About TrustBuilding trust is both art and scienceIn today's volatile environment, a company needs a strong sense of trust to have cohesion, focus, and efficiency. Ignoring the influence of trust on results leaves a manager's performance incomplete. Although company policies and measures do affect the trust level, an individual's style matters a great deal, too. In fact, some firms have asked me more about how a leader conveys a trustworthy profile than about any other aspect of leadership. Much is written about trust, and you can make a case that the world doesn't need another word about the subject. However, the questions persist. Here, then, are seven principles of building trust with your team, which I have derived from years of pouring through research reports and working with clients across three continents. Seven PrinciplesGet clear. Trust begins with people having a deep understanding of corporate objectives, priorities, and performance. It isn't about telling people, "Here is our product path." It's about saying, "Here is our product path because ..." You can't just say, "Strategic relationships are important." You also need to explain that the purchase order is what counts, and that's how people will get measured. Making people accountable helps trust because it creates clarity. Be consistent. The predictable and objective nature of your decisions is what conveys reliability. Consistency removes anxiety-producing uncertainties. It reinforces a sense of fairness and evenhandedness while people come to understand the logic of your decisions. Consistency says that you act according to some data- or rule-based criterion. No rabbit punches, no left field rationales, and no hot-and-cold mixed messages. Without consistency, you run the risk of looking arbitrary and self-serving. In the most basic sense, avoid having favorites or using a double standard. Avoid emotional behavior. Emotional outbursts scare people. Screaming, door slamming, and sulking are wrong for many reasons, but especially because they weaken perceptions of you as a trustworthy leader. They raise questions: Are you in control? Is depending on someone who seems so out of control really smart? Where's the limit? What else is going on that I don't know about? Trust, in a sense, is an investment. Rash behavior suggests that the investment could be deep-sixed without warning or good reason. Use words carefully. We measure people to a great degree by what they say. Avoid exaggeration because that just raises questions of honesty. Depend less on making a gesture and more on words that convey your real intentions and abilities. Don't equivocate without admitting to it — weasel language is a red flag. Smart is good; sly isn't. So check with people about what you communicated and minimize the "arc of distortion" — the difference between what you wanted to communicate and what someone heard. Maintain competency. People who are skilled at what they do are more trusted in a work environment than people who aren't, everything else being equal (which is bad news for social scientists, because in real life "everything else being equal" never happens). People who are working to improve their competency can be trusted, too, but the emphasis here is on something akin to safety. I can trust you because I can depend on your doing the right thing. If I can't depend on you to do the right thing, then my sense of assurance while I work with you declines, and with it, trust. Choose a gyroscope over radar. Let people know that you fly by a gyroscope — some deep conviction. Yes, you're willing to look at both sides of an issue and you work with an open mind, but you're interested in representing and promoting something important for the company — be it an emphasis on customer service, speed to market, or a culture of high cooperation. Leaders that depend on radar — constantly scanning the environment for what looks safe or popular — undermine perceptions of trust. They simply don't convey the steadfastness that's an aspect of earned trust. Take trust seriously. You can't just depend on osmosis to generate a culture of trust. You have to cultivate it. As I've already indicated, trust is about perceptions, which are about expectations and communication. So, sometimes you should begin a sensitive discussion with bad news up front, and other times you should begin a debate with all the positive data. At times, you ought to initiate changes with something familiar, and other times, you ought to start a program with novel data or unfamiliar people. Sharp companies use several research studies and good practice histories to guide themselves. Avoid the charlatans and continue to get smart about the science and art of building trust. Nicholas Imparato [imparato@hoover.stanford.edu] is professor of management at the University of San Francisco and editor of Public Policy and the Internet (Hoover Press, 2000).
|
 |
Most Popular This Week
IE Weekly Newsletter
Subscribe to the newsletter
| |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
