Are There “Untouchable” Managers in Your Organization? 

In some organizations, there is a reality that everyone is aware of, yet very few openly acknowledge. 

There are certain managers…
No one easily challenges them.
Their decisions are not questioned.
Their behavior is not debated.
Their mistakes are overlooked.
And over time, this becomes normalized. 

Because gradually, a perception forms within the organization: “This person is critical — it’s best not to confront them.” 

In many investigations we have conducted in Türkiye, we have observed a similar pattern: managers who hold critical roles within company operations may, over time, create a de facto sphere of privilege around themselves. Due to their deep knowledge of specific processes, business relationships, customer networks, or commercial flows, they may begin to see themselves as indispensable. More importantly, once they become aware of this position, they may—consciously or unconsciously—foster a sense of “untouchability” around them. 

How Does the Perception of Untouchability Emerge? 

This situation rarely appears overnight. It develops gradually over time. 

A key manager does not only begin to control processes, but also people. They build a network of loyal individuals around them. This structure may not be formally defined, but it effectively exists. Over time, it becomes clear who supports them, who remains silent, and who refrains from questioning certain decisions. 

In such an environment, loyalty starts to outweigh competence.
Transparency diminishes.
The culture of challenge weakens.
And an invisible shield of protection forms within the organization. 

At this point, the issue is no longer simply about a manager being influential.
The real issue is that this influence becomes unquestionable. 

Where Silence Begins, Risk Grows 

This is precisely where the real risk begins. 

When a perception emerges that “nothing will happen to this person,” it does not only protect the individual. It also sends a powerful message to the rest of the organization: 

• Rules are not applied equally to everyone  
• Certain individuals operate without accountability  
• Proximity to power provides protection  
• Raising concerns may carry personal risk  

Over time, this message reshapes the organizational culture.
People learn to remain silent.
They choose not to speak up about what they see.
Some adapt to the system.
And most dangerously, this situation begins to be accepted as normal. 

The Environment Where Fraud Thrives Most Comfortably 

Fraud does not usually grow in chaos, but rather in comfort zones — among the most trusted individuals, within the least questioned areas, and in positions perceived as “indispensable.” 

As such managers recognize their criticality, they also sense that control mechanisms are applied more loosely to them. This may lead, in some cases, to explicit fraudulent behavior; in others, to conflicts of interest, favoritism, or the normalization of unethical decisions. 

In such environments, certain vendors may be protected, commercial decisions may lack transparency, expense or approval processes may not be adequately scrutinized, and employees may hesitate to raise concerns about certain relationships. 

What Should Be Done? 

In such cases, the solution is not to focus solely on the individual. The real need is to identify the underlying structure and address it. 

Our recommendations are as follows: 

• Apply the same control standards to everyone, including critical managers  
• Ensure that roles, authorities, and approval mechanisms are system-driven, not person-dependent  
• Establish whistleblowing mechanisms that genuinely inspire trust  
• Strengthen accountability at the management level  
• Carefully analyze loyalty networks forming around specific individuals  

Because some risks do not arise from the absence of procedures, but from the fact that procedures do not effectively apply to certain individuals. 

Conclusion  

Ultimately, the real risk for organizations is not the presence of strong managers, but the transformation of that strength into an unchallenged, unmonitored, and privileged position. 

Once a perception of “untouchability” takes hold, the risk no longer resides solely in individual behavior—it evolves into a broader governance weakness affecting the entire organization. Therefore, the foundation of a healthy corporate culture is not strong individuals, but strong systems that apply equally to everyone. 

Perhaps the most important question is this: 

Is everyone in your organization truly accountable?
Or have certain managers become beyond question simply because they are considered critical?