The SPEED of Trust: The One Thing that Changes Everything

by Stephen M. R. Covey

  There are three signs of a hypocrite: when he speaks he speaks lies, when he makes a promise he breaks it, and when he is trusted he betrays his trust.

  —MUHAMMAD

  As these examples clearly show, there are implicit as well as explicit commitments, and the violation of either creates huge withdrawals of trust. Many people assume that most organizations have commitments to honesty, integrity, and quality. When entities behave in ways that violate those implicit commitments, it creates enormous withdrawals and immediate distrust. And the same is true in relationships. For example, most people who get married assume that their spouse is fully committed to the marriage relationship and to the welfare of any children born into that relationship. When a spouse violates those commitments, it creates a serious breach of trust.

  Whether commitments are explicit or implicit, they will have an impact on speed and cost. To violate them causes doubt, suspicion, cynicism, and distrust that rust the wheels of progress. To keep them generates the hope, enthusiasm, confidence, and trust that increase momentum and lubricate the accomplishment of results.

  CULTURAL INTELLIGENCE

  In the new global economy, it’s vital to understand that sometimes different cultures view commitments differently. And understanding the difference is a key to making deposits and avoiding withdrawals.

  And I’m not just talking about ethnic or geographic cultures. I’ve been in many company cultures, for example, where when you set up a meeting at two, everyone is expected to be there promptly at two ready to go. I’ve been in other cultures where the nature of commitment is best reflected by a clock a friend told me about that shows the hours as “one-ish,” “two-ish,” “three-ish,” and so on; it depends on what people consider most important at the time. This difference is reflected in the Greek words chronos and kairos. Chronos means chronological time and kairos means quality time, or the value you get out of whatever time you have.

  I well remember the first meeting we held after the announcement of the FranklinCovey merger. The Franklin people were there in the formal boardroom all dressed nicely in suits and right on time. Those of us from the Covey group arrived in khakis 10 minutes late. The Franklin people came from a company culture of “manage your time”; we came from a company culture that emphasized “lead your life.” I know people from both companies were thinking, What have we done?

  The point here is that by being sensitive to the nature of commitments—both explicit and implicit—in different cultures, you will be able to build trust much more quickly than if you’re insensitive or clueless.

  THE MOST IMPORTANT COMMITMENTS OF ALL

  When it comes to dealing with a commitment to a client, people tend to be more rigid. But when it comes to a family commitment, they tend to be more flexible—sometimes simply because they’re trying to provide for their families and they tend to justify breaking those commitments more easily. But I affirm that commitments to people at home are every bit as important—or even more important—than commitments to people at work.

  Some time ago, my daughter McKinlee had the lead role in her high school musical, and I made a commitment to her that I would be there. I was scheduled to be on the road, but I planned to fly back in time to see her in the play. To me, I hadn’t made an “I will be there at all costs” commitment; it was more of an “Oh, yeah. I think I can make it.” But to her, it was a commitment and it was important.

  As I was talking to the client representatives several weeks in advance of my road trip, they said, “Stephen, we really need you to stay longer.” I went to my daughter to see if I could renegotiate. However, I quickly realized that even trying was a big withdrawal. So I tried to lower expectations with the client. They were not happy with the request and really pushed me to stay.

  So I had a dilemma. I decided to apply what my late colleague Blaine Lee called the 10-Year Rule. I asked myself, Ten years from now, what will I be glad I did? I clearly concluded that ten years from now, I’d be glad I kept what my daughter viewed as a commitment. So I told the client I wouldn’t be able to stay. As a result, I lost some economic opportunity, but the client survived and I was happy. My daughter was thrilled. The night she performed, I was there on the front row with a dozen roses in my arms.

  Because keeping commitments has such an impact on trust—and because trust is so vital to a thriving family culture—it’s wise to keep in mind that commitments to family members are often the most important commitments of all. Also—as we discussed in the chapter on Integrity—making and keeping commitments to yourself is the key to success in making and keeping commitments to others. That’s where it all starts, and that’s what gives you the power and the confidence—the Self Trust—that enables you to build trust with others.

  TRUST TIPS

  If you’re on the left end of the bell curve in this behavior—you’re not making enough commitments or not following through very well—you may need to focus on increasing your Integrity, strengthening your mutual benefit Intent, developing the Capability to repeatedly perform this behavior and turn it into a habit, or become more aware of the trust-building Results.

  If you’re on the right end—maybe overextending yourself by making too many commitments or keeping commitments at all costs, even when the situation changes and makes it impractical or unwise—you may need to focus on building the judgment that comes from strengthening all 4 Cores. You may want to especially focus on Integrity and consider the Results of making commitments that you can’t or shouldn’t keep.

  As you work to Keep Commitments, you may want to do one of the following:

  • In establishing a new relationship where you want to build trust fast, follow this process: Find a value-added reason to make a commitment and keep it . . . and do it again . . . and again . . . and again. As you implement this “Make-Keep-Repeat” cycle, notice how quickly the Trust Account grows.

