When control becomes the question

In its early days, Netflix was not associated with radical ideas about management. Co-founded by Reed Hastings, it competed on convenience as a DVD rental service, not on philosophy. As the company grew, Hastings began to question something more fundamental than business model or distribution:

What if control itself was the problem?

The limits of control

Most organisations are designed around control. Layers of approval, policies, and processes aim to reduce risk and ensure consistency. They create structure and prevent mistakes.

But they also introduce friction.

Over time, control can slow decision-making, limit initiative, and reinforce the idea that people need to be closely managed in order to perform well.

Hastings took a different view.

Freedom as a leadership choice

Instead of adding more control, he began removing it.

Fewer rules. Fewer approvals. Fewer constraints on how work should be done.

In its place: freedom. Not as a perk, but as a system.

At Netflix, this idea became central to what is now widely known as a freedom and responsibility culture - a model that pairs autonomy with high expectations. Employees are trusted to act independently but also expected to perform at a consistently high level.

What freedom requires

One of the clearest expressions of this philosophy is the “keeper test”. Managers are encouraged to ask whether they would fight to keep a particular employee. If the answer is no, the expectation is not to delay, but to act.

It is a system that is both empowering and demanding.

Freedom, in this context, is not about comfort. It is about clarity about understanding what is expected and taking full ownership of delivering it.

READ: The Changing Business Landscape

Rethinking management frameworks

With an MBA from Stanford University, Hastings is deeply familiar with traditional management structures. His approach is not a rejection of those frameworks, but a re-evaluation of their relevance.

In fast-moving, creative environments, control can become a constraint rather than a safeguard.

Leadership, then, becomes a question of judgement: which rules still serve the organisation, and which no longer do.

The tension of high-performance cultures

The results of this model are visible, but they come with tension.

A system built on freedom removes many of the safety nets found in traditional organisations. It asks individuals to take responsibility not only for their work, but for their role within the company.

It requires:

  • continuous alignment
  • honest feedback
  • a level of professional maturity that cannot be enforced through policy

And it is not designed for everyone.

READ: The Value of the MBA in a Disrupted World

What leadership looks like without control

Leadership, in this context, is not about creating comfort. It is about creating clarity.

It means defining the kind of environment that leads to strong outcomes and building consistently toward it, even when it feels counterintuitive.

There is a tendency to associate leadership with control: oversight, direction, the reduction of uncertainty.

But some of the most influential leadership models move in the opposite direction.

They remove control to create something else.

Where freedom becomes responsibility

That shift - from control to freedom, from oversight to ownership - is rarely simple.

It introduces ambiguity. It raises expectations. And it places more responsibility on individuals than many systems are designed to handle.

But it also creates space.

For faster decisions. For stronger ownership. For a different kind of performance - one that is driven not by control, but by trust.