Dear Editor,
This lead question in a recent article in the CIPD professional journal seems just as timely and pertinent in our national affairs as indeed it is in our workplaces. The origins and implications of this collapse in ‘trust’ are manifold and of course cry out for answers. It is naïve to think that solutions are just around the corner, but we can at least put the matter on the table and hope that from our collective awareness and discussion some indications of rescue and relief might emerge. The local and international media have not skimped on reports of trust deficits in politics, business, religion and , guess what – the media itself! to name just a few of our societal ‘institutions.’
My professional interest encourages me to take a first look at the phenomenon in the workplace. The CIPD article stems from a major research effort that examined why trust matters and what can be done to repair it. They identified these four types of primary trust relationships in the workplace: Trust in the organization, the leaders, the line manager and each other. The study revealed that while each of these was powerful in its own way, “trust in each other” was the most robust. The lessons arising from the research study are by no means original or new or counter-intuitive; their sharp impact is in their surprising simplicity, cost-free applicability and potential nodal effect. For example, who among us with average intelligence and interest in improving the lot of workers and society at large can quarrel with the following:
*Trust is harder to restore once it has been broken than it can be built in the first place.
* To build and retain trust leaders need to demonstrate that they are not self-serving but instead are serving the needs of the country, the community, the group, the organization and all stakeholders. There is too much manipulation of the ordinary citizens, the workers who are being used as pawns in the games being played by so-called leaders with the result that there is no trust among fellow workers. The sight of so-called leaders riding on the backs of divided followers continues to cast its dark shadow.
* Managers must be visible, (must walk the work, not just talk and give orders).
* Communication with employees and all others must be straight, simple and sincere. People need discourses that are honest and free from ‘spin’ in order to be fully engaged. In the workplace the relationship with the line manager, the direct supervisor, is crucial; to undermine this is suicidal for the organization, the very managers, supervisors and employees.
* Structurally, the need for repositioning the HR function should be carefully considered (of course this implies the availability of credible HR expertise).
Yours faithfully,
Nowrang Persaud
