Hi, I'm Severin de Wit, host of the TrustTalk podcast, where we dive deep into the fascinating world of trust. With a genuine passion for understanding the foundations and nuances of trust, I am dedicated to uncovering its secrets and sharing compelling stories that illuminate its profound impact. Join me on this captivating journey as we explore the transformative power of trust. Subscribe now and become part of the TrustTalk community
Hi, I'm Severin de Wit, host of the TrustTalk podcast, where we dive deep into the fascinating world of trust. With a genuine passion for understanding the foundations and nuances of trust, I am dedicated to uncovering its secrets and sharing compelling stories that illuminate its profound impact. Join me on this captivating journey as we explore the transformative power of trust. Subscribe now and become part of the TrustTalk community
Interview with Charles H. Green, co-author of the seminal book “The Trusted Advisor” (2000). He talks about the trust paradoxes, the shift from trust as a personal attribute to reputation and branding, and whether getting a real connection is made harder using on-screen connectivity tools. He reflects on the Trust Equation which hasn’t changed over the last 20 years. Potentially the most powerful component, “intimacy” (feeling emotional security in dealing with a person) is more important than most professionals realize. He speaks about lawyers who feel more confident about sharing content than proving intimacy and the importance of listening as a profound method of trust.
About how he came to write the book:
“I had been a general management consultant for 20 years, and then I got involved. I left that and was doing some just contract training and I knew somebody in the faculty of marketing at Columbia Business School. He got involved in a joint in a long training development program for Deloitte & Touche, and they needed some consultants in addition to academics. So I got put onto that team and then like the very beginning of the project, some professor missed an airplane and the client said we have a half an hour free. Can you guys throw together something on the idea of a trusted advisor? And my partner and I said, sure, we’ll come up with something. And, you know, we did a half an hour and it went well. And he said, gee, that’s you know, can you make it an hour next time? Sure we’ll do that. And eventually became a book. And in the rear-view mirror, I realized a lot of what I had done was relevant and made sense, but I hadn’t gone looking for it, you know, was a little bit serendipitous.”
On business development:
“(…) for example, business development, I think if you really explore the idea of trust, you get to the point where you say the purpose of sales is not to get the sale, it is to help the client. And if you would do that, if you behave that way, if you believe that, you end up making more sales. So it’s one of many paradoxes in the area of trust. You know the best way to sell is to stop trying to sell. Instead, serve the client. And guess what? Enough people reciprocate that you actually it’s more effective than if you were trying to tweak every little transaction and so forth.”
On interpersonal contact, in the online environment we are in due to the corona pandemic, using LinkedIn:
“There is a goldmine of interpersonal information there. All you have to do, take a few minutes and look on that LinkedIn profile before you have a phone call and say, gee, I noticed it was snowing in Amsterdam last night, really a lot. Did you get stuck in that snowstorm? How was it? Are you guys able to skate again? How exciting. You know, you’ve made it personal.”
On lawyers, wary of “intimacy” as an important way to build trust:
“Well, let me give you a quick example. You can try this with your lawyer friends. When you run into a client, a lawyer, and they say, you know, don’t give me that soft stuff. I’m a believer in data and, you know, good theory. And don’t waste time on the wishy washy stuff. You say to them, “Ah, I think I understand. What I’m hearing you say is you’re a no nonsense kind of person, right? You like just the data. You don’t want to waste time on all the silly interpersonal crap. Am I right? Is that who you are?” And they’ll say, “yes, that’s who I am.”
“Well, you just establish intimacy with them by trashing the notion of intimacy. You’ve made a connection with them. Lawyers react just like any other person. They want intimacy, they want connection just as much as anyone else, but they fostered this belief system and again, they’re not alone. This is also true of accountants and consultants, this belief in the meritocracy of purely rational thought. It’s just not true.”
Listen to the podcast! Here on this website under “podcasts” and on all major podcast platforms.
In the interview Charles Green quotes from a Bob Dylan song. More about that in an article of Charles Green which he wrote in 2006, and posted on this blog, “To live outside the law, you must be honest”.
The Stephen Covey story about the man and the kid throwing starfish in the ocean, We are sure you know the parable, in case you are not, this is the story:
Want to read what Charles Green said in the interview? Here is the transcript, made by Sonix.ai
“Should we be doing that now? Share those personal messages.” It’s Wednesday morning. A large office in Amsterdam’s Zuidas district. I’m in a meeting with two board members of a professional service firm. We’re talking about employees who post personal messages on their own social media channels. By the way, it’s still about posts in the business sphere. Just not pure professional content, knowledge, or expertise. “I think so,” I say, “In fact, people are more likely to trust you the moment you get more personal.”
