Why leaders can no longer keep personal affairs private

From Singapore to the States, leaders are facing growing consequences for personal misconduct, and social media is amplifying every misstep. PropertyLimBrothers, a prominent real estate agency in Singapore, recently saw CEO Melvin Lim and vice-president of strategy Grayce Tan resign over allegations of an affair. The scandal has prompted conversations about workplace culture and accountability in Singapore’s highly competitive property sector, where reputation is often as valuable as performance.

The PropertyLim case is not isolated. Across the globe, Andy Byron, for CEO of tech firm Astronomer, resigned after being spotted on a kiss cam embracing his chief people officer Kristin Cabot at a Coldplay concert. The incident, widely shared on social media, drew commentary not only from industry insiders but also from global media outlets, highlighting how even personal moments can become professional crises in the digital age.

Similarly in 2019, McDonald’s CEO Steve Easterbrook was ousted after a consensual relationship with an employee violated the company’s strict non-fraternisation policy, serving as a reminder that corporate governance standards have real teeth, regardless of personal intent.

Don't miss: Why silence isn’t key to managing PropertyLimBrothers' alleged scandal 

The role of social media

Industry professionals MARKETING-INTERACTIVE spoke to say these cases reflect a larger shift in how CEO misconduct is perceived and managed, oftentimes with social media amplifying the visbility and impact of these cases. 

“Social media collapses the line between private conduct and public accountability, and incidents which are in the public interest will end up amplifying very rapidly,” said Jose Raymond, managing director, SW Strategies. He added that public sensitivity is heightened toward organisations that are well-known or influential, “where audiences feel a sense of ownership, expectation, or grievance which raises the stakes far beyond the incident itself.” 

In addition, Manisha Seewal, group president of Redhill, explained that the speed and scale of online platforms means that everything can move at the pace of a tweet or a TikTok clip: 

In the past, workplace issues or personal missteps often stayed within closed circles. Now, every single moment can be amplified, reshared, and commented on by millions within minutes.

Meanwhile, Oliver Budgen, founder and CEO of Bud is of the opinion that social media has lowered the barrier to public scrutiny. He noted that online platforms, often under anonymity, remove accountability and proportion. "What might once have been handled internally can now become public spectacle or pseudo‑entertainment, amplified by algorithms that reward outrage," explained Budgen. 

He added that this doesn’t necessarily mean audiences are more morally sensitive, stating that audiences are "more fragmented and distracted than ever". 

What’s changed is speed and amplification, not moral standards. The impact often depends less on the behaviour itself and more on how quickly and clumsily organisations respond.” 

Shifting expectations on leadership

Pei Lin Cho, managing director, APRW noted that human curiosity, or being “kaypoh,” as Singaporeans say, has always driven interest in scandals. “We love stories like these because they are scandals and gossip. They are good for the coffee table, and they make life feel a little less mundane,” she said.

She also highlighted that corporate purpose has evolved over years. Many companies now define themselves by morality or principles, she said. As such, when leaders act in ways that contradict this declared purpose, it can have a direct impact on the brand. The effect depends on the type of relationship the public has with the leader and the prominence of the organisation, with highly visible leaders facing greater scrutiny.

The nature of the relationship between leaders and their audiences also matters. Cho points out that the impact depends on whether the leader is admired or influential. “If the leader is someone the public looks up to, for instance, a politicians, expectations are higher, and misconduct may feel more consequential. Leaders with strong personal brands or high visibility can see even minor scandals amplified,” she said.

Moreover, many C-suite leaders today cultivate a strong online presence, seeing it as part of their personal brand and career path. Some give talks, write and actively promote themselves. Cho added: 

When this personal brand becomes public, any scandal can naturally gain more attention — and people care because it touches both the leader and the organisation.

Seewal noted that public standards of accountability have also shifted. People today expect a different standard of accountability, be it at work and in life. There’s also less tolerance for ‘that’s just how things are.’

"The public has become more vocal about values and consistency, and they are increasingly willing to call out behaviours that feel misaligned with what a brand, public figure, or leader claims to stand for," said Seewal. The combination of viral visibility and heightened expectations means that reputational risks are no longer limited to boardrooms and are in fact, actively managed in real time, often under the watchful eye of millions.

The cumulative effect is clear: in today’s hyper-connected world, leadership missteps are no longer private matters. They ripple through social media, mainstream press, and industry circles, influencing public trust, employee morale, and even company valuation. While some incidents are fleeting, others prompt long-term scrutiny of governance practices, brand values, and corporate culture.

As Raymond concludes, “The combination of visibility, public sensitivity, and real-time amplification makes it more important than ever for organisations to manage both behaviour and perception, or risk turning a private misstep into a public crisis.”

Related articles:  
Outlasting the gossip: Why Astronomer doesn't need to kiss its reputation goodbye  
From boardroom to courtroom: Does comms have a say in the CDL family feud? 
How can SingPost win back investor trust post high profile terminations?