Archive

Posts Tagged ‘trust’

Trust Us!

Are we Bitcoiners in the painful process of witnessing the birth of a new central banking junta that we’ll have to TRUST to not rip us off in the future?

Categories: bitcoin Tags: ,

Mutual Mistrust

March 11, 2016 Leave a comment

CoveyTrust

Assume you walked into an organization and discovered a massive, productivity-sapping, mistrust between management (party A) and the workforce (Party B).  Would you wonder how such a toxic environment came about in the first place? Well, it really doesn’t matter “who started it first” cuz once the self-reinforcing loop of escalating mistrust kicks into gear, all is lost.

PartyAPartyB

YouFirst

Categories: management Tags:

Loops Of Distrust

Mistrust reigns everywhere. Governments distrust big businesses and vice versa. Big business heads (and I mean it both literally and figuratively), even though they often superficially espouse otherwise, distrust their low level, non-executive people.

The two cause-effect loop diagrams below crystallize the situation, no? On the left, more regulation begets more lobbying and lawyering – which begets more regulation. Bummer. On the right, more red tape begets more subversion – which begets more red tape. Double freakin’ bummer.

In the government-DYSCO cat-and-mouse duel, government, even though it’s a massively dysfunctional CCH itself, wants its version fairness and equity to prevail. In the DYSCO-DICforce scenario, the DICforce wants its version of fairness and equity to prevail. In both scenarios, the DYSCO DJs want an unfair advantage.

Note: Not all companies are DYSCOs. Only DYSCOs are DYSCOs. Every once in a blue moon I state a disclaimer like this because some people may think I’m a black-and-white binary thinker.Those that do may be binary thinkers themselves?

Trustworthiness Metrics

January 16, 2011 Leave a comment

Check out this hilarious blarticle from “Federal Computer Week“: Measuring federal employees’ moods to determine trustworthiness. If you don’t want to go there, I’ll cherry pick the parts that reinforce my UCB:

In the memo, national security officials ask agencies what metrics they use to measure trustworthiness without alienating employees. They also ask agencies if they use psychiatrists or sociologists to measure relative happiness or “despondence and grumpiness” as means to gauge an employee’s trustworthiness.

My question is: Do these rule-making, memo-writing “national security officials” eat their own dog food; practice what they preach? Do they “objectively” measure their own trustworthiness and “leakability“? I’d love to see an enumerated list of these officially sanctioned metrics.

Moving on, let’s see what the article says about the latest fading management buzzword, “engaged“:

…because now there’s more understanding about the importance of an engaged workforce.

WTF? Just now, and not waaay before now?

I’m sure that our government is going down the right path with the strategies they’re proposing for stopping future Wikileaks type fiascos. Our government SCOLs need to declare “a war on leaks” and appoint a “Leak Czar“. Wars and czars are sure-fire solutions that have worked before on terrorism, drugs, crime, and obesity, right? Maybe businesses should employ the “war” and “czar” metaphors too. Oops, they already do, but without publicly espousing it.

Does writing this post decrease my trustworthiness score? By how much? What’s your trustworthiness score?

Trust

March 16, 2010 Leave a comment

In “Design For Prevention” (there’s no link here because the book hasn’t been released yet), friend and mentor Bill Livingston elegantly states:

Trust substitutes for search, negotiation, monitoring, and enforcement; it substitutes for hierarchical control internally and for the legalisms of contracts externally. The core elements of trust include: reciprocity, reputation, and a common semantic.

Reciprocity and reputation align motives, and a common semantic aligns perceptions. People have an innate, passionate desire to contribute, called the instinct of workmanship. Opposing this urge to contribute is fear of rejection, failure, loss, retribution, or embarrassment. Earned trust tips the balance between the urge to contribute and fear. Working in an environment of trust reinforces, validates, and supports trust. – William L. Livingston

The truth in Bill’s words ring loud and clear to me. Trust flattens the hierarchy and nurtures the emergence of a collaborative, wealth creating community. Without trust, a herd-following and hardened mediocracy is guaranteed.

Sadly, because those in the top tiers of CCHs want nothing more than to stay in the penthouse, trust is not allowed within corpocracies. Fine grained, micro-detailed work schedules (that are hopelessly out of date as soon as the ink dries) coupled with useless daily status meetings continuously destroy trust and clearly show “who’s in charge” and who’s supposed to be more important.

%d bloggers like this: