Archive

Archive for the ‘Behavior’ Category

Jun
30

Today we conclude our 2020 Trust Insights series. Should you ever choose to think about the role trust plays on your team or in your organization, start by answering the question “Trust to do what?” and then consider the following:

 

 

 

  • All leaders and their team members must take ownership and be proactive about trust. Trust must first be well defined, never taken for granted or only talked about after a crisis. More on this subject at this link.
  • Trust is an outcome of principled behavior on the part of all leaders and team members. Access our Trust Alliance Principles to learn more. The weakest behaviors break the trust chain.
  • Leadership effectiveness should be evaluated by the internal environment of trust that has been created and maintained. Learn how you can evaluate it.
  • Trust cannot be regulated or delegated to a “department.” Without shared values that foster a culture of trust, leaders defer to legal and compliance to enforce rules. Read “Trust: Going Beyond Compliance & Ethics.”
  • No organization is sustainable without a foundation of trust, and there are no shortcuts.
  • Trust in leadership and among teams cannot be measured by public opinion polls. Don’t confuse external “perception of trust” surveys with internal surveys of trust.
  • A company cannot create authentic brand trust without first building trust internally.
  • If you are a leader who is not willing to personally do the work to build trust, don’t talk about it as if you are. Read “Ten One Liners for the Low Trust Leader.”
  • The only way to build trust is to behave your way into it. Unfortunately there are no shortcuts to trust, and there are many work arounds.
  • Ignoring trust as an intentional business strategy presents enormous enterprise risk. The benefits of high trust are too numerous to ignore.

I hope you have enjoyed our 26-week Trust Insights series.

Before you leave, Tap Into Trust and complete our 1 minute/1 question quiz. Find out how the level of trust in your workplace compares to over 500 others. 

Have you reviewed how our workshops are helping teams and organizations just like yours elevate trust? Schedule an ONLINE webinar today.

Did you miss our previous 2020 Trust Insights? Access them at this link.

Contact us for more information on elevating trust on your team or in your organization or email me directly:

Copyright 2020, Next Decade, Inc.

, , , , , , ,

Jun
16

Given the right tools, trust can be measured. Barbara Brooks Kimmel

For decades, the external advisors to senior business leaders have counseled them to measure and evaluate every action according to return on investment. In recent years, box checking has become increasingly popular as well. Have you met your quota for women on boards? Are you decreasing your carbon footprint? Diversity and inclusion? Check. Advisory firms love to build new boxes to keep themselves in business. Last year’s box was “Purpose” and this year it is ESG. Imagine the year that the “trust” box becomes the box of choice. If you need proof that a business case for trust exists, please request it by sending an email to: info@trustacrossamerica.com

The following is a simple starting point to measure whether your employees trust you and trust each other. Ask them to count the behaviors below that are present in your organization.

  • High energy, motivation and engagement
  • Easy to hire and onboard new employees
  • Fun and laughter
  • High confidence, creativity and risk taking
  • Thriving innovation and productivity
  • Team alignment, sharing of information and credit, and quick forgiveness
  • Accountability and transparency as the norm
  • Willingness to be vulnerable and open, speak freely, and to listen
  • Positive team-building behaviors including gratitude, empathy and candor
  • A strong sense of “community” and shared values

Now ask them to identify how many of the following are present.  

  • Low energy, low productivity and burnout
  • High employee turnover and excessive use of sick days
  • Difficulty recruiting new employees
  • Too much focus on risk, rules and regulations 
  • Low innovation
  • No sharing of information and resistance to ideas
  • Lack of respect and passive/aggressive behavior
  • Resignation and cynicism
  • Finger-pointing, water cooler talk and lots of judgment
  • Cordial hypocrisy

Subtract the second number from the first to arrive at your trust baseline score.

Let’s say hypothetically your employees identify 5 positive trust behaviors and 5 negative. (5-5=0). Your trust score is zero. Don’t expect much employee engagement, innovation or risk taking.

