The Workplace Dynamic of People-Pleasing: Understanding Its Effects on Productivity and Well-Being

Definition

This entry explores the psychological, developmental, and organizational dynamics of people-pleasing behavior, analyzing its roots in childhood conditioning, cultural reinforcement, and evolutionary mechanisms. It highlights how chronic approval-seeking compromises authenticity, mental health, and workplace productivity, while proposing interventions for individuals and organizations to cultivate assertiveness and healthier relational patterns.

1. Introduction

Social acceptance is an essential function that serves as a mechanism to keep communities unified. Positive social feedback promotes and supports behaviors, such as collaboration, empathy, and prosocial conduct that contribute to collective well-being and harmony [1]. Following this approach, approval serves as a healthy reinforcement of behaviors that benefit both the individual and the group. According to Bandura [2], when individuals cooperate or participate in helpful behaviors, social approval promotes these actions, which in turn, strengthens group cohesion and productivity. Approval for empathic or compassionate behavior boosts emotional intelligence, resulting in greater interpersonal interactions and emotional maturity. According to Markus and Kitayama [3], approval encourages the internalization of adaptive societal standards, such as honesty, respect, and responsibility, which ultimately results in beneficial behaviors within the society. Social unity and individual emotional development are both positively impacted when individuals receive praise for activities that are genuinely prosocial, empathic, or cooperative [4]. As a means of providing positive feedback, social approval assists both children and adults in learning actions that are suitable and healthy, without lowering their sense of self-worth or limiting their autonomy [2]. Social acceptance is necessary and beneficial for normal human functioning and is advantageous in certain situations. It only becomes an issue if it is overly pursued or comes at the price of personal authenticity and well-being [2].

People-pleasing behavior denotes a psychological pattern in which individuals prioritize fulfilling the needs, expectations, or desires of others, often to the detriment of their own emotional or physical well-being, primarily motivated by a fear of rejection, a need for approval, and anxiety regarding social acceptance [5,6]. These behaviors often include excessive compliance, challenges in establishing personal boundaries, and an inclination to minimize one’s own emotions or preferences to preserve interpersonal harmony or obtain social validation [4].

Flett and Hewitt [5] define people-pleasers as those who consistently exhibit actions designed to avert conflict or rejection, most often generating significant psychological and emotional consequences. This pattern often originates from early developmental experiences in which approval by caretakers depended on adherence to specific expectations or behaviors [6]. As a result, these individuals assess their self-worth through external validation instead of internal fulfillment or authenticity, resulting in mental discomfort, diminished autonomy, and challenges in establishing genuinely balanced connections [7].

People-pleasing conduct is a significant topic due to its substantial effects on individual mental health, interpersonal interactions, and society dynamics [4,5,6,7,8,9,10]. Analyzing people-pleasing allows psychologists and individuals to comprehend how ingrained behavioral patterns influence personal development, psychological well-being, and social interactions.

Understanding people-pleasing habits is essential due to their considerable influence on mental health. Persistent people-pleasing is strongly linked to anxiety, sadness, diminished self-esteem, and feelings of inadequacy [5]. Such actions often result in emotional exhaustion, persistent stress, and burnout as individuals consistently neglect personal needs to meet external demands [4]. Addressing these behaviors is crucial for establishing psychological resilience and enhancing general well-being. People-pleasing significantly affects interpersonal interactions [11]. Individuals who consistently emphasize others’ approval over their own authenticity are frequently faced with superficial or unidimensional relationships, resulting in emotional discontent, resentment, and weakened connection [7]. Understanding these relational dynamics helps the formation of healthy interactions based on mutual respect, authenticity, and honest expression of needs [7].

The modern cultural environment, characterized by an intensified focus on social acceptance, perfectionism, and external validation—particularly via social media—renders people-pleasing an increasingly significant issue [12,13]. Increasing awareness of this phenomenon allows people and society to identify maladaptive social influences, promoting healthier forms self-expression, autonomy, and assertiveness.

Examining the developmental origins of people-pleasing can help inform educational and parenting initiatives that promote healthy emotional control, assertiveness, and authenticity from a young age, lowering the likelihood of maladaptive behaviors persisting into adulthood [7]. Identifying the initial impacts and societal reinforcements of people-pleasing behaviors can help with the development of effective psychological interventions and prevention strategies [6].

To sum up, the examination of people-pleasing is significantly important and necessary due to its significance for mental health, interpersonal dynamics, cultural factors, and the prospect for impactful psychological interventions. By acknowledging the intricate relationship between individual psychology and social influences, individuals as well as professionals can address these habits, generating greater self-awareness and genuine social relationships.

2. Origins of People-Pleasing: Conditioning, Reinforcement, and Evolutionary Viewpoints

The human psyche is profoundly influenced by the desire for social acceptance and validation. Although evolutionary theories offer insights into the reasons why humans naturally seek to earn acceptance, developmental psychology emphasizes the ways in which childhood experiences, particularly those that involve conditioning and reinforcement, further refine and intensify these tendencies [14]. This essay examines these psychological and evolutionary origins, focusing on early childhood conditioning processes, reinforcing mechanisms, and the evolutionary foundation of the desire for social approval [15]. The role of conditioning and reinforcement in the development of children is examined from a psychological perspective.

