Empathy with a Backbone: Why Good Leadership Needs Closeness and Boundaries

Empathy is one of those terms that hardly any manager would openly contradict today. Of course empathy is important, they say. Especially in difficult times, when people are feeling insecure. And of course, they consider themselves to be an empathetic leader.

However, there is often a significant gap between one's own perception and that of the employees.

A 2024 US study highlights this very clearly: 55 percent of the polled CEOs were convinced they lead with empathy. Yet, only 28 percent of employees and 22 percent of HR executives shared this view. Empathy is apparently in abundant supply – albeit often only in one's own perception. The State of Workplace Empathy Report puts this discrepancy in an impressive nutshell.

The recent August 2026 issue of the Harvard Business Manager also addresses this field of tension. I find the concept of a shared "empathy protocol" particularly interesting here. This is because it moves away from well-meaning attitudes and towards a key question: Where can we actually recognize empathy in everyday leadership?

Empathy is more than sympathy

Empathy in leadership does not mean feeling all the emotions of another person yourself. Managers do not need to become therapists for their employees either. And empathy certainly does not mean avoiding conflict, backing down on demands, or trying to please everyone.

Leading with empathy means first of all making a genuine effort to understand the other person's reality before judging, deciding, or acting.

This involves listening carefully, taking different perspectives, and being as aware of the needs of an individual as of the interests of the entire team. Empathy is therefore not just emotional attention. It is also a way of gathering information: Anyone who understands what is on people's minds, what experiences shape their outlook, and what they need right now can make better decisions.

A technology company described in the Harvard Business Manager therefore refers to empathy as "intellectual generosity". This means the willingness to give real space to another person's perspective and to let one's own assumptions be challenged through contradiction and debate. The goal is not harmony at any price, but technical excellence through diverse view points.

This may seem unusual at first – but it hits on an important point: Empathy can be kind, but it doesn't always have to be comfortable. Respectful contradiction can also be empathetic. The crucial factor is whether it serves the common output and respects the dignity of the other person.

What an empathy protocol can achieve

An empathy protocol is not a conversational guide that provides managers with suitable phrasing. Instead, it is a shared agreement on what empathy means within one's own company or team and how it should show up in everyday life.

To achieve this, four questions should be clarified:

1. What do we mean by empathy?
   Is it about honest interest, changing perspectives, attentive listening, respectful contradiction – or a combination of these? The clearer the shared definition, the lower the risk of everyone interpreting it differently.

2. What behavior makes empathy visible?
   For example, letting people finish speaking, asking questions before presenting solutions, or being able to speak difficult truths openly without exposing anyone.

3. How do we connect empathy with performance and responsibility?
   Individual burdens should be taken into account. At the same time, the team must not permanently bear the consequences. Empathy does not replace accountability. Rather, it helps find sustainable and fair solutions.

4. What do we commit to each other?
   What can employees expect from their manager? What can the manager expect from the team? And how do both sides recognize that the agreed-upon commitment is actually being lived?

In this way, an abstract value becomes observable behavior. Empathy is no longer just something a manager claims about themselves. It becomes something that others can experience.

Really listening – without immediately taking center stage ourselves

Many managers want to build rapport by sharing their own experiences: "I know that. Something similar happened to me once." This is usually well-intentioned. But suddenly, the conversation is no longer about the person seeking support, but about the manager.

Empathetic listening demands something else: opening the space without immediately filling it yourself.

This does not require sophisticated techniques. Often, a few honest questions are enough:

• How are you experiencing the- situation?

• What bothers you most about it?

• What is working at the moment – and what isn't?

• What do you need from me right now?

• Would you like to develop a solution or should I just listen for now?

The last question in particular can make a big difference. Because not everyone describing a problem expects advice immediately. Sometimes the most important support is simply being present, listening, and not prematurely downplaying the other person's experience.

Supporting without taking over the problem

Empathetic leadership easily seduces into rescue mode. The manager hears a problem, feels responsible, and immediately starts organizing solutions. By doing so, however, they might take away the very self-responsibility that leadership is actually supposed to encourage.

Four pragmatic questions are more helpful:

• What actually happened?

• What support is needed?

• Who can reasonably provide this support?

• What role do I have in this?

Leading with empathy does not necessarily mean providing the support yourself. It can just as well mean providing access to suitable support.

In doing so, keeping an eye on the bigger picture remains important. An individual relief can be right. However, it must not unnoticed lead to the permanent overload of other team members. Good leadership therefore keeps the needs of the individual and the capability of the collective in balance.

Empathy needs boundaries

An empathetic leader does not have to be constantly available. Anyone who absorbs every mood, is accessible at all times, and makes every problem their own concern eventually wears themselves out. Empathy then turns into overload – and the approachable manager into a person who withdraws internally.

Healthy boundaries are therefore not a contradiction to empathy. They make sustainable empathy possible in the first place.

Fixed times for focused work, clear rules on availability, and consciously protected breaks are not signs of a lack of approachability. On the contrary: A manager who takes their own needs seriously also shows their employees that self-care and performance go hand in hand.

Three questions help with personal clarification:

• What boundaries do I currently need to lead effectively?

• Why are these boundaries important to me?

• How do I need to communicate them so that others can understand and respect them?

Approachability does not mean permanent availability.

The right words are part of it too

Finally, empathy shows itself in language. Phrases like "I know exactly how you feel", "It'll be alright", or "At least..." are often intended to comfort. However, they can unintentionally downplay the other person's experience.

Better are phrases that acknowledge without pretending to understand everything:

• "I hear how much this is on your mind."

• "That sounds like a really difficult situation."

• "I want to better understand your perspective."

Such phrases do not solve the problem immediately. But they create a connection – and often this connection is the prerequisite for finding a good solution together.

The protocol must not turn into a theatrical act

As helpful as the idea of an empathy protocol is, it also carries a risk: Empathy cannot be fully standardized. If managers simply work through learned questions or recite the right phrases, people quickly sense that they are not receiving genuine attention.

An empathy protocol should therefore be a framework, not a script. It can clarify behavior and outline mutual expectations. However, the quality of the encounter still arises from presence, genuine curiosity, and the willingness to let oneself actually be touched or even irritated by another person's view.

Empathy is not a program for being nice. It requires openness – and sometimes courage. The courage to listen, even if you don't know the answer yet. The courage to let another perspective stand. The courage to constructively contradict. And just as much, the courage to protect your own boundaries.

Especially in crises, people need both: a leader who perceives what is happening to them – and a leader who provides direction. True empathy combines humanity with clarity. That is exactly where its leadership strength lies.