Foster trust with both performance and vulnerability

Both cognitive and affective trust are required to make business relationships thrive.

“What events led you to trust [your colleagues and friends]?” writes Meyer (pg. 167). For an American, the answer depends on the person.

Friendships in the United States are established in affective trust, built slowly over shared interests as each party lets their guard down and shares their true feelings, negative or positive. Business relationships; however, are another story. Americans trust their employees by their track record of reliable, efficient success at their assigned work. You’ll rarely hear an American say of their colleague that she couldn’t trust him because he wouldn’t let his guard down, but if he misses a few meetings or a deadline, her trust in him quavers. Americans value cognitive trust above all, and only affective trust in private relationships.

On the other side of the spectrum, a Turkish colleague measures trust in time spent socially. Whether it’s his wife or his colleague, he builds trust with them over Lahmacun and Turkish coffee. The coldly efficient colleague is branded untrustworthy because he wouldn’t let his true self be known, regardless of how reliable he may be. If, however, he let his guard down and treated our example as a trusted friend, trust would naturally begin to form. Affective trust is the foundation of all relationships, business and personal.

A business that only attracts cold, efficient workers or social, easy-going hobbyists is crippled by its lack of cultural diversity. People are attracted to others like themselves, and it takes effort to become like another culture in order to attract people from that culture. Paradoxically, the effort involved may not be increased focus or practice; it may be letting go and partying.

Entrepreneurs typically lean in one direction or the other. An American entrepreneur is likely to be a task-driven, responsible leader who measures her work relationships by evidence of diligent labor and met deadlines. But her relationships will remain trapped in the utilitarian realm of cognitive trust unless she’s willing to ease up and play a silly game with her colleagues. Likewise, a Brazilian entrepreneur is likely to be a socially vibrant, time-flexible leader who measures trust by hours spent at the local bar cheering over her favorite soccer team with her colleagues. Her relationships may need a little more thought placed into them to attract employees with integrity and commitment to her vision.

This chapter is a revelation. Like Teebone’s ringing bells (Meyer, pg. 193), this chapter puts a spotlight on dozens of conversations I’ve had. When I learned that my manager did not trust me, I redoubled my efforts to prove myself a reliable, hard-working employee. Never did he state that my work ethic was sub par, but he did often ask me to loosen up. Such a request is an affront to my heavily task-based mentality and sounds like an invitation to make a fool of myself. How mistaken I have been!

There’s no getting around it - this is a major hurdle to quality relationships for me. I cringe at words like ‘let go’ or ‘let your guard down.’ I find pleasure in work well-executed, and horror at the thought of my colleagues seeing me play a board game with a couple drinks in me. My entire life has been devoted to efficiency and structure for so long I go blank at the question, “What do you do for fun?” Never before have I thought my inhibitions towards “fun” - it hardly affects my efficiency after all - would directly hinder my ability to influence people for good. I can’t even write fun without putting it into quotes, as though it’s a pseudonym for an unpleasant experience (which it has been for me).

In short: I hate fun, and it’s a problem.

References