When it comes to shaping social approval-seeking behaviors in children, conditioning and reinforcement play key roles in how these behaviors are formed. Skinner [10] conducted substantial research on the notion of operant conditioning, which suggests that behaviors that are rewarded or favorably reinforced during childhood are more likely to continue into adulthood without significant change. When caregivers repeatedly provide positive reinforcement for compliance or actions aligned with parental expectations, such as obedience, politeness, or the suppression of negative feelings, children internalize these behaviors as desirable methods of achieving social approval [6]. This makes it easier for children to conform to the expectations of their parents.

A child who only receives praise or affection for exhibiting compliant or agreeable actions, for instance, may internalize the idea that their personal acceptance is dependent solely on meeting the expectations of others, which could lead to obsessive approval-seeking practices. Also, the same subject whose emotional expressions or autonomous behaviors are punished, ignored, or criticized may become worried about potential rejection, reinforcing a dependence on external validation and approval-seeking methods [11]. These practices must be differentiated from helpful, constructive parental instruction that aims to teach empathy, kindness, civility, manners, and emotional self-control. To achieve healthy socialization, it is necessary to achieve a balance between validating a child’s emotional authenticity and cultivating their capacity to assert personal boundaries and individuality, as well as providing structure, guidance, and consistent feedback [7]. The principles of operant conditioning demonstrate how subtle but ongoing interactions during early life can alter long-term behavioral habits. Persistently rewarding a child for repressing negative feelings and prioritizing the needs of others may result in an adult whose main coping mechanism is putting the needs of others before their own [16,17,18,19,20].

Going back to the concept of politeness, when it is executed in a harmonious and balanced manner, emotional regulation and politeness are positive and beneficial. They assist individuals in successfully adapting to their social environments, strengthen relationships, and create social harmony. Nevertheless, potential issues are not caused by the behaviors of politeness and emotional regulation themselves; rather, they arise from the way they are learned, reinforced, and internalized, particularly when the behaviors are carried to extremes.

The potential issues are as follows:

• Excessive suppression of emotions—Politeness occasionally induces individuals to suppress genuine emotional expression to preserve harmony or prevent conflict [12]. Chronic suppression of emotions is associated with elevated levels of anxiety, depression, and psychological distress [12].
• Conditional self-worth—If emotional regulation and politeness are heavily enforced during childhood (e.g., caregivers consistently praise compliance or severely punish emotional displays), individuals may develop the belief that their self-worth is contingent upon their ability to please others [6]. This results in an overreliance on external validation rather than internal authenticity, and a fragile sense of self-esteem.
• Absence of authenticity—Individuals who are excessively polite may compromise their authenticity and genuine self-expression, leading to superficial or inauthentic relationships [5]. Continuously concealing emotions or preferences limits the growth of meaningful relationships, resulting in feelings of isolation or loneliness.
• Decreased assertiveness and boundary-setting—Individuals who are taught to prioritize emotional restraint and politeness over honest communication may have trouble with assertiveness, which can result in a lack of ability to establish personal boundaries and a susceptibility to exploitation or manipulation [4]. Healthy emotional control and politeness leave room for sincere emotional expression.

When balanced with genuine emotional expression and authenticity, politeness and emotional regulation are beneficial. Problems only emerge when these behaviors are excessively enforced or evolve into habitual coping mechanisms to secure acceptance, resulting in emotional suppression, psychological distress, and reduced authenticity, which is why we need to examine the traits of approval seeking.

2.1. The Evolutionary and Biological Foundation of Approval Seeking

According to evolutionary psychology, approval-seeking behaviors originate from the adaptive importance of social cohesion and group belonging. Humans evolved in settings were obtaining resources, surviving, and procreating were all seriously threatened by social exclusion [13]. As a result, humans developed psychological processes, such as emotional sensitivity to social acceptance and rejection, to help in successful social integration and cohesiveness within groups [1]. This is further demonstrated by neurobiological evidence, which shows that rejection and social exclusion activate similar brain regions associated to those activated by physical pain. This underlines the evolutionary importance of approval-seeking as a strategy for preventing social isolation [16].

2.2. Cultural Reinforcement of People-Pleasing Behaviors

Cultural influences considerably promote and reinforce the psychological and evolutionary roots of an approval-seeking behavior. Markus and Kitayama’s [3] work on culture and self-construal demonstrates how collectivist cultures regularly promote harmony, compliance, and interdependence. Individuals raised in cultures that prioritize relational harmony and collective identity may be more likely to engage in people-pleasing actions, considering them as necessary for social success. Individuals from more individualistic cultures, while still influenced by social approval, may experience internal conflicts if they believe their people-pleasing tendencies are incompatible with culturally promoted ideals of autonomy and independence, resulting in mental strain and emotional distress [3].

Additionally, people are increasingly sensitive to social validation and praise due to modern societal pressures, which are particularly amplified by digital communication and social media [9]. By making approval and rejection more visible, measurable, and publicly important, modern technology has increased the evolutionary mechanisms of social monitoring and intensified chronic people-pleasing inclinations [8].

2.3. Interventions and Practical Implications

Understanding the psychological and evolutionary foundations of approval-seeking behavior has important implications for helpful interventions. Maladaptive people-pleasing can be effectively addressed with methods of treatment based on behavioral conditioning frameworks, evolutionary psychology, and attachment theory. To promote emotional autonomy and better interpersonal functioning, strategies like cognitive-behavioral procedures, assertiveness training, and compassionate mind training seek to rebalance people’s dependence on outside approval [19,20].

