Self-sabotage is well recognized.

But in many organizations, there’s a quieter, more insidious pattern: team sabotage.

It’s often committed not by malicious actors, but by well-regarded leaders who believe they’re doing the right thing.

They may speak for their teams in senior meetings “to protect them,” assign tasks that waste time but please higher-ups, or make strategic promises without involving those who will do the actual work.

Meanwhile, they hoard visibility, stifle dissent, and over-control delivery—believing they’re safeguarding quality or reputation. In reality, they’re draining trust, morale, and engagement.

This is where people processes should protect people.

Fair decision-making frameworks, feedback mechanisms, and 360 reviews can bring team dynamics into the open.

But in many organizations—especially those where relationships and hierarchy outweigh process, such sabotaging leaders thrive. They’re seen as politically savvy and high-performing, even as their teams quietly burn out or walk away.

The Theranos story is an extreme, but cautionary tale.

While Elizabeth Holmes was the face of the company, and not a conventional mid/senior-level manager, her – and her COO, Sunny Balwani’s – behaviour shaped much of the day-to-day culture.

Together they:

• Isolated departments from one another, limiting collaboration and transparency.
• Discouraged questioning and punished dissent, creating a culture of silence and fear.
• Overpromised results to investors and partners, while expecting their teams to somehow fulfill unrealistic expectations with limited information and flawed technology.
• They positioned Holmes as the face of innovation, but didn’t allow teams the space or structure to innovate safely or honestly.

People stayed silent. Processes were overridden. And outcomes were catastrophic. Not just for the company, but for the many capable people whose careers and reputations were harmed in the process.

It’s a high-profile example of what happens when self-protective leadership trumps integrity and open teamwork.

The truth is: even the best people systems and processes can only go so far. Ultimately, culture reflects the choices and tolerances of the C-Suite.

If a leader sabotages their team but continues to be rewarded, the message is clear: results matter more than respect.

That’s a risk not just to people, but to long-term performance and reputation.

So yes, build the right processes. But also look up.

Who’s being elevated, and why? What behavior is being rewarded? The answers will tell you whether your culture supports teams – or subtly undermines them.