Establishing Trust by Mastering the Art of Listening

/0 Comments/in , , , , /by

We often think of establishing trust in business relationships in sales-related roles. For instance, if I have a product or service, I will tell you how my industry knowledge and credentials will make it clear I am the person you should buy from. In short, you can trust me. I know everything there is to know about this product or service. Just ask me!

Let’s broaden our perspective. Is your expertise the key to building trust in various business and professional situations beyond just sales?

Business relationships encompass various roles, each essential for an organization’s smooth functioning and success. In addition to the roles of suppliers and vendors who provide necessary goods and services and customers and clients who are the end-users, there are employees whose skills and dedication drive daily operations and partners, collaborators, and colleagues who are extensions of their companies, working together for the client’s good.

Regardless of your role, be it a supplier, vendor, customer, client, employee, partner, collaborator, or colleague, trust is a crucial element in fostering a thriving business ecosystem. And it all starts with listening to what each of these role players have to say.

By mastering the art of listening—understanding why you’re listening—individuals can empower themselves to create meaningful connections, better understanding, and enrich their relationships. This understanding fosters empathy, a key element in building trust and a deeper connection with others.

Let People Talk About Themselves and Their Experiences

In professional settings, it’s common for people to believe that their expertise and credentials validate their ability to perform tasks, make informed decisions, and contribute meaningfully— grounding the conversation in trust and reliability.

This is only true when you are talking about yourself, not listening.

Whether you are talking to a client, colleague, friend, or someone you just met, they want to discuss what everyone wants to discuss: Themselves. Being open and receptive to these discussions, and allowing others to talk about themselves, can significantly enhance your professional interactions.

The key to making them feel valued is actively listening as they do so.

Allowing someone to share personal stories and experiences can be powerful in building trust and making connections because it fosters authenticity and relatability. Listening to someone share their experiences and perspectives encourages reciprocity, opening the door to mutual understanding and empathy.

As you listen, it allows others to illustrate values, lessons, and insights memorably. This creates deeper emotional connections that form the foundation of solid and trusting relationships.

It ensures that you fully grasp the needs, concerns, and perspectives of others, enabling you to provide relevant and thoughtful responses. Whether maintaining friendships, working in teams, or conducting business, effective listening leads to better collaboration, problem-solving, and decision-making, enhances mutual respect, reduces misunderstandings, and promotes a more harmonious and productive environment.

Trust integrates the emotional and ethical dimensions that credentials alone cannot provide, making it a cornerstone of successful and fulfilling relationships in all aspects of life.

Put the Art of Listening Into Action

The art of listening is a powerful tool that enhances communication, builds strong relationships, and fosters personal and professional growth. By practicing active, empathetic, non-judgmental, and attentive listening, individuals can improve their interactions and create a more understanding and connected world.

Here are five tips for listening this way:

  • Ditch the distractions. You cannot multitask undiscovered, and being multitasked feels insulting. Close the door, face away from the window, blank the computer screen, turn the cell phone over, and avoid glancing at your smartwatch (an all-too-common distraction). Looking at your watch—any watch—suggests that you have other priorities or engagements that you deem more important than the current conversation.
  • Use your whole body. Lean toward the speaker—even on the phone. Use facial expressions. Use hands and arms, shake your head, and use “non-verbal” language. Positive body language encourages the speaker to continue and feel valued, promoting a more open and honest dialogue. This improves your listening and indicates to the speaker that you are 
  • Keep it about them—not you. Use open-ended, not closed, questions. Let them tell their story. By actively listening and keeping the conversation centered on the other person, you demonstrate empathy and understanding, making them feel valued and heard. Keeping the conversation about the other person also allows you to gather valuable insights and information to help you understand their perspective, needs, and expectations.
  • Acknowledge frequently. Frequent acknowledgments can include reflective statements or paraphrasing, which help clarify your understanding of the speaker’s message and ensure no misunderstandings. Consistent acknowledgment fosters trust and rapport by demonstrating genuine interest in the speaker’s experiences and perspectives.
  • Think out loud. The biggest obstacle to listening is your own thinking. Be courageous— postpone your thinking until they’re done talking. Be willing to think out loud—withthe other person. Doing so role-models collaboration and transparency, and that reinforces trust. I hear you. I value you. I respond to you with no hidden agenda. I trust you. You can trust me.

Listening—unrestricted, unbounded, listening for its own sake—is how we develop such relationships. The point of listening is not what you hear but the act of listening itself.

Resources to Build Your Trust Skills:

Contact us directly to learn about private workshops

Honestly Ask (and Answer) Yourself: Do My Clients Trust Me?

/0 Comments/in , , , /by

Trust is complicated in many aspects of our daily lives; by comparison, trust in business seems relatively straightforward. Or is it?

While personal trust involves emotional and relational complexities, trust in business is not necessarily uncomplicated. It involves navigating ethical dilemmas, managing diverse relationships, adapting to cultural differences, and maintaining transparency—all of which require careful attention and can make trust in business equally, if not more, complex.

Here’s where things are seemingly straightforward in business. We all know it is crucial to have your clients trust you because trust forms an enduring client relationship, driving loyalty and long-term success. When clients trust you, they feel confident in your ability to deliver on promises, provide high-quality services or products, and act in their best interests.

This trust leads to greater client satisfaction, repeat business, and positive word-of-mouth referrals, which are invaluable for sustaining and growing your business. Furthermore, trust facilitates open communication, allowing clients to express their needs and concerns freely. This enables you to address issues promptly and tailor your offerings to meet their expectations more effectively. Again, the straightforward takeaway is higher client satisfaction leads to stronger business relationships.

