Balancing Empathy and Authority: Effective Boundary Setting for Leaders
Photo by Joel Munis, Unsplash
Empathy as a Defense: Balancing Boundaries, Leadership, and Dialogue
My experience leading teams in corporate life, managing a psychotherapy clinic, running a psychotherapy magazine for eight years, and now leading Sidewalk Talk has taught me one clear thing: I often veer into the territory of ruinous empathy. When I dared to stick my neck out and say, “Hey, I’m observing something here. Help me understand it. It doesn’t meet my needs,” I’ve noticed a fascinating and challenging trend. There seems to be a zeitgeist of using the language of social justice and oppressor/oppressed to shame leaders out of leading. This dynamic has left me curious, reflective, and deeply engaged in finding a more skillful way to lead. But it has also increased my study of power in systems, what character styles struggle with ‘being influenced and led’ by others, and how to coach leaders struggling to lead from a place of rootedness rather than ruinous empathy or harshness.
The Pitfalls of Ruinous Empathy
Empathy, at its core, is the ability to understand and share the feelings of another. It’s a relational tool that fosters connection and compassion, allowing us to tune into others' experiences. While empathy is often celebrated as an unqualified good, it’s important to recognize its nuances and potential pitfalls, particularly in leadership contexts.
Kim Scott, in her work on leadership, defines "ruinous empathy" as caring so much about others' feelings that you avoid challenging them when necessary. This type of empathy often arises from a well-intentioned desire to avoid conflict or maintain harmony, but it ultimately undermines both the leader and the group they’re trying to guide. For individuals with a history of complex trauma, this pattern may be further exacerbated by a nervous system wired for fawning or people-pleasing as a survival strategy.
When empathy overrides discernment, it can:
Lead to resentment and burnout for the empathetic leader.
Enable harmful behaviors in others.
Create confusion about boundaries and roles.
Undermine trust, as people can sense when boundaries are unclear.
Empathy and Power in Leadership
Julie Diamond’s work on power provides a useful framework for understanding how empathy and boundaries intersect in leadership. Power is not inherently oppressive, but how we wield it matters. When leaders set boundaries or express needs, they are often navigating a double bind—particularly if they hold marginalized identities. The nurturing, self-sacrificing archetype is still expected of female leaders, and stepping outside this role can provoke backlash. Note: I have yet to train directly with Julie, but it is on my list and maybe should be on yours, too. I send lots of leaders her way.
One of my psychotherapy clients (edited story for privacy), a female executive, came into therapy deeply distressed. She’d been labeled “oppressive” by her team after setting clear expectations for project deadlines. Despite her efforts to approach the conversation with care and openness, the feedback left her questioning her own leadership style and even her values. Together, we worked to untangle the psychological defenses at play and reframe her boundaries as acts of care for both herself and her team.
In some cases, the language of oppression and power dynamics can be weaponized against leaders who set boundaries. When a leader is called oppressive for expressing concerns or setting limits when they are simultaneously inviting a caring dialogue, this is not true oppression—it is a form of gaslighting. This dynamic becomes especially harmful when the leader themselves belongs to a marginalized group, compounding the psychological and emotional toll. I work with male leaders too. They come and see me with similar issues. But what does seem to be true is that women, gay folks, or folks of color have more limits put on how to use power in my experience as a therapist.
Psychological Defenses at Play
When boundaries are met with resistance, several psychological defenses may be at work, including:
Projection: Assigning one’s discomfort with authority or unmet needs onto the leader, labeling them as “oppressive.”
Splitting: Viewing the leader as either completely good (nurturing) or bad (boundaried), without room for nuance.
Deflection: Shifting the focus away from one’s own accountability to avoid confronting uncomfortable truths.
Minimization: Downplaying the importance of the leader’s boundaries or needs to maintain the status quo.
