The neoliberal management systems shape and condition employees to see their struggles – burnout, stress – as personal failures and as individual responsibility rather than the results of capitalist exploitation.  Divya GS, a PhD scholar in Tata Institute of Social Sciences Mumbai writes about the toxic environment prevailing in the so called hi-tech industries in the background of the death of 26-year old Anna Sebastian, a chartered accountant working in E&Y Pune.

Think of the zombie ant fungus that invades a host, takes control of its brain, and makes it act according to the fungus’s will. This fungus doesn’t kill its host immediately but instead alters its behaviour to serve its own survival, leading the ant to its eventual demise. In a strikingly similar way, my research on IT workspaces reveals how neoliberal management systems shape subjectivities that are gendered, too, conditioning employees to see their struggles—burnout, stress, and even the tragic death of Anna Sebastian—as personal failures and as individual responsibility rather than results of capitalist exploitation. While it is important to discuss labour rights, the pressures placed on workers, and the unique spatio-temporal dynamics of the work environment, my focus here is to expose how neoliberal work practices shape and reshape employees' subjectivities. These systems create an illusion of a meritocratic, gender-neutral, and progressive workspace, but beneath this facade, they condition employees to view their struggles as personal and individualistic. The emphasis on merit and self-reliance highlights how individuation and meritocracy dominate, distracting from collective resistance and structural problems.

What’s more insidious is that, unlike the rigid, top-down management practices of the past, like Fordist or Taylorist approaches which emphasized efficiency and control through direct oversight, the neoliberal workspace has developed what can only be called "soft management techniques." These methods are far more subtle, using the material and discursive aspects of the workspace to shape employee subjectivities. From the sleek, modern office designs to the constant rhetoric around ‘self-improvement’ and ‘resilience,’ these work environments make employees believe they are empowered and autonomous. However, much like the fungus that gradually consumes its host, these techniques slowly take over the employee's sense of self, making them conform to the system's needs without ever realizing it.

Gender plays a significant role in how these subjectivities are shaped. These work environments, while promoting an image of meritocracy and progressiveness, quietly foster gender-specific expectations in a particular way. In neoliberal IT workspaces, women are often subtly and explicitly encouraged to adopt non-questioning attitudes, especially in relation to workload and managerial authority. Women are expected to "tolerate" excessive workloads and to demonstrate emotional resilience without complaint, embodying a nurturing persona that places others—whether colleagues or the company itself—above their own well-being. In the letter from Ms. Anita Augustin, Anna Sebastian's mother, it is described how Anna was burdened with an excessive workload and was constantly required to accommodate rescheduled tasks, all of which fell outside the standard ethical boundaries of her work. Women are expected to remain agreeable, avoid confrontation, and silently shoulder heavier workloads and emotional burdens while being expected to "prove themselves" more than their male counterparts. While men are often assumed to be competent and deserving of promotions or higher pay by default, women must continuously prove their worth, balancing technical skills with the unspoken requirement to be empathetic, approachable, and tireless. Women who challenge these expectations risk being labelled as "difficult" or "uncooperative," which further discourages them from speaking out or resisting exploitative practices.

^{REPRESENTATIVE IMAGE| WIKI COMMONS}
During my interviews with IT professionals, many were acutely aware of the "hire and fire" culture, where everyone is replaceable, and job security is compromised. Yet, instead of questioning this disposability, employees have internalized it. They plan their futures with the understanding that it is not the job provider’s responsibility to ensure job security. The narrative drilled into them is that success means thriving under immense pressure, and if they can’t handle it, it’s a personal shortcoming. This resonates with the arguments of scholars like McRobbie (2009) and Anita Harris (2004), who discuss how neoliberalism compels individuals—especially women—to believe that navigating and surviving precarious work environments is a measure of personal strength. This is amplified by the rhetoric of ‘top girls’ and ‘can-do girls’ through the strong woman narrative. Just like the zombie ant, employees are led to believe that their suffering is their own doing, not a result of the system they are trapped in.