Conversely, your relationship becomes increasingly complicated if your clients don’t trust you. How can you address the disconnect? First, you must acknowledge that distrust is a factor, which is easier said than done.

Ask Yourself Again: Do Your Clients Trust You?

Whether you call them customers, clients, stakeholders, or partners, the cornerstone of your business’s success is truthfully asking (and answering), “Do these people trust me?”

Most will say yes. Of course they do, or they wouldn’t be working with me. Right?

Not necessarily. In some cases, making a change could lead to significant disruptions in operations, production, or service delivery, which the client may want to avoid.

In others, existing contracts or agreements might legally bind the client to continue the relationship for a specified period. Alternatively, your company might supply critical components or services the client cannot quickly source elsewhere, creating a dependency despite trust issues.

The bottom line is that clients continue relationships with untrustworthy people until they find a suitable replacement or alternative solution. Are you ready to be replaced? Can you afford to be replaced?

Honestly asking and answering if your customers trust you is crucial because it provides a candid assessment of your relationship with them, revealing strengths and areas needing improvement.

Trust is the foundation of customer loyalty and satisfaction, directly impacting repeat business, referrals, and overall reputation. By reflecting on this question, you can identify whether your actions, communication, and service quality align with customer expectations and ethical standards.

Then comes the hard part: Acknowledging trust deficits.

This allows you to take proactive steps to rebuild and strengthen trust through transparency, reliability, and responsiveness. Ultimately, this self-awareness fosters a customer-centric approach, ensuring long-term success and a resilient business built on genuine trust and credibility.

But in our haste to be trustworthy, we often forget one critical variable: people don’t trust those who never take risks. If all we do is be trustworthy and never do the trusting ourselves, we will eventually be considered untrustworthy.

Because to be fully trusted, we need to do a little trusting ourselves.

Examining the Connection Between Risk, Trust & Trustworthiness

We often talk casually about “trust” as if it were a single, unitary phenomenon—like the temperature or a poll. To speak meaningfully of trust, we must declare whether we are talking about trustors or trustees.

  • The trustor is the party doing the trusting—the one taking the risk. These are, for the most part, our clients.
  • The trustee is the party being trusted—the beneficiary of the decision to trust. This is, for the most part, us.

The Trust Equation is a valuable tool for describing trustworthiness:

The Trust Equation: Trustworthiness equals the sum of credibility plus reliability plus intimacy, divided by self-orientation

But where is the risk? In the Trust Equation, the risk appears mainly in the Intimacy variable. For example, many professionals have difficulty expressing empathy because it could make them appear “soft,” unprofessional, or invasive. Of course, it’s that kind of risk that drives trust.

Often, empathy begins with reciprocal pleasantries that help build and strengthen social bonds. Simple gestures like greetings, compliments, and polite conversation create a sense of connection and community.

Pleasantries facilitate communication by opening lines of dialogue, including:

  • “I was up late with a sick kiddo and running late. Did I miss anything this morning?”
  • “Was that a TikTok reference? I’m usually behind on social media references.”
  • “You handled that difficult interaction really well. Better than I probably would have.”
  • “Best of luck with your presentation this afternoon. I’m looking forward to attending.”

They serve as a precursor to more meaningful conversations, allowing individuals to gradually gauge each other’s intentions and build trust. Taking small steps, signaling respect and goodwill, shows that we recognize and value the other person, which is fundamental in establishing trust and allows others to reciprocate.

  • “Oh, I know all about sick kids and feeling out of sorts the next day.”
  • “No idea, but I’m sure someone will show us the video later.”
  • “Thank you. I’ve had my share of challenging conversations. I’m sure you would have had a similar response.”
  • “Thanks! Hopefully, it will be worth your while!”

This increases intimacy levels, and the trust equation gains a few points. If we don’t take these small steps, the relationship stays in place: pleasant and respectful but stagnant in trust.

While the Intimacy part of the Trust Equation is the most obvious source of risk-taking, it is not the only one.

Here are some ways to take constructive risks in other parts of the Trust Equation:

  • Be open about what you don’t know.Although you may think it’s risky to admit ignorance, it increases your credibility if you’re the one putting it forward. Being open about what you don’t know fosters honesty and transparency, builds trust, and encourages collaborative problem-solving.
  • Make a stretch commitment.Most of the time, you’re better off doing exactly what you said you’ll do and ensuring you can do what you commit to. But sometimes, you must put your neck out and deliver something fast, new, or different. Never taking such a risk is to say you value your pristine track record over service to your client, and that may be a bad bet. Making a stretch commitment demonstrates ambition and confidence in your abilities, inspiring trust and motivation in yourself and others to achieve challenging goals—even at the risk of failing.
  • Have a point of view. If you’re asked for your opinion in a meeting, don’t always say, “I’ll get back to you on that.” Having a point of view rather than an immediate answer is essential because it demonstrates that you have thoughtfully considered the issue. It encourages a more in-depth discussion and collaborative decision-making, ultimately leading to better-informed and more trusted outcomes.
  • Try on their shoes. You don’t know what it’s like to be your client. Nor should you pretend to know. Genuine empathy and understanding come from actively listening to their unique experiences and needs rather than making assumptions, which fosters trust and more effective solutions.

While trust always requires a trustor and a trustee, it is not static. The players must occasionally be more elastic in their approach and trade places. If we want others to trust us, we have to trust them.

Resources to Build Your Trust Skills:

Why Taking Risks Creates Trust

/0 Comments/in , , , /by

Due to several universal experiences and observations, everyone is familiar with taking risks, whether they engage in them or not. Even those who avoid taking risks are familiar with the concept because of the fear and caution they experience. This avoidance is a direct response to the perceived dangers of risk-taking.

