TRUST

Of the four pillars of leadership, trust is primary.??

My perspective on trust is shaped by years of firsthand experience and extensive research. The best read related to trust is 'The Speed of Trust' by Stephen M. R. Covey , which has helped me unpack and better understand my experiences around trust.???

Trust is primary (aka first) for a reason — nothing will go as smoothly or fast as it otherwise could without trust. Even if a leader is effective at the other three pillars, when there is limited trust, the calorie burn-to-outcome ratio will suck.?

Trust is the foundation.? Effective leaders create and maintain an atmosphere of trust, and here is how they do it.?

Effective Leaders Have Integrity?

Integrity is the component of trust most people identify with. To better understand integrity, we must break it down into two categories.??

First, integrity is about doing what you say you will do. Following through on commitments is an enormous necessity. No matter how big or small the task, trust erodes when a leader fails to keep their word. Following through is simple yet simultaneously challenging because sometimes we make commitments and forget. While not sexy, great leaders keep a rolling to-do list to ensure follow-through happens 100% of the time. Leaders who keep their word build trust.??

My successor at The Delta Companies, Bill Tracewell , was a master at following through on his commitments. If Bill agreed to do something, he would write it down immediately. Then, he would sprint out of a meeting and quickly complete the task, no matter the distractions.?As a result, people trusted Bill.

Every time a leader commits and doesn't follow through, it is like swinging and missing in baseball. With each failure, the batting average (of trust) goes down. Trust erodes when there are too many swings and misses, and that leader will eventually be asked to play elsewhere.

For this reason, leaders need to be aware of their time capacity and ensure they can accomplish the task they commit to. Otherwise, they should delegate or postpone the matter.??

Second, integrity is about doing the right things. Because ethics, morals, and right versus wrong are subjective, this part of integrity is more complex.?

It is a leader's responsibility to mitigate ambiguity, and the way to do this is with stated core values, mission, purpose, creed, etc. (let's refer to these as 'codes'). These codes signal how leaders want people in their organizations to think and behave. Remember Bill, who sprinted to complete his commitments? His behavior was in alignment with our stated code of speed. He moved fast to accomplish his commitments and reinforced our organization's stated core behavior of speed. As a result, he built lots of trust.??

When leaders act harmoniously with these stated codes, the codes become the behavioral compass for everyone in the organization. A compass is a tool that shows the way. Similarly, this compass will help leaders and everyone in the organization behave accordingly and aid in making decisions, no matter how big and strategic or tiny and tactical.??

It is all too common for the leader (and therefore the company) to be unaware that they are acting in ways that conflict with their code. For example, let's say a company has a stated code against HPJs (High-Performing Jerks) and that there is a good salesperson whose numbers are great but is an energy vampire to those around them. Leaders who do not see things correctly can unconsciously justify the HPJ's existence despite the 'people first' or 'people-centered' code. The performance of one salesperson isn't worth the cost of everyone else believing the leader is a hypocrite. Great leaders will make the 'right' decision — the one that aligns with their code — and get rid of the HPJ. It has been my experience that when this happens, others step up meaningfully, more than offsetting the jerk's performance.??

My good friend and accomplished CEO Jeff Harris calls this 'protecting the culture.' Acting in ways that align with the stated code protects the culture mainly because it deepens trust.??

Nobody is perfect, and at some point, every leader will unintentionally behave in ways that aren't in harmony with their code. It takes accurate and constant self-introspection to avoid this. And even that isn't enough. Being aligned also requires others nearby to be candid and point out blind spots. Of course, this level of candor amongst leadership teams will only happen with healthy team trust. An added benefit of modeling trust and candor by the top leaders will also encourage trust and candor throughout the organization.??

Saying one thing and doing another is the work of politicians. People don't believe what politicians say because they know the real intent is for them to get re-elected. Therefore, the constituents' well-being comes as a secondary agenda. Unfortunately, this is why the masses are called constituents and not followers.??

When codes are absent or ignored, there will be inconsistencies in how leaders behave and make decisions. Whether by omission or commission, this is the catalyst for suspicion. Suspicion is the opposite of trust. People don't perform at their best when they constantly question and doubt.?

Effective leaders have win-win intent.??

Trustworthy leaders have the best intentions for others, themselves, and the organization. The opportunity for a true win-win has never been more present than leading others inside an organization.??

I don't believe in servant leadership. Being a servant implies that there must be a master. This is all kinds of wrong, mainly because it creates a win-lose scenario suggesting the leader must sacrifice. Genuine leaders get fulfilled when their followers succeed. That alone is a win for them. Effective leaders don't put others first. Instead, they include their followers pari passu whenever possible.

