Management: A Matter of Trust
12 September 2012
Read by 2815 persons
We often speak of our time as an era where we manage uncertainty. In the face of doubt, managers may need trust more than ever: trust in themselves, in their team, and in the future.
How is trust a key to management? What does it change in the manager's relationship with their team and in their perception of events?
Management largely rests on a relationship, of oneself to oneself, of oneself to others, and of oneself to the world. Trust, among other factors, induces this relationship; it dictates its functioning. Thus, the manager who trusts themselves takes more risks, is more active, and is driven by positive emotions (desire to succeed, joy of success); thus, they often accomplish more than the manager who doubts themselves.
Managerial Self-Confidence
This self-confidence also has an impact on their relationship with their team. Confident, the manager needs less to defend their territory and is less susceptible to power games. Their confidence offers a space for healthy exchanges with their team, where co-construction can replace a directive management style.
Because what happens when the manager lacks self-confidence? They are on the defensive, they distrust the team and seek to know what is being said or thought about them. They dedicate some of their energy to escaping criticism or delicate situations. They communicate less, or less well, with their team than the confident manager.
Of course, a balance is essential: excessive self-confidence makes one arrogant and creates the ground for a power struggle—this excess being, in some cases, another face of a lack of confidence.
Let's take the example of a collaborator who questions their manager in front of the entire team: "Why did you hide the reorganization from us? All the other teams have known for a long time." The confident manager will find an assertive response without aggression, will know how to be transparent without justifying themselves. The manager who doubts themselves risks responding defensively, either with aggression ("I don't have to account to you! I choose where and when I communicate strategic information.") or by avoidance, avoiding answering the question ("I don't have time to talk to you about it today, we'll see about it later.")
In this example, the manager is confronted with a situation that, depending on their level of confidence, can trigger a fear that they face with their resources—including their confidence.
The manager's fear also speaks to the confidence they place in their team: what is their level of trust in others?
The Manager's Trust in Others
Do you know that manager who controls everything in the smallest details: your work, your hours, your actions, your interactions with others, etc.? This profile is that of the "controller," who naturally lacks confidence in their collaborators. Often, it is not the person being controlled who is targeted: they control each person on the team with equal zeal.
The consequences are multiple and can prove disastrous for the team's motivation, creativity, and autonomy. Thus, the collaborator who undergoes "micromanagement" on each of their tasks feels neither valued nor empowered; they may become demotivated and choose to strictly conform to their manager's instructions... they then produce the minimum and leave their potential dormant. A loss for the company! Not to mention that work can be slowed down if the manager demands validation before dissemination.
Another example: the collaborator who feels under surveillance may be irritated and adopt a cunning behavior to escape their overseer. When a manager believes that "when the cat's away, the mice will play," they induce in their team a behavior that confirms their prediction. This is what is called the Pygmalion effect, discovered by Robert Rosenthal:
"The Pygmalion effect is a factor of cultural reinforcement in companies (...) When trust between managers and collaborators is lacking, the intentions of the former encourage the latter to make mistakes," writes Bernadette Lecerf-Thomas in "Neurosciences et Management."
Sometimes, the manager does not control their collaborator openly; they do it discreetly (they check their work through other involved people, ask them "Are they working well at the moment?", they reread each letter produced by their collaborator). The effect is similar because it is likely that the collaborator will realize it sooner or later, and often it is the manager themselves who reveals themselves by mentioning a fact that they are not supposed to know.
The Pygmalion effect also works positively. Thus, a manager who has complete confidence in the loyalty of their collaborators and gives them freedom by saying "I know you will make good use of it and that you will not disappoint me" is likely to obtain loyalty in return. Similarly, the manager who believes in their team and conveys this confidence leads the team to have confidence in themselves; think of the effect produced by words like "I have confidence in you, I know you will succeed" or "I'm not worried, you have all the resources to succeed in this project."
If a manager's lack of confidence in their team presents serious drawbacks, vigilance still presents advantages. Because what happens when the manager places excessive trust in their team? They do not check the work done, leave complete autonomy to the team, which may abuse it (for example, on break times, schedules, personal use of the tools provided) or simply make mistakes that escape the manager.
Example: an IT team working in complete autonomy makes a bad technical choice. None of the collaborators realize it. The manager can make them aware of the mistake they have identified either through their own technical knowledge or by their concern to question the team about their technical choices and their relevance.
Hence the adage "trust does not exclude control." All the subtlety lies in the right positioning of the cursor between trust on one side and control on the other! Trusting implies taking a risk... the one who takes it has enough confidence to manage the consequences.
The Manager's Trust in the Future
Finally, managing requires a dose of confidence in the future and the possibility of success. This confidence is the engine that allows us to move forward, to undertake, and to lead teams in a dynamic that is beneficial for the company.
The sales manager who believes they will achieve their sales target is more likely to achieve it. This phenomenon is very well described by the work of Richard Wiseman, author of "The Luck Factor"; here we find the notion of self-fulfilling prophecy. Repeating daily "it's a crisis" is equivalent to programming oneself to experience all the effects of the crisis. Fatality?
Conversely, can one have excessive confidence in the future? Perhaps, because managing also involves anticipating setbacks and planning responses.
Knowing how to manage one's confidence is indeed a manager's skill. How to develop it?
Coaching responds to this strong expectation (the question of trust very often arises in management coaching, whatever the initial problem). It allows the development of a feeling of confidence through awareness and affirmation through action; measured actions allow one to go from success to success. Confidence is built like a building, brick by brick; coaching often provides the first brick, through the solid confidence that the coach projects onto their client.
