A matter of trust

Business has lost its mandate to lead, and the public wants greater government regulation. This is what 62 percent of respondents felt and clamored for in the 2009 Edelman Trust Barometer. Edelman is the world’s leading independent stakeholder relations whose affiliate in the Philippines is EON Stakeholder Relations.

In the United States, where the world financial slump began, only 38 percent said they trusted business to do what is right — a substantial 20 percent drop from last year — and only 17 percent said they have faith in information from a company’s CEO. This is lower than the level of trust measured following other crises, including the September 11 terrorist attacks.

The 10th Edelman Trust Barometer was generated by research firm Strategy One covering 30-minute telephone interviews using the fielding services of World One from Nov. 5 to Dec. 14, 2008. The survey sampled 4,475 global respondents using two age groups (25-34 and 35-64) who are college-educated, with household income in the top quartile for their age in their respective countries, read or watch business/news media, and follow public policy issues in the news at least several times a week.

1. By a three is to one (3:1) margin, respondents said that government should intervene to regulate industry or nationalize companies to restore public trust. In the major Western European economies of the UK, France, and Germany, three-quarters said that government should step in to prevent future financial crises (73, 75, and 74 percent, respectively).

2. In the US, not even half (49 percent) said that the free market should be allowed to function independently. Globally, the call for government intervention also extended to critical issues like energy costs, global warming, and access to affordable healthcare, as respondents, by at least a 2:1 margin, said the government has the primary responsibility for solving these issues. Two-thirds (66 percent) expected business to collaborate or partner with governments and advocacy groups to solve these issues.

3. Emerging economies indicated a much higher level of trust in business, as well as specific industries than did the US and EU-member countries.

4. To “trust a company” is one of the most important factors that determine a company’s reputation. Among the 25 to 64-year-olds, trust ranked higher than a company’s financial future, job creation capability, community relation and products and services innovation. Transparency, defined as frequent and honest communication, also outranked those attributes.

5. Sixty percent of respondents said they needed to hear information about a company three to five times before they believe it.

6. Specialists remained the most trusted purveyors of information about a company, with 62 percent globally saying an academic or an expert on the industry to which the company is classified or issues surrounding the organization would be extremely credible.

7. Employees and peers were also considered credible sources of information about a company, with 47 percent trusting what they heard from “a person like you” and 40 percent trusting conversations they have with employees.

8. Trust in news outlets and spokespersons is down from last year. Globally, only 29 percent trust information about a company from a CEO — down from 36 percent last year. Only 13 percent trust corporate or product advertising — lower than last year’s 20 percent.

“All these findings emphasize the need for companies to build stronger ties with their stakeholders,” said Junie del Mundo, CEO of EON. “Companies have to invest in building trust by revisiting their relationships with their publics as well as their corporate social responsibility programs. They have to learn to listen to and engage them in meaningful conversations. It is no longer enough to just come up with advertising and PR campaigns,” he substantiated.

Building unassailable trust relationships is critical in business. It is indispensable if you want to engage in professional transactions — whether external like sales or service-based deals, or internal like employment contracts or benefits administration. It is indeed a greater determinant of success than any other considerations when you enter a bond. What exactly is trust? What theoretical structures do you need to sharply evaluate and improve your and your company’s trustworthiness?

Charles H. Green, an international executive educator on the role of trust in professional services, shares three core trust models he has developed and adopted over the years — The Trust Equation, The Trust Creation Process, and The Trust Principles.

Trust is a two-way street — you give trust, and trust is given back to you. The two are interconnected but they’re not the same thing. Green’s trust equation is a model for the latter. It brings credibility, reliability, intimacy and a better sense of self-orientation. You use the word trust to express what you think people say, or to explain people’s behaviors. You use it to describe whether or not you feel comfortable sharing certain information with someone else and to point to a certain feeling or belief — like whether the people you deal with have your best interests at heart or not.

The Trust Equation

Credibility is associated with words that come out of your mouth. You are somebody to be trusted if you are acknowledged as a credible person in most of the things you say. Reliability, on the other hand, is anchored on what you do. For example, if you say you’ll submit a contracted work two days from now, and you are trusted to do so, for sure you are seen to be dependable.

Intimacy is a feeling of security. You feel it when handing over something precious to someone, which you do only because you trust the other party you deal with. And this trust is founded on previous positive experiences — like he has a kept a secret or he has to date, not violated any agreed upon confidentiality. Thus, you are totally convinced he would not fail or embarrass you.

Self-orientation refers to your focus. If your focus is primarily on yourself, your point of reference, Green exemplifies, is something like this, “I can’t trust him on this deal — I don’t think he cares enough about me, he’s focused on what he gets out of the deal.” Or — more commonly, he continues, “I don’t trust him — I think he was too concerned about how he was appearing, so he wasn’t really paying attention.”

Increasing the value of credibility, reliability and intimacy in the numerator increases the value of trust, while increasing the value of the self-orientation — decreases the value of trust. Given these realities, the most important factor in the equation is self-orientation. To illustrate, if you are a salesperson with low self-orientation you are more customer-focused. You relate not for your own sake, but for the sake of your client. This way, trust connections are set on a more solid ground.

Creating Trust

Green’s Trust Creation Process is a five-step course: engaging the client in an open discussion about issues that are confronting him; listening to what is important and real to the client, which allows you to earn the right to offer solutions; framing the true root issue minus the language of blame; envisioning an alternate reality, including win-win results; and committing to actionable next steps that imply significant commitment and movement on the part of each party. Creating trust is anchored on great communication. Its most powerful component is listening. If you have listening inadequacy or if you have the tendency to jump too quickly to conclusions without securing all the facts, you are committing serious mistakes.

Living The Trust Principles

Green underscores, “Your actions are driven by your beliefs, and your beliefs are driven by your values or principles. Trustworthy behavior is way too complex to fake without the beliefs and values behind them.” He outlines four specific principles governing trustworthy behavior: a focus on the other for the other’s sake, collaboration or the willingness to work together, a perspective centered on medium to long-term goals, and transparency in your dealings. Putting these principles to work will truly develop the fullest possible kind of trusting relationship.

Trust is fragile. Like a piece of china, once cracked it is never quite the same. If you go by the results of the 2009 Edelman Trust Barometer, people’s trust in business, and those who lead it, is cracking.”

Futurist and philosopher Charles Handy says that companies and their leaders can avert the erosion of trust if organizations live up to the literal meaning of the word company — “the sharing of bread” — and regard themselves as “communities.” As such, companies turn into villages whose residents give trust and earn trust in return.

* * *

E-mail bongosorio@yahoo.com or bong_osorio@abs-cbn.com for comments, questions and suggestions. Thank you for communicating.