Chapter 28 – Controlling – When Your First Employees Mess Up
Controlling –
When Your First Employees Mess Up
The Measurement Challenge
Controlling is the managerial function that determines whether planning, organizing, and directing efforts are actually working. While countless plans and strategies are developed daily, only through systematic measurement can managers determine if these initiatives achieve their intended outcomes – and whether success comes from deliberate action or mere coincidence.
The biblical account of humanity’s first failure – Adam and Eve’s disobedience in the Garden of Eden—provides a unique window into the controlling function of management. This story illuminates how even the most basic rule can be misinterpreted, how poorly communicated expectations lead to failure, and how organizational responses to failure shape future performance.
As Kranc (2004) notes, measurement alone is not a substitute for management. A manager who merely measures without nurturing employees will ultimately fail. Effective controlling requires balancing quantitative assessment with qualitative development, ensuring that mistakes identified are new ones rather than repeated failures. If an organization keeps heading down the wrong road, they will inevitably reach the same destination.
The Garden Context: A Management Microcosm
The Garden of Eden represented the first workplace, with humanity’s first employees receiving direct instruction from the ultimate authority:
“ADONAI, God, took the person and put him in the garden of ‘Eden to cultivate and care for it. ADONAI, God, gave the person (Adam) this order: ‘You may freely eat from every tree in the garden except the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. You are not to eat from it, because on the day that you eat from it, it will become certain that you will die.'” (Genesis 2:15-17)
This initial management directive established a clear scope of authority, a specific prohibition, and an explicit consequence for violation. Yet despite this seemingly straightforward instruction, the experiment ended in catastrophic failure, raising critical questions about rule communication, employee understanding, and appropriate responses to violations.
Employee Management From Day One
The snake incident in the Bible remains one of the great puzzles – how could humanity fall so quickly in such a short time frame? If Adam and Eve had avoided eating from the tree of knowledge, humanity would have been blessed to live in the Garden of Eden. One mistake doomed humankind.
When the Lord created the world, he provided minimal instruction for operating and running this new creation. There was no owner’s manual, no policy and procedure guide. Adam received a quick orientation discussion that established one primary rule: don’t eat from the tree of knowledge. The rule was clear, but there was no further explanation or verification to determine if man understood what the Lord commanded. There was also no discussion of whether the rule applied only to Adam or to everyone on earth.
This situation highlights that rules have very little value if they are not appropriately communicated, understood, and followed.
Establishing Appropriate Rules
In Genesis, the Lord told Adam he could not eat fruit from the tree of knowledge. Adam supposedly conveyed this message to Eve, though the Bible never mentions Adam telling Eve anything. How was Eve supposed to learn the rules? We don’t know when or how Eve learned the rules, but we know the message was somehow changed in transmission.
This miscommunication resembles the children’s game of “telephone,” where a message passes from person to person until it becomes distorted. Even with only three entities involved (God, Adam, Eve), the message transformation suggests how inherent biases and personal interpretation create workplace miscommunications.
Eve’s statement to the serpent added a prohibition – “nor touch it” – that wasn’t in the original instruction. This phenomenon – machmir l’machmir (“holier than holier”) – represents how rules often become progressively more restrictive as they pass through an organization. Employees create additional “safety buffers” around rules, sometimes making compliance unnecessarily burdensome.
The problem with such overrestriction is what happened to Eve. Once she touched the tree and nothing happened, the relevance of all other rules was undermined. Some commentators suggest the serpent exploited this vulnerability by pushing Eve into the tree, then arguing that if touching the tree didn’t cause death, eating from it wouldn’t either.
When too many rules are in place that have little value, they significantly impact people’s conduct and respect for all rules. Without clear context for understanding and applying rules, employees often create their own interpretations, leading to confusion and eventual failure.
Knowledge of Good and Evil
Knowing the difference between good and evil can help a manager ensure ethical actions. If improper actions occur, something has gone wrong – either the wrong person was hired or they weren’t trained effectively. But how do people learn what is right and wrong?