The Role of Nonviolent Communication
Nonviolent Communication (NVC) provides practical tools for balancing empathy with boundary setting. Marshall Rosenberg’s framework emphasizes expressing feelings and needs clearly while staying connected to compassion. Here’s how to use empathy to set a boundary and engage in dialogue:
Observe Without Judgment: Identify the specific behavior or situation without assigning blame.
Example: “I’ve noticed that meetings often run over time because everyone wants to share their input.”
Express Feelings: Share your emotional response to the observation.
Example: “I feel overwhelmed and unable to focus on my other tasks when meetings run late.”
State Needs: Clarify what you need in the situation.
Example: “I need us to stay within the allotted time so that I can honor my other commitments.”
Make a Request: Ask for a specific action to meet your need.
Example: “Can we agree to limit discussions to 10 minutes per agenda item?”
Regulating the Nervous System
When faced with backlash or resistance, nervous system regulation becomes essential. Leaders who veer toward ruinous empathy often have heightened sensitivity to conflict, which can trigger fight, flight, freeze, or fawn responses. To show up in conflict more skillfully:
Pause and Breathe: Activating the parasympathetic nervous system helps reduce reactivity.
Ground Yourself: Use somatic practices like feeling your feet on the ground or placing a hand on your chest.
Validate Yourself: Acknowledge your right to have boundaries and express needs.
Seek Support: Consult with trusted colleagues or mentors to process difficult interactions.
Reframing Boundaries as Care
Setting boundaries is not an act of aggression; it’s an act of care—for yourself, your team, and your mission. By balancing empathy with clarity, leaders can foster environments where both accountability and compassion thrive. This involves:
Modeling vulnerability while maintaining strength.
Using power responsibly and transparently.
Staying curious about resistance without capitulating to it.
Another client, a school administrator, shared how setting boundaries with her staff allowed her to create a healthier work environment. Initially, she feared being perceived as cold or unapproachable, but by framing her boundaries as a way to ensure fairness and efficiency, she gained her team’s trust and respect over time.
Harsh Leadership Vs. Ruinous Empathy
Overcorrecting for ruinous empathy or as a defense against trauma can lead some leaders to become reactive and overly harsh. This pendulum swing often arises from unprocessed wounds or histories where vulnerability felt unsafe or boundaries were poorly modeled. Leaders may unconsciously adopt a "tough" stance as a protective mechanism, believing that it will shield them from the discomfort of perceived weakness or from being taken advantage of.
This pattern can be traced to various factors in a person’s history:
Early Experiences with Authority: If a leader grew up in an environment where authority figures were controlling or dismissive, they may internalize the belief that boundaries must be rigid and forceful to be effective.
Trauma Responses: Leaders who have experienced betrayal or a lack of safety in relationships may develop a heightened reactivity to perceived challenges, responding with harshness to maintain control.
Cultural Norms: Societal messages about leadership often valorize toughness and decisiveness, which can lead individuals to equate empathy with weakness and overcompensate with severity.
Burnout: Exhaustion and chronic stress can impair emotional regulation, making it harder for leaders to respond with nuance and care.
Recognizing this tendency is crucial to breaking the cycle. Just as ruinous empathy undermines leadership, so too does reactivity and harshness. True strength lies in finding the balance between empathy and clarity, compassion and decisiveness.
Final Thoughts
Empathy and leadership are not opposites; they are complementary forces. When wielded together, they create the conditions for growth, trust, and meaningful dialogue. Leaders who navigate this balance—even in the face of weaponized criticism—demonstrate a courage that inspires others to do the same.
As you reflect on your own approach to empathy and boundaries, consider:
Where do you lean too far into empathy at the expense of your own needs?
How can you regulate your nervous system to show up more fully in conflict?
What would it look like to balance compassion with clarity in your leadership?
By integrating tools from Nonviolent Communication, Julie Diamond’s work on power, and Kim Scott’s insights on ruinous empathy, we can step into boundaried leadership with grace and integrity. Let’s lead—with both open hearts and firm foundations.