Resentment in small business employees doesn’t usually show up like anger. It shows up as compliance. It shows up as silence. It shows up as people doing exactly what you asked and nothing more. And you are probably wondering why all of that is bad. It’s bad because small businesses with employees who simply check a box so they don’t get fired take much longer to grow. They have deep underbellies of culture that actually stagnate scalability. It doesn’t matter how good the product or service is, employee resentment will inhibit success, and that’s why this topic makes leaders uncomfortable. Not because they’re bad people, but because most resentment isn’t created by malice. It’s created by avoidance. Employees don’t usually resent you as a person. They resent the systems you tolerate, the decisions you delay, and the behaviors you excuse. So today I want to walk through three reasons your employees may resent you, even if they smile, even if they stay, even if you genuinely believe they like you. This isn’t about being liked. In fact, the leaders who optimize for being liked tend to create the most resentment over time.

Almost every CEO I talk to says some version of “my door is always open,” “I encourage feedback,” or “I want people to speak up.” And I believe most of them mean it, or they genuinely think they do. But psychological safety is not created by what you say. It’s created by what happens after someone challenges you. Employees are constantly running experiments. What happens if I push back. What happens if I disagree. What happens if I name the real issue. And if they aren’t running experiments themselves, they are watching when other employees do and adjusting their behavior accordingly. If the response is defensiveness, subtle punishment, being labeled difficult, or simply being ignored, they don’t argue harder. They stop talking. That’s not trust. That’s risk management. Here’s the CEO blind spot. You assume silence means alignment. It doesn’t. It usually means people decided it’s safer to work around you than with you. And resentment grows in that gap. That resentment turns into back channeling, one of the biggest culture killers. When employees agree to one thing in a meeting to save face but the minute the meeting is over they are talking about why that won’t work or why something else should be the solution, it’s because they didn’t feel comfortable speaking up and they also don’t feel comfortable doing what was asked, so they don’t, at least not well. The meeting was a waste, you spend hours in rework, and that process gets washed, rinsed, and repeated with every other initiative. Let me give you a diagnostic question. When was the last time someone on your team challenged your thinking in a meeting, questioned a decision you were excited about, or said I don’t think this will work. If you can’t remember, that may not be because your team agrees with everything you do. It may be because they’ve learned what kind of honesty is allowed. If you can remember, how was it handled. If you truly want an open door policy, thank leaders and employees publicly when they push back or challenge you. Of course they should do it respectfully, but if you want your open door to be used, thank them for the feedback even if you don’t agree or take their suggestion. Resentment doesn’t show up as rebellion. It shows up as disengagement. People stop investing emotionally once they realize the truth isn’t welcome.

This second one is subtle and incredibly common. You use language like we’re a family here, we take care of our own, we’re all in this together. Usually well intended. But when the experience doesn’t match the language, decisions get made without context, changes are announced without explanation, sacrifices are expected without reciprocity. That’s where resentment begins. Because adults don’t want a family at work. They want clarity, fairness, and predictability. When you say family but operate transactionally, employees feel emotionally overpromised and operationally underdelivered. It looks like we’re a family until budgets get tight. We’re all in this together until leadership bonuses are untouched. We care about you but no transparency when things change. From the employee side it feels manipulative, even if that was never your intent. The resentment comes from the mismatch, not the decision itself. Employees can handle hard news. They struggle with inconsistent logic. If loyalty is expected, context is required. If flexibility is requested, trust has to run both ways. Culture is not about closeness. It’s about credibility. Do your actions match your language, especially when it’s inconvenient. If not, people don’t disengage loudly. They disengage quietly. They do what’s required. They stop volunteering ideas. They stop giving discretionary effort. And resentment settles in. You’ve heard of quiet quitting. This is it. I tend to be a very transparent leader. My team knows what is going on in this business at all times. I’m transparent with our numbers, our pipeline, the realities of employees leaving. I would much rather share too much than make them feel like I’m keeping things from them or not living the words I say. And when you aren’t transparent with employees, they don’t feel like there is nothing to share. They make up what you don’t say and believe that to be true.

This is the place I spend the most time. My expertise inside my fractional HR firm is in leadership development and in identifying what is affecting people inside the organization and keeping them from meeting goals. And almost always it’s a bad manager or three. It’s the one CEOs rationalize the most. There is almost always someone who gets results but leaves damage behind, hits numbers but misses people. You know who I’m talking about, and employees know you know. When that behavior is tolerated, the message employees hear is results matter more than respect, performance excuses behavior, leadership protection is uneven. Resentment skyrockets because now the system feels unfair. You might tell yourself you’ll deal with it later, they’re too valuable right now, that’s just their personality. But your team is watching what you don’t address and drawing conclusions. If you asked your employees privately who is protected here, would they all name the same person. If yes, that’s not a perception problem. That’s a leadership decision. People don’t leave companies because of one bad manager. They leave because leadership knows they have a bad manager and does nothing. Even the high performers. Especially the high performers, because they see the cost of staying. That toxic manager you know is toxic is killing your business whether they are performing or not.

Here’s the part I want to leave you with. Resentment is not a morale issue. It’s not an engagement issue. It’s not an HR issue. It’s a leadership lag indicator. It shows up when clarity is avoided, accountability is inconsistent, and courage is delayed. Your employees don’t need you to be liked. They need you to be clear, consistent, and willing to confront what’s uncomfortable. If you want less resentment, stop managing how you’re perceived. Start managing what you permit. Because culture isn’t what you say when things are easy. It’s what you’re willing to address when it’s not.