There is so much evidence out there that trust is the bedrock of team performance. Whether that’s scientific research, or case studies, or your own lived experience of being in a team. I believe it is so fundamental that I created a podcast episode about it.
Trust me (chuckles), you’ll want to listen to the episode.
I hope you find it helpful.
There’s a famous phrase about trust that I share often,
“Trust is built at the speed of a snail and lost at the speed of a racehorse.”
I don’t know who came up with that phrase but whoever it was gets to the heart of how fragile a thing trust is. And yet, all too often I see people in organisations take it for granted. In this episode, I’m going to explore different aspects of trust in the workplace and the things that I encourage managers like you to focus on.
What factors help facilitate team trust?
A 2018 study, led by Ana Cristina Costa, explored how important trust is when it comes to team performance and the factors that help build trust (Costa, Fulmer & Anderson, 2018). In a review of 125 studies, Ana Cristina and her colleagues found that trust is influenced at three levels.
First, at an individual level where trust comes from people having trusting natures and taking the time to build relationships.
Second, at a team level, where trust is nurtured through the quality of relationships team members have with each other AND the quality of relationship they have with you as the team leader. At the team level, the researchers found that tasks where people needed to work together helped build trust along with a team environment where people could give open and honest feedback safely.
Third, many teams operate inside a wider organisational system, so the researchers also looked at the impact the wider the organisation has on levels of trust in a team. It seems that fair HR policies, along with an ethical culture and strong sense of corporate social responsibility all helped build trust.
The key takeaway from this research? Higher levels of trust tended to lead to better levels of performance, and higher job satisfaction.
I think there’s something here, for me, also about the signals that top leadership sends in their day-to-day behaviour and expectations, implicit and explicit.
Many years ago, I was asked to run a session on trust with the top 200 leaders and managers of an organisation. When I met with the chief executive for the briefing, they were really proud of how trusting the organisation was. Not only was it an organisational value (I’d already spotted the framed values in the lobby), but trust was everywhere. Until I found it wasn’t.
After the initial briefing, I went on a wander around the different buildings and spaces. I found formal signs and paper posters telling people what not to do. Lots of things about what was prohibited, what to stop. From signs telling people to be quiet in the meeting areas, to signs telling people to not use mobile phones in the toilet, to posters telling people to not eat anywhere but designated places. Then there were all the policies. There were more than 30 HR policies alone, many of which were about what people couldn’t and shouldn’t do.
If you remember episode one of this season, I mentioned one of the four aspects of culture – artefacts. These are the physical representation of the culture. Well, all these signs and policies – among other things I won’t go into here – all sent one very clear signal. We don’t trust you. And this was confirmed when I met with a focus group of middle managers who talked about the number of sign off levels to get reports and other things signed off. Things had to go to their managers and their managers’ managers often adding huge amounts of extra and unnecessary time to projects and workflow. This was completely at odds with what the chief executive thought the culture was.
What unintentional signals are being sent out in your team or organisation when it comes to trust?
A taxonomy of trust for teams
Let’s get back to another bit of research to help you think about creating a high trust team culture. In 2020, a group of German researchers came up with a taxonomy of factors that help facilitate trust in teams (Breuer, Huffmeier, Hibben & Hertel, 2020). It seems there are five things that help create high levels of trust, some of which echo the research led by Ana Cristina Costa. The five factors are:
- Confidence in our colleagues’ abilities and levels of conscientiousness.
- Feeling that our care and kindness are reciprocated, that there is emotional care and support for each other.
- Seeing integrity in action through good moral judgment and ethical values.
- Experiencing transparency through people being open and readily sharing information, with people’s roles and responsibilities being crystal clear.
- Being able to rely on team members because we know they’ll follow through on commitments. They’re consistent and predictable.
© 2026 Sketchnote of 5 foundations of trust by Hayley Lewis
Interestingly, the researchers found that these factors did not differ significantly from face-to-face and virtual team interactions. So if you’re a manager with a hybrid or remote team, these five factors are a helpful thing for you to focus on.
The characteristics of high-trust leaders
You’ll have heard me say on previous episodes that you play a big part in your team’s culture. In his book, The Science of Change, Professor Richard Boyatzis says,
“Leaders often have power and social status to be more infectious and spread contagion faster than others.”
In a study led by Joanna Paliskiewicz, the researchers looked at the role trust in a leader had in the extent to which people readily shared information and knowledge with each other (Paliskiewicz, Goluchowski & Koohang, 2015). As part of this study, the researchers developed an instrument to assess levels of trust in a leader. They identified 10 characteristics leaders need to display to be trusted. As I share them, think about how you might do against each of them if I were to ask your team their thoughts on your leadership. The 10 characteristics are:
- Level of ability and competence – we’re more likely to trust a leader who knows what they’re doing.
- Benevolence – we’re more likely to trust a leader who is compassionate and empathetic.
- Congruency – we’re more likely to trust a leader who works with us, in partnership.