Avoiding conflict is often a practical and advantageous approach as it can lead to negative outcomes, including emotional harm, tension, or damaged relationships. Nevertheless, problems arise when conflict avoidance becomes a habitual response rather than a strategic decision based on the context.

The potential drawbacks of habitual conflict avoidance are as follows:

• Unresolved Problems—Consistently avoiding conflict may result in the incomplete resolution of critical issues or disagreements, which can lead to the accumulation or intensification of underlying issues over time. As unresolved emotions develop and build up, they may result in resentment, frustration, and passive-aggressive behaviors.
• Reduced Assertiveness—Habitual conflict avoidance affects an individual’s ability to effectively assert their own demands, ideas, or boundaries [4]. Absence of assertiveness can result in feelings of powerlessness, diminished self-esteem, and diminished self-respect.
• Decreased Authenticity in Relationships—Authenticity and honesty are essential components of healthy relationships. If conflicts are avoided at all costs, individuals may conceal their true sentiments or preferences, which may weaken relational intimacy and trust [5]. When handled constructively, authentic disagreements can fortify relationships by nurturing greater emotional depth and awareness.
• Anxiety and Psychological Stress—Continuous avoidance can worsen anxiety by causing individuals to become overly vigilant or fearful of potential conflict, resulting in chronic emotional stress [17]. A persistent fear of conflict may limit an individual’s capacity to engage in social activities and can negatively impact personal development.

When is conflict avoidance beneficial? When emotions are excessively intense or the situation is at risk of escalating in a negative manner, it can be practical to temporarily avoid conflict. Strategic avoidance allows individuals to regulate their emotions and respond thoughtfully [17,18,19,20,21].

What is a more balanced alternative? Individuals can share their emotions in a respectful manner during constructive conflict resolution as follows:

• Participating in active listening with empathy.
• Pursuing solutions that are mutually beneficial.

Healthy emotional regulation includes selectively engaging in conflict only when it is necessary and beneficial, rather than habitually avoiding it due to anxiety or fear [7].

The goal is to develop discernment in selecting when to engage or avoid conflict, rather than eliminating it. When it impedes emotional well-being, assertiveness, or authentic communication, habitual avoidance can become problematic. Therefore, it is essential to cultivate healthy conflict-resolution skills to maintain a harmonious emotional and relational state.

3. Parenting Styles, Criticism, and Conditional Approval: Development of People-Pleasing in the Early Years

Early childhood development is critical to the development of behaviors such as people-pleasing, with caregiver interactions and parental styles playing a central role. A child’s predisposition to develop people-pleasing patterns can be significantly influenced by specific parental behaviors, such as excessive demands, excessively critical attitudes, and conditional displays of affection.

3.1. People-Pleasing Development and Parenting Styles

Parents have a significant impact on their children’s social and emotional development, which in turn, influences the children’s interactions with others throughout their entire lives. Baumrind’s [18] typology, which was influential, identifies four parenting styles: authoritative, authoritarian, permissive, and neglectful.

Authoritative parenting is considered the most optimal approach due to its balanced combination of affection and structure. In contrast, the development of maladaptive behaviors, such as excessive people-pleasing, is more likely to occur in children who are subjected to authoritarian and permissive parenting styles [19,20]. Authoritarian parenting is defined by its high demands and a shortage of emotional responsiveness, making it particularly influential in the development of people-pleasing tendencies. In this parenting approach, the emphasis is placed on obedience, conformity, and rigorous adherence to rules. When standards are not met, the parents frequently resort to criticism or punishment [18]. Children who are raised by excessively critical or demanding caregivers often experience anxiety regarding rejection or disapproval, which leads them to engage in behaviors that are intended to prevent parental dissatisfaction, conflict, or punishment [20]. These children generally learn to repress their true emotional needs and preferences, constantly altering their actions to escape criticism or achieve parental favor.

A closely related factor that contributes to the development of people-pleasing tendencies in childhood is the experience of conditional affection and love. According to Harter [6] and Elliot and Thrash [21], conditional parental affection, which may be defined as approval that is reliant upon the child’s adherence to expectations or performance criteria, has the potential to dramatically erode a child’s feeling of unconditional self-worth. According to research conducted by Assor et al. [20], children who are subjected to conditional affection internalize the message that love, acceptance, and value must be continuously earned by committing to the expectations of their parents. This results in a deeply ingrained habit of seeking approval from others. Conditional love, which is defined by affection withdrawal or emotional manipulation based on performance or compliance, is notably linked to low self-esteem and increased vulnerability to interpersonal anxiety in adulthood [20].

In addition, parental criticism has been discovered to promote self-critical thinking patterns that, in turn, substantially influence the development of perfectionism and self-critical tendencies, which are central components of chronic people-pleasing [5]. By indirectly reinforcing children’s perceptions of inadequacy and conditional self-worth, highly critical or perfectionistic parents influence their children’s relational approach toward compulsively pursuing external validation in adulthood [21]. However, it is crucial to acknowledge that the motivation behind critical or demanding parenting is often positive—parents frequently aspire to cultivate achievement-oriented behavior, civility, and discipline. The maladaptive consequences, including chronic approval-seeking, are the result of parental expectations that are unrealistic, harshly enforced, or combined with emotional neglect or invalidation [22]. On the other hand, authoritative parenting, which is characterized by affection, emotional validation, and clear boundaries, promotes emotional autonomy, self-worth, and better social relationships, all of which lower the likelihood of people-pleasing [19].

