Approximately two decades ago, a group of colleagues, who happened to be business professors, convened within an office setting to engage in a discussion on the fundamental elements contributing to business success. The focal point of our discourse revolved around the essence of success and its underlying catalysts. As our dialogue progressed, we arrived at a collective realization that, above all else, it is relationships that predominantly govern the achievement of prosperity within the business realm. These relationships extend between businesses themselves, as well as between employees and their superiors, companies and their clientele, and suppliers and the organizations they serve. We unanimously concluded that relationships, in fact, epitomize the driving force behind corporate performance, efficiency, and effectiveness. In light of this revelation, we discerned the imperative need to comprehend the intricacies of these relationships and the key factors that propel their sustenance. Consequently, our focus shifted towards a thorough examination of the essence of relationships, leading us to deduce that trust lies at their very core. The sheer significance of trust as a foundational element within all relationships heightened our enthusiasm, propelling us towards an ardent quest to unravel the true nature of this intangible construct. To embark on our quest, we delved into the vast reservoir of literature, meticulously perusing various sources to gain insight into the multifaceted concept of trust. However, our exploration yielded a disheartening outcome as we were met with a perplexing conundrum: the absence of a definitive and universally accepted definition of trust. Instead, we encountered a plethora of inconsistent interpretations and definitions that only served to further confound our understanding of this enigmatic concept.
Now, as researchers, we are excited to explore a particular domain that presents ample opportunities for investigation. However, we have encountered a perplexing situation where individuals express their trust in us by stating, "I trust you." This led us to ponder the true meaning of trust and prompted us to embark on an inquiry into its essence. In our quest for understanding, we deemed it necessary to examine the realm of world leaders, specifically focusing on those who have had the most significant impact throughout history. It is evident that influential world leaders must possess the trust of their constituents. To gauge this, we turned to online sources such as Rankine.com, which ranks world leaders based on their influence. Astonishingly, Alexander the Great holds the top position, with Napoleon ranking third, surpassing notable figures such as George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and Winston Churchill. It is disconcerting to contemplate what implications this has for trust. Does it imply that Adolf Hitler, ranked 17th, is deemed more trustworthy than Abraham Lincoln? Consequently, we delved deeper into the concept of trust, extending our investigation to the corporate sphere. Entrepreneur.com provides a compilation of the most trusted brands and companies. Among them, renowned names like Nike, Coca-Cola, and Southwest Airlines reign supreme. But how does one determine whether Southwest Airlines can be trusted with their luggage or if consuming a can of Coke won't lead to illness? Moreover, when confronted with lengthy license agreements, such as Apple's iTunes agreement spanning 229 pages, it becomes evident that the majority of individuals simply agree without comprehending its contents. We refrain from inquiring about the number of individuals who have perused this agreement, as most of us willingly consent to it without grasping its implications. However, the underlying reason behind this blind agreement lies in our trust in Apple and other reputable entities.
Trust is defined as the willingness to be vulnerable, where one chooses to take risks and be open to the other party. When stating that I trust someone, it implies my readiness to be vulnerable and take such risks. Vulnerability and risk are the essential elements that foster trust. To illustrate this concept, allow me to recount a personal experience. My fiancé and I were driving through Wyoming in Jackson City, specifically Jackson Hole, when we noticed a ski resort on a mountain. Observing individuals paragliding and leaping from this majestic peak, known as the Tetons, we contemplated whether to join them in this daring endeavor. Motivated by curiosity, we decided to seize the opportunity and proceeded towards the establishment. Once there, we approached the first person we encountered, a gentleman named John, who would be our guide in this exhilarating activity. In a matter of moments, we found ourselves confronted with a crucial decision. We scrutinized John, pondering whether we should place our trust in him. Considering that we were entrusting our lives to him, we questioned our willingness to be vulnerable in his presence. It is worth noting that when I prepared this TED talk, I sought John's consent to utilize his image, highlighting the reciprocity of trust. In this scenario, the tables were turned, albeit in a manner not dissimilar to leaping off a mountain. Consequently, the crux of the matter lies in our evaluation of John's trustworthiness, as we were entrusting him with our very lives in the imminent mountain jump. Am I truly prepared to embrace vulnerability and trust him?
The driving force behind my inclination to undertake risks in John stems from several factors. Firstly, there exists a concept known as propensity, which refers to an inherent inclination or disposition to trust and embrace vulnerability. From the very time and date of its actual birth, every individual possesses a natural propensity to take risks, influenced by various elements such as geographical location, familial background, upbringing, and societal norms. The Adelman Trust Barometer, accessible online, conducted a global study revealing distinct levels of trust across different regions. Notably, areas depicted in red on the map indicate lower levels of trust compared to those depicted in blue. However, it is important to note that our predisposition to take risks is not solely determined by our upbringing or family environment. This became apparent during a conversation between my fiancée, John, and myself. Despite hailing from the same town and sharing the same familial roots, certain members of our family expressed reluctance to engage in daring endeavors, while others were enthusiastic about embracing such challenges. Hence, we can assert that this inclination to take risks extends beyond mere propensity; it encompasses factors beyond our innate disposition and reflects a complex interplay of various influences.
In our research, we have identified three key factors that contribute to the establishment of trust. These factors serve as reasons underlying our trust, and notably, they are closely tied to our perception of a company or an individual. The initial driver of trust is the individual's ability. This pertains to whether the person possesses the competence to fulfill their stated commitments and perform the tasks they claim to be capable of. Allow me to illustrate this with an example: Consider John, who is sporting an unshaven appearance and wearing a black helmet, exuding a confident aura as if he has prior experience in mountain jumping. Personally observing John, I found his attire and demeanor convincing, which led me to believe in his ability. In fact, when I inquired about his expertise, he affirmed that he has been engaged in this activity for two decades without incurring any injuries. Consequently, I became convinced that John indeed possesses the requisite ability. It is worth noting, however, that ability is context-dependent. While I may trust John's capability to engage in mountain jumping, I would not rely on him to repair my car engine, as he does not possess the appearance of someone proficient in that area. Therefore, the concept of ability is not universally applicable but rather specific to the particular task or responsibility that necessitates trust. To summarize, when determining whether to trust an individual, it is crucial to assess whether they can effectively accomplish what they claim to undertake, thus demonstrating their capability.
