Mistrust and Conflicts
Trust in organisations must be controlled and limited. Organisations must also utilise mistrust. A very significant difference lies within whether the utilisation of mistrust leads to conflicts or not. Organisations who opt for a controlling (mistrustful) approach, without this leading to heated arguments, resistance, loss of trust, offence, withdrawal, caution and tactics, are at a clear advantage in their ability to survive in complex environments. To treat the employees’ psychological competences with sensible mistrust, and to normalise control within the potential of the organisational culture, does, therefore, acquire considerable significance. Where control is interpreted as a reference to mistakes or to dubious suitability for a position, fear is quickly created. Where control is seen as an offer to communicate and as a coordination function, it can, as a result, readily re-engage trust afterwards. The self-regulatory competences of employees, and their interaction with the ‘becoming transparent’, should, for this reason, also be given attention. In light of these considerations, employees who must always shine (!), instead show themselves to be problematical in the aspect of complexity competence. Counter-measures such as “Transparency is always good” do just as much damage. Likewise, it can be important not to stimulate mistrust in other places too speedily, because one must be able to test and try things discretely and in peace and quiet. It is as easy as it is wrong to define one side of the polarity as the right one!