Leadership; Its a Matter of Trust

Leadership of organisations is not for the faint hearted. It can be
a difficult and lonely place at times. This is particularly so if
the leader does not have a supportive team. However, the lack of a
supportive team is probably as good an indicator as any, that
leadership skills are lacking.

It is not enough for leaders to say, “Follow me, I know the way”.
They must be able to convince their teams by their actions, not just
their words, that they do indeed know the way.
That is not to say that leaders need to have their teams always
accepting what they are advocating is right. What they must have is
the trust of their teams. Trust is a central element of leadership.

A study by the Hay Group found there is a clear link between
employee satisfaction and the trust held by the top leadership. In
examining over 75 key components of employee satisfaction it found
that trust and confidence in the leadership of an organisation was
the single most reliable predictor of employee satisfaction in an
organization. Trust can be characterized three ways.

The first is a trust based on fear of reprisal. The strength of this
kind of trust is when the trust is broken and the consequence is
clear, known and imposed. Examples of this kind of trust include the
new manager and the employee where the trust comes through the
authority of the position. Another example is in the form of
contracts with legal consequences. This is the most fragile kind of
trust.

Knowledge based trust relies on a history of interaction, relying on
information rather than deterrence. Penalties, legal consequences
and contracts are replaced by predictable behaviours as the basis of
trust. If the behaviour becomes inconsistent, trust is not
necessarily broken. When explanations for changes in behaviour can
be explained trust is usually maintained.

The third and most enduring trust is based on an emotional
connection between the parties. Trust exists because the parties
understand each others needs, wants and intentions. Either party can
in effect, act as an agent for the other. At this level of trust,
controls are minimal.

Leadership styles can be categorised in innumerable ways. A useful
category for demonstrating how different levels of trust interact
with leadership style is to consider leadership as authoritarian,
participative or delegative.

An authoritarian style of leader tells their subordinates what they
want done and how they want it done, without getting the advice of
their subordinate.

To be able to carry off this style over long periods of time and
maintain trust, leaders need to have trust built from their
demonstrated superior knowledge of the organisation’s business.

Some people seem to think that this style also includes yelling,
using demeaning language, and leading by threats and abuse of power.
This is not the authoritarian style…it is an abusive,
unprofessional style of leadership.

A participative style involves the leader including one or more
subordinates in the decision making process, determining what to do
and how to do it. However, the leader maintains the final decision-
making authority.

This style relies heavily on a trust built on knowledge of the
predictability of what individuals will do and uses checkpoints to
verify that the predictable action has occurred.

A delegative style allows the employees to make the decision.
However, the leader is still responsible for the decisions that are
made. This is used when employees are able to analyse the situation
and determine what needs to be done and how to do it.

This style relies almost completely on the trust that comes from an
emotional connection.

Leaders demonstrate too often, however, their lack of understanding
of the interrelationship between their leadership style and the
trust they need to develop. New managers come to an organisation,
the business of which they do not understand, and practice an
authoritarian style with experienced subordinates.

They lose the trust of their position quickly.

Experienced managers with detailed and insightful knowledge of an
organisation’s business, attempt to practice a delegative style with
an inexperienced or underperforming team, when a participative or
even authoritarian style would have been better.

Experienced leaders practice the one leadership style with
subordinates with different levels of experience and maturity. They
use, say, a participative style with a university graduate new into
the organisation. If the subordinate fails the task in terms of
quality or time, the question of, “Who is at fault?” should find an
answer - “The leader”, who should have used an authoritarian style.

Leadership requires trust. Trust can come from position, but is more
enduring when it comes from predictability and even more enduring
when it comes from respect between the leader and the subordinate.

Leaders of organisations who do not engender respect and give
respect will find leadership a very lonely place.