Food for Thought
Why doesn't more control automatically create more trust?
After a mistake, an additional approval is introduced. Soon the next step needs a signature too. Nobody has lost trust, people say. Even so, ever more is documented, checked and formally safeguarded.
Perhaps these controls are necessary. Or perhaps we are trying to solve a problem in how we work together by adding forms.
Control and mistrust are not the same thing
Anyone changing a safety-critical system, handling sensitive data or signing a contract that would be hard to reverse needs appropriate controls. It would be reckless to abolish them simply in the name of trust.
Things look different for decisions where the possible harm is small and corrections are easy. If even these actions require multiple approvals, it is worth asking which specific risk those approvals are actually meant to manage.
Approval can also help conceal responsibility: many have agreed, yet nobody feels responsible for the outcome. That is one possible organisational consequence, not a general empirical law.
A test question for each new control
Before introducing another rule, write down four things: What harm should it prevent? How likely and how serious would that harm be? Who is allowed to decide after the control? And how will we later recognise whether the control has served its purpose?
If you cannot answer those questions, perhaps the rule has not yet been thought through. Conversely, where risks are high, an independent check can be an expression of responsibility and trust in a sound process.
I would also ask whether those involved can speak openly about mistakes, uncertainties and opposing views. Additional controls achieve little if important information is withheld out of fear.
Observation: The number of approval steps is growing. Hypothesis: This could reflect real risks, bad experiences or unclear responsibilities. My position: Trust is not a free pass. Controls should be designed according to risk rather than used to conceal a lack of trust.
The more uncomfortable question, then, is: Do we need another control, or do we first need a conversation about why we no longer trust one another?
Further thinking: Collaboration and leadership and Decisions and responsibility.
Context: This proposal is a normative aid to reflection, not a general claim of success for controls. Legal and contractual obligations remain unaffected.