betray them. According to Sprenger, there is also a form of “horizontal” distrust that
makes competitors out of colleagues and the daily work a constant battle.
The reason for this distorted image is a widespread shortcoming of German
bosses: their penchant for perfection. If one assumes that others do not work or
do not work well enough, it is the worst possible basis for trust. Indeed, many
executives would prefer to do everything themselves, but this is impossible. There-
fore, they must delegate – but it is best to always keep an eye on the staff, because
trusting in their ability and determination is not enough. Although tasks are
delegated, responsibility is not. In these economically difficult times trust and
letting go requires considerable effort and courage. Instead of taking this leap,
often everything is declared an “executive priority” or is “escalated” into a mana-
gerial decision so that nothing can go wrong.
Many companies are dominated by an early industrial labor organization in a
modern guise, which focuses on the duty to show presence, on systems of control,
and on meeting rituals. Some companies practically have their own “distrust depart-
ments” that are just busy figuring out if others are doing what they are supposed to
be doing. Overwhelming their victims with forms and regulations to the point of
neurotic stress and fatigue, they succeed only in keeping them from doing what they
are really supposed to be doing. Many people have had enough of their employer’s
bureaucracy and excessive control and are tired of the perpetual distrust. Internally,
they “resign” and no longer identify themselves with their work, let alone with their
company. Only a person who is responsible and has the freedom to act indepen-
dently will fully commit to a task, show initiative and do more than just working by
the book.
There is supervision at every step: in production, the employees are supervised
by punch-in clocks and with video cameras. On the upper floors, it is a bit more
subtle: the distrust manifests itself in the rampant “meeting mania,” in piles of reports,
notes and memos (since it is better to have everything in writing), in completely
over-the-top monitoring activities, waves of reports (with constant updates on
the intranet), the ever-increasing flood of emails (because the boss wants to receive
a copy of each of his employees’ emails), and in the hypertrophy of measurement
(if it can’t be measured, it can’t be managed).
Sprenger’s analysis paints a devastating picture of German corporate culture:
“Many companies are mere ‘suspicion organizations.’ Distrusting managers put out
manuals of biblical thickness, defining even the smallest roles in the company. They
do not believe that people want to do a good job. A deep insecurity transforms
ostensibly rational executives into police forces, police managers who monitor
‘control margins.’ They have no faith in the self-imposed quality standards of
their employees and are extremely cautious when it comes to employees finding
their own ways of achieving the goal” (Sprenger 2002b, p. 22). Distrust is the rule,
confidence the exception.
Many companies have locked themselves into an invisible high-security wing,
where bureaucratic, rigid governance and an excess of policy guidelines preclude
any entrepreneurship or innovation. The bars of this prison are false, outdated
assumptions about business and human behavior.
2.3 The Relationship Between Leader and Led 91