When I go to the gym in the mornings, I put in my earbuds and mentally check out until my body's done all the things it needs to do. It's how I cope with being bored during a workout... 'cause let's face it, "keep this elliptical moving" doesn't usually tax the brain very much. While I was there this morning, I looked up and observed the humor of "being balanced"... 2 big screens right next to each other, one with left-leaning news and the other with right-leaning news.

Note: This post isn't about politics. Stand down from Red Alert and lower your shields!

It occurred to me, as I watched this curious dichotomy in front of me, that neither side trusts "those in authority". And that got me thinking about my career, a place where I've had an extremely tenuous relationship with "authority" for a long time.

Generally speaking, I'm a trusting person. I try hard to see the good in someone, to assume positive intent, sometimes to the point of naïveté... but I realized this morning as the sweat rolled down my face that by default I don't extend that same trust to "authority figures" in my career. When I'm faced with someone in my career who's exercising their authority over me, I naturally (instinctively?) recoil from it.

Not a bad revelation for the first 5 minutes on the elliptical. Warm-up complete, and I have a thought to mull over for the rest of the workout!

So why do I respond this way? As I kept on stepping, I thought back to the political picture that sparked this thought, and I thought that politics are a mess because political figures have stopped working to earn the trust of the population. No surprise there if you've ever watched the news before, but it made me then wonder... does my general distrust for authority figures in my career stem from the same sort of cause?

And it clicked.

I have a problem being told to trust without cause.

Where Leaders Go Wrong

Most of us start our careers as Individual Contributors (ICs)... and we're all working on climbing the ladder. We put it all out there and work hard to prove that we have what it takes to lead, in hopes of getting that promotion and moving out of the rank & file into the higher-pay, higher-prestige "manager" space.

Let's imagine for a moment that we do that, and we convince the management that we're worthy to join their ranks. We probably poured a great deal of effort into learning to balance a budget, working on efforts that are strategically important, and helping the business grow; things that show that forward-thinking approach and innovative nature that companies want to see in their leadership. Those aren't bad things, and it's often enough to get you noticed and promoted to management... but it misses something.

What about the people we're supposed to be leading? Did the other ICs trust us? Did we spend our time impressing the higher-ups (which I totally understand, after all they make the promotion decision) and forget to earn the trust of those we would be leading?

As I think of my own prior conflicts with authority, I found that in every case, I had no trust in the person who was "leading" me because it had been implied rather than earned. That is, I was "expected to trust Bob because he's my manager" rather than "I trusted Bob to be my manager". It's wild how a subtle difference in the wording fundamentally shifts the problem!

It's a human tendency to work really hard to achieve something, and then take a moment to rest on your laurels. And if you earned the trust of your team in the promotion process, it probably won't hurt to do that.

HOWEVER

When your team adds a new person, you're at Square 1 with the new person... and what's more, the trust you've earned with the rest of your team is also at risk! The new person might not know anything about you, so their trust in you is only at that default level (which as we see from my opening, could be quite low!). Meanwhile, if you fail to cultivate that trust with the new person, you'll damage the trust you've earned in the rest of your team as they watch how things unfold.

And THIS is the shortcut that I see managers, directors, and VPs take... "I earned my stripes doing blah, blah, blah so I don't have to earn their trust, they just need to accept that I'm in charge and trust me."

Part of your responsibility as a manager is continually earning the trust of your team, one member at a time. You might think that you get by with shortcutting it on occasion... but you're setting yourself up for long-term problems, because that person whose trust you assumed will have a harder time trusting you further down the road. They'll push back on things and you won't understand why... "I've got years of experience with this! Why are they being so difficult?"

Bruh. It's a lack of trust.

How do I get them to Trust me?

Here are some differences I see between people who have earned my trust and people who didn't:

• People I trust tell me when they're just guessing. This one I put first on purpose, because it's a dead giveaway. I remember cases where business decisions were made that I didn't agree with, but they were presented as "we're doing this thing because I said so" rather than "hey, we're trying something to see if we can improve things, give us a little time to experiment". Don't double-down on ego & bravado going into a situation; tell me that you don't know and we'll work together to find the best answer.

• People I trust give me trust in return. If you want to engender trust, trust them yourself. Give people some room and some latitude to solve problems. Develop a partnership rather than a need to order the steps yourself. If your team is just supposed to blindly do what you say, why do they all have brains too?

• People I trust are more interested in getting to know me than they are in being "efficient". It takes TIME to develop trust. That means quality time spent together - regular 1:1 meetings that aren't always goal-oriented are important. Get to know them, let them tell you about themselves and dividends will be paid. I absolutely hate the Taylorist-rooted philosophy that there should be a "professional-distance" barrier between a manager and an employee, because it's so wrongly interpreted. We take it to mean "we have to be impersonal" when in reality it means "never put yourself in a position to unfairly profit from your subordinates."