Everyday life involves countless decisions that carry varying degrees of risk, from choosing what to eat to making career moves. Even seemingly mundane choices involve some level of risk assessment.

Many professional and personal development courses include risk management elements, ensuring that risk is understood and considered in various contexts.

That includes addressing common risk-taking challenges like:

  • Should you risk mentioning the price early on in a sales call?
  • Should you be candid about your less-than-perfect qualifications for a job?
  • When you notice the client looking distracted, should you take the risk of commenting on it?

In such situations, the thought process is, “That’s too risky. You can’t do that—you don’t have a trust relationship yet.” Or, “Well, sure, you could do that, but only when you have a long history of trust.” That is a big misconception.

The truth is, you can’t get trust without taking risks. It is the taking of risks itself that creates trust.

Early Risk-Taking Can Strengthen Relationships

Risk-taking is a fundamental aspect of human life, woven into the fabric of daily existence, cultural narratives, psychological experiences, and biological responses. Whether individuals actively take risks or choose to avoid them, the concept remains a familiar and integral part of their understanding of the world.

This is true in business, sales, finance, education, and personal endeavors. Taking small risks can build trust and credibility without being perceived as careless or unprofessional. However, trust only grows when one party takes a risk, and the other party responds in a trust-based way.

  • Should you risk mentioning the price early on in a sales call?  

You take the risk of answering a direct question about price, even though you haven’t established your value proposition yet. Being open about the price early demonstrates transparency, which can build trust. It shows that you are straightforward and not trying to hide any information. This approach is respectful and opens the door for an honest discussion about budget and value. It can help ensure that the rest of the conversation is productive and focused on how you can meet their needs within their budget.

  • Should you be candid about your less-than-perfect qualifications for a job?

You take the risk of being very open about a relative weakness in your job qualifications. This approach shows humility, a willingness to learn, and the ability to turn a potential weakness into a strength, which can be very appealing. Although the client may or may not give you the job, they’ll note your directness and trust you more.

  • When you notice the client looking distracted, should you take the risk of commenting on it?

The risk can be as easy as saying, “I noticed you seem a bit distracted today. Is everything alright? I want to make sure we address any concerns or thoughts you might have.” This approach is gentle and non-confrontational, showing that you are perceptive and considerate of their current state. It shows that you are willing to engage in honest and open communication, opening the door for them to share any issues they might be facing, which can strengthen the client relationship.

In each example, the small risk may or may not go your way, but if you avoid taking that risk, it’s guaranteed that you’ll not get the trust (unless your client initiates it, in which case you depend on someone else to make your luck).

Early risk-taking can strengthen relationships by demonstrating commitment and reliability. Strong relationships are vital in navigating more significant risks in the future.

Resources to Build Your Trust Skills:

Why the Definition of Trust Depends on Its Use

/0 Comments/in , /by

Trust, a universal concept, is pivotal in our daily conversations. We often invoke it in statements that we believe to be meaningful. It’s a comprehensive language that binds us all, connecting us in our shared understanding of its importance.

However, its meaning becomes blurred when used as:

  • “Trust in the airline industry is down.”
  • “I don’t trust what media and news organizations say – I rely on people like me for trustworthy information.”
  • “I trust Amazon, but not Google.”

While the word trust is omnipresent in each statement, and others like them, the level of discussion about trust is fraught with definitional ambiguity everywhere.

Imprecision in discussing trust is not just a minor inconvenience. It can significantly impede progress in various areas, including personal relationships, business, and societal development. The stakes are high, and the need for clarity is essential and urgent. This urgency underscores the importance of precise trust definitions.

How Clear Definitions of Trust Transform Personal Relationships, Business, and Societal Growth

Trust can sow the seeds of misunderstanding when ambiguously communicated, potentially leading toconflicts. The cumulative effect of misinterpretations, misaligned expectations, and insecurity can lead to a complete breakdown of the relationship. Precise definitions of trust are helpful and necessary for establishing and maintaining strong personal bonds.

In business, imprecision in discussing trust can erode confidence among team members, partners, and clients. For instance, stakeholders may feel deceived if a company vaguely promises transparency but fails to define what that means. Businesses that are not clear and precise about their trust policies can damage their reputation, leading to significant loss of customers and revenue. The potential damage is substantial, and the need for precision is paramount.

For workplace colleagues, trust is not just a nice-to-have in collaboration; it’s a must-have. Imprecise communication about trust can create an environment of doubt and skepticism, making team members reluctant to share ideas or collaborate effectively. However, clear communication is the key to unlocking the full potential of trust in collaboration, empowering us to foster a culture of openness and cooperation.

In societal contexts, the lack of precision in trust discussions can hinder the successful implementation of policies and initiatives. For instance, vague trust-based government policies can lead to public disillusionment and a lack of support for essential programs, thereby hindering societal development.

Meaningful discussions about trust are crucial. They pave the way for valid, justified conclusions and actions. They also play a vital role in fostering trust-based organizations, cultures of trust, and increased trust in institutions. These discussions are essential for understanding and addressing cross-generational trends in trust.

Without standard definitions, we are reduced to bemoaning the fate of trust, wringing our hands as bystanders, accomplishing nothing. We need basic definitions.

Let’s call them:

  1. the Grammar of trust,
  2. the Objects of trust, and
  3. the Actions of trust.

The Grammar of Trust: Trust is a Noun, a Verb, and an Adjective

What does it mean to say, “Trust in the airline industry is down?” Does it mean major airlines have become less trustworthy? Or does it mean public opinion is turning against the airline industry? Or both?

It matters if our discussions are to have any policy implications. This is loose language, meaning nothing unless we clarify our definition of trust.

  • Trust, as a noun, is the state of a relationship between two parties. It exists or doesn’t; if it does, it is described as high or low, thick or thin, broad or deep. Sociologists use this to talk about high- or low-trust societies or cultures. In business, Edelman’s Trust Barometer primarily (when it is clear) focuses on the state of trust.
  • To trust someoneis to take a risk, to willingly put yourself in harm’s way of another. This is the verb “to trust.” Psychologists focus on this propensity to trust, the entry point of business books like Bob Hurley’s The Decision to Trust.
  • Trustworthinessis an adjective, an attribute we ascribe to others. It falls in the category of virtues. We use “trustworthy” to describe people with credibility, reliability, high integrity, benevolence, and unself-preoccupied virtues. It’s discussed in books like The Trusted Advisor as the Trust Equation.

When we see “Trust in the airline industry is down,” we should immediately ask: which meaning of trust is used here?

Do we strictly intend to indicate a decline in trust? This is trust as a noun. We can track it over time, but it should always beg the question, why? What have been the patterns of trustworthiness and propensity to trust? What is driving the state of trust lower?

If we mean that people have become less inclined to trust major airlines, this is trust as a verb. If this is the problem, is it unique to the industry? Or is it part of a general decline in propensity to trust? What kind of social intervention is appropriate? Enhanced customer service initiatives? A transparent commitment to safety? Marketing campaigns that address common pain points and offer solutions?

If we mean airlines have become less trustworthy, this is trust as an adjective. If this is the issue, what data is used to define trustworthiness? And should we seek industry-based or regulatory-based solutions to the issue? Probably both.

Objects of Trust: Personal vs. Institutional

“I don’t trust what media and news organizations say – I rely on people like me for trustworthy information.”

It may seem evident that trusting a person differs from trusting an institution. We’re not confused by, “I trust FedEx to deliver my packages, but not to babysit my daughter,” because baby-sitting requires an individual, not a firm, and we don’t think of FedEx delivery people as being in the baby-sitting business anyway. Trusting people is fundamentally different from trusting organizations.

Major trust surveys, like the Edelman Trust Barometer, say that “trust in someone like me” is trending up compared to “trust in government” or “trust in companies.” This is a category mistake.

The two types of trust are qualitatively distinct; they do not belong on the same quantitative scale. The blurring of lines is similar to that of “friends” on social media platforms, as we use the same word to describe our digital tribes that we use to describe our neighbors and old college friends. The common language must be recognized and respected, but it doesn’t have the same meanings.

Most trust is personal. If FedEx misses two deliveries in a week, my “trust” in them is seriously eroded. Yet if my best friend fails to return two calls, I am perplexed—but my trust in them is barely affected. This is not surprising. It’s not the same trust we’re discussing.

Trust in particular organizations—companies, Congress—is “thin” trust. It’s connected to branding, reliability, and reputation—but not to the more powerful personal attributes we associate with trusting individuals. Most people “distrust” Congress but are more inclined to “trust” their congressperson. This is only surprising if we think the same “trust” is at issue.

Companies that consistently score high on broad measures of trust (see, for example, Trust Across America’s Most Trustworthy Companies) are usually, on closer examination, that assiduously foster trust-based relationships between individuals—between employees and customers, among employees, with local constituent organizations.

Writers should avoid sloppy use of the object of trust—humanizing trust when we talk about institutions, for example—and readers should point this out sharply. The word “trusted” means very different things when applied to Toyota, LinkedIn affinity groups, and next-door neighbors. I may “trust” them all, but we are discussing distinct phenomena.

Actions of Trust: Trust to Do What?

“I trust my dog with my life, not my ham sandwich.”

We all understand the difference, yet we often hear sentences like, “I trust Amazon—but not Google.” The Amazon/Google difference is probably the same as the life/ham sandwich difference, but we don’t usually hear it the same way.

To see why, ask what it is that we trust Amazon and Google to do. Most likely, the utterer of that sentence means that Amazon delivers fast and reliably and that Google tracks mountains of information about us. Fast delivery and responsible guardianship of private details are very different—maybe as different as “life” and “sandwich.” And yet, we act as if we’re making a meaningful statement about corporate trustworthiness when we use the “T” word with both companies in the same sentence. We are not expressing distinct opinions about two very different phenomena.

Whenever you read (or write) something comparing levels of trust—whether between people or organizations (or across people and organizations)—always remember to ask: Trust to do what? If we had more critical readers (and writers) about the above three distinctions, the discussion of trust would be incredibly advanced.

Resources to Build Your Trust Skills:

Five Misconceptions about Trust in Business: Part 3

/0 Comments/in , , /by

In this blog series, we explore five of the most common misconceptions about trust that, while they are widely-held, are powerful inhibitors to creating real trust:

  1. Trust has to be earned
  2. Trust takes time to grow and is quickly lost
  3. Clients just want you to solve their problem
  4. Clients will trust you if you give good advice
  5. Having the right answer is critical

Two wooden figures with the image of the brain and heart.MISCONCEPTION 3: CLIENTS JUST WANT YOU TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM

Most providers think that clients are focused on solving the problem. No surprise there—most clients would say the same thing. Let’s dig a little deeper.

Of course, clients want providers to solve problems. That’s what they are paying for, after all. But if ALL you are giving the client is what they are paying for, you need to be incredibly better than anyone else to avoid constantly competing on price. And that’s incredibly hard to do.

Clients don’t seek to trust providers’ expertise …

… they seek experts they can trust.

Clients don’t want to be experts in the provider’s field. If they did, they’d have gotten their own degree or certification. They also know they will need that expertise again in the future. What they would really love to have, if only they could be so fortunate, is confidence in an expert on whom they could then rely repeatedly.

