“Sky diving without a parachute is suicide. Total freedom is suicide. …Holing up in a closet is vegetating. Total security is vegetating.”

Gordon MacKenzie, Orbiting the Giant Hairball

The Principle

There is a statistic, perhaps apocryphal, that has floated around for years, which says that people are more afraid of public speaking than they are of death. A workshop participant insightfully pointed out that the reason for that may be that a public speaking engagement seems, for most of us, more imminent. When it comes down to it, we might rather get up in front of people and talk than meet our maker. But, research does point to the fact that getting up in front of others and expressing oneself can cause extreme amounts of stress. When you are presenting with a team, then, you had better trust the folks on stage with you.

Diane Rachel, a coach and performer with BATS Improv in San Francisco, offers an improv course entitled “Sex and Violence”. It is designed to get students comfortable doing scenes that include the most taboo and dangerous subject matter. Why? Because that taboo and dangerous subject matter is the stuff of great theater. We go to the theatre, since the time of the Ancient Greeks, for catharis – to experience the terror and sadness and exhultation and adventure that most of us avoid in real life. So what is it that Rachel is teaching when she teaches a course on “Sex and Violence”? Ultimately, Rachel’s class is mostly about building trust among a group of performers. Trust grows through

acknowledging discomfort,
establishing and enforcing ground rules,
engaging in an activity together.

The last, actually participating, makes the real difference. Ultimately, the only way to engender trust is to show, through your actions, that you are trustworthy. The only way to do that is to act.

This does not mean that you must wait until the moment of crisis – a fire, a war, a performance, a sales call – to build trust. There are plenty of small cues that people read in order to assess whether their teammates and managers should be trusted. Every action, every word, whether directed at us or at those around us, gives us a clue to the trustworthiness of our colleagues. Much of improv rehearsal time focuses on creating trust – helping individuals become more focused and empathic, and providing the group members opportunities to build rapport.

John Phillips of Synectics suggested the following formula to define trust:

Trust ƒ = (Credibility)(Intimacy)/Risk

In this model, “Credibility” is defined as perceived competence - seen as possessing the knowledge, skills and abilities necessary for the task. “Intimacy”, in this context, translates to empathy, the capability to understand, identify with, and care for others. When people believe that someone possesses these two qualities, their trust for him will increase. The last piece of the formula states that the higher the perceived level of risk, the more credibility and intimacy are needed to engender trust.

In business, a lot of formal attention can be focused on assessing credibility. How well does this person perform? How much do they know? As a trainer, credibility is gained through subject-matter knowledge, and group-process skills. If a trainer has no experience in a given industry, that community may question her more. Similarly, if her slides are crowded or confusing her capability may be doubted. As a leader or manager, credibility may come from holding a certain degree or having experience within a given industry or having attained success on certain projects. In all cases, credibility feels easy to measure and to increase through training and experience.

Intimacy, at first glance, seems harder to identify and develop. Isn’t empathy just a personality trait that some people possess or something that grows naturally with time?

Improvisers believe that empathy is a skill. And they have devised exercises to cultivate it. And that is great news for organizations as evidence mounts that emotional intelligence is at least as important a predictor of success as IQ. [Goleman- Citation needed]

In To Kill a Mockingbird, Harper Lee’s classic novel of life in small Southern town, Atticus Finch says to his six-year old daughter, “You just learn a single trick, Scout, you’ll get along better with all kinds of folks…. You never really understand a person till you consider things from his point of view…. Till you climb inside of his skin and walk around in it.” That is a pretty good definition of empathy. It could also define the acting process. Actors learn how to identify with characters and get inside their skins, so to speak. The further they are from the character, the better. Many actors love to play villains, because the “bad guys” are often the more complex and intriguing characters. Interestingly, actors will often say that they do not see their villain personas as evil at all. Once they have understood the character’s pain and motivations, no matter how vile we may think they are, the actors speak of them with affection.

In real life, too, the better we know each other, the greater the chance we will empathize. Traditionally, organizations have aggressively divided what they deemed the “professional” lives of their employees from their “personal” lives. But increasingly, businesses are recognizing that this dichotomy is not only false, but unhelpful. In fact, the more team members know about each other, their colleagues and constituents, the more effective they can be. And as companies and work groups become more diverse, the attention one must pay to getting to know and understand one’s colleagues increases. It used to be that the “Golden Rule” – treat others as you like to be treated – proved a dependable way of guessing and meeting other’s needs. Now, organizational development practitioners speak of the “Platinum Rule” which says “Treat others the way they wish to be treated.” The distinction inherent in this modern-day framing is not superficial. It acknowledges that although as humans we may desire the same things at a fundamental level, in practice how we measure and experience those things (e.g. physical well-being, respect, community, purpose) may show up in radically different ways. For example, in her TED talk on “The Art of Choosing,” Sheena Iyengar shares a story about attempting to order sugar with her green tea while living in Japan. The waiter and eventually the manager refuse to serve it to her, because putting sugar in green tea is just not done! When Iyengar defends her desire, the staff goes so far as to tell her that the restaurant does not have any, rather than accede to her request. However, when Iyengar gives up the argument and orders coffee instead, it arrives with two packets of sugar on the side of the cup. As Iyengar puts it,