Or your employees identify 8 positive behaviors from the first list and 2 negative from the second (8-2=6). Six is better than zero.

Or 2 posItive and 8 negative (2-8= -6). Not a place ANYONE wants to work. (And that “trust” box certainly can’t be checked.)

Our AIM Towards Trust survey tool has been used in dozens of teams and organizations to measure trust, start the trust discussion and fix what’s broken. The proactive and ethical business leaders who have adopted these tools can now check that trust box with confidence.

Before you leave, Tap Into Trust and complete our 1 minute/1 question quiz. Find out how the level of trust in your workplace compares to 500 others. 

Have you reviewed how our workshops are helping teams and organizations just like yours elevate trust? Schedule an ONLINE webinar today.

Did you miss our previous 2020 Trust Insights? Access them at this link.

Contact us for more information on elevating trust on your team or in your organization or email me directly:

Copyright 2020, Next Decade, Inc.

, , , , , ,

Jun
09

Building trust in policing requires both trustworthy and collaborative community leadership and teamwork.  Barbara Brooks Kimmel

Police chiefs are not solely responsible for building trust with their communities. They are part of a team.  Just like a large corporation, the police department represents only one silo in the organization. They happen to also be the group subject to the most community exposure. In other words, it’s harder for the police department to hide behind a veil of secrecy, especially in cases involving misconduct, as we have recently witnessed. If you believe in the saying “The fish rots from the head,” you would be hard pressed to find an untrustworthy police chief working as part of a well-functioning team alongside a trustworthy mayor.

The following is taken from a recently updated report written by Trust Across America called Building Trust in Community Leadership, and originally published in 2013. It provides insights from top subject matter experts with whom we have worked over the years.

At a minimum….

The following are quick guiding principles in building and maintaining trust for community leaders:

Mayor

Public confidence in the integrity of elected officials is the cornerstone of our democratic representative system of governance.  As the highest-ranking elected official of its municipal town or city, the Office of the Mayor is charged with the trust, wellbeing, security, and prosperity of its citizens and community.  The Office of the Mayor should perform its responsibilities with the highest sense of ethical leadership, integrity and competence.  Each Mayor’s Office should develop, implement and monitor a set of Guiding Principles of Integrity that is tailored to its unique mandate and responsibilities. Donna C. Boehme, Compliance Strategists

(This short news clip provides a timely example of a Mayor who is talking about fortifying trust between community, police and local government.) Thanks Mayor Terry Short!

Town Manager

Today more than half of U.S. cities with a population of more than 10,000—and an increasing number of counties—are run by a combination of appointed professional administrators and elected officials. 

Trust is both the foundation and result of ethical leadership, and the manager must seek to create trust between himself and (1) the municipal employees, (2) his elected board, and (3) the community.  He can only do this one-day at a time as he sets examples for all other employees to follow, and public policy for the elected board to adopt.  His decisions on hiring, promotions, municipal services, and public policy must begin with transparency, and reflect his unbiased opinions on how municipalities provide public services to its citizens. David L. Woglom, Lafayette College

Chief of Police

An trustworthy policing leader creates and maintains a comprehensive values-based risk-management program that:

    1. Is based on clear, practical, effective and fair policies and practices to identify, prevent and detect illegal, unethical and unprofessional conduct.
    2. Assures that, if improper conduct occurs, prompt and appropriate remedial actions are taken to prevent future misconduct and to protect and enhance the agency’s credibility and reputation.   Michael Josephson, Josephson Institute

Head of Emergency Management

In emergency management the single most important issue that comes up again and again is the need for individual relationships to be in place before there is a disaster.  The criticality of these personal connections cannot be over emphasized.  One illustrative mantra that is shared is this, “If you see people exchanging business cards at the scene of an incident; you know it won’t go well.”

