An IT specialist went viral after adding the president of his company to a browsing-history check meant to monitor employee productivity — and found the boss guilty of exactly what he had forbidden in others. The result was a public admission of guilt that could have gone very differently.
The story follows a familiar pattern: management demands oversight of everyone else, and the person tasked with enforcing it decides to apply the rule to those in charge. In this case, the IT professional was asked to check everyone’s browsing history. He decided to include the company’s President as well.
The president was up to no good during work hours, according to the check. The IT specialist shared the results online, and the professional went viral.
How the Check Exposed the Boss
The IT specialist’s decision to include management in the check was a small act of defiance with large consequences. By adding the president to the list, he forced the company to confront its own hypocrisy.
The source does not describe exactly what the president was doing during work hours. What matters is that the check revealed behavior the president had previously condemned in others. The irony is that the person who set the standard for acceptable browsing was himself spectacularly guilty of the same kind of transgressions.
The story has a clear moral arc. The president believed he was above the rules. He was not. The IT specialist proved it.
Why Toxic Leaders Get Hired
The story raises a broader question about how companies hire executives. According to Kathleen Saxton, author of How to Recognize, Resist and Rise Above Toxic Power, toxic leaders often look like healthy ones at the interview stage.
“There is nothing wrong with any of it. The problem is that a healthy leader and a dangerous one can look almost identical at interview.”
Saxton describes how corporate language washes over the differences between candidates. Low empathy becomes decisiveness. Ruthlessness becomes high standards. Emotional detachment becomes resilience. Manipulation becomes influence.
The result is that toxic leaders often get hired because they are skilled at impression management. They present themselves as bold, decisive, and charismatic — qualities that hiring committees reward.
The Pattern of Toxic Leadership
Toxic leadership tends to survive through repetition, Saxton argues. Each generation tolerates it and passes it down to the next. Employees learn to keep their heads down, toughen up, and protect their income.
But the cycle can be broken. Saxton offers a path forward through simple humanity.
“That inheritance can be refused by the board member who asks the harder question, the colleague who declines to join the whispering afterwards, the investor who asks how the numbers were achieved, the organisation that protects the person telling the truth rather than the person holding the power,” she writes.
The key is refusing to stay silent. Boards, colleagues, investors, and organizations can all choose to protect truth-tellers instead of protecting power.
What Employees Can Do
Employees facing a toxic boss have limited options. David Yamada, director of the New Workplace Institute at Suffolk University Law School, told the American Psychological Association that workers should think carefully about whether their company’s HR department takes complaints seriously.
Employers should investigate complaints and concerns about toxic work conditions ASAP. But in many cases, the best decision may be to look for another job.
Bryan Robinson, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, emphasizes that employees cannot fire their boss but can make choices that benefit them. He suggests avoiding anger, frustration, and impatience.
“Remain tactful, diplomatic, and professional even when you’re frustrated. Talk with your boss and try to understand his or her human side,” Robinson advises.
He also recommends getting clarity on what the boss expects from you in terms of performance. Make sure the boss understands your point of view, the importance of your personal life, and your expectations concerning job demands.
The Bottom Line
The story is infuriating because it exposes the gap between what leaders say and what they do. The president was up to no good during work hours — but the IT specialist was the one who caught him.
The IT specialist made a choice to hold the president accountable. The employees now know that the boss’s browsing history was spectacularly bad.
The lesson is simple: when you are asked to monitor others, monitor everyone. The truth will come out eventually. Better to let it come out now than to wait for it to surface later through rumor or resignation.
- Source: Boss Is Furious When Employee Productivity Check Includes His Own Browsing History Which Is “Spectacular”
- Author: Kathleen Saxton, author of How to Recognize, Resist and Rise Above Toxic Power
- Interviewee: David Yamada, director of the New Workplace Institute at Suffolk University Law School
- Expert: Bryan Robinson, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte
The story is a reminder that toxic leaders are not inevitable. They are chosen. They are tolerated. They can be resisted. And sometimes, all it takes is one person with access to the browser logs to expose the whole charade.
Source material: “Boss Is Furious When Employee Productivity Check Includes His Own Browsing History Which Is “Spectacular”,” Bored Panda.
Get the Notebook.
The day's best stories and every fresh verdict, in plain English, in your inbox by seven. One email a day, no more.