Karine Aubry.
Lematin.ma
Published September 9, 2012.
Posted online September 12, 2012.
How is trust a key to management? What does it change in the manager's relationship with their team and in their perception of events?
Management largely rests on a relationship, of oneself to oneself, of oneself to others, and of oneself to the world. Trust, among other factors, induces this relationship; it dictates its functioning. Thus, the manager who trusts themselves takes more risks, is more active, and is driven by positive emotions (desire to succeed, joy of success); thus, they often accomplish more than the manager who doubts themselves.
Managerial Self-Confidence
This self-confidence also has an impact on their relationship with their team. Confident, the manager needs less to defend their territory and is less susceptible to power games. Their confidence offers a space for healthy exchanges with their team, where co-construction can replace a directive management style.
Because what happens when the manager lacks self-confidence? They are on the defensive, they distrust the team and seek to know what is being said or thought about them. They dedicate some of their energy to escaping criticism or delicate situations. They communicate less, or less well, with their team than the confident manager.
Of course, a balance is essential: excessive self-confidence makes one arrogant and creates the ground for a power struggle—this excess being, in some cases, another face of a lack of confidence.
Let's take the example of a collaborator who questions their manager in front of the entire team: "Why did you hide the reorganization from us? All the other teams have known for a long time." The confident manager will find an assertive response without aggression, will know how to be transparent without justifying themselves. The manager who doubts themselves risks responding defensively, either with aggression ("I don't have to account to you! I choose where and when I communicate strategic information.") or by avoidance, avoiding answering the question ("I don't have time to talk to you about it today, we'll see about it later.")
In this example, the manager is confronted with a situation that, depending on their level of confidence, can trigger a fear that they face with their resources—including their confidence.
The manager's fear also speaks to the confidence they place in their team: what is their level of trust in others?
The Manager's Trust in Others
Do you know that manager who controls everything in the smallest details: your work, your hours, your actions, your interactions with others, etc.? This profile is that of the "controller," who naturally lacks confidence in their collaborators. Often, it is not the person being controlled who is targeted: they control each person on the team with equal zeal.
The consequences are multiple and can prove disastrous for the team's motivation, creativity, and autonomy. Thus, the collaborator who undergoes "micromanagement" on each of their tasks feels neither valued nor empowered; they may become demotivated and choose to strictly conform to their manager's instructions... they then produce the minimum and leave their potential dormant. A loss for the company! Not to mention that work can be slowed down if the manager demands validation before dissemination.
Another example: the collaborator who feels under surveillance may be irritated and adopt a cunning behavior to escape their overseer. When a manager believes that "when the cat's away, the mice will play," they induce in their team a behavior that confirms their prediction. This is what is called the Pygmalion effect, discovered by Robert Rosenthal:
"The Pygmalion effect is a factor of cultural reinforcement in companies (...) When trust between managers and collaborators is lacking, the intentions of the former encourage the latter to make mistakes," writes Bernadette Lecerf-Thomas in "Neurosciences et Management."
Sometimes, the manager does not control their collaborator openly; they do it discreetly (they check their work through other involved people, ask them "Are they working well at the moment?", they reread each letter produced by their collaborator). The effect is similar because it is likely that the collaborator will realize it sooner or later, and often it is the manager themselves who reveals themselves by mentioning a fact that they are not supposed to know.
The Pygmalion effect also works positively. Thus, a manager who has complete confidence in the loyalty of their collaborators and gives them freedom by saying "I know you will make good use of it and that you will not disappoint me" is likely to obtain loyalty in return. Similarly, the manager who believes in their team and conveys this confidence leads the team to have confidence in themselves; think of the effect produced by words like "I have confidence in you, I know you will succeed" or "I'm not worried, you have all the resources to succeed in this project."
If a manager's lack of confidence in their team presents serious drawbacks, vigilance still presents advantages. Because what happens when the manager places excessive trust in their team? They do not check the work done, leave complete autonomy to the team, which may abuse it (for example, on break times, schedules, personal use of the tools provided) or simply make mistakes that escape the manager.
Example: an IT team working in complete autonomy makes a bad technical choice. None of the collaborators realize it. The manager can make them aware of the mistake they have identified either through their own technical knowledge or by their concern to question the team about their technical choices and their relevance.
Hence the adage "trust does not exclude control." All the subtlety lies in the right positioning of the cursor between trust on one side and control on the other! Trusting implies taking a risk... the one who takes it has enough confidence to manage the consequences.
The Manager's Trust in the Future
Finally, managing requires a dose of confidence in the future and the possibility of success. This confidence is the engine that allows us to move forward, to undertake, and to lead teams in a dynamic that is beneficial for the company.
The sales manager who believes they will achieve their sales target is more likely to achieve it. This phenomenon is very well described by the work of Richard Wiseman, author of "The Luck Factor"; here we find the notion of self-fulfilling prophecy. Repeating daily "it's a crisis" is equivalent to programming oneself to experience all the effects of the crisis. Fatality?
Conversely, can one have excessive confidence in the future? Perhaps, because managing also involves anticipating setbacks and planning responses.
Knowing how to manage one's confidence is indeed a manager's skill. How to develop it?
Coaching responds to this strong expectation (the question of trust very often arises in management coaching, whatever the initial problem). It allows the development of a feeling of confidence through awareness and affirmation through action; measured actions allow one to go from success to success. Confidence is built like a building, brick by brick; coaching often provides the first brick, through the solid confidence that the coach projects onto their client.
Karine Aubry.
Lematin.ma
Published September 9, 2012.
Posted online September 12, 2012.