The development of people-pleasing behaviors during childhood is significantly influenced by parenting styles that are characterized by overly critical, demanding, or conditionally affectionate approaches. Psychologists, caregivers, and educators can promote healthier psychological and relational outcomes by implementing strategies that promote balanced emotional expression, assertiveness, and authenticity by acknowledging the detrimental impacts of authoritarian and conditional parenting.

3.2. Enmeshment and Absence of Personal Boundaries

When family members have ambiguous boundaries, it is challenging for a child to establish a sense of individuality. This is known as enmeshment. In enmeshed households, a child’s feelings, beliefs, and decisions are often determined by parental expectations rather than personal preferences, as follows:

• Over-identification with others: These children may have trouble distinguishing their own needs from those of others, resulting in behaviors that are designed to maintain family harmony, such as people-pleasing [4].
• Inability to decline: Children are more susceptible to exploitation and manipulation due to their difficulty in establishing their own boundaries [7].

School experiences and peer relationships, in addition to parental influence, additionally influence people-pleasing tendencies. Early childhood socialization teaches children on how to achieve acceptance and navigate interpersonal relationships.

3.3. The Influence of Peer and School Dynamics

School experiences and peer relationships, in addition to parental influence, additionally influence people-pleasing tendencies. Early childhood socialization teaches children how to achieve acceptance and navigate interpersonal relationships, as follows:

• Fear of social rejection: Children who have been excluded or bullied are more likely to engage in people-pleasing actions to prevent additional social rejection [1].
• Expectations from teachers: Children may internalize excessive compliance as a social survival strategy in rigorous school environments where conformity is strictly rewarded [19]. If children are discouraged from expressing their emotions or thinking independently, they may develop the belief that the sole means of achieving acceptability is through blind obedience [5]. The most effective method is one that integrates discipline and encouragement, enabling children to cultivate both self-assurance and respect for authority.
• Peer pressure: The desire to conform to the norm may lead certain children to prioritize group approval over personal boundaries, thereby reinforcing long-term patterns of external validation [3].

The psychological and relational dynamics of early life, particularly in family and educational contexts, are fundamental to the development of people-pleasing behaviors in children. Parenting styles are crucial, and the development of maladaptive approval-seeking patterns is closely associated with authoritarian and permissive approaches, which are characterized by high demands, conditional affection, and excessive criticism [23]. To avoid rejection or punishment, children raised in such environments frequently repress their genuine emotions and conform to social norms, which results in a chronic dependence on outside validation and a diminished sense of self-worth. By striking a balance between warmth, structure, and validation, authoritative parenting, on the other hand, promotes emotional autonomy and lessens the tendency toward people-pleasing. A child’s sense of individuality can also be hampered by entangled family systems, where personal boundaries are blurred, leaving them more vulnerable to emotional manipulation and self-effacement. These effects are exacerbated by peer and school dynamics, where children are further conditioned to associate social acceptance with obedience and self-denial due to strict conformity norms, fear of rejection, and teacher expectations. When taken as a whole, these developmental factors show that people-pleasing is not just a personality characteristic but rather a learned reaction to situations that do not provide unconditional approval and do not support genuine self-expression. Fostering resilient, independent people requires addressing these underlying causes through assertiveness training, emotional support, and balanced parenting [24].

4. The Impact of People-Pleasing in Adulthood

Authentic connection and emotional connection are disrupted by excessive people-pleasing behaviors in relationships. Authentic relationships are contingent upon the establishment of balanced exchanges in which both parties are at ease expressing their thoughts, needs, and boundaries [7]. Nevertheless, individuals who exhibit strong people-pleasing tendencies encounter significant challenges when it comes to setting boundaries. They typically respond by saying “yes,” even when it is unpleasant, to prevent conflict or disapproval [4]. Consequently, relationships may become emotionally exhausting, superficial, or imbalanced, which may lead to resentment, relational dissatisfaction, or feelings of being undervalued [5].

4.1. Risk of Exploitation and Difficulty Establishing Boundaries

By failing to establish and maintain appropriate boundaries, people leave themselves open to manipulative or exploitative behaviors in their relationships [25]. People-pleasers often prioritize the comfort and desires of others over their own, which inadvertently allows others to exploit their compliant nature. Soenens and Vansteenkiste [22] found that partnerships in which neither party feels valued or respected might cause emotional exhaustion, discontent, and even relationship failure.

Furthermore, the chronic suppression of genuine emotions to prevent conflict weakens the intimacy and authenticity of the relationship. Individuals who are excessively preoccupied with appeasing others are more likely to establish superficial or emotionally strained relationships in which genuine intimacy is limited [4]. This compromise of genuine emotional connection and trust, which are essential components of healthy relationships, contributes to psychological distress and feelings of isolation [7].

4.2. Chronic People-Pleasing Physical Health Consequences

Chronic people-pleasing can result in tangible physical health consequences, primarily due to persistent stress, in addition to psychological and emotional impacts. Chronic stress can be induced by individuals who consistently sacrifice their emotional well-being to satisfy others. This can result in the continuous activation of the body’s stress-response systems. This chronic activation results in elevated cortisol levels, which reduce immune function, increase vulnerability to cardiovascular diseases, lead to gastrointestinal issues and reduce overall physical well-being [26].

