Empowerment

As Abraham Maslow taught: “Every person is, in part, his own project and makes himself.” When individuals believe they have a gift that can be developed and are free to determine and control their own lives, they are empowered to contribute, make a difference, and realize their potential. Empowerment is facilitated by a contribution mindset and a supportive, inclusive environment. It is hindered by barriers — both internal and external to the individual.   

Internal barriers include doubts and limiting beliefs. If someone feels incapable of contributing or afraid of making mistakes, they will fail to become all that they can be. Internal barriers can cause someone to give up before they start. While few begin with everything in their favor, everyone has a gift that, if cultivated, can improve their circumstances. Individuals who believe in themselves — who realize they have something to offer — have discovered their unique gift and are more motivated to develop valued skills and contribute. They are more likely to develop an accurate sense of self-worth, realize what they are capable of becoming (self-actualize), and live a life of meaning.   

External barriers exist when the key institutions of society — education, business, communities, and government — hinder or impede an individual’s journey of realizing their potential. Removing all such barriers is essential. People become empowered when they are enabled to discover, develop, and apply their gifts; communities provide the support they need; businesses empower employees to succeed by contributing to the betterment of others; and governments protect the rights of every individual and ensure equal treatment.  

Koch’s success depends on empowered employees who apply Principles of Human Progress. Effective supervisors empower employees to be the best they can be, providing the conditions necessary for contributions (Requirements for Human Action). They help them understand and internalize Koch’s (and their group’s) Vision, ensure they have roles that fit their gifts, and provide the necessary resources and opportunities to learn and try new things. Empowered individuals are capable of extraordinary things.

For all the millennia of human existence, life was miserable. Nearly everyone was born into poverty, lived in poverty, and died young. As recently as two hundred years ago, 90 percent of the world’s population lived in extreme poverty. But then, something remarkable began to happen: Life started to get better and better for more and more people. The flat line representing average well-being became a hockey stick, suddenly and sharply improving — and it has not stopped. Today, less than 10 percent of people live in extreme poverty, even though the world’s population is now almost eight times what it was two hundred years ago.

What happened? In short, certain societies haltingly but increasingly began to move from top-down — where a few people controlled the many — to bottom-up, where more and more people enjoyed greater opportunity to live as they saw fit, although it has been an uneven process that remains incomplete. They were more fully able to apply their abilities and knowledge to better their lives and the lives of others.

A top-down approach presumes those in control know what’s best for everyone else. Those at the top typically seek power, rely on one-size-fits-all approaches, and use detailed rules and coercion that stifle others. No matter how well-intentioned, a top-down approach only benefits those at the top.

A bottom-up approach respects the inherent worth of each person and unleashes creativity, initiative, and talent. When behavior is governed by this principle, the outcome exceeds what anyone could have planned or predicted. Everyone benefits when behavior is mostly governed by general principles rather than detailed rules, freeing individuals to use their gifts and knowledge to tackle problems and pursue opportunities.

This approach does not mean decentralizing all decisions or equally distributing authorities. Leaders should only make decisions for which they have the demonstrated capability, while seeking and using the input and challenge of others who can improve those decisions. For example, a facility manager is most likely in the best position to make decisions that affect the whole facility. With a bottom-up approach, the manager seeks and uses the input and challenge of those who have relevant knowledge. However, with a top-down approach, managers simply impose their decisions, which undermines the culture and leads to worse results. They are guilty of “the fatal conceit.”

Bottom-up does not mean employees are free to do whatever they feel like. We strive to create the conditions where employees are motivated to do what is beneficial for Koch and themselves. The responsibility of every supervisor is to enable their employees to understand how and be motivated to maximize value in harmony with our principle-based framework. This bottom-up approach benefits everyone — employees, Koch, and society.