EPISODE · Jun 12, 2023 · 1 MIN
163. Fool me once (Condition #12: trust)
from One Minute Governance · host Matt Fullbrook
OK I know this sounds kinda dumb but I Googled “trust definition” before writing this script. So here’s my class presentation on trust. Oxford Dictionary defines trust as a “firm belief in the reliability, truth, ability, or strength of someone or something.” In other words, it’s like the opposite of doubt. And one of the things I like about that definition is that we can imagine ourselves trusting someone’s reliability or ability, but doubting the truth of something they say. The fact that someone says something that doesn’t seem entirely believable to us doesn’t mean we lose faith in their character. And each of these intersecting qualities of trust exist basically everywhere in organizations, maybe even more so in boardrooms. Like, directors need to verify the accuracy of information that management brings to them – this is why boards often hire their own auditors and lawyers. Verification is one thing. But if we don’t *trust* management to bring us the truth, we have a whole nother problem. If we don’t have a firm belief in the reliability or ability of the directors around us, that’s an equally big problem. So, obviously, trust is an important input into decision-making. But one of the most common errors that I see in boardrooms and beyond is the assumption that if I don’t trust you, it’s a YOU problem. As in, I have no influence over the conditions that affect whether I trust you or not, or whether we collectively trust each other. Frankly, that’s a load of BS. If, for example, there’s a pattern of behaviour that’s affecting your trust level, what are the steps YOU can take to influence that pattern, respectfully?
What this episode covers
OK I know this sounds kinda dumb but I Googled “trust definition” before writing this script. So here’s my class presentation on trust. Oxford Dictionary defines trust as a “firm belief in the reliability, truth, ability, or strength of someone or something.” In other words, it’s like the opposite of doubt. And one of the things I like about that definition is that we can imagine ourselves trusting someone’s reliability or ability, but doubting the truth of something they say. The fact that someone says something that doesn’t seem entirely believable to us doesn’t mean we lose faith in their character. And each of these intersecting qualities of trust exist basically everywhere in organizations, maybe even more so in boardrooms. Like, directors need to verify the accuracy of information that management brings to them – this is why boards often hire their own auditors and lawyers. Verification is one thing. But if we don’t *trust* management to bring us the truth, we have a whole nother problem. If we don’t have a firm belief in the reliability or ability of the directors around us, that’s an equally big problem. So, obviously, trust is an important input into decision-making. But one of the most common errors that I see in boardrooms and beyond is the assumption that if I don’t trust you, it’s a YOU problem. As in, I have no influence over the conditions that affect whether I trust you or not, or whether we collectively trust each other. Frankly, that’s a load of BS. If, for example, there’s a pattern of behaviour that’s affecting your trust level, what are the steps YOU can take to influence that pattern, respectfully?
NOW PLAYING
163. Fool me once (Condition #12: trust)
No transcript for this episode yet
Similar Episodes
No similar episodes found.
Similar Podcasts
No similar podcasts found.