Most providers try to create trust by demonstrating, or at least talking about, their expertise. Clients therefore assume that their expertise is the most important thing they can offer. The implicit message is, “you can trust me to take care of this problem.”

Yes, clients hire you to solve the problem …

… but what they really want is for you to care about them.

If you focus solely on your expertise and successfully solve the problem, then your client will learn to trust your expertise, but what about everything else?

The alternative is to focus less on the problem, and more on the person. That’s not to say you should perform poorly, but that you should also show your client there’s more to you than you’re your expertise.

Real trust comes from understanding your client as a person – through curiosity, empathy, and your willingness to be vulnerable with them.

Real trust comes from caring enough about your client to share what you see can help them succeed.

Real trust comes not from solving this problem, but from helping them see the next opportunity or potential issue, whether or not you can help them with it.

Clients’ main vehicle for assessing trust is your ability to address the issues facing them, head-on, with all its emotional complexities. The beauty of that is, it’s what you already do for a living anyway.

Come back here to read about misconception 4: Clients will trust you if you give good advice.

Resources to Build Your Trust Skills:

Five Misconceptions about Trust in Business: Part 2

/1 Comment/in , /by

In this blog series, we explore five of the most common misconceptions about trust that, while they are widely-held, are powerful inhibitors to creating real trust:

  1. Trust has to be earned
  2. Trust takes time to grow and is quickly lost
  3. Clients just want you to solve their problem
  4. Clients will trust you if you give good advice
  5. Having the right answer is critical

MISCONCEPTION 2: TRUST TAKES TIME TO GROW AND IS QICKLY LOST

Trust takes a long time to build, and only a few moments to be destroyed. That has to be one of the greatest trust platitudes, and it is as wrong as it is commonly believed.

Trust takes a long time to build? Not necessarily, in fact frequently not.

Trust takes only a few moments to be destroyed? Even less true.

The Truth

Of course, platitudes don’t achieve that status out of thin air. There’s usually something to them, and of course there’s something here too.

Let’s start with the first part: trust takes time. As we explored in Part 1 of this blog, most of the time we start off even new relationships with at least a limited amount of trust. But there are two points to consider when examining how long trust takes to build: the trustworthiness of the person seeking to be trusted, and the propensity to trust of the person from whom we are seeking trust.

The Trust Equation breaks down trustworthiness into four discrete factors: Credibility, Reliability, Intimacy, and Self-orientation. Of these, Reliability is the only factor that requires the passage of time to be evaluated: you need to set an expectation, then follow through on it. And even then, it’s really more about the number and consistency of interactions than the amount of elapsed time.

The other element is what social scientists and trust academics call “generalized” trust—the propensity to believe well of the motives of strangers, and to be generally optimistic about the future. That one, it turns out, can take ages to turn around—negatively or positively. As Dr. Eric Uslaner points out, generalized trust is installed early, and usually remains stable throughout our lives.

So, does trust take time or not? The answer is, “it depends.” And what it depends on is the type of trust we’re talking about. Let’s break it down:

Now let’s look at the second part: trust is quickly lost. Most relationships, like most emotions, take roughly as long to get over as they took to develop. Marriages or friendships don’t end overnight. There may be a flash point, a straw that breaks the camel’s back. But we usually give people we trust the benefit of the doubt. We don’t dump them abruptly the first time things get difficult.

Most examples of “trust lost quickly” turn out to be either just the last drip in a long series of drips eroding trust, or a delusion about trust’s existence in the first place (you don’t “violate the trust” of a subscriber to your email list by sending them a worthless referral; the relationship you have with a name on your email list may be many things, but “trust-based” is probably a stretch).

Trust formed quickly can be lost quickly; trust formed at a shallow level can be lost at the same level. But trust formed deeply takes deeper violations, or a longer time, to be lost.

But, you might say, so what?  Why is that harmful? What’s the big deal?

The Harm

If you believe that trust takes a long time to build, then you likely believe that it also takes sustained effort, and that there are limited opportunities to build trust when you have limited time. You are inclined to focus only on those things that bring immediate gratification, like solving the problem or delivering the solution (Credibility and Reliability, which are shallow forms of trust). You are less likely to be vulnerable and take risks to connect at a human level, and less likely to set aside your own goals (Intimacy and Self-orientation, which create deeper personal trust).

If you believe that trust can be lost in a moment, then you likely believe you must be cautious and careful about protecting it. You are likely to think about trust as a precious resource to be guarded against being tarnished. You are inclined to institute rules and procedures to protect it and to give cautionary lectures about the risk of losing trust.

These beliefs are self-defeating. Why would you expend energy on something for which you are not likely to see results quickly, or at all? Or that you could lose in just a moment?

And they lead to precisely the kinds of behavior that result in trust lost.

Trust, at a personal level, is like love and hate: you tend to get back what you put out. You empower what you fear. Those afraid of getting burned are the most likely to get burned. Fear of trust not only doesn’t save trust – it actually causes low trust.

Trust is a Muscle

Thinking of trust as something that takes a long time to build makes you unwilling to invest in it, and thinking of trust as something you can lose in a minute makes you cautious and unlikely to take risks. But the absence of risk is what starves trust. There simply is no trust without risk – that’s why they call it trust.

If your people aren’t empowered, if they’re always afraid of being second-guessed or saying the wrong thing, then they will always operate from fear and never take a risk – and as a result, will never be trusted.

Trust is a muscle – it atrophies without use. And the repetition of the mantra “trust takes time to build and can be lost in a moment” just tells people not to use it.

Turns out the stupidest trust is the trust you never engaged in because you were unwilling. The smartest trust is the trust you create by taking a risk.

