TJ - The Publication for Learning and Development

Trust

By Peter Honey (November 2004 Issue)
0 Comments Comments
Article Rating:

Poor Best

Email to a friend | Print Version

You’ve heard the joke about people falling into two categories: those who think people can be divided into two categories and those who don’t? Well, I obviously subscribe to the former school because I think there are two sorts of people: those who assume someone is trustworthy until they show they aren’t and those who assume someone isn’t trustworthy until they show they are. (Or might I have just rediscovered half-full, half-empty?)

It is difficult to under-estimate the importance of trust. The whole of our economic and political system depends on it. Indeed, it is difficult to envisage civilised life without it being underpinned by a solid bedrock of trust. Even if you are a half-empty person, it would not be possible to get through a single day without making numerous assumptions about the trustworthiness of people (well, let’s say most people). We assume they’ll stop at red lights, keep to the left, pay us for services rendered, turn up for work, provide us with goods and services that do more or less what they are supposed to do, keep their side of the bargain and so on. Even when our assumptions are not borne out in practice, we tend to single out certain sorts of people as not being trustworthy – politicians and estate agents, for example – and continue, as we must, to trust the vast majority of people.

Yet, despite the central part trust plays in all our lives, it remains a fuzzy concept, a fickle feeling difficult to pin down. Feeling that you can trust someone is a subjective, perhaps even subliminal, reaction based on their appearance or behaviour. But what exactly are the behaviours that foster a feeling of trust?

I have had two experiences recently that set me wondering. First, someone told me in confidence that they didn’t trust a training manager I have known for many years. I was astonished because the training manager in question is one of the most open, straightforward people you could hope to meet. I know this for a fact. Flabbergasted, I asked why they didn’t trust him. What had he done that indicated to them he wasn’t trustworthy? After some prevaricating and vague things like, ‘There’s something shifty about him’, it transpired that his eyes were doing the damage: his pupils are never still; they flicker uncontrollably from side to side. He has some sort of stigmatism so this is something over which he has no control. Dark glasses might be the answer, but then we’d be left wondering what he had to hide!

Second, I visited a conference centre – a small mansion set in the Cheshire countryside – owned by a retired psychiatrist. He lives in one wing with his family and lets out the main house for courses, conferences, weddings and so on. The most striking thing about the place is that it is full of knick-knacks, ornaments and all the usual bits and pieces you’d find in a comfortable home. Some of the pieces are small – paperweights and enamel boxes, for example – and would easily slip inside a pocket or handbag. Nothing was screwed down or glued. I asked the owner if things were ever stolen. ‘Yes, sometimes, but not often,’ he replied cheerfully. ‘Generally, I find that if you trust people they’ll behave well and respect your property.’

Clearly trust is in the eye of the beholder, but there must always be a behavioural trigger – even if it is difficult to put your finger precisely on what it is. Inevitably different people will pick up different signals. Some of them will be tiny things such as the amount of eye contact, a handshake, the hint of an I-know-something-you-don’t-know smile. But the biggest factor, it seems to me, is to do with actions being consistent with words. Discrepancies between what someone says they’ll do and what they actually do can cause any initial trust (often based on something flimsy such as giving someone the benefit of the doubt) to evaporate. When senior managers say, ‘Our people are our most important asset’ and then treat people with disdain, they are eroding trust and creating cynicism. When trainers say, ‘I’m here to help you learn’ and then proceed to ridicule students as they take their first faltering steps towards developing a new skill, they shouldn’t be surprised at widespread resentment.

A useful maxim for us all (that is, something we know but do not necessarily do) is to under-promise and over-deliver and if, as circumstances unfold, you find you have over-promised, immediately to come clean and adjust the promise to something realistic. The under-promise/over-deliver approach has two benefits: it inspires trust and it has the potential to create not just satisfaction but delight (but only so long as over-promising and under-delivering remain the norm).

How fascinating that something as critical as trust should thrive on straightforward openness and honesty. Yet another of those simple but not easy things with which we all have to wrestle.


Dr Peter Honey, FRSA, FCIPD, FIMC is a Chartered Psychologist and founder of Peter Honey Publications. He can be contacted on +44 (0) 1628 633946, at peterhoney@peterhoney.com or visit www.peterhoney.com

Back to top | Current TJ

 

Readers Comment

Comment on this story here >

Be the first to comment on this news story