In reality while it sounds like relationships are key, the real shortfall that dooms projects, programs and regional efforts is a lack of trust between the individual players.  Trust then is the ultimate goal and how you get there is a critical path to be followed.  Eric Holdeman, Eric Holdeman & Associates

Superintendent of Schools

Few would argue that our education system must transform if we are to truly serve the needs of our students into the future. Now more than ever, the foundation for an educational leader’s strength comes from their trustworthiness and their ability to build trust among others.  Trust is no longer assumed based on position and credentials, but rather must be built based on the quality of relationships.  This requires a shift in leadership approach from one of command and control to one of collaboration.  Susan Mazza

To obtain a copy of the complete 17- page report including trust-building action plans for the job functions mentioned above, as well as other community leaders, please click here.

Before you leave, Tap Into Trust and complete our 1 minute/1 question quiz. Find out how the level of trust in your workplace compares to hundreds of others. 

Have you reviewed how our workshops are helping teams and organizations just like yours elevate trust? Schedule an ONLINE webinar today.

Did you miss our previous 2020 Trust Insights? Access them at this link.

Contact us for more information on elevating trust on your team or in your organization or email me directly:

Copyright 2020, Next Decade, Inc.

, , , ,

Jun
02

With the right mindset (and tools) leaders can build trust in a new work environment.

Barbara Brooks Kimmel

Over the past few months, members of our Trust Alliance have participated in a series of Lunch & Learns. Our global membership crosses every organizational silo and we rarely view organizational trust through the same lens. Sharing our cultural perspectives and trust expertise has elevated our understanding of the nuances of this increasingly relevant and timely topic.

Working from home is just one of many “new” realities facing business leaders during this pandemic. These realities have exposed the lack of leadership acknowledgement of the role trust plays in organizational success. Now more than ever leaders MUST develop intentional trust-building strategies that are internally driven.

So once again, we reached out to our Alliance members, asking for their perspective on the trust challenges leaders should be addressing right now, and any examples of those who are stepping up to meet them.

Leaders Must Extend Trust to their Employees

According to David Belden, one of the most transformational aspects of the pandemic is the transition of the workforce to remote functioning. In working with over 400 companies for the past 22 years, the major hindrance in this transformation has been a lack of trust from leadership towards employees. Companies have traditionally felt that if they could not directly monitor their workforce, the work would not get done.

The current crisis has forced a change in that view. The results have been nothing less than astounding. In recent surveys, over 70%  reported that, given the choice, they would continue to work remotely. Concurrently, companies are reporting an unexpected increase in productivity.

 There are two critical aspects for a successful transition to remote work:

  1. Absolute clarity regarding the expected outcome. The focus has to be on outcome/results rather than hours worked.
  2. Line of sight on the part of the employee between the goal of the company and his or her personal contribution in attaining that goal.

When these two prerequisites are met, the company has to trust that the employee will fulfill their agreed upon duties. The employee must trust that the company will act in the best interests of all of the stakeholders, particularly the employees. Without mutual trust, this new arrangement will not succeed.

Trustworthiness is a 2-way street with the leader and the team adds Kevin McCarthy. COVID19 is a tough shift in every aspect of our lives and lifestyles. Such times reveal us–particularly our varying personal health conditions, risk profiles and preferences.  Leaders who acknowledge and respect these differences may honor them by providing team members, where practical, a transitional period to continue to work from home or return to the workplace as each person sees fit. Likewise, willing, but financially disincentivized,  team members drawing unemployment compensation greater than or equal to their pay can do their civic duty by returning to the workforce for the common good of their co-workers, company, and country.

Elevating Trust Requires Acknowledging Uncertainty

Bart Alexander reminds leaders that crises often result in debilitating uncertainty.  By saying “It’s too early, we just don’t know,” organizations reinforce collective and individual stress, even panic.  Companies can translate uncertainty into manageable  risk by openly sharing their best judgement, as in, “This is the worst case, this is the best case, and this is the most likely case, and if anything changes, you’ll be the first to know.”  Adding the probability of each scenario will help all to be on the same page and begin to prepare.  Open solicitation of ideas on how to best adapt further engages the entire organization into a shared future.

