There is a need for managers to develop the virtue of fallibilistic flexibility, inasmuch as one of the deficiencies of the human condition is that we are fallible. A manager who does not demonstrate some sense of fallibilistic flexibility makes it difficult for employees to trust management.
More than few managers, impelled by endogenous lust and qualitative modes of material nature, not only disrespect employees but also even emotionally abuse them, and this makes it difficult to trust management. The three modes of material nature – goodness, passion, and ignorance – are always vying for supremacy and impelling Homo sapiens to act in varying ways (Prabhupada, 2011; Widolf, 2007). The sensory modalities and the mind are the repository of lust, which forces living beings to act even against their better judgment.
Managers’ inability to demonstrate practical caring thinking skills in their relationships with employees makes it hard for employees to repose trust in management. Two types of caring are discernible: selfless caring, and caring with the intent to lord over. Antithetically, managers who are skilled in caring thinking very easily gain support and trust from employees.
Trust is reciprocal. If a manager wants employees to trust management, then that manager should practice to trust employees. However, more than a few managers do not trust their employees, and this makes it difficult for employees to trust their management.
Egocentric bias of more than a few managers facilitates trust sag in management. Discernibly, no one is the repository of all information culture; therefore, as soon as a manager begins to act as if he/she is the personification of all knowledge, a sober employee would find it difficult to trust such management.
Low self-control of managers is a major stumbling block to trust in management. The general theory of crime (Gottfredson & Hirchi, 1990) brings to bear that self-control is the main determining factor of all crimes and antisocial behavior. Managers with high self-control would facilitate trust in management. Rupa Goswami (Prabhupada, 2011) asseverates that a manager with high self-control would not only invoke support and trust from employees/followers, but also be able manage and lead the entire global village. It is not hard to find managers/leaders that disappointed their organizations due to low self-control. Trust and low self-control are mutually exclusive.
The exploitative mindset of more than a few managers makes it very difficult for employees to trust management. According to applied Vedic science (Prabhupada, 2011), exploitation of natural and human resources is inherently imbued in living beings. However, if exploitation is very pronounced or glaring in a manager’s dealing with employees, under the banner of high yields, achieving trust in management becomes difficult.
References
Gottfredson, M.R. & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
Prabhupada, ACBS (2011). Bhaktivedanta VedaBase. Los Angeles, CA: Book Trust International.
Widolf, H.E. (2007). Australian Antarctic scientists: Consciousness and behavior. A dissertation submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, University of Tasmania.
by Vasudev Das, a researcher on leadership and organizational change, serves in ISKCON.
A presentation at Harvard Business School Working Knowledge forum, July 2012, article number 95: http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/7034.html?wknews=07112012
Recent Comments