Consequences of using processes as a substitute for trust

“Why were you late?” “Break again?” “You logged off already?” Sound familiar? I came across a reel today that was meant to be funny. But honestly? It just hit too close to home. Because behind the jokes — Are real people with real managers who don’t trust them. At first, it’s just a few “check-ins.” Then, it’s constant pings. Then, it’s hesitation before every break, every log-off, every move. You start second-guessing your own rhythm. Not because you’re slacking — but because you feel watched. Judged. Like productivity means being glued to the screen. I remember a friend telling me once: “I feel more exhausted on slow days — because I have to ‘look busy’ all the time.” That’s not work. That’s performance. And here’s the thing: Micromanagement doesn’t make people more productive. It makes them more anxious. More checked out. More likely to leave. If you’ve ever worked under someone who couldn’t let go of control — You’ll know what I mean. So let’s shift the conversation: ✅ From “hours online” to actual outcomes ✅ From control to trust ✅ From fear to freedom Your best work doesn’t happen when you’re being watched. It happens when you’re trusted. Ever felt this way too? Let’s talk — you’re not alone.👇 #WorkplaceWellbeing #ToxicWorkCulture #Micromanagement #TrustInTeams #ModernLeadership #CorporateLife #WorkCultureMatters #EmployeeVoices #BurnoutCulture #MentalHealthAtWork #LinkedInVoices #RespectAtWork #PeopleOverProcesses #LeadershipMatters #WorkplaceStories #HRInsights

"I don't need your approval for this one." That's what your star employee used to say before confidently tackling complex projects. Now they're double-checking email drafts and waiting for permission to order office supplies. What changed? Your micromanagement killed their spark. Last week, I watched this play out: A high performer who once led million-dollar presentations now submits bare-minimum work. Their manager's "help" looked like this: → Rewriting every client email → Requiring approval for $50 purchases → Making last-minute presentation changes before client meetings The result? Textbook learned helplessness. Psychologists have studied this for decades. When people repeatedly experience situations where their efforts don't seem to matter, they stop trying altogether. The micromanager accidentally trained their high performer to become passive, then wondered why the team "lacks initiative." The painful truth: Every "helpful" revision and "quick fix" sends one message: "I don't trust your judgment." The cost is staggering: - Top talent leaves (or mentally checks out) - Teams become dependent rather than innovative - Managers become bottlenecks to their own success - Company culture shifts from ownership to compliance Here's your 3-step recovery plan: 1. Set clear outcomes, not processes 2. Create "decision zones" where your team has full autonomy 3. Schedule weekly instead of daily check-ins Remember: Your team's potential is directly proportional to the trust you give them. Want to know if you're building trust or control? Drop a 🎯 and I'll share the Trust vs Control Diagnostic we use with leadership teams

For the longest time, I misunderstood what trust meant. As a result, my actions compensated for a lack of trust rather than building trust. 🤝 Rachel Botsman defines trust as "a confident relationship with the unknown." Culprit #1: Transparency. Transparency often signals distrust, not trust. When you demand to see your partner's messages or create elaborate monitoring systems at work, you're compensating for missing trust—not building it. Trust-building is hard because it requires confronting discomfort and vulnerability: giving difficult feedback, admitting mistakes, working through disagreements, and navigating uncertainty together. Teams with high trust show measurable advantages: ◆ Faster project completion (Google's Project Aristotle found psychological safety was the top predictor of team effectiveness) ◆ Greater innovation when facing complex problems (Research shows high-trust teams take more intelligent risks) ◆ Fewer errors through willingness to admit and correct mistakes (Studies consistently link psychological safety to error reduction) The result is higher quality, more creative work delivered faster. Transparency works best when it provides context to help people understand why their work matters and how it connects to broader goals. The Choice: Either compensate for low trust with excessive meetings, approval processes, and trackers; or develop genuine trust through overcoming challenges with a competent, reliable team. One outpaces the other by miles. -- 💡 Exploring the intersection of #peopleanalytics, #organizationalculture, and #behavioralscience to build thriving workplaces. Follow for insights, research, and ideas.

i invited one large insurance company last week, in the day of the invitation they late for about 1 hour from the schedule, they said its about miscomms between them, for me, miscomms should be taken out from the dictionary of a service companies, it reflects how they build trust. one good writings related to this. The Missed Invitation: A Small Crack That Reveals a Larger Problem in Insurance An important business invitation arrives, filled with potential. Days later, you find out the opportunity was missed—not due to a strategic decision, but because it got lost in a maze of internal bureaucracy. Is this just a simple administrative error? In many industries, it might be. But in the insurance sector, this is a significant red flag. Our industry is built on a single, sacred foundation: trust. A policy is more than paper; it's a solemn promise to be there for our clients during their most vulnerable moments. This is where a seemingly small internal failure becomes a powerful reflection of a company's true capabilities. If an organization cannot coordinate effectively to seize an opportunity for its own growth, how can a policyholder trust that their complex claim—requiring seamless collaboration between underwriters, adjusters, and customer service—will be handled with the efficiency and empathy it deserves? A breakdown in internal communication isn't just an operational issue; it's a cultural one. It points to: Departmental Silos: Where "that's not my job" prevents proactive problem-solving. Lack of Accountability: Where responsibility is diffused until it disappears. Inefficient Processes: That hinder agility and responsiveness. These are the exact same friction points that create frustrating experiences for customers. The same disorganization that loses an invitation is what delays a claim payment, miscommunicates policy details, or makes a simple query a bureaucratic nightmare. Operational excellence isn't a back-office luxury; it is the engine of customer trust. The way we manage our internal processes is the most honest indicator of how we will manage our promise to our clients. Because ultimately, a company that can't get its own house in order can't be relied upon to protect someone else's.