- Consistency – we’re more likely to trust a leader whose actions align with their words and who is consistent in how they do things.
- Communication – we’re more likely to trust a leader who communicates in a clear, straightforward and high-quality way.
- Dependability – we’re more likely to trust a leader we know we can depend upon.
- Integrity – ah, the moral compass bit. The principles and values you live by determined how trusted you are. And I’m talking about the values you actually demonstrate, not the ones you say.
- Openness – we’re more likely to trust a leader who is open-minded and non-judgmental. This makes me think of the ‘benefit of the doubt’ baseline that Dr Nancy Doyle talks about in the last episode.
- Reliability – a leader who is reliable is more likely to be trusted.
- Transparency – a leader who doesn’t hide or block information is central to building trust. And look, I get it. I’ve been in leadership roles where I’ve not been able to share things immediately, for example, if there is an embargo or some other legal reason. But it’s okay to tell your team that. They’re not stupid. Most people sense when something is up. This is about letting them know that as soon as you’re able to tell them, you’ll tell them.
Trust doesn’t happen just by accident. It needs the right conditions and care. In his book, The Thin Book of Trust, Charles Feltman says,
“Having the trust of those you work with is too important not to be intentional about building and maintaining it.”
What things are you intentionally doing to help facilitate positive trusting relationships across your team? Between team members and with you, as the leader?
Remember, it starts with you.
3 practical things you can do to build trust
- Conduct a self-audit.
Reflect on each of the 10 characteristics from the study led by Joanna Paliskiewicz. I’ve shared a sketchnote summary for you to download in the show notes. Rate yourself on a scale of 1 to 10 on each – where 1 is the worst you could be doing, and 10 is the best. With the lowest scoring characteristic, identify one thing you can do to improve it and commit to taking action over the next month. Alternatively, you could ask your team members to score you on each of these characteristics. And when you get the feedback, respond constructively and then show what you’re doing to work on any issues. I mean, there’s no greater demonstration of being a trustworthy leader that that!
© 2023 Sketchnote of 10 characteristics of trust by Hayley Lewis
2. Show your team members you trust them.
A Norwegian study involving 1,100 people found that feeling trusted by our manager plays a large part in the extent to which we learn, share knowledge and information, and help other team members (Nerstad et al, 2018). One of the most powerful ways you can show your staff we trust them is by delegating things to them and then letting them get on. This doesn’t mean you’re not there to support them if they need but you’re not checking in and micromanaging every little thing they do for the task you’ve delegated.
Reflect on how you demonstrate you trust your team. What things do you do that clearly signal you trust people? Is there anything you do that might undermine feelings of trust? How effective are you at delegating?
3. Speak less, listen more.
In a study looking at the impact of silence in organisational life, the researchers found that managers who were more tolerant of silence seemed to create more trust and have a more positive effect on members of staff (Vakola & Bouradas, 2005). This, in turn, appeared to lead to staff getting more involved in decision making and generally having a more positive attitude.
If you tend to dominate discussions, or if you jump in when someone doesn’t answer your question immediately, set yourself a goal of holding the silence. For example, when asking a team member a question in a one-to-one, count slowly to 20 in your head.
I hope you found this helpful. What is one action you’re motivated to take after this?
About the Manage with Confidence podcast
The Manage with Confidence podcast is full of practical and evidence-based tools, tips and skills to help you be the best people manager possible.
It was launched in 2026 by Dr Hayley Lewis and is listened to by people managers, HR professions and coaches in 22 countries around the world. It exists to support people managers, because better managers means better business and better worklife.
You can find the podcast online including Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music and YouTube.
Post author: Dr Hayley Lewis. First published on the HALO Psychology website 27 October 2026.
For more insights on management and the psychology of work subscribe to my monthly email newsletter.
References
Boytatzis, R.E. (2025). The Science of Change: Discovering sustained, desired change from individuals to organizations and communities. Oxford University Press.
Breuer, C., Hüffmeier, J., Hibben, F., & Hertel, G. (2020). Trust in teams: A taxonomy of perceived trustworthiness factors and risk-taking behaviors in face-to-face and virtual teams. Human Relations, 73 (1), 3-34.
Costa, A.C., Fulmer, C.A., & Anderson, N.R. (2018). Trust in work teams: An integrative review, multilevel model, and future directions. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39 (2), 169-184.
Feltman, C. (2024). The Thin Book of Trust (3rd ed.). Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Nerstad, C.G.L., Searle, R., Černe, M., Dysvik, A., Škerlavaj, M., & Scherer, R. (2018). Perceived mastery climate, felt trust, and knowledge sharing. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39 (4), 429–447.
Paliskiewicz, J., Goluchowski, J., & Koohang, A. (2015). Leadership, trust, and knowledge management in relation to organizational performance: Developing an instrument. Online Journal of Applied Knowledge Management, 3 (2), 19-35.
Vakola, M., & Bouradas, D. (2005). Antecedents and consequences of organisational silence: an empirical investigation. Employee Relations: The International Journal, 27 (5), 441–458.