And Lea Brovedani supports these sentiments and provides an example. Leaders should be acknowledging uncertainty and showing their own humanity. They should tell what they know, what they don’t know and still take action. At this time, they need to model the duality of feeling uncertain and showing how to keep moving forward.

The first business leader that comes to mind is Satya Nadella, Microsoft’s chief executive who instructed people to work from home well before most other companies. He acknowledged feeling uncertain and worried, talking about his son who has cerebral palsy and the worries he and his wife have.

Here is a quote from an article written in the Seattle Times:

Nadella gave the interview shortly before releasing a lengthy email to his more than 140,000 employees worldwide, applauding them for their response to the pandemic and urging them to do the best they can to help others on a personal and professional level...

Nadella said in his email that Microsoft is in a position to help slow the pandemic by demonstrating leadership in the face of adversity and maximizing the company’s biggest strength — bringing people, ideas and solutions together quickly through tech. He mentioned the company’s work to bring “trusted news and facts” about COVID-19 to LinkedIn members and on Bing, while working with Facebook, Google and Twitter to bring “authoritative content” to those platforms and “combat fraud and misinformation about the virus.

Trust Will be Predicated on Employee Engagement

Ben Boyd recently wrote an article called “The COVID case for stakeholder capitalism – and the elevated role of corporate communications.” He had this to say about employees and the future of engagement. Employees have shown incredible resiliency, enduring extraordinary and ongoing change. Their continued engagement and commitment are critical to meeting the future needs and demands of the business; however, their expectations have changed over these past four months. Developing programs to engage, motivate, reassure and rebuild an organization’s workforce must be a top priority. Key questions to consider are: How will you address employees’ most basic needs related to personal safety and company hygiene? Moving toward the “next normal,” how will you assess employees’ evolving needs and expectations to ensure your leaders are authentically and empathetically connecting with the workforce?    

And finally my thoughts. Business leaders have many tough decisions ahead of them. Hopefully they also have the skill set to engage their employees to help make them. Our current climate of fear has revealed just how much leaders in all societal institutions have taken trust for granted.  In business, not only do employees fear for their physical and emotional safety, but also for the future of their jobs. In other words, they don’t trust their employers to keep them safe. Perhaps it’s the emotional element of trust (some call it benevolence) that are even more critical now in allaying those fears. Hard skills like leadership competence are no longer sufficient. In fact, they haven’t ever been. Emotional intelligence, an ethical mindset and empathy are the “soft” skills that build trust. Who returns to work and how to manage social distancing are the easy problems, and the ones that most C-Suite advisors will tackle first. They will also be the ones that are promoted in stakeholder communications. And if the emotional elements that have created the “fear” are not  given equal weight, then we will simply return to the pre pandemic levels of low employee engagement and increasingly challenging mental health issues, while sitting six feet apart.  Those “hard” decisions are the ones that will continue to separate authentic trustworthy leaders from all others. For the rest, it will be business as “usual” with a few minor and inconvenient adjustments that are the easiest to communicate.

 

Before you leave, Tap Into Trust and complete our 1 minute/1 question quiz. Find out how the level of trust in your workplace compares to hundreds of others. 

Have you reviewed how our workshops are helping teams and organizations just like yours elevate trust? Schedule an ONLINE webinar today.

Did you miss our previous 2020 Trust Insights? Access them at this link.

Contact us for more information on elevating trust on your team or in your organization or email me directly:

Copyright 2020, Next Decade, Inc.

, , , , , ,

May
26

Leadership ultimately comes down to creating conditions of trust within an organization.

Colin Powell

 

 

 

In honor of Memorial Day, this week’s Trust Insight comes courtesy of Colin Powell. During this brief and concise video, Powell discusses the role trust plays in leadership:

Powell’s timeless “rules” of leadership were first printed in the August 13, 1989 issue of Parade magazine and are reproduced below.

