January 10th, 2018
Building Trust in one’s Leadership (part 2)
Grisham (2006) citing an article by Lewicki and Bucker published in 1995, highlights three ways that may found members’ trust in their leaders (p. 186). Firstly, calculus-based trust is argued to result when actions that honor or violate another individual’s trust, attract respective rewards and punishments. For instance, an elected official may gain the trust of electorates to renew ones term if one has represented their expectations, but lose such trust in the event of acting against their expectations in the initial tenure. Secondly, identification-based trust is argued to arise when parties understand the other’s wants and needs and identify with such needs or wants (Grisham, 2006). For instance, members of a sports team trust one another to work towards ensuring the team succeeds in the sport, since such success is a common desire for each member. A third basis of trust, as highlighted by Grisham (2006) is knowledge. In this respect, knowledge helps boost the confidence of the members in the leader’s ability and willingness to pursue obligations that are of benefit to them. Thus, a leader who delegates duties to his juniors and gives them room to demonstrate their capability would receive the trust of such juniors. In view of such bases of trust, it is critical for a leader to identify ways through which one can elicit at least one of the modes of trust in the followers.
Ways of building trust in ones leadership can be identified to different bases trust. In calculus-based trust, actions that would enhance trust, as highlighted by Grisham (2006) include: making explicit agreements of the tasks and timelines to meet such tasks, agreeing on how the other person’s performance is to be monitored, and being aware of how other individuals perceive ones performance. Accordingly, communication is a core concept in developing such trust; thus, communication and trust may serve as antecedents or outcomes of each other creating a synergy in developing cohesiveness in the team (Reina & Reina, 2007; Gillespie & Mann, 2004). For identification-based trust, sharing aspects such as values, integrity, interests, goals and objectives enhances the development of trust among the parties involved (Grisham, 2006; Gillespie & Mann, 2004). These aspects however need to be evident in ones actions because only when such aspects are practiced, do they help the other members comprehend ones expectations of them (Reina & Reina, 2007). Knowledge-based trust arises with the belief in the competence of other parties. Accordingly, soliciting for such other persons’ input before making decisions and delegation of duties to such other persons without micromanaging them, provides a basis upon which higher levels of trust are built (Reina & Reina, 2007). Evidently, trust is thus a dimensional and transactional concept where one must give some level of trust in exchange for a similar or more pronounced level of trust from such other person. continue to part 3.