Below is a letter which I wrote to Financial Review Magazine in relation to one of their articles posted on 2nd October.
I'm responding to a couple of pieces in Friday 2nd October's paper, namely 'A matter of complete trust shattered' and 'Compliance focus can stunt value', both of which are all about trust. On one hand we have a number of people who have blindly trusted and have had that trust betrayed, and on the other we have corporate boards who are blind to the fact that trust is the ultimate power source, and a loss of it their ultimate risk.
To those poor people who trusted Bradfield, my heart goes out to you. One of the things that you need to understand is the difference between liking someone and trusting them. Too many times we confuse the two and end up trusting someone we shouldn't have - they might be a nice person, but they were the wrong person to trust. You need to recognise that trusting someone is all about your ability to rely on them to deliver on your Expectations, your Needs and keep the Promises they made to you (what I call ENPs®). There are always warning signs when trust starts to break down, just as many of you reported (eg. information not to hand when they asked for it, Promised returns a little too good to be true). Sadly, you failed to listen to the warning signs until it's too late and your trust has been broken.
To directors on corporate boards, your focus right now should be on making sure your stakeholders can trust your organisation. What we have seen through the recent financial crisis is a lot of people being drawn to organisations that Promise big returns and big bonuses, but when the Expectations and Needs are not met, and when the Promises are not kept, everyone jumps. The financial crisis is, in fact, a TRUST crisis. It's not a debate about whether compliance is in or out, or a focus on business performance is in or out - the organisations that come out of this stronger and with a sustainable business model to move forward are those who focus on restoring trust with those shareholders, employees and customers who are right now feeling betrayed and broken.
Vanessa Hall - 'The Trust Lady'
Sydney NSW
This blog has moved to truthabouttrust.blogspot.com.au and covers a huge range of aspects of trust - from trust in organisations, trust in families and trust in communities. Come and join me there :)
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Friday, October 2, 2009
What is Fear? An abscence of trust
This is a question that I found from the LinkedIn Group 'The Philosophy Network'
What is Fear? What causes fear and how do we overcome it?
Fear is an abscence of trust.
That is, if trust is our ability to rely on a person (or people), an organisation, or a product or service to deliver a specific outcome (my definition of trust), and that specific outcome for all of us is that we want our Expectations met or managed, our Needs met and the Promises made to us kept (what I call ENPs in my books and work), then fear is an INABILITY to rely on the same.
Where there is fear, there is a sense that my Expectations will not be met (or I don't know what to Expect), my Needs will not be met, and the Promises made to me will not be kept.
Because our trust is fragile, and I represent it as an egg (it can break that easily), we fear placing our fragile trust in something that may, or is likely, to cause it to break.
It is actually a very good warning sign that either the person, organisation or product/service is not right for you to trust, or that you have negative Expectations or are seeking to have too many Needs satisfied from one source.
What is Fear? What causes fear and how do we overcome it?
Fear is an abscence of trust.
That is, if trust is our ability to rely on a person (or people), an organisation, or a product or service to deliver a specific outcome (my definition of trust), and that specific outcome for all of us is that we want our Expectations met or managed, our Needs met and the Promises made to us kept (what I call ENPs in my books and work), then fear is an INABILITY to rely on the same.
Where there is fear, there is a sense that my Expectations will not be met (or I don't know what to Expect), my Needs will not be met, and the Promises made to me will not be kept.
Because our trust is fragile, and I represent it as an egg (it can break that easily), we fear placing our fragile trust in something that may, or is likely, to cause it to break.
It is actually a very good warning sign that either the person, organisation or product/service is not right for you to trust, or that you have negative Expectations or are seeking to have too many Needs satisfied from one source.
Thursday, October 1, 2009
University studies say employers can break promises - I don't think so!
Below is an article I came accross on LinkedIn, ofcourse with the article being about trust and not agreeing with what it said I commented back.
Break promises if you like but treat your workers well..
Promises are made to be broken – especially if you're the boss. Workers don't care so much about whether their employers deliver on specific promises, according to the latest research in organisational psychology. What matters most are the rewards and opportunities they end up getting, even if they were initially promised more.
Most psychologists have assumed that broken promises in the workplace spell serious discontent. But previous studies have tended to record workers' perceptions about such breaches, without determining what promises were actually made.
To disentangle perception from reality, Samantha Montes and David Zweig of the University of Toronto in Canada began by asking students to put themselves in the shoes of hypothetical job candidates.
Half the students were informed that the recruiter made seven specific promises – about bonuses, training, support with personal problems, and so on – while half were not. Then the students read about what had happened to the imaginary employees three years down the line, when the employer had delivered all seven inducements, five or them, or just three.
More than 550 students clearly understood the scenarios described, yet their perceptions of the situations were influenced more by the number of inducements given than by whether any specific promises had been made.
