TRUST… and More Trust.

This is a piece from the Academy Leadership that SynergyBlog feels they could have written themselves. It’s that good.

We’ll not pontificate. Please read, and in doing so, may your organizations and relationships thrive.

Enjoy. Trust… and be Trusted!

From the Academy Leadership: In its simplest form, trust can be described as the belief that those on whom we depend will meet our positive expectations of them. While this may sound the same as confidence, they are different. Trust is not always rooted in past experience with others, whereas confidence generally results from specific experiences with people and is built on reason and fact. In contrast, trust is based in part on faith. We sometimes give our trust in spite of evidence that suggests we should feel some caution, if not outright suspicion, about relying on another.

Business realities now require that more power be given to those with close contacts with very discriminating consumers. No longer can the few powerful people at the top make all decisions and take all actions. Most companies now realize that they must provide people at lower levels increasing latitude in order to react promptly to demanding market forces and to progress and prosper. Thus, they must trust people to do the right thing. To do otherwise could well spell disaster for the future. Leaders can lead only to the extent that they are allowed to lead by their followers. When people believe that they are not trusted, or lack trust in their leaders, they will actively or passively resist what the team is trying to accomplish. Thus, a leader’s options are limited by excessive and ongoing mistrust among employees.

A culture of trust leads to open and honest communications. People feel comfortable “telling it like it is” and are open to constructive feedback. The organization benefits from an information-rich environment — there is little motivation for hiding bad news or engaging in political maneuvering to avoid embarrassment for mistakes. Rather, bad news is highlighted and is seen as data upon which to base timely corrective action before problems become crises. Mistakes are viewed as opportunities for learning rather than scapegoating. Problem solving and decision making improve greatly in cultures of trust since all relevant information is “brought to the table.” Although these are benefits of a trust-filled culture, trust itself does not guarantee success, but pervasive mistrust will almost certainly lead to failure.

A Model for Building Trust

There are three imperatives for building trust in any group, team, or organization — achieving results, acting with integrity, and demonstrating concern. These imperatives often conflict with each other — for instance the imperative to achieve results conflicts with demonstrating concern. Leaders who have had to implement a reduction in the workforce have felt this conflict as they struggled with demonstrating compassion for those who are eliminated while encouraging those that remain. To build trust, all these imperatives must be present even though they may occasionally be in conflict.

Attaining and sustaining trust requires three key organizational factors — leadership style, organizational structure, and a supportive culture. These imperatives, organizational factors and their relationship to building trust are that the imperatives of achieving results, acting with integrity, and demonstrating concern provide the foundation for trust while organization factors of leadership style, structure, and culture act as supporting mechanisms for it.

Three Imperatives

Achieving Business Results — This is the most important imperative because any enterprise must achieve results to survive. This applies at the individual, team, and organizational level. Without results there will be no company, at least for very long. People must perform and fulfill their obligations and commitments to each other and to the team. We lose trust in those unable to follow through and produce results, regardless of their good intentions. Those that consistently deliver positive results are different from those that cannot. Successful companies and teams focus on clearly establishing demanding goals, communicating expectations of high performance, and implementing systems that provide fair and equitable consequences for results.

Acting with Integrity — In its essence, this entails consistency in word and deed. The foundation of trust in others is a belief that people will do as they say they will do. They say what they mean, and mean what they say. More importantly, they act according to what they say. If a person fails to act consistently with their stated beliefs, or fails to follow through with their commitments, we lose trust in them. We expect a person’s words to be their bond or we withhold trust from them. Even the perception of inconsistency can result in increasing our mistrust. Gaps between what we anticipate and what actually occurs give rise to mistrust.

At the organizational level, integrity means that the actions of the organization, its leaders, and people within it are guided by and are consistent with stated values, principles, and specific practices. When this is the case, the organization is said to have a consistent and cohesive approach. This coherent approach provides a degree of predictability based on principles that lead to trust. Leaders achieve a principle-based approach by taking a few key actions.

• First, they clearly articulate the company’s purpose – its higher-order reason for existence, beyond making money.
• Second, they identify, define and ensure behavioral consistency with the company’s core values.
• Third, they communicate an inspiring and realistic vision for the company’s future. They ensure that all organizational members understand and act consistently with these three factors.
• Finally, they interpret conditions as they are rather than as they would like them to be. They are realistic and encourage open and honest sharing of information related to the current status and probable future of the business and individual performance, particularly important since leaders must be open and fair in evaluating performance and appropriately responding to it

Another critical aspect of trust is how the organization handles mistakes. Honest mistakes should be dealt with appropriately, but should not be fatal.

Demonstrating Concern — as a practical matter, most people care for and trust those who demonstrate genuine care and trust in them. People generally trust those whom they believe will protect their interests, or at least not take actions at their expense. This does not mean that we expect others to place a greater emphasis on our needs than their own, but it does entail confidence that they will not deliberately take advantage of us. When others demonstrate that they cannot be trusted to remain loyal to us or to our interests we lose trust in them. We also expect others to respect the interests of our family, co-workers, and our company. This is particularly important in regard to trusting those in positions of leadership and authority, as their concern or lack of it can have an impact on individuals as well as on larger groups.

Key Organizational Factors

Leadership Style — everything in an organization is influenced by leader actions, especially trust and culture. Senior leaders are particularly powerful in creating or eroding trust. Leaders who want to build trust must not only adhere to the three imperatives but also develop subordinates who can do so as well. Leaders at all levels must be seen as credible and consistent. They must be the role models for the organization by achieving results, acting with integrity, and demonstrating concern for people. Leadership style varies from directive on one extreme to participative on the other. A leadership style most appropriate for high-trust cultures demands high standards of performance, appropriately includes subordinates in decision making and problem solving, and is fair and equitable in the distribution of rewards and punishments.

Structure — An organization’s formal structure and processes can also build trust or destroy it, just as individual leaders can. High-trust organizations find the delicate balance between control needed to protect the company’s interests and autonomy that allows individual and group initiative. Organizational structures are arranged to ensure free-flowing communications — formal and informal — and encourage inter-departmental cooperation. Policies and procedures encourage behaviors that are consistent with the company’s core values. High trust organizations have mechanisms to continuously evaluate structure, policies and procedures in terms of whether they are trust-sustaining, trust-neutral, or trust-eroding.

Structure varies from bureaucratic on one extreme to versatile on the other. Organizations characterized by high levels of trust ensure performance goals are challenging and attainable and hold people accountable for achieving them. They ensure that those who implement decisions and initiatives are involved early to ensure their buy-in and support. They ensure that systems encourage open lines of communication and only institute a few rigorous strategic controls.

Culture — A company’s culture is similar to an individual’s character. It is much deeper than what appears on the surface — it defines what the organization is like on the inside. Culture is intangible yet affects every member within the company. It reflects and is the result of the formal and informal aspects of the organization. The organizational culture in large measure determines the degree of cooperation encouraged to achieve organizational and personal goals. Cultures vary from competitive at one extreme to supportive at the other. Supportive cultures enhance trust over time and reinforce the trust imperatives. Leaders increase the supportive nature of the culture by ensuring that the company’s vision is widely shared, understood, and supported; and by setting the example by living the company’s values; encouraging input from people; and treating mistakes as opportunities for organizational learning and individual development.

Concluding Thoughts

Effective team building is both a skill and a process. The leader who understands the process and has the requisite skills to understand and support this process will, in the end, have high-performing teams that are more effective and efficient, as well as members who are individually more productive and satisfied with their contributions in the work place. However, all efforts to make effective teams are for naught unless the leader creates the most critical dimension of groups — trust.

For more… follow SynergyBlog on Twitter!