Companies tend to frown on leaders gullible & naive who tend to believe everything that everyone wants them to and upon that trust raise the corporate risk. Trust, a derailer. But the Co would also frown at leaders who would cast a wide net of suspicion that distrupts the smooth flow of work in the system & foster a culture of suspicion thus hurting the general organisational morale. Uneasy thus rests the citadel of a Corporate leader between 'healthy skepticism' & 'virulent distrust'. This situation becomes complex in times when organisations need to make swift moves in ambiguous environment on the one hand, where distrust can't survive and hypercompetitive markets on the other, where outmanuvering competition is the norm of success, where blind trust is not a virtue. Managing distrust as opposed to letting it manage you is the key. The answer finally boils to the primary question..is Trust - 'a priori' or is trust, 'a posteriori' ? Begin with trust & clamp with adverse experiences or begin with distrust & slowly release controls after trust is built ? Depends on the context. But more so it depends on the personality of the leader & the script he reads from. As for myself, I would begin with trust.