Assuming the Worst Can Bring Out the Best in Management

 Do you believe in the theory that people are inherently good or inherently evil? While both perspectives can be argued as both correct and incorrect, from a management and corporate governance standpoint, I lean towards building systems based on the assumption that people are inherently flawed—paradoxically, I find this approach results in a more compassionate and effective organizational structure.

Why? You might think that basing policies on a belief that "people are fundamentally bad" sounds harsh and distrustful. However, this does not mean I view all employees as bad. Humans naturally have weaknesses and flaws; acknowledging this allows us to design environments that prevent these lesser qualities from emerging. Creating systems based on this philosophy means implementing measures like ensuring instructions are both spoken and written down to prevent forgetfulness.

Moreover, even with a strong belief in the goodness of my team, I recognize that if I were left alone with a million dollars, I might be tempted to take a bill—if no one was watching. This doesn't make someone a bad person; it's just human nature. While it sounds noble to say, "I trust my staff completely and leave everything to them," this approach can be risky. Often, leaders who claim to fully delegate authority react negatively when their team doesn’t meet expectations.

Trusting and delegating to your team is crucial, but so is maintaining a system where you can responsibly verify critical details. That’s the mark of ideal leadership. Therefore, when creating rules and structures, it’s safer and ultimately kinder to proceed under the assumption that people can fail. This prepares the organization to handle mistakes compassionately and constructively.