13 Rules of Leadership

  1. It ain’t as bad as you think.
  2. Get mad, then get over it.
  3. Avoid having your ego so close to your position that when your position falls, your ego goes with it.
  4. It can be done.
  5. Be careful what you choose. You may get it.
  6. Don’t let adverse facts stand in the way of a good decision.
  7. You can’t make someone else’s choices.
  8. Check small things.
  9. Share credit.
  10. Remain calm. Be kind.
  11. Have a vision.
  12. Don’t take counsel of your fears or naysayers.
  13. Perpetual optimism is a force multiplier.

 

Please stop by our website for additional organizational trust resources, or schedule a call to learn how we can help elevate trust in your leadership team and among employees in your organization.

Did you know that over 137,000 global professionals have Tapped into Trust? Have you?

 

Copyright 2020, Next Decade, Inc.

 

 

, , , , , ,

May
19

If you don’t own trust, don’t expect others to own it either. Barbara Brooks Kimmel

 

 

 

 

I was recently asked to lend a bit of trust subject matter expertise at a webinar hosted by Navex Global. Several polls were conducted during the program. In the chart below, 420 respondents selected who they thought had primary responsibility for organizational trust.

Do you agree?

 

 

If you would like to learn more about who owns trust, please click on this recent Human Synergistics/ Culture University article, Creating a High Trust Culture: Who is Responsible?

Please stop by our website for additional resources, or schedule a call to learn how we can help elevate trust in your leadership team and among employees in your organization.

Did you know that over 136,000 global professionals have Tapped into Trust? Have you?

 

Copyright 2020, Next Decade, Inc.

 

 

, , , , ,

May
05


Robert, thank you for participating in our 2020 Trust Insights series. What is your trust insight?

“Trust is not a message; it’s an outcome – and trust may not even be the real issue.” Robert Phillips

 

 

 

Can you expand a bit on this timely insight?

For way too long, “trust” has been hijacked by communications consultancies and strategy firms, who see/ position the trust “issue” and how to address it as a function of what the organisations says, rather than what it does. They sell strategies and programmes accordingly.  Together with reliance on some dodgy data, this leads to a bogus and corrosive narrative around trust: often creating a false sense of (global) crisis. This masks more profound issues and challenges and many cultural and political nuances.

Organisations would do better by focusing on their own behaviours and on the real issues (including the climate emergency and tech disruption) that lead to better outcomes for employees, customers and stakeholders. Furthermore, trustworthiness is a more relevant construct than “trust”. Trustworthiness is a function of Honesty + Competence + Reliability + Good. It is undermined by self-interest, especially where such self-interest is not transparently declared.

 

Can you provide a real life example of a trust “challenge” where your insight has been effectively applied.

The Global Responsible Tax Project curated by Jericho Chambers for KPMG, has been running since 2014. Based on organising principles of activism, participation, accountability and dissent, it now hosts a community of 1700 experts, built peer-to-peer, from the Global North to Global South and across the political spectrum – including corporate leaders; advisors; politicians and policy-makers; activists, NGOs and campaigners; academics and experts; media and the commentariart. This global coalition has worked together to develop new policy ideas and recommendations – leading to more trust between all parties and better policy outcomes for the common good. It’s starting point was that any solution to global tax problems were better served by addressing the purpose of tax, than communications and lobbying around the issues, and that no-one has all the answers. Tax is trust, write large – as this article brings to life.

 

Generally, do you think the global “trust” climate is improving or worsening? What actions are making it better or worse?

IpsosMORI long-term veracity data would suggest that trust remains in a chronic condition. The so-called “crisis of trust” masks a more profound crisis of leadership – in business and in politics. A failure to address the leadership issue will only prolong and never resolve the current condition.

 

Many claim we have a crisis of trust. Do you agree?

No, although a recognition of the chronic condition (see above) is important, as is a determination to do something about it.