The American way, to quote Burger King, is to “Have it Your way,” because, as Starbucks says, “Happiness is in your choices.” But from the Japanese perspective, it is their duty to protect those who don’t know any better… from making the wrong choices. [TEDGlobal, Iyengar]

So, true empathic interaction may not be as easy as we initially think. On the other hand, the effort to empathize can, in and of itself, have impact. Building trust begins with expressing a desire to build mutually respectful relationships, and simply investing in asking about others can reap great rewards on both sides. As Corey Jamison, of the Kaleel Jamison Group, a consulting company specializing in creating cultures of inclusion, says, “Inclusion begins with ‘Hello’.”

A first step to building trust involves consciously providing opportunities for colleagues to learn about each other. Try this: at a meeting or training, ask participants to exchange the stories behind their names -first name, last name, nickname, whatever. For example, “Kat” is short for “Katherine”. I got the name “Katherine” because my mother had always been told she looked strikingly like Katharine Hepburn. My father made up the name “Koppett” and there are still only four of us in the world. He was born in Russia, and when he became a sportswriter in the 50’s, he changed his surname to “Koppett” because our original family name, “Kopeliovitch”, was constantly mispronounced, and, he said, it wouldn’t fit on the newspaper’s byline. (Sadly for him, “Koppett” is also constantly missed pronounced. It’s “KOP-it” like “Stop it”.)

This straight-forward exercise spurs conversation and reveals professionally appropriate but personal details that individuals often have not thought to share. Participants report that it is low-risk, and in the United States especially, names unlock such varied histories. As innocuous as they may seem, these small bits of information begin to weave a net of safety and connection that allows empathy to grow and trust to develop. “Your dad was a sportswriter? How ‘bout them Mets?” “I LOVE Katharine Hepburn. Don’t we remind of you the women in ‘Desk Set’ sometimes?” “I always wondered how you pronounced your last name.”

Another getting-to-know-each-other activity, “Stats” is a variation on musical chairs. Participants sit in a circle, with one chair-less person standing in the center. The person in the middle shares a fact about himself. Anyone to whom that fact also applies must get up and find a new chair. Those are the only rules. We have found that this simple game produces great delight. There are a couple of wonderful things about it. First, it creates an environment in which the participants themselves control what they reveal about themselves, and decide what they wish to learn about others. Second, the exercise is designed so that it is not the most aggressive or most vocal people who are in control. In fact, it may turn out that the more retiring team members find themselves in the center of the circle more. This enables those who might not otherwise have a voice to lead the discussion.

Getting to know each other makes it more likely that we will not only pay attention to each other, but that we will support each other. “Make your partner look good,” is an improv mantra. It means, concentrate on your partner rather than on yourself, and take responsibility for both of you. “If your partner drops the ball,” we say, “it is your responsibility, not his.” What a difference when team members interact this way. “Ball Toss” physicalizes this concept. Participants stand in a circle and toss a ball in a repeated pattern so that each person receives and throws the ball once. Once the pattern is established, the facilitator adds more and more balls, increasing the level of difficulty. Finally, the participants are instructed to walk around randomly while maintaining the same pattern. At first, groups struggle. Team members throw balls without looking to see if their partner is ready. People blame each other for dropping balls. Sometimes, participants try to confuse each other by throwing especially fast or high. However, when the facilitator tells them that the thrower is responsible if the ball does not get caught, things change. People focus on their partners rather than themselves. They make eye contact before tossing the balls. They aim and throw gently. They call each other’s names to get their partner’s attention. “Acountability” became a corporate buzzword early in this century. Ironically, the conversation often devolved into of admonitions directed at others, as in “YOU should be more accountable.” By focusing on making your partner look good leaders, managers and individual contributors can separate true accountability from thinly disguised blame.

Earlier in the chapter we talked about how Diane Rachel built trust in her “Sex and Violence” workshop by acknowledging discomfort, establishing and enforcing ground rules, and having her students practice together. Using improv games, it is possible to see trust improve before your eyes. The use of an “ice-breaker” admits that there is ice to be broken – it acknowledges discomfort. Games of all sorts provide a structure or set of rules within which people can play with security – they set ground rules. And the more you play, the more comfortable people become – games work as practice for higher risk situations.