  • The next time you make a commitment to someone at work, be sure the commitment is realistic. Even if you have to disappoint someone, it’s far better to do it up front than to overpromise and under deliver. Make sure you follow through with what you’ve committed to do. If you have to miss a deadline, attempt to renegotiate expectations as early as possible; don’t just ignore it and be late.

  • Pay attention to your language at home. Realize that when you say you will do something, the members of your family see that as a commitment. Treat what you say you will do seriously and follow through. Recognize that the trust you build at home is likely the most important trust of all.

  SUMMARY: BEHAVIOR #12—KEEP COMMITMENTS

  Say what you’re going to do, then do what you say you’re going to do. Make commitments—both explicit and implicit—very carefully, and keep them at almost all costs. Communicate when you can’t. Make keeping commitments the symbol of your honor. Don’t break confidences. Don’t attempt to “spin” your way out of a commitment you’ve broken.

  BEHAVIOR #13: EXTEND TRUST

  Trust men and they will be true to you; treat them greatly and they will show themselves great.

  —RALPH WALDO EMERSON

  One season when I coached Little League flag football, I had a very courageous player on my team named Anna Humphries. She was the only girl on our team. In fact, as I recall, there were only one or two other girls in the whole league. Anna wasn’t a bad player, but she didn’t have the same level of experience and skill as some of the others.

  According to the Little League rules, I was required to play every player about half of each game. That assumed I would have fourteen players to fill the seven player positions. However, that season I only had ten players. Considering Anna’s limited experience and skill, I could have played her for half of each game and then pulled her out, but I felt that she was being courageous to compete with these boys and I wanted to encourage her, so I decided to keep the playing time fairly equal.

  Everything went great until we came down to the big game. It was the end of the season, and b
oth teams were undefeated. On the last play of the game, the other team ran toward Anna’s side and scored a touchdown. They were now only one point behind. With one play remaining, they were going for two points for the win.

  I had a choice. I could take Anna out and put another person in her place, or I could leave her in. She had competed hard all year, and based on my earlier decision to play everyone equally, it was still her turn to play. With our team goal of winning it all on the line, I decided to leave her in, and I told her that if they ran to her side again, she could make the play and stop them.

  Anna felt that extension of trust and rose to the occasion. Sure enough, the other team ran toward her side, but Anna made the play, pulling the runner’s flag and stopping him just short of the goal line. This was only the second flag she had pulled the whole year, and she pulled it on the most crucial play of the year.

  We won the game and the unofficial league championship. To this day, every time I see Anna, I feel happy that I believed in her and extended trust to her. I tell her, “You are my hero! You made it happen!”

  FROM TRUSTED PERSON TO TRUSTING LEADER

  Behavior #13—Extend Trust—is different in kind from the rest of the behaviors. It’s about shifting from “trust” as a noun to “trust” as a verb. While the other behaviors help you become a more trusted person or manager, this behavior will help you become a more trusting leader. It’s a game changer! Not only does it build trust, it leverages trust. It creates reciprocity; when you trust people, other people tend to trust you in return. Additionally (and ironically), extending trust is one of the best ways to create trust when it’s not there. It’s fascinating to realize that you could have two trustworthy people working together—and no trust between them—if neither person is willing to extend trust to the other.

  Leadership without mutual trust is a contradiction in terms.

  —WARREN BENNIS, AUTHOR OF ON BECOMING A LEADER

  Consider Warren Buffett’s acquisition of McLane Distribution. That deal could happen with such speed and low cost only because Warren Buffett was willing to extend trust. A similar example is the way in which A. G. Lafley, CEO of Procter & Gamble, and Jim Kilts, CEO of Gillette, extended trust to each other in the process of merging their companies. In Fortune magazine, Lafley describes this remarkable approach as follows:

  I decided that we were going to be collaborative in the negotiations. We had a friendly deal here, and there was absolutely no reason not to have the cards on the table. I called on a person Jim trusted and I trusted . . . who urged Jim to give me an open-book look at the cost synergies and a look at Gillette’s technology into the future. We did collaborate—and without all the typical advisors. At one point Jim said to me, “Aren’t you bringing any bankers?” I said, “We don’t need any bankers.” He said, “Aren’t you bringing any lawyers?” I said, “We don’t need any lawyers.” . . . That was a very important signal that we trusted each other.

  This experience of Lafley and Kilts is an example of transference of trust, wherein the person they both trusted acted as what I call a “trust bridge” between the two parties. Because both parties independently had trust in the same individual, and that individual expressed his trust in each party to the other, the two parties were able to then transfer his trust to each other.