My Response
I read this article with interest, which quickly turned into concern. I believe these kinds of studies and their results have the potential to continue down the spiral of broken trust in a workforce that is already suffering. We are already seeing some of the lowest levels of trust in business around the world, so we certainly don’t need people believing it’s OK to break promises and contribute to that downward spiral.
Let me explain why I disagree with these findings and the subsequent statements:
1. Promises only matter to people if they match the Expectations and the Needs of the individual. We are all drawn to people who actually make Promises that meet our Expectations and Needs, and it is on the combination of those 3 things, what I call ENPs®, that we place our trust in others. Employers will often make general Promises in job ads and interviews that may not matter to some employees but will extremely matter to others. Some specific Promises made to one employee will absolutely matter and they will be drawn to them, other Promises will not matter at all and will frankly just go straight over their heads.
Example: If an employee is Expecting regular ‘on the job’ and external training, which fulfils a strong Need for Self Actualisation and constant learning, and they are Promised regular training, they will be very much drawn to that job, and will react negatively if that training is not delivered. It will be one broken Promise that could completely destroy that employees’ trust in their manager and the organisation.
However, if that same Employee was Promised a bonus, and they are not motivated by Safety and Security and money is not a major driver for them, they will still Expect it because it was Promised, but they do not Need it to any great degree. Therefore a broken Promise about a specific bonus will not bother them, they’ll be happy with whatever they receive – as long as they still get their training!
2. Most people will adjust their Expectations based on what they see going on inside or outside an organisation – difficult times, a downturn, a frugal manager, will all impact employees’ Expectations about the likelihood of initial Promises actually being met. We all adjust our Expectations subconsciously to protect our trust. This is, in fact, how most of us cope with politicians. We Expect that many of the things they Promise will not be delivered to the extent that they Promised, so we still maintain a sense of trust, provided our basic Needs are met.
3. If half-Promises are delivered and meet the lowered Expectations, employees will generally accept those if, and ONLY if, they still feel their Needs have been met.
What does this mean for employers? All employers must:
1. Understand the Expectations and Needs of their employees
2. Only make Promises that they are confident they can deliver
3. If Promises are made in good faith and things change, communicate the changes to employees – ie manage their Expectations
4. Be aware that those Promises made to employees where there is a distinct link between the Promise, the Expectation and the Need must be met, and if not, the trust will break down
5. Understand that you cannot make assumptions about what employees want
6. Know that only Promising and delivering ‘good conditions and rewards’ as Montes suggests will satisfy some employees, but definitely not all, and is a dangerous position to take for an employer that wants good performance and aims to be an employer of choice
7. Decide if they want to be a trusted organisation or not. There is no middle ground, and if organisations are not aware of how trust is being built or broken down, chances are they are breaking it down on a daily basis and are, right now, suffering the consequences of that breakdown.
If you agree with me, please feel free to follow this link and voice your oppinion:
http://www.linkedin.com/newsArticle?viewDiscussion=&articleID=69598386&anetScope=2139318&report%2Esuccess=PdmtybENV2mnc3t3p8JpWuFiB1ZhaD9OnKUphCsu7LRNRYTOK1wrHHO_rcDN0rVBb1wuxUyPL-SZ
Break promises if you like but treat your workers well..
Promises are made to be broken – especially if you're the boss. Workers don't care so much about whether their employers deliver on specific promises, according to the latest research in organisational psychology. What matters most are the rewards and opportunities they end up getting, even if they were initially promised more.
Most psychologists have assumed that broken promises in the workplace spell serious discontent. But previous studies have tended to record workers' perceptions about such breaches, without determining what promises were actually made.
To disentangle perception from reality, Samantha Montes and David Zweig of the University of Toronto in Canada began by asking students to put themselves in the shoes of hypothetical job candidates.
Half the students were informed that the recruiter made seven specific promises – about bonuses, training, support with personal problems, and so on – while half were not. Then the students read about what had happened to the imaginary employees three years down the line, when the employer had delivered all seven inducements, five or them, or just three.
More than 550 students clearly understood the scenarios described, yet their perceptions of the situations were influenced more by the number of inducements given than by whether any specific promises had been made.
My Response
I read this article with interest, which quickly turned into concern. I believe these kinds of studies and their results have the potential to continue down the spiral of broken trust in a workforce that is already suffering. We are already seeing some of the lowest levels of trust in business around the world, so we certainly don’t need people believing it’s OK to break promises and contribute to that downward spiral.