Chronic stress, which is a consequence of persistent approval-seeking, is linked to an elevated risk of cardiovascular problems, compromised immune function, gastrointestinal disturbances, and sleep disorders [27]. For instance, individuals who consistently suppress negative emotions or anxieties to satisfy others frequently experience chronic headaches, muscular tension, and fatigue, as well as an increased susceptibility to stress-related illnesses [27,28].

4.3. Common Characteristics of People-Pleasers in Professional Settings

People-pleasers typically demonstrate qualities that render them valuable employees in professional environments; however, these same qualities can result in burnout and stress in the workplace. Individuals who prioritize pleasing others are inclined to be diligent, responsible, and anxious to fulfill expectations [5]. They often give priority to workplace harmony and are accommodating, sometimes at their own expense [29]. They avoid disagreements, which results in them accepting excessive responsibilities or suppressing valid concerns [30]. People-pleasers have trouble declining requests as they are worried that it could harm their reputation or relationships [31].

Dependability and a strong work ethic are among the most noteworthy attributes of individuals who prioritize pleasing others in the workplace. They are often seen as diligent and committed employees who exceed expectations in their responsibilities, guaranteeing the efficient completion of assignments [29]. They are essential team members who contribute to the organization’s overall success by assuming additional responsibilities and assisting colleagues [1]. Furthermore, their pursuit of approval frequently results in them focusing on detail and precision as they seek to minimize errors and produce high-quality work [5].

These attributes render them exceedingly dependable employees; however, they may also result in exploitation if not effectively managed. People-pleasers may become overwhelmed with responsibilities due to their inability to establish boundaries or decline additional work, which can result in potential exhaustion and excessive stress. Their reluctance to assert themselves may also lead to their contributions being undervalued as they may be hesitant to advocate for promotions, compensation increases, or recognition for their efforts. Ultimately, this dynamic can result in a decrease in their job satisfaction and well-being, as well as an accumulation of frustration and resentment.

People-pleasers face a fundamental obstacle in the workplace: they struggle to decline additional responsibilities, even when they are already overburdened. This challenge often arises from an ingrained worry of disappointing others as they are concerned that declining requests could negatively impact their professional reputation or personal relationships [30]. Furthermore, many people-pleasers avoid confrontation because saying “no” could result in uncomfortable discussions or perceived conflict, which they want to avoid [31]. This challenge may be intensified by imposter syndrome and self-doubt as they may perceive that declining work indicates incompetence or weakness, which may induce them to hesitate in asserting their boundaries [32].

Work overload and eventual exhaustion are often the consequence of this incapacity to decline additional responsibilities. People-pleasers are at risk of emotional exhaustion, reduced productivity, and chronic stress because of their consistent prioritization of others’ needs over their own capacity. This pattern can result in resentment and frustration over time as they may feel undervalued and overburdened, without receiving the necessary recognition or support.

Often, colleagues and management perceive people-pleasers in the workplace in both positive and negative ways. Positively, they are perceived as dependable and diligent employees who are prepared to handle additional responsibilities. Managers value their dependability and entrust them with critical responsibilities as they consistently meet expectations and rarely decline requests [29]. They are also well-liked by their colleagues due to their approachable and supportive attitude, as well as their eagerness to preserve harmony in the workplace, which all result from their cooperative nature [1].

Nevertheless, there are also negative perceptions that are linked to excessive people-pleasing. Some colleagues and supervisors may exploit their willingness to accommodate others by delegating them additional responsibilities, anticipating that they will not object or assert their boundaries [31]. Furthermore, their hesitation to express opinions or take risks can make them appear passive, causing management to ignore them for leadership positions or advancement opportunities [30]. The constant pressure to meet the expectations of others without establishing boundaries can lead to emotional exhaustion and resentment, which can ultimately impact their own well-being and the morale of the workplace [32]. Setting boundaries is intended to ensure long-term productivity and well-being, not to justify refusing or neglecting duties or avoiding hard work. Healthy boundary-setting helps individuals operate more efficiently and avoid burnout, while maintaining professional integrity. It enables people to manage their workload effectively while remaining reliable and productive.

4.4. When Boundaries Could Become a Way of Doing the Bare Minimum

Exploiting the concept of boundaries to avoid tasks or transfer responsibility to others is not about preventing exhaustion; rather, it is about dodging accountability. Ethical employees have a strong work ethic but also set reasonable goals. Employees should work hard while staying within sustainable limitations. The goal is to strike a balance between contributing to the team and maintaining personal well-being. When boundaries are used in an ethical manner, individuals continue to be productive and committed, but they are also aware of when to speak up before they become exhausted. Meanwhile, those who exploit boundaries as an excuse erode and affect both workplace morale and their own reputation.

When an employee repeatedly fails to meet expectations under the pretense of “boundaries,” it indicates a lack of accountability rather than an attempt to ensure well-being [32]. Boundaries should never be used as an excuse for poor performance, and people-pleasing should never result in exploitation and exhaustion.