The second driver to be considered is benevolence: the genuine concern for others. Now let's discuss John once more. While I am aware of his ability to engage in daring activities such as mountain jumping, witnessing the paragliders spiraling down and observing the evident fear experienced by some individuals upon disembarking from the mountain, I began to question whether John's actions could potentially cause me considerable discomfort. Although I acknowledge that we would likely survive such an endeavor, I contemplated whether surviving would be a desirable outcome. Consequently, the key question arises: does John genuinely care about me? Surprisingly, during our conversations, I started to sense a connection forming between us. I began to believe that John did, in fact, have a genuine concern for my well-being. Now, let us explore an intriguing concept. If someone genuinely cares about me, their motives are not driven by egoistic gratification. Their care for my welfare is sincere and devoid of self-centered desires. To illustrate this, we can examine a few noteworthy examples. Abraham Lincoln, a renowned figure known for his empathetic nature, once expressed that alleviating the heartache of another person allows one to forget their own troubles. Lincoln genuinely cared about people. Similarly, Walt Whitman, a contemporary of Lincoln, often intermingled their names in their writings, emphasizing his belief in Lincoln's benevolence. Those who followed Lincoln recognized that his abilities were complemented by his genuine concern for their well-being. In stark contrast, consider individuals lacking benevolence, possessing only exceptional abilities. Such individuals resemble assassins, who possess considerable skill but lack genuine care for others. Caligula serves as an exemplar of this. Raised by his uncle, he coveted sole leadership in Rome and resorted to eliminating any competition, beginning with the murder of his own cousin. Furthermore, he depleted the National Treasury and even went so far as to include innocent spectators in the Coliseum to be devoured by wild animals when criminals were scarce. His lack of benevolence instilled fear in the hearts of those around him, rendering him wholly untrustworthy. Therefore, it becomes evident that the presence of both ability and benevolence is vital. Mere talent without genuine concern for others leads to a state of mistrust, as exemplified by figures like Caligula. On the other hand, individuals like Abraham Lincoln, who possess both exceptional ability and sincere care for others, gain the trust and admiration of those they interact with.
The driving forces behind an individual's willingness to take risks are their ability and benevolence. However, there yet exists a third crucial factor, namely integrity. Integrity encompasses having a well-defined set of values that are widely accepted by others. It involves living in accordance with those values and gaining the agreement of others regarding their importance. To illustrate this point, let us examine the case of Adolf Hitler. If one is familiar with the history of Adolf Hitler, they would know that he spent a brief period in jail during the 1930s. It was during this time that he wrote a book titled "Mein Kampf" (My Struggle), in which he outlined his value system and beliefs. While most of us would vehemently disagree with Hitler's values and belief system, it is important to acknowledge that his book was a best-seller in Nazi Germany. There were individuals who believed in his values and considered him to possess integrity, as he remained committed to living in accordance with his values. However, it is worth reiterating that we, as rational observers, would not place our trust in Hitler due to our fundamental disagreement with his values. Genuine integrity entails possessing a set of values, adhering to them consistently, and earning the trust and agreement of others. In other words, if one claims to be dependable, they must follow through on their commitments. If they profess honesty, their words and actions must reflect that virtue. Likewise, if they proclaim themselves to be trustworthy and courteous, they must consistently exhibit these traits. Such integrity is not motivated by egotism; rather, it is underpinned by authenticity. Hence, it is these three factors that ultimately drive trust. Thomas Moore, renowned for his integrity, is an exemplar in this regard. He famously stated that while we often speak of principles, true integrity is demonstrated when, despite adverse circumstances, we remain steadfast in our convictions rather than compromising them for personal convenience. Thomas Moore's unwavering commitment to his principles is evident in his story. If one visits the Tower of London, they will come across a small church tucked away in a corner, wherein lies Thomas Moore's burial site. He had the audacity to oppose the King of England because his values did not align with those of the monarch. While others succumbed to the pressure and adjusted their values to align with the king's, Thomas Moore resolutely clung to his own. He paid the ultimate price for his values and principles, sacrificing his life in the process. Thomas Moore was an individual whose commitment to his values was unwavering, and his actions were congruent with his professed beliefs. Therefore, he was a person in whom one could place their trust.
The fundamental factors that help to drive trust can be summarized as ability, benevolence, and integrity. It is crucial to acknowledge that these factors are subject to personal perception. The presence of John in this context warrants further attention, as I still have not yet concluded my discussion on the matter. As I had contemplated the possibility of leaping from the mountain, the concepts of ability, benevolence, and integrity occupied my thoughts. Eventually, I decide to take the leap of faith in the end, and it proved to be a gratifying experience. Surviving the jump led me to reflect on the significance of trust. I realized that if I did not have faith in John, if I did not believe in his trustworthiness, I might not have mustered the courage to jump. Equally important, my fiancée also took the leap with me, resulting in a remarkable shared experience. For many more of you seeking to enhance their relationships and minimize conflicts, it is thus vital to cultivate the perception of ability, benevolence, and integrity. By doing so, you can ensure that trust can be established, contributing to a more contented society. I express my gratitude for your attention, and your own trust in me.
See also: https://mygodsentangels.com/