Warren Bennis, the preeminent expert on the subject of leadership, believes that trust is the glue that holds organizations together. Others note a similar importance in different words. Specifically, individuals, organizations, and communities engaged in change increasingly see the importance of trust.
Leaders at every level need to develop and sustain trust if they want to accomplish their current and future goals. Knowledge of its meaning and the core elements that define it are essential to leadership.
What Is Trust?There are many definitions of trust:
In reviewing these few definitions we get a glimpse of the lack of consensus about the meaning of trust. Furthermore, professional discipline influences the definition of trust. For example, psychologists and sociologists debate whether trust is an individual psychological event or a systemic social reality.(1)
We intuitively know (and much of the research supports) that trust is a complex form of social, political, and psychological capital in individuals, organizations, and communities. It penetrates the individual psyche and under girds the systems that makeup the entire fabric of society. It also exists at cognitive, emotional, and behavioral levels. So any discussion of trust needs to be an integrative, rather than reductionistic, approach.(1)
Trust cannot be studied as an absolute.(5) If someone were to ask, “do you trust him or her,” rarely would you answer with an unqualified, "yes." Trust depends on who the individual is, your history with them, what they wanted you to trust them to do, your own experience of and with trust, and the circumstances in which the question was asked. Trust is best understood in context, and this tests our capacity to manage paradox and "to hold the tension of the opposites" together long enough to attain a fuller understanding of it.
Trust in the Relationship Age
The historical context for our examination of trust is one of rapid and complex change, globalization, and revolutionary technological advances; a time unparalleled in history unless we compare it to the 4th and 17th centuries. The nature, pace, and type of change feels as though individuals and organizations are in a perpetual state of transition. In philosopher Hannah Arendt's words, "a time of no longer and a time of not yet," aptly describes the reality.
In this in-between state, speed and quickness have become the norm for individual and organizational behavior. Being facile in responding to challenges or problems is perceived as a desirable trait. The prevailing wisdom is, if you aren't able to adapt quickly you won't survive. Balancing the need to be adaptive in the immediate context with the need to think and plan long term is one of the great challenges facing organizations, or any other system, today.
The shift from an Industrial Age to a Relationship Age has changed the way companies structure themselves, deploy workers and resources, view leadership, and disperse authority. More leaders are operating in a circular model and there is an increasing recognition of some of the limitations of the pyramidal paradigm style of top down leadership.
Ki ThoughtBridge is currently working with a group of change leaders in a company that is engaged in a massive organizational restructuring. One of its leaders has just been promoted to a new position with her company making her one of the highest-ranking women there. Her wise insight was "I recognize my strong need for control and in part this is what has made me successful but now I need to shift from control to influence."
In the Relationship Age paradigm®, the so-called "subordinates" may know as much or more than those who supervise or manage them. They are more motivated by meaning than facts; more inspired by mission than money. In the Industrial Age paradigm®, technical expertise is highly valued; in the Relationship Age paradigm the need for adaptive leadership skills is equally essential. The skills of developing organizational maneuverability in an ethical manner demands having the adaptive skills of influencing rather than controlling; of leading change, not just managing it; and of resolving conflict not denying or avoiding it.
As the pyramidal model in businesses is being reshaped, and more and more responsibility and authority is being shared throughout organizations, the ability to build and sustain trust is even more important to the attainment of organizational viability and sustainable results.
Every year Ki ThoughtBridge facilitates leadership and change management workshops at the Smith College Colloquium for women managers from the top tier of U.S. corporations. When asked about the most significant change in their roles/responsibility, the top one identified is, “having oversight and responsibility for teams composed of people from various divisions in the company over whom they have no direct or formal authority.”
They are learning that if the organization's norm for conducting business is through participative management and self-directed work teams, the development of trust within and across teams is essential to achieving success.
Significant societal shifts and organizational changes evoke considerable ambiguity, anxiety, and ambivalence in individuals and organizations. This "Gap" is where people feel less trusting, at a time when the greatest need is for trustworthy leadership. The September 2006 issue of The Harvard Business Review cites a survey of 450 executives of 30 companies from around the world. The findings were disturbing: about half of the managers said they didn't trust their leaders.(7)
Most change initiatives fail due to the lack of trust. Although the issue of trust has been largely ignored in the past by managers, they are beginning to understand how important it is to their success and the performance of their companies. Leaders who are in denial and ignore the importance of trust may be derailing their company's strategic plans and sabotaging its success.
References
(1) Trust as a Social Reality J. David Lewis; Andrew Weigert Social Forces, Vol 63, No.4. (Jun., 1985), pp. 967-985.
(2) Initial Trust Formation is New Organizational Relationships. D. Harrison McKnight; Larry L. Cummings; Norman L. Chervany The Academy of Management Review Vol. 23, No. 3. (July., 1998) pp. 473-490.
(3) An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust. Roger C. Mayer; James H. Davis; F. David Schoorman The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20, No.3 (July., 1995), pp.709-734.
(4) Trust in the Balance, Building Successful Organizations on Results, Integrity, and Concern, Robert Bruce Shaw Jossey-Bass, 1977.
(5) The Structure of Optimal Trust: Moral and Strategic Implications. Andrew C. Wick; Shaw L. Berman; Thomas M. Jones The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 24, No.1. (Jan., 1999), pp.99-116.
(6) The Role of Trust in Organizational Setting, Kirt T. Dirks; Donald L. Ferran, Organizational Science, Vol. 12, No. 4 (July-August 2001), pp.450-467.
(7) The Decision to Trust, Robert F. Hurley, Harvard Business Review, September, 2006.
(8) Soul at Work, Margaret Benefiel, Seabury Books, Church Publishing Company, New York, 2005.
Katherine Tyler Scott is the managing partner of Ki ThoughtBridge. Katherine is the founder and former President of Trustee Leadership Development, Inc., a resource center for governance leaders and not-for-profit organizations, located in Indianapolis, Indiana. She has more than 30 years of experience in leadership education and development, consultation, coaching and facilitation. Katherine is a nationally recognized speaker and has written extensively on the topics of leadership, trusteeship, organizational development, and change work. Read more about Katherine.