Instead of a sincere commitment to sustainable work practices, organizational psychology suggests that the deliberate abuse of personal boundaries may be a sign of a more serious problem with disengagement and low effort. A growing body of research emphasizes the ethical distinction between self-protection and accountability avoidance, even though setting boundaries is crucial for maintaining mental health and avoiding burnout. A shift from self-care to self-serving minimalism is frequently indicated when employees routinely use “boundaries” to avoid obligations, refuse to collaborate, or reject reasonable workload expectations. Often described as “performative boundary-setting,” this phenomenon erodes team effectiveness and fosters animosity among team members who still make equitable contributions. Healthy boundary management, according to academics like Maslach and Leiter [33], is defined by proactive communication, constant effort, and reciprocal respect. Boundary manipulation, on the other hand, is consistent with organizational withdrawal patterns, in which workers minimize their discretionary effort while ostentatiously adhering to job requirements. This undermines accountability and trust systems in the workplace in addition to harming team cohesion. Setting moral boundaries should ultimately serve as a dynamic tool for resilience rather than a fixed defense against poor performance.

5. Managing People-Pleasers in Organizations and How Emotional Intelligence Helps

Organizations can assist people-pleasers by creating a work climate that encourages open communication, balanced workload distribution, and mental well-being. One critical way is to acknowledge their efforts without reinforcing overwork. According to Grant and Sonnentag [29], managers have a responsibility to ensure that people-pleasers are not just rewarded for taking on excessive workloads, but also for demonstrating strong time management and prioritization skills. This is because people-pleasers often base their sense of self-worth on external validation. Maintaining morale and productivity requires making sure that their dedication is appreciated while discouraging unhealthy overcommitment. Furthermore, companies can create mentorship and coaching programs that focus on assertiveness training and confidence building, providing people-pleasers with the skills needed to balance teamwork and self-advocacy [30].

Setting and maintaining boundaries is critical for avoiding burnout and guaranteeing long-term productivity. Clearly defined tasks assist people-pleasers in understanding their obligations without feeling pressured to take on additional tasks [29]. Regular check-ins can assist managers in detecting signs of burnout before they worsen, ensuring employees are not overcommitted [34]. Constructive feedback that focuses on recognizing efficiency rather than rewarding overcommitment helps to reduce the reinforcement of unhealthy behaviors [32]. If a people-pleaser is taking on too much work, managers should address workload concerns in a supportive manner, emphasizing sustainability rather than criticism [1].

5.1. Assigning Roles Where Their Strengths Shine Without Being Exploited

Organizations should leverage people-pleasers’ abilities in ways that allow them to thrive without being exploited. These individuals generally excel in professions that involve teamwork and collaboration, problem solving, and attention to detail, but struggle in positions that need constant confrontation or boundary enforcement [31]. Rotating leadership responsibilities in team projects allows people-pleasers to gain leadership experience without feeling captive in lower positions [1]. Assigning them to collaborative, detail-oriented tasks and roles allows them to optimize and maximize their contributions while minimizing their risk of exploitation [5]. Creating a healthier and more productive work environment can be accomplished by organizations by assigning people-pleasers to positions that maximize their abilities while also ensuring that they are treated fairly.

People-pleasers often have difficulties with delegation because of their concern about imposing their burdens on others. According to Grant and Sonnentag [29], leaders can provide guidance on effective delegation strategies, which can enhance productivity and confidence. As Maslach and Leiter [34] point out, managers should set an example for healthy habits and make sure that staff take breaks and time off when they feel it is necessary. Regular performance evaluations should evaluate both productivity and well-being to prevent employees from overworking themselves to secure approval [30]. People-pleasers can achieve success in their careers without sacrificing their well-being when they are managed effectively, which promotes a more productive and healthier work environment for all [35].

Depending on its intensity, motivation, and context, people-pleasing behavior can be seen as either an adaptive or maladaptive manifestation of emotional and social intelligence. People-pleasing, when used adaptively, is consistent with the essential elements of emotional intelligence as outlined by Daniel Goleman [36,37]: social skills, self-awareness, empathy, emotional regulation, and internal motivation. In this form, it symbolizes a person’s enhanced social presence and interpersonal sensitivity, which are aspects of social intelligence. It shows up as cooperative relationship maintenance, diplomatic conflict avoidance, and a sophisticated comprehension of the feelings and expectations of others. A refined social sensitivity and an internalized value for relational cohesion may drive people who adaptively engage in people-pleasing to prioritize group harmony rather than out of fear. These people can adapt to social dynamics in a genuine way, without losing their identity, and they frequently behave tactfully and empathetically to maintain stability in emotionally charged situations.

People-pleasing, however, throws off the delicate balance between assertiveness and empathy when it becomes obsessive and chronic, leading to emotional dysregulation and a significant loss of emotional autonomy. Instead of being motivated by true social motivation, people-pleasing in this dysfunctional form is an over-conformity based on social anxiety and rejection fear. People may misinterpret the needs of others as their own, repress their emotions to prevent conflict, and shun constructive criticism because they think that any unfavorable assessment puts their relationship in danger. Amotivation, burnout, and identity diffusion—all indicators of emotional exhaustion and psychological entanglement—are brought on by this maladaptive pattern. These people may exhibit the characteristics of empathy, concern for others, and social fluency, giving the impression that they are socially and emotionally intelligent, but their actions lack the fundamental internal stability and self-control that characterize true emotional competence. Therefore, people-pleasing can conceal underlying distress, codependency, and self-neglect while acting as a surface-level stand-in for emotional intelligence.