People typically learn ethical standards through observation and instruction. Why was the Lord so interested in preventing people from distinguishing between good and evil? Part of the question concerns who should define good and evil. Is giving 5% to charity good or evil? What about giving nothing to charity? These examples demonstrate that ethical judgments often involve degrees rather than absolute categories.
In the newly created world without established distinctions between good and evil, the Lord needed to set boundaries. These boundaries were established with the tree of knowledge – the tree was good to look at but its fruit would bring harm if eaten. While this explanation is accurate, if the Lord wanted to make a greater impact, he might have explained the reasoning behind his decision. Managers who establish rules without explanation have a harder time obtaining compliance compared to managers who explain the rationale behind rules.
Adam and Eve’s actions may also reflect an issue of maturity. While apparently in adult form, they were only one day old at the time of the incident. Without sufficient experience, they lacked the context to determine appropriate action. Managers similarly face situations where employees lack the experience to understand appropriate conduct – underscoring why ethical education and clear context must precede expectations of ethical judgment.
Proper Perspective
When Adam and Eve were in the Garden, they were naked but untroubled by this condition. Only after eating from the Tree of Knowledge did they “know” they were naked. What was once acceptable suddenly became inappropriate. This transformation demonstrates how perspective shapes judgment – and how acquiring knowledge without proper context creates confusion rather than clarity.
This insight suggests managers cannot share all information with subordinates indiscriminately. Information must be provided based on what subordinates can process and understand. If employees aren’t prepared to receive certain information, a manager will struggle to communicate its importance or guide appropriate responses.
Long or Short Term Focus
Given the choice between good and evil, what would most employees choose? Good might offer long-term benefits while evil might provide immediate gratification. Judaism emphasizes this distinction through its focus on olam haba (the world to come) – those who suffer now while following God’s laws will be blessed in the future, while those who pursue immediate gratification may forfeit long-term rewards.
There’s no indication Adam and Eve understood this potential trade-off. They knew disobedience would bring death (immediate punishment) but lacked perspective on the long-term benefits of compliance. This dynamic mirrors workplace challenges where employees must choose between immediate convenience and long-term organizational benefit – a choice that depends on understanding the broader context of their actions.
Negative Tone
The Lord’s communication with Adam used an authoritative, commanding tone. Would a gentler approach have been more effective? Perhaps the Lord could have said:
“I know this is all new to you. I want you to enjoy the garden I made for you. There are many wonderful things to experience. The only thing I want to warn you about is the tree in the middle, which has some issues. When you’re a bit older, I can explain more, but for now, please stay away from it so it won’t harm you.”
Such an approach might have increased compliance without sacrificing clarity. The tone of communication often determines its effectiveness, especially when introducing rules or expectations.
Blaming Others
When confronted, Adam immediately blamed others:
“The man replied, ‘The woman you gave to be with me – she gave me fruit from the tree, and I ate.'” (Genesis 3:12)
Adam blamed Eve while simultaneously implying God was at fault for creating her. This blame-shifting represents a common response to failure – self-preservation through deflection rather than taking responsibility.
Interestingly, Adam didn’t blame the serpent, perhaps knowing that argument wouldn’t succeed. The Lord, however, did blame the serpent first, followed by punishing Eve and then Adam. The serpent’s punishment seems more severe than that given to Eve or Adam, perhaps because the Lord recognized the serpent’s deliberate manipulation versus the humans’ naivety.
When managers assign unequal punishments to equally culpable employees, they risk creating additional conflict and resentment. Consistency in accountability is essential for maintaining organizational trust.
Developing Appropriate Punishments
Punishments can sometimes become blessings in disguise. When Adam was cursed to work by the sweat of his brow, he received the opportunity to become a producer rather than merely a consumer. This transformation from taker to giver represents a developmental consequence rather than mere punishment.
The Jewish sage Rambam (Maimonides, 1135-1204) suggested that the highest form of charity isn’t giving someone money but giving them a job. By requiring man to work, the Lord transformed him from dependent to provider – a consequence that built capability rather than merely inflicting suffering.
Collective Punishment
One troubling aspect of the Eden account is how punishment extended to all future generations. This extreme collective punishment raises questions about fairness and effectiveness. Imagine a manager catching one employee in a company of 1,000 doing something wrong. Punishing everyone would create resentment among those who had done nothing wrong.