It cannot be said too often: Whether in the context of daily interpersonal activity, or in a workshop setting, trust is the foundation upon which everything rests. If you wish workshop participants or team members to make themselves vulnerable, you must nurture their efforts regardless of the outcome. The following chapters present a variety of concepts, all of which are capable of enhancing creativity, positive communication and collaboration. None of them will amount to anything unless the environment is imbued with trust.

The Principle in Action

As trainers, managers and leaders, we require people to follow our advice and procedures. In order to be effective, we must be deemed trustworthy. In addition to incorporating trust-building activities into our work, here are some ideas for enhancing trust.

Practice What You Preach

The “Do-what-I-say-not-what-I-do” school of guidance has been shown to be ineffective. If you have enough authority, people might comply, but they will not trust you. If you encourage people to take risks, and then punish them when they fail, they are even more unlikely to risk than if you had never brought up the topic.

A teambuilding consultant I know used to ask his employees to deliver parts of his training workshops as part of their professional development. “This is your bit,” he would say. “I trust you. Design it however you wish.” Then, when the moment came, he would interrupt and contradict them in front of the workshop participants. Needless to say, trust eroded very quickly. And the effect was only exacerbated when he spoke of trust the next time.

Recognize that You Are Seen

Human beings are highly attuned to potential danger, and they judge situations by what has happened to others before them. It is the monkey who saw the previous monkey eat the poisoned berry, and therefore avoided eating it himself, which survived. Every interaction that you have affects not only the person whom it involves, but also everyone that sees the event or hears the story.

In the example above, when the consultant undermined his trainer, he not only sabotaged her trust in him, but the trust of his other employees. They heard the story, and became nervous about training with him. Plus, the workshop participants doubted the consultant. They saw what he was doing. If he was not going to support his own people, why should they believe him when he said they should take care of each other? And why should they feel safe to participate in his activities or to ask questions? It is frighteningly easy to build a reputation. Build the one you want.

Set Expectations

If direct reports or students are unclear about what it is you want of them, they can feel undermined, even when that is not your intention. The more straightforward you can be about the procedures and outcomes you expect, the more likely it is that people will succeed. You will not have to go back on your word. They will not feel confused or wrongly attacked if things veer off track. It is wonderful to offer people freedom to create and problem-solve in their own way. However, if there are specific results you are looking for, you had better explain them from the beginning. Perhaps if the consultant above had set more specific expectations of his trainers, for example, he would not have felt the need to jump in during the workshop.

Frame Your Intentions

We are aware of our intentions, whereas others can only guess them based on our behaviors. By “framing” or setting context for your actions, you may defuse mistrust born of misinterpretation. Studies of attribution theory show that people will forgive harmful actions if they believe the intentions were honorable. For example, if I arrive late to a meeting, other attendees may assume that I do not think their time is valuable. Or they may assume I am unreliable. If I let them know that I was in a car accident or, less dramatically, if I apologize for keeping everyone waiting, and let them know that I respect them and their schedules, I can mitigate the damage. That does not mean that actions will be excused time and time again, but in individual instances, sharing your intentions can avert the erosion of trust. Let people know why you are requesting something. Tell them why you made a particular decision. Articulate the need, as you see it, for whatever process you have employed.

Provide Low-Risk Opportunities

If you ask people to take huge risks without establishing yourself as dependable, you are likely to be rebuffed. Find small ways to reassure people before you embark on high-risk activities. As mentioned, games are great tools for accomplishing this task. Another technique is to have one-on-one conversations with those you are coaching - conversations devoted only to uncovering their needs and concerns. On the simplest level, let people know you are willing to listen, before you ask them to. Yet another strategy is to give people easy tasks that they feel comfortable with before challenging them, so that they can trust their own competence, and you can trust your ability to be supportive.

Pick Your Activities Carefully

Some of the most powerful training activities are “Jolts”. A jolt is an experience designed to dramatically challenge a participant’s attitudes or beliefs. Jolts can create useful epiphanies. They can also leave participants feeling vulnerable, manipulated or betrayed. In choosing to use these kinds of activities, weigh the payoff against the price. Like a physician, a trainer’s responsibility is first to do no harm. Sometimes, a trainer chooses an activity, not because it is the best way to facilitate learning, but because she enjoys the ease or status that accompanies running it. Be clear about why you are employing an activity that requires manipulation. Is it necessary to consciously mislead the group or set them up to fail? Can you get the same value from a less confrontational experience? Remember, trust is even harder to rebuild than to build.

Key Points:

Trust is the foundation for all creative and collaborative endeavors.
To establish trust
- acknowledge discomfort
- establish and follow ground rules
- practice together
Trust ƒ (credibility)(intimacy)/Risk
Make your partner look good
Practice what you preach
Recognize that you are seen
Set expectations
Frame your intentions
Provide low-risk opportunities
Pick your activities carefully