There is a widespread myth that trust is something one either has or does not have. This means that, as leaders, the moment we experience a breach of trust, it can feel irrevocable or irreparable. Therefore, trust between leaders and employees is increasingly being replaced by rules and subsequent control.
Replacing trust with rules and control is a phenomenon we know from all levels of society.
Nationally, over the past 15 years, we have been presented with one “trust reform” after another, each time with the ambition of replacing many rules and control systems with more trust. So far, it has not had much effect. Most recently, Mette Frederiksen set the same agenda, and one might fear that her ambition will also fade away.
But also in individual municipalities, errors that occur, agreements that are broken, and legislation that is not complied with, lead to a tightening of procedures or the introduction of additional control systems to ensure that it does not happen again.
According to American professor Jennifer Williams, who has researched trust in organisations for several years, we can only break this pattern by starting to view trust in a new way. And perhaps there lies a key to understanding why it has been so difficult to replace control and rules with trust.
According to Williams, trust is not something we can build once and for all. Trust is constantly being built and broken down in a dynamic process. Mistakes happen, agreements are broken, and sometimes legislation must be compromised in daily work. What is interesting is what the leader does based on these events, because according to Williams, a leader has a choice!
Will one choose to strengthen rules and control, or will one choose to engage in a dialogue with the employees who have ‘broken the trust’? When dialogue is not chosen, it may be due to a reluctance to confront the individual employee with the ‘breach of trust,’ or a feeling of not having time to have the dialogue.
By engaging in a dialogue, in most situations, one will discover that employees often have very good reasons for not adhering to the agreements and trust they have been given. It may be to make daily life work or because the agreed procedures make everyday life unnecessarily cumbersome.
It is therefore crucial that leaders ask themselves three central questions before taking action:
1. Balance Between Control and Trust?
The combination of control and trust in an organisation will always be evolving. Sometimes they are a substitute for each other, while other times they complement each other. The leader should therefore consider whether the existing balance creates the desired results or if the balance needs to be changed.
2. Are the Existing Control Systems Appropriate?
Control is a process that regulates the behaviour of organisational members to achieve organisational goals. Do our control systems support the desired behaviour? And if I cannot immediately change the control systems, can I/the organisation live without fully meeting the expectations?
3. Can Trust Be Strengthened Through Dialogue?
Increased trust in the individual strengthens flexibility in task solving, while engagement and sense of responsibility increase significantly when individuals are allowed to use their expertise and judgement. Can we therefore, through structured dialogues, adjust or replace existing control systems, where we – as a side benefit – will also strengthen organisational trust?
For any questions, contact Henrik Schelde Andersen.
Henrik has over 25 years of experience and advises on Public Leadership & Organisational Development, Process Facilitation, and Change Management & Transformation.