The Lord’s use of collective punishment appears multiple times in scripture – the flood generation, the tower of Babel builders, and many Egyptians as some examples. Perhaps this approach aimed to encourage mutual responsibility, compelling humans to look after one another rather than focusing solely on individual interests. This might explain why the Bible repeatedly emphasizes proper treatment of converts, widows, and orphans – fostering community accountability for the vulnerable.
Testing Greed
According to commentaries, humanity was initially vegetarian, not permitted to kill animals for food. The primary means of sustenance was fruits, vegetables, and dairy products. After the fall, Genesis 3:17-19 states that man would need to work hard to eat, suggesting food had previously been easily obtained.
This scenario suggests the Lord may have been testing man’s ability to be content with abundance rather than coveting what was forbidden. Adam had all the food he needed; he wasn’t at the lowest level of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. The forbidden fruit represented not necessity but excess desire – wanting what is off-limits simply because it is prohibited.
Managers need to help employees understand the rewards of effort and contribution rather than encouraging entitlement. Wanting what one doesn’t need can lead to distorted priorities and destructive behaviors.
The Snake’s Strategy
The snake appears to have followed a Machiavellian strategy, using deception to achieve its goal of eliminating competition. Being “more cunning than all the animals of the field,” the snake recognized humans as rivals for dominance and systematically engineered their fall from divine favor.
The snake methodically:
- Questioned the validity of God’s rule
- Dismissed the threatened consequences as baseless
- Offered a compelling alternative narrative (becoming like God)
- Exploited Eve’s rule expansion (touching versus eating)
This calculated approach succeeded in getting Adam and Eve expelled from the Garden, but the snake failed to anticipate divine intervention and punishment. The snake’s punishment came first and was particularly severe, perhaps signaling the Lord’s special displeasure with deliberate manipulation versus naive disobedience.
Taste of Power
The Hebrew word used when Adam says “I ate” (Ve’ocahl) is actually in future tense rather than past tense. Some commentaries suggested that Adam was saying “I ate and will eat again in the future”—indicating a defiant attitude rather than remorse.
This interpretation aligns with historical patterns where people given a taste of power become hungry for more. Dictators like Stalin, Hitler, and Mao all began somewhere with their first exposure to authority. This initial experience germinated into ever-expanding power-seeking, often at others’ expense.
Adam’s first taste of forbidden knowledge led quickly to deception (hiding from God), excuse-making, and blame-shifting. This rapid corruption demonstrates how quickly power can transform character – and why organizations must carefully develop leaders who can handle authority responsibly.
Teach Like a Parent
The Lord commanded humans to “be fruitful and multiply,” creating an opportunity to experience the divine perspective of parenting. A weak parent maintains maximum control while a strong parent gradually extends freedom and responsibility. The Lord allows humans freedom to make mistakes while providing guidance and consequences.
Judaism emphasizes questioning and critical thinking, even celebrating the “wicked son” who asks challenging questions at Passover over the son “who does not know how to ask.” Questions lead to growth, even when answers aren’t immediately apparent.
Deliverables
- Establish crystal-clear rules with adequate context – Ensure rules are precisely communicated with explanation of their purpose.
- Verify understanding through active feedback – Confirm employees understand not just what is required but why it matters.
- Match expectations to employee development stage – Design responsibilities appropriate to employees’ experience and judgment capabilities.
- Create accountability systems that encourage ownership – Design responses to failure that promote taking responsibility rather than blame-shifting.
- Design developmental consequences rather than merely punitive ones – Ensure consequences build capability rather than simply inflicting discomfort.
- Identify potential threats to your control systems – Prepare employees to recognize and resist inappropriate external influences.
- Monitor how rules are interpreted as they move through your organization – Prevent excessive rule expansion that undermines compliance.
Discussion Questions
- Would you have eaten from the tree of knowledge? Would it have mattered if you heard the direction directly from the Lord?
- Who should have been punished more severely in the incident and why?
- Do you think the Lord is in any way at fault for not clarifying any rules?
- Why do you think the Lord planted the tree of knowledge in the first place?