  I’m certainly not suggesting that the way Warren Buffett or A. G. Lafley handled these mergers is the way everyone should do deals. You could easily meet someone, shake hands on a deal, and do no “due diligence” only to discover you bought a warehouse that doesn’t even exist! In fact, during a break in one of my programs, a woman came up to me and told me that she had had a terrible experience in extending trust. She said, “Some time ago, I bought a company. During the negotiations, when I started talking about needing an employment agreement, the CEO whose company I was buying told me he didn’t want to do one. He said, ‘Look, you’re buying my company. You’ve got to trust me. If you don’t trust me, why buy my company?’ It seemed to be a very logical argument, so I said, ‘Okay, I trust you.’ ” According to this woman, however, after the deal went down, this CEO (whose expertise and relationships she desperately needed) caused all kinds of havoc, threatening to leave if he didn’t get more money. Not having an employment agreement in place nearly turned the entire deal into an absolute disaster. In the end, she said, it made her never want to extend trust again.

  Clearly, you don’t want to be gullible. You don’t want to be a Pollyanna. You don’t want to extend trust indiscriminately or unwisely. You’ll get taken to the cleaners. You’ll get burned. But neither do you want to withhold trust when extending it could bring such enormous benefits.

  The last section of this book is all about Inspiring Trust. In that section, we’ll talk in depth about when and how to extend “Smart Trust” so that you can minimize your risk and you don’t get caught up in situations like this woman did. But in this chapter, I simply want to point out that most of the time, extending trust will have an extraordinary impact on building trust in relationships and in the culture. Clearly it is one of the best and fastest ways to establish and grow trust, and this is the aspect of it we will focus on now.

  WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU EXTEND TRUST

  Extend Trust is based on the principles of empowerment and reciprocity, as well as on the fundamental belief that most people are capable of being trusted, want to be trusted, and will run with trust when it is extended to them.

  The opposite of Extend Trust is to withhold trust, which creates an enormous cost everywhere, especially in organizations.

  When you think about it, why is it that such a low percentage of employees trust their senior leaders? There are undoubtedly many reasons, but I contend that a principal reason is that senior leaders don’t trust their people, and this distrust gets reciprocated. Thus, senior leaders are actually complicit in helping to produce their employees’ distrust. It becomes a vicious downward cycle: People tend to not trust people who don’t trust them.

  As an example of this distrust, many companies do not allow overtime, after hours, or weekend work unless a supervisor is present. Why? Because fundamentally, they don’t trust employees to do their jobs. As an employee in one such company said, “They think we’re just going to sit around eating donuts and racking up overtime!”

  Now contrast that kind of behavior to the approach of Ritz-Carlton Hotels, where management gives every employee—including the maids—the ability to resolve a customer’s concerns and comp up to $2,000 without approval. Or to the retailer Nordstrom, where employees have only one rule governing the way they provide customer service: “Use good judgment in all situations.” Or Zappos, where customers are trusted to order any shoes they want, try them on, and return what they don’t want anytime within 365 days and with free shipping both ways. Zappos also extends trust to its customer service reps, who are not bound by scripts or time limits on calls, but are encouraged to use their best judgment and take whatever time they need to make customers happy.

  Another example of extending trust is JetBlue, which is widely recognized for its quality service. JetBlue doesn’t have a reservation center—instead, people work out of their homes. In the vast majority of cases, these reservationists are mothers who want to balance work and family and don’t want to leave their homes. JetBlue managers set them up on terminals and trust them to be at their task when they’re supposed to be. A less trusting company might be worried that they’d be off task attending to their kids or other matters. But these reservationists are known for being superbly responsible and incredibly courteous, kind, pleasant, and engaging on the phone—partly because they reflect back to the customer the way they are treated, the trust extended to them, and how they feel about their company and their job.

  Interestingly, other carriers have attempted to copy the JetBlue (and Southwest) discount airline model. At this point, however, while they may have been able to copy the strategy, they haven’t been able to implement it nearly as eff
ectively as these two carriers because they can’t copy the culture of trust. As Jet Blue Chairman Joel Peterson puts it, “A high-trust culture is the ultimate competitive moat.”

  Companies should trust people to work at home more. Commuting kills so much time and energy that could be spent creating.

  —SIR RICHARD BRANSON, FOUNDER AND CHAIRMAN, THE VIRGIN GROUP

  Of Chaparral Steel, former president and CEO Gordon Forward said:

  We don’t have policies. What we started with essentially were some very basic ideas. First, we decided that such things as trust and honesty were going to play a big role in what we were doing. We felt that a lot of the procedures in many organizations were designed to catch the 3 percent who were trying to cheat in one way or another. We decided to design our rules for the 97 percent we can trust. The others would stand out like sore thumbs, we figured, and they’d eventually leave. That’s exactly what happened.

  One of the biggest restraining forces against working at home is that at the end of the day, employers really don’t know whether or not they can trust their people, so they make the choice to treat the 97 percent who can be trusted like the 3 percent who can’t, instead of the other way around.

  Some might argue that 3 percent is unrealistically low—that it’s more like 10 percent who can’t be trusted. But even if that is true, what about the 90 percent you can trust? Are we letting the “few” define the “many”? And if we are, what’s the impact on speed and cost?