According to this theory, rather than a sign of low emotional or social intelligence, people-pleasing is a misuse or overuse of emotional and social intelligence when it is not based in self-awareness and assertiveness. To differentiate between compulsive appeasement and healthy relational cooperation, it is essential to cultivate assertiveness, emotional self-regulation, and autonomy. Autonomy guarantees that choices are not entirely determined by outside validation, and emotional control helps people cope with the discomfort of rejection, while assertiveness allows people to politely communicate their needs. The integration of empathy and boundary-setting is ultimately necessary for a balanced emotional and social intelligence profile that reflects both self-awareness and awareness of others.

5.2. People-Pleasing as a Cultural Byproduct

One powerful factor influencing employee identity, motivation, and behavior is organizational culture. Workplace engagement and retention can be improved by a healthy sense of attachment and belonging, but these same psychological anchors can also paradoxically reinforce maladaptive behaviors, most notably chronic people-pleasing. Although this behavior pattern is frequently commended for its flexibility or camaraderie, it may be a coping strategy for navigating societies that discourage assertiveness and reward conformity.

According to the hypothesis being studied, organizational cultures that place a strong emphasis on harmony, conformity, and avoiding conflict, especially those in which success is subtly characterized as being agreeable, always available, and uncritical, create an environment that is conducive to persistent people-pleasing. Employees frequently discover in these settings that voicing discomfort, disagreement, or boundaries can result in social penalties, exclusion, or a lack of “team spirit.” Instead of being praised as a sign of emotional intelligence and leadership, assertive behavior is reframed as resistance, insubordination, or even selfishness.

People-pleasing consequently turns into an adaptive tactic to preserve social acceptance and employment stability. People repress their true feelings, needs, and opinions to prevent rejection or exclusion, particularly when identity and self-worth are psychologically entwined with a sense of belonging at work [38]. Once a source of positive motivation, attachment to the organization can become a dependency that compromises autonomy by promoting compliance.

The paradox of the indispensable subordinate is a noteworthy organizational effect of this culture-induced people-pleasing. People-pleasers are frequently given informal rewards, such as praise for their availability, willingness to assist, and avoidance of conflict. They are rarely elevated to positions of leadership, though. This is indicative of a larger structural ambivalence, whereby organizations respect their compliance but mistrust their ability to make important decisions, set boundaries, or be innovative. Typically, leadership positions call for tough talks, strategic confrontation, and a strong sense of self—qualities that are difficult to develop in settings that discourage independence.

Adaptive change and innovation also suffer. Employees self-censor, steer clear of danger. When the cost of belonging is implicit submission, preserving group harmony comes ahead of questioning inefficiencies or putting forward audacious ideas. Because of a deeply ingrained fear of interpersonal rupture, the culture may become stagnant, internally cohesive but externally brittle, and unable to respond to complexity or disruption.

The deeper psychological impact is that belonging becomes conditional, secured through silent compliance rather than authenticity or value contribution. In turn, people-pleasers start to internalize a skewed definition of social success, where putting up with stress, avoiding conflict, and repressing discomfort are all seen as indicators of professional maturity. This eventually causes emotional repression, a misunderstanding of boundaries, and even burnout, but these people are frequently afraid to speak up for fear of losing their hard-earned position in the social fabric of the organization.

Organizations must redefine psychological safety as the ability to disagree, set boundaries, and innovate without fear of exclusion, rather than as “not upsetting others,” to counteract this dynamic. True emotional and social intelligence requires cultures to actively strike a balance between assertiveness and empathy, as well as between individual authenticity and group cohesion. People-pleasing behaviors can only be changed from compulsive appeasement to collaborative emotional intelligence to become a strength rather than a symptom in these settings.

6. The Hidden Cost of Conformity: People-Pleasing, Pseudo-Loyalty, and Burnout in the Organizational Culture

As a sign of engagement, retention, and alignment with company values, organizational attachment is frequently presented as a desirable employee attribute. But not every type of attachment is made equal. It is important to distinguish between loyalty of avoidance or convenience and true loyalty, which is based on respect for one another, chances for personal development, and internal motivation. The former occurs when workers stick with a company out of fear, inertia, or emotional dependence rather than inspiration or alignment. In societies that normalize over-compliance and conflict avoidance, this pseudo-loyalty is commonly reinforced. In these situations, emotional disengagement and declining motivation are concealed by attachment. This group of workers frequently exhibits superficial agreement, little disagreement, and a reluctance to look for outside opportunities—not because they are satisfied, but rather because they lack psychological safety or personal efficacy. They may continue to be “present” in the organization, but they lack emotional attachment and are not developing.

This phenomenon is frequently associated with a passive form of burnout, which is a persistent emotional exhaustion that simmers as disengagement, poor performance, and apathy rather than exploding in breakdown or turnover. Passive burnout can go unnoticed for years, in contrast to active burnout, which frequently leads to significant career changes or health interventions. Although they may appear “loyal,” these people have reached a professional plateau where their drive, ambition, and inventiveness have diminished. Such workers may contribute in low-disruptive ways, avoid risk, and over-conform to expectations—appearing functional, while their psychological and developmental development is put on hold. Businesses run the risk of developing a workforce that is emotionally numb, cognitively underutilized, and resistant to adaptive change if they mistakenly interpret this kind of compliance as contentment.

