More convenient, short term, to do nothing? Then the leaders can avoid having a conflict with that angry person. And long term, when this affects the company n

More convenient, short term, to do nothing? Then the leaders can avoid having a conflict with that angry person. And long term, when this affects the company negatively -- maybe they don't care? What if they're in it for the money and status (they had nice sounding job titles?). Seems like possibly rational "leadership" to me :-(