The High Cost of Low Trust: I

George sat very still, withholding comment on what Trish had just said. She sipped her coffee and waited patiently for the idea to sink in. Trish knew that he would have difficulty accepting that the people in his organization didn't trust each other, and that they didn't trust him. And she knew that he wouldn't run away from the truth. So she waited.

George now sipped his coffee. He set the cup down, laced his fingers together, looked at his hands for a while, and sighed. Then he turned to Trish.

"I think I understand," he began. "People CC me on so many emails because they're trying to write a 'transcript' of their activities, so nobody can attack them later for not doing the job. Right?"

"Almost," said Trish. "Some expect you to defend them later, on the basis of the 'transcript.'"

"Right," said George, wincing because he'd forgotten that part.

Trish continued, "And some believe that since you saw the messages, you're now responsible, too, if they've made some bad calls."

"Right." George winced again. "And it doesn't matter that I get so many messages that I can't read them?"

"Right," said Trish. "It's a cultural problem. It's about Trust. But it's the same in International. It's no different in my patch."

Low-trust cultures have
lower productivity,
more defective products,
more rework and
more toxic politicsTrish and George are dealing with a common problem — a low-trust organizational culture. On the surface, things look OK, but the consequences of low trust include toxic politics, low productivity, lost sales, defective products, and still lower levels of trust.

Addressing the problem begins with understanding how people cope.

Preemptive defense

The preemptive defense, or "CYA," entails creating explanations or excuses intended to defuse any possible later attack from a colleague. Usually it takes a verbal form — a statement, a memo, or an email message — and serves no productive purpose.

The costs of preemptive defenses include not only the effort required to create them, but also the time and effort required to read or hear them. In meetings, the preemptive defense can be very expensive, wasting time for all who attend.

Preemptive attack

The preemptive attack is intended to head off perceived threats from those we distrust. By limiting their ability to harm, we hope to defend against whatever we fear.

This tactic leads to lower productivity for both the attacked and the attacker, and sometimes for bystanders, in two ways. Through the distraction and harm it causes, it interferes with getting work done. And attacks can actually disable those attacked, limiting their ability to exercise influence, even for legitimate purposes.

These are just two coping strategies for low-trust environments. We'll look at some more coping strategies next time.  Next in this series  Top    Next Issue

Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. More info

For more about Trust, see "Creating Trust," Point Lookout for January 21, 2009, "TINOs: Teams in Name Only," Point Lookout for March 19, 2008, and "Express Your Appreciation and Trust," Point Lookout for January 16, 2002.

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Workplace Politics:

Devious Political Tactics: The Three-Legged Race

The Three-Legged Race is a tactic that some managers use to avoid giving one person new authority. Some of the more cynical among us use it to sabotage projects or even careers. How can you survive a three-legged race?

Stalking the Elephant in the Room: II

When everyone is thinking something that no one dares discuss, we say that there is "an elephant in the room." Free-ranging elephants are expensive and dangerous to both the organization and its people. Here's Part II of a catalog of indicators that elephants are about.

Anticipate Counter-Communication

Effective communication enables two parties to collaborate. Counter-communication is information provided by a third party that contradicts the basis of agreements or undermines that collaboration.

Full Disclosure

The term "full disclosure" is now a fairly common phrase, especially in news interviews and in film and fiction thrillers involving government employees or attorneys. It also has relevance in the knowledge workplace, and nuances associated with it can affect your credibility.

Four Razors for Organizational Behavior

Deviant organizational behavior can harm the people and the organization. In choosing responses, we consider what drives the perpetrators. Considering Malice, Incompetence, Ignorance, and Greed, we can devise four guidelines for making these choices.

See also Workplace Politics and Workplace Politics for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming May 14: Working with the Overconfident

A cognitive bias known as the Overconfidence Effect causes us to overestimate the reliability of our judgments. Decisions we make based on those judgments are therefore suspect. But there are steps we can take to make our confidence levels more realistic, and thus make our decisions more reliable. Available here and by RSS on May 14.

And on May 21: Mismanaging Project Managers

Most organizations hold project managers accountable for project performance. But they don't grant those project managers control of needed resources. Nor do they hold project sponsors or other senior managers accountable for the consequences of their actions when they interfere with project work. Here's a catalog of behaviors worth looking at. Available here and by RSS on May 21.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenDJpmhgyaDTwBQXkhner@ChacmGoYuzfZpOvDQdRkoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info