The Complexity & Profoundness of Trust.

It's time to reimagine how we work. A paradigm based on trust, autonomy and regeneration. This article explores the concept of trust, how it works, and why trust is the starting point.

Control does not match the current consciousness of people anymore. The system is breaking. A record number of people are resigning, burning out, or just doing the bare minimum (quiet quitting). People feel trapped, stressed, and limited by the way they are being controlled inside organisations.

If we believe people are generally good, then we should organise our companies that way. Trust is one of the core elements of that fundament.

This article dives into the concept of #trust, as a complex & profound aspect of the new organisation & leadership paradigm.

MYTH 1: TRUST MUST BE EARNED.

A common phrase used by many managers is "I need to first earn your trust". When trustworthiness is confirmed again & again, it is proven. Yet this has little to do with trust, this is evidence of trustworthiness.

Because initially there is doubt, fear, and low expectations. Leading to systems of control, and interventions to test or enforce trust. These are very effective ways to decrease productivity & motivation, but not to build trust.

Trust is not earned, nor checked. Trust doesn't have a guarantee. That's the whole point.

Spongebob: "What if I break your trust someday?" Patrick: "Trusting you is my decision, proving me wrong is your choice."

MYTH 2: TRUST CAN BE GIVEN

On Linkedin, I have read a few posts & comments about the invalidation of trust-based, self-organised teams. Simply put, the expressions are along the line of: "I've tried it, it is bullshit, trust me, it doesn't work".

I believe these statements show that they don't fully understand the complexity of trust in our interpersonal relations. Therefore, I would like to clarify the key aspects of the dynamics of trust.

The opposite of trust is distrust or doubt. As a result, when a manager doesn't trust his team, he/she will try to keep control—either by monitoring closely, implementing bureaucratic processes to track performance or mistakes or by unexpectedly intervening (at the last moment). Different strategies to stay on top of it, and ensure results.

Distrust is not a character trait or skill, it's deeper, it's a state of being. This might sound vague, but we all notice it immediately when someone lacks trussonally, or the world in general. It's nervous energy.

It is connected to their limiting beliefs & stories about how they view the world, and themselves. It is fear covered up by 'clever' organisation through control & power plays.

It's a state of being that teaches people around him/her to be careful. To check in extra. To not take risks. To avoid initiative. In short, it creates a fear-based 'eggshell' environment.

An environment where you are being rewarded for doing exactly as told, for pointing out what's not gonna work, before even trying. It's not a learning environment, it's a limiting environment.

"When a stressed, directive manager has been micro-managing for years, suddenly says, "go figure it out, I trust you". This leads to more stress, confusion & uncertainty. Because it's just words, there is no safe space & no true trust."

Setting up self-organised teams in such an environment, without addressing the leader/manager's state of being, as well as the imprinted cultural bottlenecks, it will always fail.

Trust is not something that is given. It is not enough to just express the intention towards trust. Trust is something you are, you emanate.

TRUTH: YOU EMANATE TRUST

Trust is a complex concept. It's not earned, nor simply given. Research shows trust is a state of being you embody, and even emanate.

It's easy to spot people who emanate trust. It's the way someone stands in the world, calm, bold, confident, and compassionate. No rush, no stress, no suffocating attempts to control. No tense face, clenched fists or jaws. No twitches.

But instead, open. Focused. Intentional.

There is little ego, no fear of not being seen, of not being good enough, or not knowing or mattering. Not there to prove themselves, or for solely personal financial gains, but instead in service for a purpose beyond themselves.

Trust is a state of being in which someone is connected to their authentic selves and their inner wisdom. Able to zoom out, and oversee emerging opportunities & challenges. And facilitating his/her team accordingly. With a deep sense of trust in themselves, those around them, and in the universe/nature as a whole.

Let's dive into some of these solid studies showing the profound effect of trust on people. In sum, when you trust in the potential of the other person, their confidence, performance, commitment, and even IQ increase. Trust gives the other person the wings to expand and to be their best self.

Rosenthal's Experiment and the Pygmalion Effect

Robert (Bob) Rosenthal is a professor at Harvard University (now 89 years old). He is most known for his research and studies conducted on experimenter expectancy effects. The first notable study. Rosenthal and Fode (in 1963) were with two groups of student test rats; categorized as being bred “maze bright” or “maze dull,” even though, in reality, they were all standard lab rats and not specially bred differently.

The results showed that the students unconsciously influenced the performance of rats in order to fit the expected results between the “maze bright” and “maze dull” rats .(“Rosenthal’s Work”, n.d.).

The Rosenthal Experiment - An Overview

His most famous study followed, to validate if the same effect were true among teachers & students. Rosenthal & Jacobson (experiment at an elementary school near San Francisco, California (Spiegel, He intention was to figure out what would ensue if teachers would react differently towards certain students if told that a select number of students were expected to learn more information and more quickly than the pupils in their class. To test this, Rosenthal issued a Test of General Ability to the students at the beginning of the year (“Rosenthal’s Work, n.d.). After the students had completed this IQ test, some were chosen at random to be the students that were expected to be academic bloomers; however, the results of the test did not influence which students of the class were chosen (Bruns et al., 2000). He continued to observe the interactions between teachers and students and decided to issue another IQ test at the end of the study to see how IQ improved in students who were to be academic bloomers versus the control group (Spiegel, 2012).

Rosenthal’s and Jacobson’s results reinforced their hypothesis that the IQs of the “academic bloomers” would in fact be higher than those of the control group even though these academic?bloomers were chosen at random (Bruns et al., 2000). Especially in younger children like those in grades 1 and 2, there was a remarkable difference in the increases in IQ between the students chosen to be academic bloomers and those that were not. In 1 year they made an average jump of 27 IQ points (Rutger Bregman, 2019). A reason for this is that younger children may be able to be influenced more greatly by their teachers, who are respected authorities (“Rosenthal’s Work”, n.d.).

The conclusions shown in this 1-year experiment greatly illustrate the Pygmalion effect, or Rosenthal effect, which is the phenomenon that explains better performances by people when greater expectations are put on them (Bruns et al., 2000). For example, the teachers in the study may have unnoticeably given the supposed academic bloomers more personal interactions, highly extensive feedback, more approval, and kind gestures, such as nods and smiling (Spiegel, 2012). On the other hand, teachers would generally pay less attention to low-expectancy students, seat them farther away from teachers in the classroom, and offer less reading and learning material (Bruns et al., 2000).

Trust in others (conviction of human potential and positive outcomes) increases not only performance, but even IQ scores.

QUESTION: HOW DO THESE INSIGHTS RELATE TO HOW WE LEAD & WORK?

We are amidst a paradigm shift in society, and shifting the way we work is a huge part of that. To create more human, inspiring, and trust-based workplaces. Organizations, where people thrive, will ripple outwards to benefit society & nature as a whole.

But it starts with the awareness of founders, leaders, and changemakers who embody trust & practice it daily.

Once the fundament is set, the next step is assessing culture & systems to design the company based on trust. A whole other story, which I will dive into in one of the next newsletters, so stay tuned.

WE INVITE YOU TO BUILD COMPANIES ON PURPOSE.

You can be part of this wave of change.

We invite you to ON.PURPOSE STUDIO to go on a journey to shift from a machine paradigm towards an ecosystem paradigm of companies. Where connection is key, not control. This requires conscious leaders to embody a state of being to guide that change. Free from ego. Aware of your limiting beliefs & stories. Connected to your intuition. As well as a super clear playing field, with principles, conversations and rituals to foster trust, ownership and accountability.

Want to know more about this upcoming transformational online course?

Visit our website and join the waiting list.