UP NEXT – Come back tomorrow to read about the third misconception: Clients just want you to solve their problem.

 

Trust-Based Resources to Maximize Your Team’s Potential:

Five Misconceptions about Trust in Business: Part 1

/3 Comments/in , /by

There are many misconceptions about trust that pervade how we think about professional relationships. While most seem harmless (think about Ronald Reagan’s admonition to trust, but verify), unless they are examined and dispelled, they will impede real trust.

This blog series describes five of the most common – and most dangerous – misconceptions about trust:

  1. Trust must be earned
  2. Trust takes time to build and is quickly lost
  3. Clients just want you to solve their problem
  4. Clients will trust you if you give good advice
  5. Having the right answer is critical

MISCONCEPTION 1: TRUST MUST BE EARNED

I often start workshops by asking if the people there trust me, and why. One reason I commonly hear from those who don’t is, “Trust is earned.” While that mindset is pervasive, it’s an unfounded misconception that often hinders relationships before they start.

Quite simply, withholding all trust until it’s “earned” would make it nearly impossible to collaborate or have meaningful transactions with others. A complete lack of trust impedes communication and progress.

The reality is that in most business situations, we extend at least some level of trust from the very first interaction with someone new. Trust is the default that allows any productive conversation or collaboration to occur.

Trust is not “All-or-Nothing”

Once I’ve introduced myself, at least a few more people will say they trust me, but in a limited capacity based on my role as a workshop facilitator.

Trust is contextual – it can exist in varying degrees for different situations or aspects of a relationship. In other words, I trust the UPS driver to deliver my packages, but not to babysit my grandchildren.

Of course, egregious violations like unethical conduct or repeated untrustworthiness can sever trust completely. But more often, trust exists even if it’s fragile at first. The opportunity is to nurture it into something more resilient.

The Trust Is Already There – Now Build Upon It

To be trusted, you must also be willing to trust. Extending trust upfront creates an environment for more open communication and creates opportunity for personal connection – the foundation for any trusted advisor relationship. Withholding trust, meanwhile, can spark defensive tendencies and strain the relationship before it starts.

The key is to approach new relationships not from a deficit requiring trust to be painstakingly earned, but instead looking to build upon and validate the trust that already exists. It’s a mindset shift, but one that facilitates much stronger collaboration and relationships.

Finally, remember that many people are willing to trust others until proven untrustworthy, rather than requiring trust to be earned first. Taking the risk of granting trust first demonstrates vulnerability and opens the door for the other person to reciprocate and validate that trust.

UP NEXT – Come back tomorrow to read about the second misconception: Trust takes time to build and is quickly lost.

Trust-Based Resources to Maximize Your Team’s Potential:

The Strengths Trap: How Overplaying Your Strengths Harms Trust (Part II)

/1 Comment/in , , /by

Part I of this blog described how over-emphasizing the trust-building factors in the Trust Equation without balancing your self-orientation can actually hurt your trustworthiness. It also identified many internal and external triggers that might increase self-orientation.

In this post, we explore specific actions you can take to avoid over-playing your strengths.

The Goldilocks Effect

Source: “Stop Overdoing Your Strengths,” Kaplan and Kaiser, HBR Magazine, February 2009

In a Harvard Business Review article, “Stop Overdoing Your Strengths” (HBR Magazine, February 2009), authors Robert E. Kaplan and Robert B. Kaiser explored the impact of the leadership trait forcefulness on leaders’ overall effectiveness.

The plotted results of their research shows that overplaying a strength can be just as dangerous as underplaying it.

When it comes to being trustworthy, optimizing the trust equation may seem akin to the story of Goldilocks and the Three Bears: what’s too little, what’s too much, and what’s just right?

Self-orientation is an important counterweight to overplaying our trust-building strengths.

The key is balance: being able to demonstrate your strengths while keeping your self-orientation low so your overall trustworthiness increases.

Managing Self-Orientation

Lowering self-orientation to combat over-playing our strengths starts with self-awareness, noticing when internal or external pressures trigger us to focus on ourselves. Internal pressures include things like ego, fear, complacency, and personal agendas. External pressures include things like deadlines, sales and performance targets, distractions, and issues at work or home.

The antidote to overplaying our strengths is lowering self-orientation, first by recognizing when your self-orientation is high, then shifting your focus to something other than yourself.

While it sounds simple, this takes ego strength.

Once you are aware of what triggers your self-orientation to go up, you can adapt your behavior. Here are some tips to avoid over-playing each trust-building strengths:

Counter arrogance with humility.

Humility is often interpreted as timidity, but a more appropriate interpretation is recognizing how you fit into something larger than yourself. Two ways to practice humility are:

  • Open-mindedness – hear others out fully and without judgment before proposing a solution. Respect their knowledge and contributions and consider their inputs. People will see your open-mindedness as increasing your credibility.
  • Curiosity – explore their point of view with them before offering a different perspective. A great opening phrase might be, “Help me understand where you’re coming from.”

Counter control with tolerance.

Tolerance means accepting something you don’t agree with; it also means enduring something that feels unpleasant. When we are fully committed to one particular way of doing something, it’s hard to accept – or even see – viable alternatives. Two ways to practice tolerance are:

  • Check your perspective – when you find yourself struggling because things aren’t happening the way you think they should, pause and ask yourself if your approach is the only valid one. If the overall goal is being met, even if it isn’t how you expect or want it to be, then consider changing your perspective instead of trying to change to situation.
  • Grace – give others (and yourself) grace to make mistakes, to change the plan, and to be able to achieve the goal in their own way. Trusting others requires relinquishing some control. If you never give up control to someone else, what might they infer about how much you trust them?

Counter appeasement and intrusiveness with sharing.

