On our ‘Engaging People Powering Companies’ podcast this week, Amrit shares some findings from the Institute of Leadership’s report ‘The Index of Leadership Trust 2023’.

We talk about trust a lot; with each other and with our clients, in our workshops, and when we are undertaking cultural diagnostics and surveys. We talk about it because it is widely accepted (academically, scientifically and in all the ways), that trust matters.

Disappointing then, that the report states that for line managers, the overall Trust rating was 67% which was a drop from the 71% in the 2018 report. Perhaps hardly surprising considering the few years we have had. CEO’s have a lower rating at 62% and while this has seen an increase since 2018 (58%), it's still trailing behind the Trust rating of the line manager. In fact, in all the determinates of Trust (capability, understanding, openness, fairness, integrity, consistency) the CEO scores lower than the line manager.

Accessibility is the only determinate that is measured just for a CEO, and it scores 5 (out of 10) which is lower than any other score. Maybe this goes part way to explaining why the other scores are so low. Smaller organisations (less than 50 employees) have a higher Trust rating for their CEO’s at 69.5% and senior manager’s or board member’s scored on average 4 points higher in the Trust rating for their CEO, so accessibility is important. Afterall if you don’t see someone how do you know if you can trust them?

All this got Amrit and I thinking, what are CEO’s acting to achieve? As in, when they are taking action, what are they acting on? For what purpose? Maybe you can relate to only ever really seeing or hearing those at the top, when there was big action to be taken, usually around efficiency and cost cutting. And, even if we didn’t see them, we knew (assumed) that this is where those instructions came from. Unlike actions focused on driving efficiency and cost-cutting, we were never quite so sure though, of their involvement when it came to action around engagement. I know this is a generalisation. Please forgive me, I grew up in my career, seeing much of this, with an organisation ticking all the boxes they needed to tick. The ‘fluffy’ stuff didn’t seem to generate as much excitement as a good old restructure, or redundancy drive.

Don’t get me wrong, there were amazing people doing their best to make sure that the messages and actions were delivered as compassionately as possible, or that the insights were acted upon and bought to life for people - and it was appreciated, but perhaps it helped grow that distrust gap between the front line and the top. ‘Them’ up there, and ‘us’ down here. They don’t know ‘us’, but can make our lives harder at the drop of a hat, and we don’t know, or trust ‘them’ to do the right thing because we don’t see them in the way we need to; to have an opportunity to build trust.

I do know that the job and responsibility of those on the front line, (in the trenches as it was known, and if language shapes culture it’s important!), and that of the senior leaders and CEOs are fundamentally different. And I do believe that this is respected and acknowledged. You can’t get away from the fact though, that everything is relational, and people need to know that they matter, and they are cared for. And they want to know that those who hold the reigns, care, and know that they (we) matter. 

Rachel Botsman, has written two books on trust (‘Who Can You Trust’ & ‘What’s Mine is Yours’), shared 3 TED talks, and created Oxford University’s first course on trust in the digital world. She encourages organisations to make decisions through a trust lens rather than a money lens, and says that it is not until you have lost all trust, that it becomes apparent that this is where you needed to start from in the first place. Afterall, without trust how can we expect people to move from a known situation to the unknown? You might drag them kicking and screaming, but wouldn’t it be better if they trusted, that despite the fear and uncertainty of change when it hits, they will be cared for and that they matter?

Botsman also suggests that trust is not built but given, and leaders must earn it. The best way to do this? By focusing on traits or ingredients of trustworthiness which determine the ‘how’ you do things (competently and reliably), and the ‘why’ you do things (with empathy and integrity). Out of all that, the most important ingredient? Integrity. Integrity is about alignment. As a leader, do my words and actions match up, and are my intentions aligned with the good of the organisation and its people. So, a leader can earn trust through acting with integrity, through consistent actions over time.

We have come a long way since the 80’s. We can now talk about trust and care in the workplace. We are learning about our humanness and our needs, and there are plenty of people committed to researching and sharing the latest insights about how we can all be happier and human-er(!) at work, and therefore more productive. It is a win-win. How then can we demonstrate care, with integrity? Demonstrate it and really mean it?

I guess that is about listening. Caring enough to listen closely and find out what will make the biggest differences to the people we work with. If those that lead our businesses can make it their business to learn and take note of what their people need to feel cared for, and to feel like they matter and then act upon it, how can trust not grow? It seems inevitable doesn’t it...

Listen to the podcast here.