Three can keep a secret if two of them are dead. – Ben Franklin
Today’s diverse and rapidly changing workforce has made trust a deep-seated, complicated issue. It comes up regularly in conversations with employees and managers. Senior clients make questions about the trustworthiness of an employee part of my “assumed” contract. I’ve also received a number of thoughtful questions and comments on trust from blog readers, especially as a result of my blogs on narcissists and asshole bosses. One writer, for example, asked me to “throw the light on trust,” for the purpose of developing “life-time friendships,” including “both genders and also for divorced people.” And, this writer made it clear that his concern was for people in their 30’s and 40’s as well as for those of a younger generation. Still others have presented me with specific cases, asking for my analysis to help determine whether an individual could be trusted.
Figuring out whether to trust someone can be a difficult task. About 15 years ago a senior client told me it took him six months to decide whether to trust an employee. He needed the time to observe a person’s behaviors so he could figure out his trustworthiness. It’s an exceptionally valid approach for that decision. But his question took a slightly different tack. “Is there a faster way to make a trust decision?” he asked.
.
The experience of life-long, trusted relationships may well become a delicious experience that fewer and fewer of us find ourselves able to enjoy, largely because we’re a mobile society. Many of us rarely have the time or inclination to keep up relationships when we change geography. Time invested in relationships comes at a price and therefore must be prioritized. About ten years ago, I developed an intimate, trusting relationship with a high school friend, a relationship that provided many hours of delight until his passing last year. Although there were 250 kids in my Michigan high school class, it was the only long-term relationship from my teen-age years. We were merely acquaintances in high school, but our history, values and interests brought us together here in Minnesota, making it possible to receive the “blessings” of a relationship. I touch base regularly with two college friends, but I have no intimate relationships with anyone else from that far back. Still, I have numerous trusted relationships dating from my thirties. I value all these trusted persons both as friends and resources.
Another difficulty facing really long-term relationships is that many of us grow apart. The vast differences that can surface over time, including experiences, interests, values and even changing life-objectives put an end to what once may have been a very good and meaningful, trusting relationship. For many of us, life-time trusting relationships may be few.
The wise and pragmatic psychologist, Abraham Maslow, says that we need at least four or five significant friendships. I’m fortunate to have more than that. However, the lack of family responsibilities at my stage of life makes it possible.
3 keys to trust-building
Trust is an ambiguous term needing clarity. The psychologist, Erik Erikson, believes that the first stage of human development centers around a child’s basic needs of comfort, food and dependable affection. If the child receives that, he begins life with a fundamental outlook of trust. Lacking that early experience, trust of himself and others becomes a more difficult task. Erikson viewed trust as confidence that life and the future are basically okay. I don’t believe that our first experience in life is destiny, but that experience certainly impacts us. Figuring out whether to trust another is often strongly related to the inherent level of confidence about people and the future that you bring to the party of life. Some may require a great deal of data before trusting, while others require less.
Trust is the degree of confidence you feel when you think about a relationship with another person. Trust makes it possible to share the important experiences, values and questions of our lives. These self-disclosures are not shared readily with people we do not trust. But it’s that mutual sharing that can make life interesting and full. I like the description of trust attributed (perhaps wrongly) to George Eliot: Friendship (trust) is the comfort, the inexpressible comfort of feeling safe with a person, having neither to weigh thoughts nor measure words, but pouring all right out just as they are, chaff and grain together, certain that a faithful friendly hand will take and sift them, keep what is worth keeping, and with a breath of comfort, blow the rest away. I should say that many of the people with whom I’ve had that relationship are business clients, not only those outside my profession.
Trust, according to a number of fine studies, is composed of three primary keys or perceptions between you and another. I’ve found that these keys are very helpful for making determinations about trusting another and that they work in any and all settings. They serve as a template for both identifying and developing relationships of trust.
Predictability—the expectation that the other person will act consistently in positive ways toward you. Does he or she do what they say they’re going to do? Be wary of this. Give a person the opportunity to be consistent about his promises to you. But be realistic about that. No one keeps all his promises. All you need is a strong tendency to be predictably safe in the relationship. My little test is that if the person significantly fails to be consistently positive and protective of me in two or three settings, trust is broken. It can be rebuilt, but it’ll take time.
Dependability—means that I can rely on that person when it counts. Predictability overlaps with dependability. I had a conversation this morning with two long-term colleagues about a serious ethical problem related to my wife’s care. I knew that they would have insight on the matter and would also be comfortable disagreeing with me. Further, I was quite certain that disagreement would only add to my store of insight.
Faith—refers to the belief that your friend (or partner) will continue to be responsive and caring in the future. Faith is not a permanent given. It has to be talked about and worked on between people. It is a covenanted relationship requiring mutual action.
One of the reasons we see people disclosing highly personal information to strangers is that they realize there is minimal risk. But in the work setting, trusting enough to share highly personal information can make us vulnerable, giving others power over us. That’s why we try to get people to talk about themselves when we meet them: we’re trying to get to know where they stand, what they think so that we can have some control and predictability in the relationship. I think of disclosures as a dance. I’ll disclose this much, and then you disclose. If one doesn’t reciprocate, the dance quickly comes to an end. Most people are comfortable with cliché talk and personal history. But when it comes to important opinions and deep-seated attitudes, we’re cautious about revealing those matters--and rightly so.
Mark Knapp and Anita Vangelisti provide a very appropriate capstone to this discussion of trust in their book on interpersonal communication. We must make the person feel our appreciation for his or her trust in us and our acceptance and support for that person, and not necessarily for the behavior or feeling that is the focus of the disclosure.
Hope this throws some light on the experience of trusting. I’m very curious to get your comments and questions in response to this blog.
Photo: Flickr. Yourclimbing.com