In many cases, the lack of unions within IT workspaces is presented as evidence of their progressive and non-hierarchical nature. Neoliberal management systems and strategies often cultivate a belief among employees that unionization is outdated, unnecessary, counterproductive and even a manifestation of idleness in an industry that champions individual achievement and innovation. Unlike traditional manufacturing sectors, where unions are considered essential for protecting workers' rights and workers actively form unions, in the IT industry, employees themselves believe that unions are unnecessary. This is cultivated through soft management techniques, such as offering competitive wages and benefits, creating robust internal grievance redressal mechanisms, and instilling a subtle fear among employees that if they engage in any political or organizing activities, they will be individually targeted. The precarious nature of employment in the IT sector, characterized by contractual or project-based jobs, exacerbates this trend. The inherent job insecurity within the industry may lead employees to feel less invested in long-term collective action, reducing the likelihood of union formation. This transient nature of employment fosters a mindset where individuals are more concerned with immediate career prospects rather than engaging in collective bargaining for long-term benefits. Further, IT firms often cultivate an environment that emphasizes personal achievement, career progression, and meritocracy. This corporate culture can be at odds with the principles of collective bargaining and unionization, as it promotes a narrative where success is seen as a product of individual effort rather than collective action. 

^{REPRESENTATIVE IMAGE | FACEBOOK}
In my interviews with IT professionals, the lack of unions was frequently praised. Many believed that unions were unnecessary for white-collar professionals and viewed them as a relic of blue-collar jobs. The absence of unions and collective action in the IT sector is not just a symptom of individuation; it is a deliberate strategy employed by neoliberal capitalism to maintain its dominance. By keeping employees focused on personal achievement and career progression, the system diverts attention from structural issues like exploitation, sexism, and job insecurity. The culture of competition that is encouraged within these workplaces makes it difficult for employees to unite around shared struggles, further entrenching the status quo. Management practices, such as offering competitive wages and perks, act as a buffer, making workers feel that they are being fairly compensated even as they are exploited. Additionally, internal grievance mechanisms are set up to placate employees, giving them the illusion of agency without any real power to challenge the system. The absence of collective bargaining in this sector, however, leaves employees vulnerable to the very systems of exploitation that unions traditionally address.

Without unions, workers have little recourse when faced with unfair treatment, excessive workloads, or job insecurity. The narrative that unions are obsolete or irrelevant in the high-tech world further deepens the isolation felt by workers. The lack of union presence allows companies to maintain the veneer of an egalitarian, forward-thinking workplace while exploiting workers with little pushback. In such environments, employees are encouraged to compete with one another for opportunities and promotions, further undermining any possibility of collective resistance. The absence of unions also means that systemic issues, such as gender and caste-based discrimination, go largely unaddressed. Without collective action, women and marginalized communities have little support when navigating the gendered expectations of the workplace.

^{REPRESENTATIVE IMAGE | FACEBOOK}
The lack of collective bargaining is a crucial factor in the systemic control over employees' subjectivities. It prevents workers from forming solidarities or challenging the structural violence of their workplaces. In IT spaces, where job roles are increasingly fluid and tied to short-term contracts, the possibility of organizing seems remote. Workers are more concerned with keeping up with technological advancements and securing their next role than with collective action. The gig economy mentality that pervades these workspaces, with its emphasis on flexibility and individual responsibility, further fractures any sense of shared struggle. The absence of unions ensures that these feelings of inadequacy and self-blame persist, as there is no collective body advocating for workers’ rights or exposing the exploitative nature of the system. For women, these pressures are compounded by the expectations of fulfilling not only the professional but also the social and emotional demands of the workspace. The neoliberal system thrives on this gendered exploitation, ensuring that women remain complicit in their own subjugation, all the while projecting the illusion of empowerment and meritocracy.

Ultimately, the neoliberal management system doesn’t simply demand productivity. It has perfected the art of shaping employee subjectivities, using soft management techniques to mask the structural inequalities and exploitative practices that underpin the IT sector. The distinction between empowerment and exploitation becomes harder to recognize when the system itself is designed to blur those lines. And like the ant controlled by the fungus, employees in these neoliberal spaces find themselves trapped, carrying the weight of an unjust system while believing it’s all part of the game.