The supposed leaders who say they put others first but then act in more selfish or company-first ways are phonies. People know a phony when they see one because the truth always leaks. If people feel that their best interests aren't at least a part of the equation, trust evaporates, and they will emotionally check out. The atmosphere worsens when people leave emotionally yet stay physically. And there can only be a leader with a follower.???

Leaders who have a win-win intent genuinely care about people's well-being. Self-centered people who don't care about others should not be in leadership. It is as simple as that.??

Outside of being outright self-centered, when a leader doesn't care about others, it is because they don't know their followers well enough. Abe Lincoln once said, 'I do not like that man; I must get to know him better.' Spending time to know others well will help leaders.?

The challenge in some business settings is that caring about others can be a weakness. This B.S. bravado suggests that winning at business requires business decisions that don't consider the impact on people. While making good business decisions in tandem with what's in people's best interest does require more time and effort, it is possible to do both. There is a win-win if you work hard enough to find it. When you genuinely care about others, the time and work are worth it.??

Effective leaders are competent.??

This component of trust is pretty straightforward. Leaders must be competent to build trust. More specifically, they need relevant ability, knowledge, or experience to add value to the followers' work. The result should be that the follower is more productive with a leader than without. If someone can't accomplish more with a leader present, the follower or the leader isn't a fit. Maybe both.??

Having relevant competency doesn't mean that leaders must have all the answers. Nobody can know it all. People get this and will respect you when you say, 'I don't know' or 'I'm not sure, but I will find out.’ Being vulnerable is not only required; others welcome and appreciate it. They can identify with those who don't have all the answers because they don't have all the answers either. When leaders make stuff up or ignore questions from those they are supposed to be adding value to, trust deteriorates.??

Effective leaders communicate to build trust.

When people don't know what is happening in a company, suspicion builds, and trust erodes. In a vacuum, people will make up a story that is always way worse than reality — especially regarding organizational change. Managing change is critical to a culture of trust.??

I once worked with a leader who trusted me unconditionally. I didn't need to give a lot of 'whys' to get her bought in and going in a direction. And while efficient, it could have been more effective. Because she only needed a few, if any, details, she assumed her followers didn't either. Most people need lots of 'whys'. This leader wasn't prepared to answer her followers 'why' questions and paint a compelling vision of the desired state. As a result, she couldn't get buy-in, results suffered, and trust decreased.??

If your company is building software or other products, a large part of being a visionary is coming up with the next thing to build. This takes a particular ability, a'la Steve Jobs. However, for those of us in people-centric businesses, vision is mainly about long-term thinking that looks out over many years and brings that vision into HD quality clarity to people today.??

Where are we today? Where are we going? Why? How? To create an atmosphere of trust, a leader must effectively communicate the company's vision. Absent this roadmap to a collective and desired future, people will be lost. Getting a group to a desired destination becomes even more challenging when they aimlessly wander. Pointing people in the right direction is part of a leader's job. It motivates and gives people hope. Then, when leaders communicate progress toward that desired place, they build trust.??

Be you.?

So many times, people get into their new leadership role and try to be someone they are not. Usually, they try to be some former leader or what they think a leader is supposed to be. You have to stay you. Trying to be someone different because you are in leadership isn't congruent with the reality of who you are. Besides, trying to be someone else is acting, and that is exhausting.?

As I mentioned, Bill created as much trust as any leader I have seen. This was partially done by keeping his commitments. Another way he built trust was by being himself. While our belief systems are closely aligned, our styles, approaches, how we dressed, and many other things about us were different. Being transparent, in the beginning, my ego wanted him to be more like me. After a bit of introspection, Bill was being Bill, which was a winning approach for him and all that followed him.

Even if you are being you, a balance is required between acting in ways that align with the company's code and your authentic self. Finding this balance will take some reflection and may take some time to achieve.???

To summarize, trust is necessary for optimizing any team. Great cultures that consistently overachieve and have fun doing it are built on a foundation of trust. To build and sustain trust, a leader must:

1. Do what they commit to
2. Be aware of and limit commitments?
3. Have actions that align with the company-stated code
4. Be reflective and aware of their words and actions?
5. Point out the blind spots of others?
6. Have a win-win mentality that puts followers on par with themselves and the company's best interest
7. Care about others
8. Spend time getting to know followers
9. Be vulnerable; don't pretend to know it all?
10. Communicate a vision??
11. Manage change?
12. Be their authentic self?

What comes to mind for you when it comes to effectively building trust??