Can Trust Be Taught?
by Charles H. Green on Wednesday, June 3, 2009 (post #500)
Let’s not mince words. The answer, pretty much, is yes.
The exception is what the academics call social trust—a generalized inclination to think well or ill of the intentions of strangers in the aggregate. That kind of trust ends up being inherited from your Scandinavian grandparents (or not, from your Italian grandparents).
The rest, let’s break it down. First, enough talk about “trust.” Trust takes two to tango. One to trust, another to be trusted. They are not the same thing.
So let’s start by asking which we want to teach: to trust, or to be trustworthy?
Trusting someone is, paradoxically, often the fastest way to make that other person trustworthy—thereby creating a relationship of trust. People tend to live up, or down, to others’ expectations. So if you can muster the ability to trust another, you’re both likely to reap big returns quickly from the resultant trust.
However: trusting can also be a high risk proposition. The vast majority of business people, on hearing “trust,” will say “that’s too risky.” In other words, they hear “trust” as meaning “trusting,” and they turn off.
On the other hand, there is being trustworthy. If you consistently behave in a trustworthy manner, others will come to trust you, and voila, you have that trusting relationship. Being trustworthy tends to take longer than trusting, but the results are just as good. And, it’s very low risk.
Let me say that again: becoming trustworthy is a low risk, high payoff proposition. This is not a hard concept for people to get, if explained right.
What does it mean to be trustworthy? The trust equation explains it: it’s a combination of credibility, reliability, intimacy, and a low level of self-orientation. You can take a self-assessment test of your own TQ, or Trust Quotient, based on the trust equation.
So the question is: can people be taught to become more credible? More reliable? More capable of emotional connectedness? More other-oriented and less self-oriented?
The answer is yes. Big picture, there are two ways to teach these things. One is to recall Aristotle’s maxim: "We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act, but a habit."
People can be taught truth-telling, reliability, even other-orientation to some extent by showing them the behaviors—particularly the language--of trustworthy people.
But the deeper, more powerful approach to building trustworthy people starts the other way around: by working on thoughts to drive action. As the Burnham Rosen group articulates this point "thought drives actions which result in outcomes."
Many disciplines outside of business know the truth and power of this approach: psychology, acting, public speaking, to name a few. Business doesn’t appreciate it enough. But commonsense does.
Trust can be taught: either by teaching trusting, or trustworthiness. The latter is lower risk, hence the most attractive approach for many in business. And trustworthiness can be taught via a mix of skillsets and mindsets
It makes sense.
Over 12,000 people have taken our Trust Quotient quiz. Check out the NEW VERSION and learn your Trust Temperament.
Charles H. Green is founder and CEO of Trusted Advisor Associates LLC; read more about Charlie at http://trustedadvisor.com/cgreen/
You can follow him on twitter @CharlesHGreen
posted in Trust in Leadership Development and Strategy, Trust-based Selling, Building Trusted Advisors









March 2010
barbara garabedian said
Charlie, while reading the blog,I was reminded of Barbara Minto, author of the The Pyramid Principle. She explained her approach this way, ...Flawed, cloudy writing is the direct result of flawed, cloudy thinking. I don't teach writing, I teach thinking. I paraphrased but you get the point.
I get nervous when I read that trust can be taught. Its not that I disagree w/ you, however some myopic manager will read that and think, EUREKA, there's a shortcut!! Let's have a training class & that will solve our problems re: trust.
I applaude the Burnham Rosen group, they appear to focus on the thinking behind actions. Isn't that what learning is suppose to be about? I think a certain way, therefore I act a certain way, therfore I get a certain result. Many business mgr believe a fast, short training class is the panacea to everything (especially mgmt/leadership issues). If I wanted to see a change in a manual task, that could be reasonable. Once one gets into the soft, messy stuff of leadership behavior and its impact, it's no longer as simple as training one to use a new machine. The awareness of the thinking that initiates the behavior and it's impact should be the ultimate goal in any learning activity. Only then can one be shown some appropriate approaches and techniques otherwise its like spitting into the wind. Training and Learning are connected but are not the same and unfortunately, in business (and interestingly in L&D, as well), the two are used interchangably. Sorry to go so far afield from your original thoughts but I don't want some manager walking away thinking establishing trust and becoming trustworthy, can be learned from just a short training class.
posted on Wednesday, June 3, 2009