Autonomy Is Not Taught. It Is Practiced. - Latchkey Kids 2
An unplanned situation leads to an interesting development that we can leverage in our business projects.
DEVELOPING PEOPLE
Autonomy Is Not Taught. It Is Practiced.
A few weeks ago, I wrote about latchkey kids: that generation of children who, after school, returned home alone because both parents worked. For some, it was a necessity; for others, it was simply the way everyday life worked.
Not all of us experienced it in the same way, nor would it be right to idealize it. It would not be fair to turn it into a source of nostalgia either.
But I do believe it left us a lesson that remains extraordinarily relevant.
Not about a generation.
About the development of people.
There is a principle known as subsidiarity, which can be summarized in a very simple phrase:
Do not do for someone what they are already capable of doing for themselves.
It seems like a simple principle, but it completely changes the way we understand education, leadership, and human development.
A good parent helps a child when the child is not yet able to do something independently. However, as the child develops capability, the parent’s role changes. The parent’s responsibility is no longer to do things, but to create the conditions for the child to do them.
Not because it is more convenient.
Because it is the only way to grow.
We often remember latchkey kids for the independence they developed. But I do not believe that independence emerged simply because they were alone.
It emerged because, whether they liked it or not, they began making small decisions every day.
Preparing something to eat.
Doing homework without someone sitting beside them.
Solving small everyday problems.
Managing their time.
Waiting.
Making mistakes.
And discovering that they were capable.
It was not the absence of supervision that developed those abilities.
It was the opportunity to assume responsibilities aligned with their capability.
That distinction matters.
Because subsidiarity does not mean abandonment.
It means accompanying someone while they develop the ability to walk on their own.
And that principle applies in exactly the same way within an organization.
We often encounter leaders who, with the best intentions, solve every problem for their team.
They authorize every decision.
They correct every document.
They answer every important email.
They handle every difficult customer.
They seem indispensable.
But that indispensable presence usually carries an invisible cost.
Every problem a leader solves for someone who was already capable of solving it represents a learning opportunity that disappears.
Today’s problem was solved.
Tomorrow’s development was postponed.
In the Toyota Production System, there is a deeply held conviction: the leader’s job is not to be the person who always has the answer.
It is to develop people capable of finding it.
That requires patience.
Accepting that others will do things differently.
Allowing small mistakes in order to prevent large dependencies.
Resisting the temptation to intervene too soon.
Because developing people always takes more time than doing the work yourself.
But it is the only investment that multiplies capability.
Modern life also presents challenges that my generation never faced.
Decisions are no longer limited to crossing the street or making a sandwich. Today, young people must learn to navigate a digital world, artificial intelligence, social media, endless information, and entirely different risks.
That is precisely why the principle remains valid.
They do not need fewer opportunities to develop judgment.
They need more.
Autonomy has never meant the absence of support.
It means that support decreases as capability increases.
That is subsidiarity.
And perhaps that is a good way to summarize both parenting and leadership.
As much parent as necessary, but as much child as possible.
And in organizations:
As much leader as necessary, but as much team member as possible.
Because the true success of a parent does not lie in having their children need them forever.
And the true success of a leader does not lie in having the team remain permanently dependent on them either.
Success lies in developing people who are capable of continuing to grow, even when we are no longer there.