Let me explain why I disagree with these findings and the subsequent statements:
1. Promises only matter to people if they match the Expectations and the Needs of the individual. We are all drawn to people who actually make Promises that meet our Expectations and Needs, and it is on the combination of those 3 things, what I call ENPs®, that we place our trust in others. Employers will often make general Promises in job ads and interviews that may not matter to some employees but will extremely matter to others. Some specific Promises made to one employee will absolutely matter and they will be drawn to them, other Promises will not matter at all and will frankly just go straight over their heads.
Example: If an employee is Expecting regular ‘on the job’ and external training, which fulfils a strong Need for Self Actualisation and constant learning, and they are Promised regular training, they will be very much drawn to that job, and will react negatively if that training is not delivered. It will be one broken Promise that could completely destroy that employees’ trust in their manager and the organisation.
However, if that same Employee was Promised a bonus, and they are not motivated by Safety and Security and money is not a major driver for them, they will still Expect it because it was Promised, but they do not Need it to any great degree. Therefore a broken Promise about a specific bonus will not bother them, they’ll be happy with whatever they receive – as long as they still get their training!
2. Most people will adjust their Expectations based on what they see going on inside or outside an organisation – difficult times, a downturn, a frugal manager, will all impact employees’ Expectations about the likelihood of initial Promises actually being met. We all adjust our Expectations subconsciously to protect our trust. This is, in fact, how most of us cope with politicians. We Expect that many of the things they Promise will not be delivered to the extent that they Promised, so we still maintain a sense of trust, provided our basic Needs are met.
3. If half-Promises are delivered and meet the lowered Expectations, employees will generally accept those if, and ONLY if, they still feel their Needs have been met.
What does this mean for employers? All employers must:
1. Understand the Expectations and Needs of their employees
2. Only make Promises that they are confident they can deliver
3. If Promises are made in good faith and things change, communicate the changes to employees – ie manage their Expectations
4. Be aware that those Promises made to employees where there is a distinct link between the Promise, the Expectation and the Need must be met, and if not, the trust will break down
5. Understand that you cannot make assumptions about what employees want
6. Know that only Promising and delivering ‘good conditions and rewards’ as Montes suggests will satisfy some employees, but definitely not all, and is a dangerous position to take for an employer that wants good performance and aims to be an employer of choice
7. Decide if they want to be a trusted organisation or not. There is no middle ground, and if organisations are not aware of how trust is being built or broken down, chances are they are breaking it down on a daily basis and are, right now, suffering the consequences of that breakdown.
If you agree with me, please feel free to follow this link and voice your oppinion:
http://www.linkedin.com/newsArticle?viewDiscussion=&articleID=69598386&anetScope=2139318&report%2Esuccess=PdmtybENV2mnc3t3p8JpWuFiB1ZhaD9OnKUphCsu7LRNRYTOK1wrHHO_rcDN0rVBb1wuxUyPL-SZ
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Why do Marketing and Sales hate each other so much?
Whenever we do work with any organisation, we want to know what 3Rs goals do they want to achieve. What Results do they want? What Retention levels do they want to improve? What Relationships do they want to improve?
9 times out of 10, one of the key relationships that the organisation wants to improve is between Marketing and Sales. Why do these 2 teams hate each other so much? They both want the same outcomes for the organisation, don't they?
Both are highly Esteem driven - they want respect, recognition and don't take criticism too well. This also means they are not too good on accountability. It's easier to point the finger at someone else than to take responsibility for something not quite working out the way they planned. Because both teams are like that, they clash, big time! Neither one wants to back down, to admit that maybe they need to review their practices - that would be admitting fault!
Now this is a generalisation, of course, and we have certainly worked with teams that have been brave enough to work together, to sort out their differences and to work for the common good of the organisation.
The key thing is this: there needs to be a common purpose, a reason why these two teams should work better together. Unless that is established, clear, and agreed, you are pushing you-know-what uphill!
Once that common purpose is set, then the need to be absolutely clear on what they each Expect of each other, what they Need, and what they are prepared to Promise each other, and take accountability for that. They need to be able to TRUST each other!
Is that possible? Yes it is. And when an organisation can take the plunge and make that work, it delivers straight to the bottom line.
9 times out of 10, one of the key relationships that the organisation wants to improve is between Marketing and Sales. Why do these 2 teams hate each other so much? They both want the same outcomes for the organisation, don't they?
Both are highly Esteem driven - they want respect, recognition and don't take criticism too well. This also means they are not too good on accountability. It's easier to point the finger at someone else than to take responsibility for something not quite working out the way they planned. Because both teams are like that, they clash, big time! Neither one wants to back down, to admit that maybe they need to review their practices - that would be admitting fault!
Now this is a generalisation, of course, and we have certainly worked with teams that have been brave enough to work together, to sort out their differences and to work for the common good of the organisation.
The key thing is this: there needs to be a common purpose, a reason why these two teams should work better together. Unless that is established, clear, and agreed, you are pushing you-know-what uphill!