An important factor in reducing or escalating these dynamics is the organizational culture. Psychological autonomy is suppressed, and emotional exhaustion is accelerated in cultures that penalize assertiveness, discourage feedback, and celebrate unrestricted availability [39]. Employees are forced to self-regulate in silence when there is no open communication about expectations, growth paths, and well-being—often at the expense of their long-term resilience. Furthermore, a cycle where people and the organization settle into a comfort zone of low challenge, low innovation, and high emotional suppression is perpetuated when managers avoid discomfort (for example, by ignoring poor performance in the name of loyalty).

This necessitates reevaluating and developing human capital from the standpoint of strategic management [40]. To differentiate between learned helplessness masquerading as loyalty and healthy engagement, organizations need to use diagnostic tools, including the following:

• Carrying out routine engagement evaluations that incorporate autonomy, purpose, and boundary respect in addition to satisfaction surveys.
• Promoting career trajectory audits to find people who are unable to advance in their positions.
• Encouraging psychological safety in which setting boundaries, providing feedback, and being assertive are seen as signs of leadership potential rather than as disruptive behaviors.
• Establishing individualized development plans that enable staff members to advance professionally without needing to “escape” their current position or business to advance.
• Establishing managerial accountability for early intervention and burnout awareness through KPIs that incentivize resilience and retention quality in addition to performance.

In the end, companies need to change from a straightforward retention model to a more complex renewal model. The extent to which an employee develops, contributes, and changes within the company determines their long-term value, not how long they work there [41]. To avoid institutionalizing people-pleasing, burnout, and professional stagnation, strategic human capital management should concentrate on creating work environments where employees feel safe enough to be assertive, challenged enough to remain motivated, and supported enough to grow.

7. Conclusions

People-pleasing is often viewed as a positive quality because it is linked to conflict avoidance, cooperation, and kindness. Nevertheless, chronic people-pleasing can have severe adverse effects on an individual’s personal identity, professional development, and relationships when it is carried to an extreme. The suppression of personal authenticity restricts personal development and self-discovery. According to Baumeister and Leary [1], people who are people-pleasers may display reluctance when it comes to engaging in new experiences, expressing their creativity, or taking personal risks because they are afraid that these acts may result in rejection or disapproval. This results in an internal conflict in which the individual’s right to self-expression is compromised to achieve social approval, which ultimately leads to emotional exhaustion.

When it comes to both personal and professional contexts, people-pleasers are more susceptible to being exploited and manipulated due to their intense need to be liked and accepted by others. As a result of their difficulties in establishing clear limits and articulating their requirements, they are often taken advantage of by individuals who are aware of their compliance and seek to profit from it. According to research conducted on interpersonal relationships, people-pleasers often become the target of manipulators because of their hesitation to say “no” or assert themselves. Furthermore, people-pleasers tend to avoid conflict, which means that they are less likely to challenge unethical behavior or defend their rights. This makes them excellent targets for individuals who look for control in relationships. They may find themselves in unhealthy power dynamics, where they put their own well-being at risk in order to retain approval since they are afraid of disappointing other people.

The inclination of people-pleasers to put the demands of others before their own can result in emotional exhaustion and concealed resentment, even though they often strive to keep relationships harmonious. According to Baumeister and Leary [1], this resentment can, over the course of time, express itself as behaviors such as emotional withdrawal, passive-aggressive behavior, or sudden outbursts of frustration. They may feel caught in one-sided dynamics, where they feel like they are obligated to provide support without reciprocation.

Ironically, the very behavior that people-pleasers use to maintain strong connection with others can ultimately adversely affect those relationships since hidden resentment weakens trust and connection over time. People-pleasers’ fear of failure, rejection, or criticism might limit their creativity and risk-taking in professional settings. Because they are highly motivated by external approval, they may avoid introducing new ideas, challenging current processes, or taking calculated risks that could result in failure or criticism.

While people-pleasers may appear to be helpful, accommodating, and easy to deal with at first, excessive people-pleasing can have long-term negative effects for both personal well-being and professional performance. Chronic people-pleasers confront several major issues, including a loss of authenticity, a greater susceptibility to manipulation, concealed resentment in interactions, and reduced innovative thinking.

Organizations and individuals should detect these patterns early on and apply techniques that encourage healthy boundary-setting, self-assertion, and intrinsic self-worth. Encouraging people-pleasers to embrace authenticity, voice their needs, and take calculated risks can lead to increased confidence, closer connections, and professional success while maintaining their well-being.

People-pleasing and politeness are frequently confused, but they have very different origins and effects. People-pleasing is rooted in a desire to be liked or avoid conflict, typically at the expense of one’s own needs or authenticity. It may generate temporary harmony yet tends to generate internal resentment, reduce self-respect, and distort relationships as others respond more to the appeasement than to the real person. In contrast, politeness is a deliberate, considerate manner of interacting that considers both sides. It is not about avoidance or submission; rather, it permits the expression of honesty, boundaries, and even disagreement with care and empathy. In society, politeness should be encouraged as a means of ensuring respectful coexistence, while people-pleasing should be discouraged and unlearned as it causes emotional exhaustion and imbalanced dynamics. The healthiest communities are built and rely on sincerity wrapped in kindness, not self-erasure in the name of peace. Politeness builds an environment for open dialogue, emotional safety, and stronger, more balanced relationships and connections, and the best results arise when individuals show kindness but remain honest, valuing connection without sacrificing boundaries.