 

Robert, thank you so much for your time and more importantly for your commitment to elevating organizational trust. What would you like our audience to know about you?

Robert has been at the forefront of the UK Public Relations industry for three decades. His expert area is the relationship between communications, leadership and trust. 

Robert’s 2015 book Trust Me, PR is Dead was heralded by Management Today as “a game-changer for the future of communications”. His often-outspoken views have been described as “essential for anyone who wants to influence and persuade in the mid-21st century”. Since 2014, Robert has helped build coalitions across business, government and civil society on subjects ranging from Responsible Tax to the Future of Work; Adult Social Care to the Future of Transport; Infrastructure and Housing to the Built Environment. Robert advocates new operating principles based on activism, accountability, co-production and dissent.

Robert is Founder of Jericho Chambers and Visiting Professor at Cass Business School, City, University of London. He was formerly CEO, Europe, Middle East & Africa for Edelman – the world’s largest Public Relations firm – and Global Chair of its Future Strategies & Public Engagement Group. He co-founded JCPR in 1987 – described by PR Week as “the seminal consumer brands consultancy of the Nineties and Noughties” – which he sold to Edelman in 2004. Two of Robert’s campaigns, for Wonderbra and PlayStation, were included in the Top 20 PR Campaigns of All Time.

 

Before you leave, Tap Into Trust and complete our 1 minute/1 question quiz. Find out how the level of trust in your workplace compares to hundreds of others. 

Have you reviewed how our workshops are helping teams and organizations just like yours elevate trust? Schedule an ONLINE webinar today.

Did you miss our previous 2020 Trust Insights? Access them at this link.

Contact us for more information on elevating trust on your team or in your organization or email me directly: barbara@trustacrossamerica.com

Copyright 2020, Next Decade, Inc.

, , , , , , , ,

Apr
28

This week’s Trust Insights welcomes our Trust Council members who joined us in addressing the following question:

Is the Apple/Google Contact Tracing Plan Worthy of our Trust?

by Barbara Brooks Kimmel, Founder Trust Across America-Trust Around the World

 

During these trying times, Apple and Google claim to have temporarily placed their corporate competitiveness on hold to begin collaborating on at least one very large data project. It’s called contact tracing, “the process of tracking down the people with whom infected patients have interacted, and making sure they get tested or go into quarantine’ according to this recent NPR article. The Apple/Google “alliance” will expand the reach of existing contract tracing capabilities. This initiative has raised many questions and multiple collective eyebrows, not only for our trust and ethics subject matter expert community, but also for the general public, and for good reasons. For example:

  • Why should the public now trust the tech giants with their data when these companies have not proven themselves trustworthy in the past?
  • Should all trust concerns be set aside in the interest of global health? 

Who better to ask than Trust Across America’s  Trust Council? Our council is comprised of senior members of our Trust Alliance who are some of the world’s leading trust subject matter experts.

What we already know about trusting the tech giants

Bart Alexander shared a quick retrospective on the state of tech’s visibility into our private lives: 

Providers such as Apple and Google already have comprehensive information about our location.  Even with location services (GPS) off, they have visibility into the relative strength of every wifi signal and cell signal. From years of collection including through  Google’s fleet of Street View cars, they can correlate that triangulated location with GPS.  With other data bases, they can determine if we are at home, at a shop or even a medical facility.  Google recently reached a $13 million settlement on the use of Street View cars for MAC address collection that goes back a decade.  This kind of information is used for target marketing to the public.  To now add a permission marketing app to supplement with Bluetooth technology is a rather minor addition to the existing privacy concerns, and at least has a public health purpose.

Natalie Doyle Oldfield who spent twenty years working in IT before turning her attention to organizational trust, added a bit more historical perspective:

As history has shown, wars vastly expand governments’ powers to regulate, to collect data and introduce new measures.  For example, income tax was introduced as a war time measures act in the interest of public welfare.  At the same time, strict policies to protect personal income data were enacted. Census taking provides another historical example of data collection.

