One of the most expensive mistakes I see organizations make is writing policies designed to control people they fundamentally do not trust.
It shows up in familiar ways. Remote work is denied because leaders feel uneasy when they cannot physically see employees. PTO policies become interrogation exercises rather than benefits. Time-tracking software monitors every click and keystroke. Productivity is measured by whether someone is in their seat from eight to five rather than by what they actually produce.
These policies are often justified as safeguards. In reality, they are symptoms. And they are costly.
At the root of nearly every punitive or overly restrictive policy is not a legal requirement or a compliance necessity. It is a trust problem.
Policies Are Signals
Policies do more than define rules. They communicate what leadership truly believes about its people.
When an organization relies heavily on surveillance, rigid approvals, and control mechanisms, the message is clear: we assume you will take advantage of us if given the chance. Over time, employees internalize that message. Engagement drops. Initiative disappears. High performers, who have options, leave.
Leaders often tell themselves these policies are necessary because of “how people are.” In reality, the issue usually falls into one of two categories.
Two Root Causes Leaders Avoid Naming
The first possibility is uncomfortable but common. Leadership does not trust by default. There is an assumption of worst intentions. Control is confused with accountability. Management energy is spent monitoring behavior instead of developing capability.
The second possibility is more operational. The wrong person is in the role, or there is a clear performance issue that leadership has been unwilling to address directly. Instead of managing the problem, a policy is created to constrain everyone.
In both cases, policy becomes a substitute for leadership.
The Cost of Distrust
Over decades of managing operations and people systems, the pattern is consistent. Teams that are tightly controlled experience significantly higher turnover and lower productivity. Micromanagement erodes confidence and autonomy. Employees spend more time protecting themselves than doing their best work.
By contrast, high-trust environments retain top talent. Expectations are clear. Feedback is frequent. Performance is addressed directly, not indirectly through rules. Culture becomes a competitive advantage rather than a liability.
This is not about being permissive or ignoring accountability. High-trust organizations are often the most disciplined. The difference is where the discipline is applied.
A Leadership Reframe
Control-focused organizations tend to ask questions like:
How do we stop time theft?
How do we monitor remote workers?
How do we prevent people from abusing flexibility?
High-performing organizations ask different questions:
How do we define results clearly?
How do we create accountability for outcomes?
How do we support people so they can perform at their best?
The best leaders do not spend their energy trying to control people. They invest it in developing them.
The Trust Equation
Trust at work is not abstract or sentimental. It is built through systems and behaviors:
Clear expectations
Regular, honest feedback
Consistent performance consequences
When these elements are present, trust grows. When they are absent, no amount of policy will compensate.
A Question for Leaders
Take a look at your most restrictive policy. Ask yourself what it is really trying to control. Is it addressing a genuine business risk, or is it compensating for a leadership or performance issue that has gone unresolved?
If you do not trust your people, there are only two sustainable options. Improve your leadership approach, or improve your hiring and performance management. Creating policies that punish everyone for the behavior of a few will only drive away the people you most want to keep.
Trust is not blind. It is earned over time. But healthy organizations understand that it has to be extended first.
The question is not whether your people deserve trust. The question is what it is costing you when you refuse to give it.