent punishment of dissent. Digital communication channels—once heralded as democratizing tools—can amplify these dynamics. A curt Slack message, a public rebuke in a virtual meeting, or the absence of recognition in performance dashboards can all reinforce fear, regardless of age.

Moreover, younger employees may lack the institutional knowledge or political capital to challenge intimidation effectively. Their “fearlessness” may be situational, not structural. Without psychological safety, even the most energetic minds retreat into compliance.

The Financial Fallout: Beyond Attrition

Experts like Nihar Ghosh and Mukul Chopra rightly highlight the tangible costs of intimidation: absenteeism, attrition, and underperformance. But the most dangerous consequence is invisible—lost innovation.

When employees operate in fear, they default to safe choices. They avoid risk, suppress ideas, and disengage from strategic thinking. This erosion of creativity is particularly lethal in industries driven by disruption. As Chopra warns, “The cost of intimidation is not just absenteeism or attrition—it is lost market share.”

Consider this: A single disengaged employee may cost an organisation up to 34% of their annual salary in lost productivity, according to Gallup. Multiply that across teams, and the financial impact becomes staggering. Yet, because these losses are intangible, they rarely trigger alarms in quarterly reviews.

Why Coaching Alone Won’t Fix It

Purohit advocates for coaching, mentoring, and anchoring as solutions. These are valuable tools—but insufficient on their own. Coaching addresses individual behaviour; intimidation is a cultural issue. It thrives in environments where power is unchecked, feedback is unidirectional, and performance is measured solely by outcomes, not process.

To truly dismantle intimidation, organisations must go beyond interpersonal interventions. They need structural reform:

Redesign performance metrics to include leadership behaviour, team engagement, and innovation contribution.
Embed psychological safety into onboarding, training, and leadership development programs.
Audit culture regularly, using anonymous surveys and exit interviews to surface intimidation patterns.
Align promotion criteria with inclusive leadership, not just target achievement.

Without these systemic changes, coaching becomes a band-aid on a deeper wound.

A Win-Win Framework: From Fear to Flourishing

So how can organisations move from fear-based compliance to commitment-driven performance? The answer lies in a dual approach—one that balances accountability with empowerment.

1. Institutionalise Psychological Safety

Psychological safety isn’t a soft skill—it’s a strategic asset. Google’s Project Aristotle found it to be the single most important factor in high-performing teams. To embed it:

Train managers in inclusive communication and active listening.
Create safe channels for feedback, dissent, and idea-sharing.
Recognise and reward risk-taking, even when outcomes fall short.

This doesn’t mean lowering standards—it means raising the quality of engagement.

2. Measure What Matters

Organisations must expand their KPIs to include cultural health. This includes:

Metric	Why It Matters
Innovation Index	Tracks idea generation and implementation rates
Psychological Safety Score	Gauges employee comfort in expressing opinions
Leadership Behaviour Ratings	Evaluates manager impact beyond targets
Engagement-to-Attrition Ratio	Measures retention quality, not just quantity

These metrics shift the focus from control to collaboration.

3. Build Accountability into Leadership

Fear often stems from unchecked authority. To counter this:

Introduce 360-degree reviews for all leadership roles.
Make cultural stewardship a formal part of job descriptions.
Tie bonuses and promotions to team health, not just financial results.

This ensures that leaders are not just performers—but enablers.

4. Empower HR as Strategic Custodians

HR must evolve from policy enforcers to culture architects. This means:

Leading regular culture audits and publishing findings.
Facilitating cross-functional dialogues on intimidation and inclusion.
Designing toolkits for managers to foster psychological safety.

HR’s role is not reactive—it’s transformative.

Reframing Respect: From Fear to Trust

One of the most damaging myths in corporate culture is that fear equals respect. In reality, fear breeds silence, not reverence. True respect is earned through consistency, empathy, and integrity.

Organisations must reframe leadership expectations. The best leaders are not those who command silence—but those who cultivate voice. They don’t intimidate—they inspire.

The Strategic Payoff

Investing in psychological safety is not just ethical—it’s profitable. Companies that prioritise it report:

Lower attrition and absenteeism
Higher innovation and agility
Stronger employer branding and recruitment
Sustainable performance and growth

In an era where talent is mobile and reputation is transparent, culture is currency. Fear may deliver short-term obedience—but trust delivers long-term excellence.

Conclusion: Beyond Optimism, Toward Action

Praveen Purohit’s optimism about generational shifts is not misplaced—but it must be tempered with realism. Intimidation is not a relic of the past; it’s a shape-shifter. And unless organisations confront it with intentionality, they risk losing their most valuable asset: human potential.

The win-win solution lies in recognising that psychological safety is not a luxury—it’s a necessity. By embedding it into systems, metrics, and leadership behaviours, organisations can transform fear into flourishing. They can move from compliance to commitment, from silence to innovation, and from hierarchy to harmony.

In the end, the question is not whether intimidation exists—but whether we’re willing to eliminate it. The cost of fear is high. But the return on trust is priceless. For further insights into the evolving workplace paradigm, visit

JOIN OUR WHATSAPP CHANEL