When our natural tendency is to create connection with others, we may push too hard for them to share with us, or we may feel pressure to agree with them (regardless of our point of view). Two ways to practice sharing are:

  • Go first – To avoid appeasing: if you tend to keep quiet when you disagree with what someone says, consider sharing your point of view before others share theirs so you don’t have to worry about seeming disagreeable if your point of view differs. To avoid intrusiveness: before asking someone to share something personal, share something about yourself so they feel more comfortable sharing in return.
  • Create context – it’s easy to forget that others don’t necessarily know what we are thinking. Create context by framing your perspective or questions in a positive way, focusing on the mutual benefit to you and the other person. It will feel less threatening to you and to them.

To borrow from a famous C.S. Lewis quote on humility, low self-orientation is not thinking less of ourselves; it is thinking of ourselves less.

How will you lower your self-orientation to let your trust-building strengths shine through?

Trust-Based Resources to Maximize Your Team’s Potential:

The Strengths Trap: How Overplaying Your Strengths Harms Trust (Part I)

/1 Comment/in , , /by

Playing to our strengths can be seductive. We all want to feel we are presenting our best selves, and that naturally leads us to emphasize those things at which we excel. It’s often how we define our professional roles, our careers, even ourselves.

Too Much of a Good Thing

Some modern psychometric tools are built around the idea that individuals are more successful and fulfilled when they focus on developing their strengths rather than trying to fix weaknesses. Gallup’s CliftonStrengths©, for example, claims that, by identifying and leveraging their strengths, individuals can “enhance their performance, engagement, and overall satisfaction in various aspects of their lives.”

That may be good advice in general. But is it possible to rely too much on our strengths?

When we’re talking about building trust, the answer is a clear, “Yes.”

More Is Not Always Better

Over-emphasizing or relying too heavily on a single factor to build trust can become a liability. To understand why, we need to explore the relationship of each trust-building variable with self-orientation.

In the Trust Equation (source: The Trusted Advisor by Maister, Green, and Galford, The Free Press, 2000), the factors in the numerator (Credibility, Reliability and Intimacy) build trust, while the single factor in the denominator (Self-Orientation) inhibits or diminishes trust.

The Trust Equation: Trustworthiness equals the sum of credibility plus reliability plus intimacy, divided by self-orientation

In this equation, when numerator – the sum of the factors that build trust – increases and the denominator is constant or decreases, trustworthiness goes up.

It’s when we start to separate out the factors in the numerator that we can identify the risk. Although the Trust Equation is a heuristic and not a strict mathematical formula, we could rewrite the equation as the sum of each numerator over the single denominator:

The Trust Equation: Trustworthiness equals Credibility divided by self-orientation, plus Reliability divided by self-orientation, plus intimacy divided by self-orientation.

Simple common sense tells us that relying too heavily on a trust-building strength can backfire, with consequences for our own behavior and how others may perceive us:

  • Over-playing Credibility can lead to intellectual rigidity; others may perceive you as arrogant or closed-minded.
  • Over-playing Reliability can lead to overcontrolling; others may perceive you as domineering or overly-focused on details.
  • Over-playing Intimacy can lead to emotional exhaustion or appeasement; others may perceive you as intrusive or, at the other extreme, lacking ambition.

Why It Happens

It would seem that increasing each of the elements in the numerator would increase trust. But that only works if we lower or keep constant the denominator, self-orientation. The more we focus on our strength, the more our self-orientation increases, which diminishes the trust we are working to build.

Remember that when we have something that works well for us, it’s natural to fall back on that strength. When we’re under pressure, whether internal or external, it triggers an increase in self-orientation, which heightens the instinct to flex our strength.

The table below lists some likely internal triggers for each trust-building factor; the external factors are potential triggers regardless of the trust-building strength. The internal triggers typically fall into three categories: fear- or ego-based (concern about what they think about you), complacency (over-confidence in your strength), or achieving your agenda (getting what you want from the situation).

Common Triggers of High Self-Orientation

Self-Awareness: The Antidote to Self-Orientation

The presence of any of these triggers should be a warning sign that self-orientation might be on the rise. Once you recognize that a trigger is present, you can take action to lower your self-orientation to build trust, or at least to avoid diminishing it.

In Part II, we’ll explore what actions you can take to avoid over-playing your strengths.

Resources to Build Your Trust Skills:

Six Hacks to Get into the Trusted Advisor Mindset

/0 Comments/in , /by

In a recent TrustMatters webinar, I shared four key attributes of Trusted Advisor relationships, and six mindsets that can help you get there.

You can view this and all our free webinar recordings here. For those of you who prefer to read versus watching a recording, here’s what we discussed.

Four Attributes of Trusted Advisor Relationships

True Trusted Advisors are safe havens for tough issues – those people to whom we can turn for any challenge, professional or private, when we want guidance, support, or a sounding board. The special professional relationships Trusted Advisors form have four key attributes that distinguish them. These attributes are:

Personal. We often define our professional relationships by the roles we play: client and consultant, business partner and provider, customer and customer success advisor. Thinking about our relationships in terms of our roles creates a buffer and promotes the concept that we are working together only to fulfill a transaction. For trusted advisors, the relationship transcends the transaction. It is not a relationship between roles, but a relationship between two people. To be a Trusted Advisor, we must care about our client as a person.

Two-way. No one has the power to unilaterally create a Trusted Advisor relationship. The client must participate and reciprocate. While we can always strive to be more trustworthy, we won’t – can’t – be Trusted Advisors to all our clients. That isn’t to say you shouldn’t invest in building trust with all your clients, just that if it isn’t two-way, it’s limited.