Banks, health care professionals, lawyers, accountants and other professionals must follow established confidentiality rules and codes of ethics to keep our personal data secure and private. For the most part, the regulatory bodies have put safeguards in place to ensure these professions do not abuse our privacy.  And if they do, there are repercussions. Medical professionals can lose their licenses to practice and lawyers can be disbarred. 

The question is will “Big Tech” demonstrate that they too not only can but WILL voluntarily meet the highest ethical standards? Can they provide sound answers to the following questions: Specifically, what data will be collected and who will have access to it?   Are we committing to practicing privacy and security by design? What about HIPAA certification? Will we do what’s ethical and in the public’s best privacy interests,  or only what’s regulated, understanding that tech regulations are lagging far behind other industries like finance and health care.

Personal Trust vs. Societal Health

Charlie Green’s response is one of “Roll the dice trust.”

Personal trust inevitably comes in conflict with tech privacy and security concerns. After all, the height of privacy and security tech models are called “zero trust” for a reason. Because it has nothing to do with personal trust.

I think the trust issue in this case is that we need to trust Apple and Google and each other, adding some clear transparency bumpers, to do something potentially tremendously positive in the face of a pandemic.

Randy Conley sits in the camp of “cautious optimism.”

I think technology can play a tremendously helpful role in public health or disaster management situations like this, AND, we have to be cognizant of the personal privacy issues involved. I believe South Korea has leveraged personal technology to a large degree in their successful management of the COVID-19 virus. The reality is that we live with an illusion of privacy. Despite our safeguards, we don’t have as much privacy as we think we do. If nefarious actors in Big Tech or any skilled hacker wants information on us, they can get it.

Linda Fisher Thornton considers the trade offs:

“The challenge we face is balancing the benefits of surveillance during the COVID-19 pandemic, which potentially includes saving lives, with the costs in terms of the loss of privacy and autonomy. The surveillance approach puts the safety of the masses ahead of the privacy and autonomy of individuals  For surveillance to be effective, a strong majority will need to allow access to their location and health status data. To convince them to do that, tech companies will need to demonstrate trustworthy intentions, a clear plan, full disclosure, and implementation that includes privacy protections.” 

Bob Whipple adds that with the tech solutions, just remember that anything that is made by people can be hacked by other people.  So the potential of abuse in electronic tracing is immense.

Pandemics Aside, Trust is ALWAYS a Function of Leadership

Bob Vanourek, a former CEO of several large pubic companies reminds us that:

Good leaders go first in extending trust and scale up or down afterwards depending on the behavior of the other. 

This pandemic is a huge Black Swan (or perhaps a “known-unknown”) event that will change much of our world forever. Some would argue that using such tech will help save lives and is, therefore, worthwhile. Others will argue the privacy invasion issues are scary, and we can’t take a step down this potentially slippery slope.

Like many ethical issues, there are legitimate pros and cons on both sides of the argument. Should the government pass a law outlawing this technology and behavior? I think not. Should we blindly accept the tech companies to handle this without close scrutiny? I think not. 

Stephen M.R. Covey’s “smart trust” applies here alongside Jim Kouzes’ “go first” dictum. Let’s extend Google and Apple smart trust and closely monitor what they are doing, adjusting accordingly.

Wrapping up

Getting back to Bart Alexander:

In 1988, Shoshana Zuboff wrote “In the Age of the Smart Machine” that increasing automation can be used to empower or control us at work and beyond.  Even in that pre-internet era, the key moral issue of surveillance had emerged: for whom and for what purpose are we giving up our privacy?

I’ve argued (in the work I did for the U of Denver Institute for Enterprise Ethics) that these moral issues should not and cannot be resolved by engineers.  We need sociologists and ethicist to struggle with what otherwise are just technical problems to be overcome.  I would add that public health officials will always err on the side of protection versus personal freedoms, embodied in the precautionary principle.  They may often be right, but they and the software engineers’ solutions should not be without scrutiny.

