The Question Every Leader Should Ask About Trust

Trust is one of those things that is easier to see when it is missing.

Think about what happens when there is doubt about whether someone will follow through. A reminder gets sent. Someone checks the work. Another person gets copied on the email, just in case. Perhaps another approval gets added to a process that was already taking too long.

Now consider what happens when people trust one another. There is confidence that commitments will be kept, information will be shared, and problems can be raised without everything becoming more complicated than it needs to be.

When it comes to trust, organizations spend a lot of time focused on transactions: documentation, meetings, deadlines, and performance conversations. Yet much of what determines whether people actually trust one another happens in the interactions between the transactions.

Trust Builds Through Experience

Most leaders agree that trust is important, but it's not something leaders can simply declare or require people to have. It develops organically, through experience.

When someone says, "I’ll get back to you," and does, that creates a small piece of evidence. When someone shares something difficult and it is handled with care, that creates another. The reverse is also true. When commitments disappear into the busyness of the day, input is requested but rarely considered, or words and actions conflict, people notice.

Trust is rarely about one grand gesture. It is the accumulation of ordinary experiences that answer basic questions: Can this person be counted on? Will they listen? Will they tell the truth? How will they respond when something goes wrong?

Over time, the answers become part of that person’s reputation.

The Hidden Tax of Low Trust

Stephen M. R. Covey makes a compelling business case for trust in The Speed of Trust. His premise is straightforward: when trust goes down, speed goes down and costs go up. He calls the additional cost a trust tax. When trust is high, the opposite can occur, creating a trust dividend.

That hidden tax is easy to see in day-to-day work. It can look like another approval, another meeting, another person copied on an email, or more time preparing for a conversation because nobody is quite sure how the other person will react.

Good governance matters, but when extra steps exist mainly because people do not trust one another’s intentions, judgment or follow-through, they create friction that costs time, attention, and energy.

High-trust relationships work differently. People are more willing to raise issues early, conversations can be more direct, and disagreements do not automatically become questions about motive.

There Is a Cognitive Tax Too

There is also a brain-based reason why low trust requires so much extra energy.

The brain is continually trying to predict what will happen next, scanning the environment for potential threats. Dr. David Rock’s SCARF model identifies certainty and relatedness among five social factors that can influence threat and reward responses. Certainty helps us anticipate what is likely to happen, while relatedness helps us assess whether the people around us feel more like a friend or foe.

When a leader or colleague is consistent and reliable, there is less to figure out. But when responses are unpredictable, commitments are missed, or intentions are unclear, more attention gets pulled toward anticipating what might happen next.

People may ask themselves, "What did they mean by that? Is this really going to happen? Can I say what I actually think?"

Those types of questions compete for attention that could be directed toward problem-solving, learning, or the work at hand. In other words, the trust tax is not only about extra meetings, emails, and approvals. It also includes a hidden cognitive tax because mistrust leads people to spend valuable brain energy monitoring, interpreting, and second-guessing one another.

Consistency and clarity help build certainty and relatedness, leaving more attention for the work itself.

The Small Interactions Matter

Building trust does not require a major initiative. Much of it comes back to what happens every day:

Follow through. People make small commitments all the time. We've all said, "I’ll look into that," "Let’s take this offline," or, "I’ll get back to you tomorrow." Usually those statements are made with every intention of following through. But then another meeting starts, something urgent arrives, and it's easy to let the commitment slip down the list. Closing the loop matters. If someone raises an issue, let them know what happened. If feedback is requested, explain what was heard and what will happen next. If something cannot be delivered when promised, say so rather than leaving someone wondering.

Be consistent. When your reactions, values, and decision-making frameworks remain steady, people don’t have to spend cognitive energy bracing for mood shifts or changing priorities. Consistency doesn't mean rigidity; it means that people know who you are going to be when you show up, whether the team is navigating the everyday workload, celebrating a win, or going through a period of high stress.

Show people it's safe to speak up. How you respond when someone asks a question, brings bad news, or challenges an idea sets the standard for the entire team. Responding with curiosity instead of defensiveness signals that different perspectives are welcome, boosting feelings of trust and openness.

Have more "water cooler" moments. Trust deepens when people feel seen as humans, not just resources delivering transactions. Simple gestures like asking about life outside of work, acknowledging when someone has carried a heavy load, or actively listening without checking your phone signal genuine relatedness. When team members know you care about their well-being, trust becomes the default rather than the exception.

Trust Does Not Require Perfection

None of this means getting every interaction right. Commitments will occasionally be missed, messages will be unclear, and people will misunderstand one another. Trust does not require perfection. What happens after something goes wrong can become an important trust-building interaction in itself.

Acknowledging, "I said I would get back to you and I didn’t," is different from hoping the other person forgot. Saying, "I can see that I didn’t explain that decision very well," creates a different experience than becoming defensive when someone questions it.

Taking responsibility gives people another piece of evidence about what they can expect from you as a leader. When enough of that evidence is positive, decisions can happen faster, collaboration becomes easier, and less energy is spent checking, protecting and second-guessing.

The Question Every Leader Should Ask

Rather than simply asking, "Do people trust me?", here's a more useful question for you to consider: "What are people experiencing in their everyday interactions with me that gives them reason to trust me?" 

Much of our work happens through transactions. Trust is built in what happens between them.

Interested in developing brain-based leadership skills that last? Explore our Certificate in Applied Leadership (CAL) and applied neuroscience programs at eLeadership Academy®.

About eLeadership Academy^®

eLeadership Academy is the only online training solution that provides accessible, actionable training to develop high-performance leaders that people love to follow. For more information, visit www.eleadershipacademy.com or contact training@eleadershipacademy.com.