Both Rational and Emotional. Trusted Advisor relationships go beyond the rational benefits, like solving business problems and meeting business needs, to engage on an emotional level. Empathy, the ability to recognize what someone is experiencing emotionally, is a critical element to connecting. But Trusted Advisorship also is more than deep friendship. Don’t overlook that being a Trusted Advisor means being comfortable engaging on a broad set of issues, not just those for which we’ve been hired.

Intrinsically about Perceived Risk. To quote from The Trusted Advisor, “Trust without risk is like cola without fizz; there isn’t much point to it.” The very act of trusting is taking a risk; if there were no risk, there would be no need for trust. Risk, real and perceived, varies based on the situation, but the client’s perception of their own risk may as well be the reality. Whether or not we agree with that perception, we need to acknowledge and respond in kind.

Mindset Matters

So how do we develop relationships that have these key attributes? It’s simplistic to look for tips and tricks without considering the importance of Trusted Advisor mindsets. And often, having the right mindset will help us naturally take the right action. Mindset hacks are simple things we can do to get – and stay – in the right mindset.

Here are six key Trusted Advisor mindsets, and a hack to get into each one.

Mindset #1: Focus on the other person. If we focus on the other person, everything else in the relationship will pretty much fall into place. As professionals, it would seem obvious that we would be focused on the other person. But there are a lot of impediments to other-focus. For example, we may believe that our technical capability or competency is enough, or have difficulty maintaining concentrated attention, or we’re focused on what they think about us. Maybe it’s just that we think that solving the problem is more important than understanding the problem. All of these are impediments to other focus.

The mindset hack here is to focus on the person, not the problem. Clients generally want to be understood as a precondition to having their problems solved.

Mindset #2: Self-confidence. Self-confidence is about recognizing the value that you bring to the relationship, beyond technical expertise or the results of a particular transaction. The biggest impediment to self-confidence is fear; that we’re wrong, that they won’t think we’re smart or competent, or like or respect us. So we push conversations to our expertise, to where we’re comfortable. With self-confidence, you can let the conversation go where it naturally will, knowing you can meet the client where they are.

The mindset hack for self-confidence is to ask yourself, “What value do I bring to the relationship?” (Beyond the technical expertise to solve the challenge is that’s in front of you.)

Mindset #3: Ego strength. This sounds like a strange one for trusted advisors, where we spend so much time talking about maintaining a low self orientation. Ego strength is the ability to take yourself out of the equation and focus on the process of developing the relationship. Ego strength requires objectivity, the ability to look past ourselves and our emotions and focus on the process of building the relationship. Impediments to ego strength include a desire for recognition or an avoidance of blame; inappropriate emotional attachment to our solution, idea or perspective; and losing sight of the big picture. We let what we want to get emotionally out of a situation get in the way of the relationship.

The mindset hack for ego strength is a mantra, “It’s not about me.” If you feel yourself thinking about getting the credit, or the blame, or you find you’re tied up in something that’s emotional for you, just remind yourself that it’s not about you.

Mindset #4: Curiosity. The mindset around curiosity is this: the problem is rarely as simple as it seems at first pass. David Maister, co-author of The Trusted Advisor, points out that the problem is never what the client says it is in the first meeting. Curiosity helps us focus on what we don’t know, not just on what we do know. It enables better solutions, ensures we’re solving the right problem, and demonstrates to client that we fully understand them. Some things that get in the way of curiosity are over-confidence from past experience (you’ve seen this before and know the answer), unexplored or unrecognized assumptions, and urgency. Don’t get so caught up solving the problem that you forget to understand the problem.

The mindset hack for curiosity is one question: “What’s behind that?” It’s non-judgmental and creates an opportunity for the other person to share more before we move on to the next step in problem solving.

Mindset #5: Inclusive professionalism. This is not “inclusive” in the sense of DEI. Inclusive professionalism means working with the client, not carrying the attitude that, as the professional, I’m here to fix them or do something they are not capable of doing. Inclusive professionalism requires that we embrace the value the client contributes to do our job correctly. Some inhibitors to inclusive professionalism include fear of losing control, patronization stemming from ego, and the assumption that they offer limited value because they asked for our help. Lack of transparency can also be exclusive. Our clients are specialists and experts in their roles. We may have a different perspective or experience, but they are experts at what they do, and we need both parts, together, to succeed.

The mindset hack for inclusive professionalism is a simple statement: “We will be more successful together.” That suggests they have something to add and we have something to add, and only together can we be successful.

Mindset #6: The relationship is the goal. It’s easy to get so caught up in work we’re doing that we forget about the relationship. Relationships survive bad events. Not projects. And relationships lead to growth, not deliverables. One impediment to a relationship mindset is short term thinking. If you only focus on this project or transaction, you give up the future potential the relationship holds. Similarly, only focusing on the technical problem leaves you with nothing when the problem is solved. Another major impediment is a lack of willingness to invest emotionally, to care about our clients as human beings.

The mindset hack is very, very simple. “The relationship is more important than …” The relationship is more important than not being blamed, than defending myself, than completing this deliverable right now. If we always put the relationship first, then our behaviors will follow.

Keeping Yourself on Track

Changing your mindset takes practice and intentionality. These four questions will help you be intentional about your mindset:

  1. Who am I thinking about?
  2. What does the client feel about this?
  3. Who am I serving by my present approach?
  4. What am I afraid of here?

The next time you feel yourself slipping out of the Trusted Advisor mindsets, ask yourself these four questions to get back on track.

Content for this post sourced from The Trusted Advisor by Maister, Green, and Galford, The Free Press, 2000; and Trust-Based Selling by Charles H. Green, McGraw Hill, 2006.

Trust-Based Resources to Maximize Your Team’s Potential: