07/08/2026
A recent workplace observation got us thinking about the different ways people choose to lead.
Imagine an employee with significant experience misses a task. They own the mistake immediately, complete it as soon as they realise, and apologise.
One leader’s response is simple:
“It’s done now. Don’t worry about it.”
That response acknowledges the mistake, but it also demonstrates trust. It recognises that experienced, high-performing employees aren’t defined by the occasional oversight. They are defined by their overall track record, accountability, and willingness to put things right.
Another leader might respond very differently. They regularly check whether tasks have been completed, ask for constant updates, and closely monitor every piece of work. Their intention may be to ensure nothing is missed, but over time this approach can leave capable, experienced employees feeling like they are not trusted to do their job.
Both leaders want good outcomes.
The difference is how they get there.
Leadership isn’t one size fits all. Someone who is new to a role, still developing their skills, or has a history of not following through may benefit from more frequent guidance and check-ins. But when someone has significant experience, consistently delivers high-quality work, and has built a reputation for following through, the leadership approach should evolve too.
People generally rise to the level of trust placed in them. When employees know they are trusted, they often take greater ownership, communicate openly when they make mistakes, and work harder to maintain that trust. Constant monitoring, on the other hand, can unintentionally reduce confidence, autonomy, and engagement.
Trust should be earned, but once it has been earned, perhaps the greatest sign of leadership is knowing when to step back.
What do you think?
Do you believe leadership should adapt to an employee’s experience and proven performance, or should everyone be managed the same way regardless of their track record? We’d love to hear your perspective.