Once that common purpose is set, then the need to be absolutely clear on what they each Expect of each other, what they Need, and what they are prepared to Promise each other, and take accountability for that. They need to be able to TRUST each other!
Is that possible? Yes it is. And when an organisation can take the plunge and make that work, it delivers straight to the bottom line.
Monday, September 7, 2009
7 truths about trust every people manager needs to know
If you truly want to be a good, effective manager and you want your people to trust you, there are a few little (actually not so little) truths you need to know that will help you build trust with your people.
Why trust? Well, you are not going to get much out of your people if they don't trust you. However, we've proven time and time again that where there is trust in a team (and we actually define trust and measure it), there is also great performance - and that not only makes everyone work better together and feel better about being at work, it absolutely delivers to the bottom line (and that's really what most people in business want to get to).
So, here are the 7 truths about trust every people manager needs to know:
1. Your people are relying on you! The question is, what are they relying on your for? Trust is all about relying on someone or something to deliver a specific outcome. You need to know that they are not just there for the ride, but their performance as a team, and as individuals are directly related to how much they can rely on you, and it all comes down to 3 core things - Expectations, Needs and Promises (what I call ENPs)
2. Expectations are formed before they even start - what Expectations do your people have of you? Where did they come from? You will have created them in the job interview. The branding of the company would have created them, and so on. fail to meet their Expectations, and you have a problem on your hands.
3. People will always find ways to satisfy their Needs - we all do it, just mostly subconsciously. What Needs are each of your people seeking to have satisfied by you and by their work? Understanding these and meeting them is critical to your success as a manager.
4. You make Promises all the time - Yes you do! We all do. But when your people are relying on those Promises and you don't meet them, again, major problems. Being aware of what Promises you are making to your people is the start, and the minute you begin writing them all down, you'll be shocked at how many you make!
5. You need a two way contribution - many companies make a point of telling their employees what they Expect of their people, and what they Need, but very few find out what their people Expect and Need from them. The ones that take the time to follow a process of discovery and agreement (what I call Company Contribution Statements), are the ones that get great performance from their people.
6. Negative Expectations become self fulfilling - If you have people in your team who have negative Expectations about you and your company, you will have problems until you specifically address those. They become self fulfilling prophecies, and you don't need them. In fact, they will drag you and your team down.
7. You need to be a People Manager - too many good, technically competent people end up in a role where most of their time should be in managing people. If you have a team under you, you should be spending about 80% of your time managing those people to peak performance. It's what they Expect of you, and it's what your company Needs from you
If you want to know more, download the 7 truths about trust every people manager needs to know ebook, or eguide here.
Take care.
Vanessa
Why trust? Well, you are not going to get much out of your people if they don't trust you. However, we've proven time and time again that where there is trust in a team (and we actually define trust and measure it), there is also great performance - and that not only makes everyone work better together and feel better about being at work, it absolutely delivers to the bottom line (and that's really what most people in business want to get to).
So, here are the 7 truths about trust every people manager needs to know:
1. Your people are relying on you! The question is, what are they relying on your for? Trust is all about relying on someone or something to deliver a specific outcome. You need to know that they are not just there for the ride, but their performance as a team, and as individuals are directly related to how much they can rely on you, and it all comes down to 3 core things - Expectations, Needs and Promises (what I call ENPs)
2. Expectations are formed before they even start - what Expectations do your people have of you? Where did they come from? You will have created them in the job interview. The branding of the company would have created them, and so on. fail to meet their Expectations, and you have a problem on your hands.
3. People will always find ways to satisfy their Needs - we all do it, just mostly subconsciously. What Needs are each of your people seeking to have satisfied by you and by their work? Understanding these and meeting them is critical to your success as a manager.
4. You make Promises all the time - Yes you do! We all do. But when your people are relying on those Promises and you don't meet them, again, major problems. Being aware of what Promises you are making to your people is the start, and the minute you begin writing them all down, you'll be shocked at how many you make!
5. You need a two way contribution - many companies make a point of telling their employees what they Expect of their people, and what they Need, but very few find out what their people Expect and Need from them. The ones that take the time to follow a process of discovery and agreement (what I call Company Contribution Statements), are the ones that get great performance from their people.
6. Negative Expectations become self fulfilling - If you have people in your team who have negative Expectations about you and your company, you will have problems until you specifically address those. They become self fulfilling prophecies, and you don't need them. In fact, they will drag you and your team down.
7. You need to be a People Manager - too many good, technically competent people end up in a role where most of their time should be in managing people. If you have a team under you, you should be spending about 80% of your time managing those people to peak performance. It's what they Expect of you, and it's what your company Needs from you
If you want to know more, download the 7 truths about trust every people manager needs to know ebook, or eguide here.
Take care.
Vanessa
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)