Finally, as the Founder of Trust Across America- Trust Around the World, I’ll add my perspective. I do not believe that these two tech giants will receive adequate voluntary public buy-in to reach the scale they had hoped for. They simply haven’t earned the public trust required of such a large initiative. That being said, something tells me that Apple and Google already have all the technology and data they need to go forward, with or without permission, while other competing interests attempt to play catch up.

One member of our Trust Council shared this quote from the often controversial Winston Churchill: “In wartime, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies.”

Trust Across America-Trust Around the World, along with members of its Trust Alliance, offers both online and in-person workshops to help leaders, teams and organizations build their trust competency. These are some samples of recent engagements.

Catch up on our 2020 Trust Insights series at this link.

Barbara Brooks Kimmel is an award-winning communications executive and the CEO and Cofounder of Trust Across America-Trust Around the World whose mission is to help organizations build trust. Barbara has consulted with many Fortune 500 CEOs and their firms, and also runs the world’s largest global Trust Alliance . She is  the editor of the award-winning TRUST INC. book series and TRUST! Magazine.  Barbara holds a BA in International Affairs and an MBA.

Copyright 2020, Next Decade, Inc.

, , , , ,

Apr
26

 

According to these recent Gallup polls, American’s trust in government is at an all time low. The same can be said for American’s trust in media.

 

Two questions. If Americans don’t trust the government to handle problems, and they don’t trust mass media then:

  1. “Why are American’s placing trust in their elected officials to make the “right” decisions for them during this crisis?
  2. “Why are American’s now trusting the mass media to report the news fully, accurately and fairly?

What are your thoughts? What will be the “state of trust” in government and media when this crisis ends? 

Post your thoughts here or contact me directly at Barbara@trustacrossamerica.com 

 


, ,

Apr
21

While there are no shortcuts to trust, there are many work arounds.  Barbara Brooks Kimmel

In the words of Abraham Lincoln…. You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.

 

 

 

The same applies to trust. Perhaps now, more than ever, leaders have a responsibility to their stakeholders to stop treating trust like an outcast soft skill, and start approaching low trust as a high risk. Trust is an essential organizational competency with tangible value, just like any other.

How many of these shortcuts to trust have you participated in or taken?

  • Misdefining trust in a way that suits organizational leadership and its advisors. A few examples: brand trust, check the box sustainability/ESG, philanthropy, “feel good” CSR, and blockchain solutions are not trust. Neither is”purpose.”
  • Engaging a “feel good” speaker, rather than holding a trust competency workshop with a trust subject matter expert.
  • Paying to be designated as a “great workplace.”
  • Hiring additional legal and compliance professionals.
  • Creating a marketing campaign based on trust “talk” rather than action.

Unfortunately, not a single one of these costly “perception of trust” shortcuts will elevate trust.

Building a high trust organization is not difficult if trust is acknowledged as the outcome of principled behavior. It simply requires leadership buy-in, a solid trust-building framework, and a destination. High priced trust shortcuts might fool some of the people in the short-term, but in the long-term principled leaders build trust-based organizations from the inside out, not the outside in.

Trust Across America-Trust Around the World, along with members of its Trust Alliance, offers both online and in-person workshops to help leaders, teams and organizations build their trust competency. These are some samples of recent engagements.

Refer to the list of above and decide which you would rather do, build trust or work around it.

Barbara Brooks Kimmel is an award-winning communications executive and the CEO and Cofounder of Trust Across America-Trust Around the World whose mission is to help organizations build trust. Barbara has consulted with many Fortune 500 CEOs and their firms, and also runs the world’s largest global Trust Alliance . She is  the editor of the award-winning TRUST INC. book series and TRUST! Magazine.  Barbara holds a BA in International Affairs and an MBA.

Copyright 2020, Next Decade, Inc.

, ,