Knowledge, free to take away
Today, there are really no professional service firms that don’t share knowledge and expertise online. The consultants at McKinsey do it. Just like the consultants of Big4 firm EY or the more locally operating Berenschot. Law firms are also participating. Dirkzwager was one of the first in the Netherlands to fully commit to sharing their knowledge. All law firms are now doing it. De Brauw, Dentons, LoyensLoeff, all give away their professional views on current affairs for free.
Undoubtedly there was considerable discussion about this a few years ago. “Should we be doing that now? Share that knowledge.” Now it is no longer a question. It’s only logical. Showing that you know a thing or two about something is good for gaining trust. And since everyone googles these days – even when they are in need of professional services – it makes perfect sense to share this knowledge online. Not shielded by a login or paywall.
But is it enough if you only share professional knowledge? If you show what you are good at, without listening to your target audience? If you share factual information without showing anything more of yourself? The answer is “no”. At least, not if you want your target audience to really trust you.
Trust
For professional service firms, trust is essential. Only if clients trust them will they be awarded contracts. The knowledge and expertise they offer is not unique. Others offer exactly the same. Often in the same market. Of course, it is important that customers know the company (brand awareness). Just like knowing that the organization can do something that these customers need (reputation). However, if customers do not trust the organization and its employees, they will not award the company a contract.
For this reason, many professional service firms say they want to be a trusted advisor to their customers. The book with the same title was first published in 2001. In Chapter 8 we find the Trust Equation, an equation with which trustworthiness can be determined. The authors immediately warn that it is not a mathematical formula. The Trust Equation is more of a framework that shows which components influence the degree to which we trust each other.
In the numerator of the equation we find Credibility, Reliability and Intimacy. The first has to do with words; believing that what someone says is true. Reliability has to do with actions; believing that someone keeps his word, for example. Intimacy is a bit more complex. Within a business context it may also sound a bit crazy. Intimacy here means that people feel safe and at ease. Essential if you want to get to the heart of the real problem together.
All parts of the numerator are divided by Self-Orientation, or the degree to which someone is focused on themselves. If we are helped by someone who is mainly concerned with himself (= high denominator) then this is at the expense of our confidence. However, if someone is mainly focused on us, then we are much more likely to believe that she has our best interests at heart. The degree of Self-Orientation is lower and the trust higher.
Let’s get personal
“Should we be doing that right now? Share those personal messages.” Yes, we do! The level of subject matter knowledge and expertise is fine within most professional service firms. I also believe that these organizations stick to their agreements. What is more challenging for them is to create a situation in which others feel at ease. It is precisely because they have so much knowledge (and a gigantic and impressive track record) that they generally have a high status.
This high status comes with risks. As former MIT Sloan professor Edgar Schein shows in his book Humble Inquiry. He uses an example from the operating room. The surgeon has a high status, causing an assistant to not easily contradict him. Not even at the moment when the surgeon is about to make a mistake. If the surgeon wants to prevent this, he will have to open up first. According to Schein, this has to happen before the operation. For example during lunch in the hospital canteen. If the surgeon (with the high status) tells something about himself there, he gives the assistant (with the lower status) the opportunity to also tell something about themselves and thus to level with him.
So sharing a personal message online is much more than just showing something of yourself. It is a way of opening up to others. Showing them that you – with all your knowledge and skills and your enormous track record – are also just a human being. Just like the client who wants to be helped, the student who is looking for an internship or the colleague who needs a sparring partner. With a personal message, you show that you are a person to level with and a person to whom someone can confide her real problems.
But beware…
There is also a downside. Let’s not forget the denominator from the Trust Equation. If you only share posts in which you are focused on yourself, Self-Orientation increases. The trust people have in you will automatically decrease. Show in your messages – both purely business, and more personal – that you have your target audience’s best interests at heart. In general, this means that you serve. Putting yourself in the spotlight by putting others in the spotlight.
And of course, you don’t build trust solely with a few posts on social media. However, it can help you a lot. So dear knowledge leader / critical expert, please be a little more personal. I’m sure it will do you no harm.
Jochem Koole. This article was first published in Dutch on JochemKoole.nl.
