SLAUGHTER: Give employees chance to break your trust

Robby Slaughter
December 4, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Viewpoint columnist Robby SlaughterAn old saying insists that character is what you do when no one is watching. If you want the best team with the strongest commitment to ethical behavior, you must ensure they have every opportunity to lie, steal and cheat.

This strategy sounds radical and counterintuitive. Shouldn’t we closely monitor employee activity? Shouldn’t we keep interior doors locked, ration valuable resources, bolt down furniture and equipment, and install security cameras? These are certainly prudent actions to reduce the threat of abuse and criminal activity. However, most people—and furthermore, most employees—are honest, law-abiding citizens. Why do we build work environments that practically boast about how little we trust our workers?

Much of the rationale is surely a calculated risk. Most people don’t need strict policies and mechanisms to behave ethically, but the financial outlay of a security program is significantly less than a lawsuit or catastrophic loss. This small investment, however, may have a hidden cost to employee morale and productivity. As best-selling author and corporate visionary Ricardo Semler notes, “I’ll bet that, on average, 2 percent or 3 percent of any work force will take advantage of an employer’s trust. But is that a valid reason to subject 97 percent to a daily ritual of humiliation?”

At his own wildly successful factories, Semler replaced security checkpoints and random searches with a sign that read, “Please make sure as you leave that you are not inadvertently taking anything that does not belong to you.” At first, employees wanted the old system back so they could show they were honest. Eventually, they realized the company had changed its position: Now everyone was assumed innocent until proven guilty.

Through the steady accretion of bureaucracy, we fail to establish large organizations with the premise that most people have a moral conscience. Even a small step in the direction of trust seems unimaginable. Consider the philosophy of one locally owned restaurant: If you whip out a credit card, a staff member will proudly explain the business accepts only “cash or IOUs.” Choose the latter and you’ll receive a hand-scrawled note. The theory is that anyone you’d want as a repeat customer will come again to settle up while people who would dodge their bill will never return.

Likewise, we don’t worry about employees making a few brief personal calls to loved ones from the phone on their desk. So why do we ask IT departments to block access to online banking, private e-mail accounts or e-commerce sites? We don’t tell hourly employees to clock out during a 10-minute rest-room break, so why do we measure the number of minutes they are away for a half-hour lunch? Isn’t it more important to get things done than to watch the clock?

Due to practical and legal restrictions, workplaces must have some policies and some monitoring. Yet at the same time, we can all acknowledge that responsible people thrive in an environment of freedom. Fewer restrictions and less bureaucracy create greater potential for innovation. Brilliance often requires knowing the rules and knowingly setting them aside. Most important, responsible people will work because they are driven by the satisfaction of progress and discovery.

Likewise, irresponsible people quickly stand out in a culture that emphasizes freedom. They will exploit any cookie jar left unguarded. They will be lazy and complacent. If they are rarely monitored, their work will barely advance. Autonomy is a kind of disinfectant that almost instantly highlights those who would violate your trust.

The best teams succeed despite all the restrictions and paranoia that limit their activities. Consider doing something drastic: Trust your employees. You may uncover a few bad seeds, but those worth keeping will take root and flourish in the open sun.•


Slaughter is a principal with Slaughter Development, an Indianapolis business-process and workflow-consulting company and the author of “Failure: The Secret to Success.”


  • Agreed
    Agree with you that our default, in most situations, should be a much higher level of trust. Whatever happened to the leadership idea that people rise to your expectations of them? Perhaps this reveals the unfortunate expectations most companies/businesses have of employees.

Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I am a Lyft driver who is a licensed CDL professional driver. ALL Lyft drivers take pride in providing quality service to the Indianapolis and surrounding areas, and we take the safety of our passengers and the public seriously.(passengers are required to put seat belts on when they get in our cars) We do go through background checks, driving records are checked as are the personal cars we drive, (these are OUR private cars we use) Unlike taxi cabs and their drivers Lyft (and yes Uber) provide passengers with a clean car inside and out, a friendly and courteous driver, and who is dressed appropriately and is groomed appropriately. I go so far as to offer mints, candy and/or small bottle of water to the my customers. It's a mutual respect between driver and passenger. With Best Regards

  2. to be the big fish in the little pond of IRL midwest racin' when yer up against Racin' Gardner

  3. In the first sentance "As a resident of one of these new Carmel Apartments the issue the local governments need to discuss are build quality & price." need a way to edit

  4. As a resident of one of these new Carmel Apartments the issue the local governments need to discuss is build quality & price. First none of these places is worth $1100 for a one bedroom. Downtown Carmel or Keystone at the Crossing in Indy. It doesn't matter. All require you to get in your car to get just about anywhere you need to go. I'm in one of the Carmel apartments now where after just 2.5 short years one of the kitchen cabinet doors is crooked and lawn and property maintenance seems to be lacking my old Indianapolis apartment which cost $300 less. This is one of the new star apartments. As they keep building throughout the area "deals" will start popping up creating shoppers. If your property is falling apart after year 3 what will it look like after year 5 or 10??? Why would one stay here if they could move to a new Broad Ripple in 2 to 3 years or another part of the Far Northside?? The complexes aren't going to let the "poor" move in without local permission so that's not that problem, but it the occupancy rate drops suddenly because the "Young" people moved back to Indy then look out.

  5. Why are you so concerned about Ace hardware? I don't understand why anyone goes there! Every time ive gone in the past, they don't have what I need and I end up going to the big box stores. I understand the service aspect and that they try to be helpful but if they are going to survive I think they might need to carry more specialty parts.