Trust in the workplace is vital for cooperation, innovation and job performance. However, trust is not one thing; psychologists find it useful to distinguish trustworthiness from trust propensity.
Studies led by Roger Mayer at the University of Notre Dame have identified that trustworthiness – our ability to get others to trust us – is based on three characteristics. The first is ability, measured by stakeholders’ perceptions of our knowledge and competence. Another is benevolence – the degree to which we are perceived to want to do good for others. The third is integrity – the extent to which we are judged as acting according to principles that stakeholders find appropriate.
Demonstrating integrity happens by behaving consistently
Building trustworthiness therefore starts with intentional signalling. Demonstrating ability could mean sharing progress updates that highlight decisions taken or outcomes achieved. Simply doing good work may not build trustworthiness if others are not made aware of it.
Conveying benevolence often comes through interpersonal interactions that show genuine care. Ask colleagues how they are coping with their workloads and offer help – or even just kind words – when they are struggling.
Consistency counts
Demonstrating integrity happens by behaving consistently. Follow through on spoken commitments and admit mistakes quickly. Explain your reasoning transparently when circumstances change and you must renege on promises.
According to a meta-analysis by the University of Central Florida’s Peter Hancock, a strong predictor of trustworthiness is communication quality – the degree to which information is shared openly and in a timely manner. Transparent communication builds trust more effectively than benevolence alone. In practice, this means informing colleagues before they have to ask and being honest about uncertainties.
Trust propensity, meanwhile, is a measure of how readily we place trust in others. It is measured by agreement with questionnaire statements such as ‘I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt’. Analyses show that trust propensity correlates moderately with job performance and organisational citizenship behaviours: trust-prone employees tend to be rated more highly both on their core job accomplishments and broader contributions.
Trusting professionals are seen as more cooperative, which allows them to achieve more
If you recognise within yourself a tendency towards scepticism, be mindful of its impact. Research suggests that trusting professionals are not typically exploited but are instead seen as more cooperative, which allows them to achieve more.
If you manage employees, identify those with higher trust propensity. Assign them to roles that benefit from strong relationships. Their inclination to trust encourages stakeholders to trust them, which helps everybody to achieve higher quality outcomes.
Uneven and fluid
Given differences in both employee trustworthiness and trust propensity, it is natural that not every team member trusts others equally. Unevenly distributed trust – often called trust dispersion – undermines cooperation. When some individuals are committed but others are cynical, communication weakens and conflict rises.
Trust is also not fixed: it can grow or weaken over time. Teams that periodically take time to discuss trust can avoid misunderstandings later. When working with teams, I often conduct a team audit, asking individuals to rate anonymously each other’s reliability. By discussing gaps constructively, we then set expectations, establish boundaries, and agree on actions that strengthen both trust and performance.
Face-to-face communication boosts trust more effectively than digital channels
Modern working practices complicate the building of trust. Studies repeatedly confirm that face-to-face communication boosts trust more effectively than digital channels. In-person conversations allow stakeholders to read subtle cues – tone of voice, facial expressions and body language – that deepen relationships. A five-minute coffee or a quick video call typically builds trust more effectively than dozens of carefully worded emails.
Human vs AI
AI introduces further complexity. A study led by Miriam Höddinghaus at the University of Münster found that automated agents are trusted as having higher levels of integrity and transparency, while humans are trusted as being more benevolent and adaptable. This suggests that humans remain indispensable. Success will belong to professionals who can review AI’s recommendations and add context.
Treat AI insights as a starting point rather than a final solution. Be ready to identify exceptions that can be used to retrain AI to be more useful in the future. Above all, communicate AI recommendations with compassion: understand that stakeholders trust you for your benevolence and adaptability.
As work becomes more AI-assisted, trust increasingly defines the value that professionals can add. Machines can analyse and predict, but only humans can reassure, empathise and connect. By displaying competence, care and consistency, we can create conditions in which teams collaborate effectively and perform at their best.
More information
Watch Dr Rob Yeung’s video on trust.
ACCA’s annual virtual Accounting for the Future conference is available on demand and offers over 21 units of free CPD. Sessions include one with Dr Rob Yeung on how to foster team trust and bold thinking.
