The Role of Trust in Change Leadership

More often than not, change begins with an ending. 

It requires leaving something behind or, as the Center for Creative Leadership CCL team put it, “letting go” – of the status quo, of the familiar way of life, of the comfort that comes with doing things the way they have always been done. But letting go isn’t easy; it involves facing the fear of the unknown, losing a bit of control, and dealing with feelings of discomfort. Perhaps this explains why two-thirds of all organizational change efforts fail. Or maybe, as the CCL team argued, the issue lies in how these efforts are approached—focusing more on managing change than on leading people through it.  

Upon hearing this, I was reminded of last year’s CEO Summit – my first with Edison – and Adam Bryant’s keynote on “the inner game of leadership.” One key takeaway from Bryant’s presentation was the importance of trust; it underpins everything in leadership and without it, leaders are doomed to be ineffective.  

But if there’s one thing I know for sure, it’s that trust isn’t given—it’s earned. So, as a leader in periods of organizational change, how much must your team trust you to be able to let go of what they know and follow you into the unknown? And how can leaders build and maintain this trust throughout transitional periods? 

Surprisingly enough, the answers to these questions might be as simple as elementary school arithmetic. 

The Trust Equation 

In teaching us about trust, Adam Bryant referenced the following equation, originally articulated in The Trusted Advisor by Robert Galford, Charles Green, and David Maister: 

As Casey Myers put it in his reflection on the session, “A trustworthy leader should be competent, with enough knowledge and skill to move the company forward. They should be reliable (and/or predictable), executing at a consistently high level. They should maintain strong personal connections with their team, fostering relationships that empower each team member to perform at their best. Additionally, according to Bryant, a trustworthy leader must also be perceived by their team to act in the best interest of the company as a whole.” 

Reflecting now on this year’s CEO Summit and the outcomes of the simulation, I realize that change leadership is all about trust.  

Trust-in-Action in the Actee Change Simulation 

For context, CCL's Actee Change Simulation™  placed Summit attendees in the role of leaders guiding two organizations through a merger. In each chapter of the simulation, teams made decisions about how to manage the merger. These choices affected how employees (the key stakeholders) responded, with the company’s progress represented by a "boat" on a game board. Depending on the decision, the boat would either move closer to or farther from the end goal. Stakeholders could move in or out of the boat and around the game board, reflecting their level of support or resistance. Teams earned points based on their decisions, with a max of 20 points per decision or a loss of up to 4 points if resistance from stakeholders increased, lowering their overall score. 

While I didn’t participate directly in the simulation, I served as a moderator in one of the three breakout rooms. This meant that I got to be a fly on the wall, listening in on teams as they went through the (often intense) decision-making process. Thinking back to Adam Bryant’s keynote, it’s clear to me now that the teams that scored the highest were those whose decisions reflected the key components of the trust equation: competence, reliability, personal connections, and a commitment to acting in the best interest of the newly merged company. Here’s what I mean: 

• Competence: Particularly in the first chapter of the Actee simulation, when the merger had just been announced and integration efforts were just beginning, many teams focused (with positive results) on framing the change effectively. They made decisions that not only elucidated the path ahead, but also laid out the strategy and reasoning behind the merger. These decisions signaled to stakeholders that their leader was sufficiently informed and capable of leading them forward.  

• Reliability: By chapter 2, it was clear that many key stakeholders needed reassurance that the merger was worthwhile and that the boat that their leader was so desperately trying to get them on board was rowing in the right direction. At this point, the highest-scoring teams decided to showcase their reliability by creating opportunities for and taking time to recognize small wins.  

• Personal Connections: This class of decisions was tricky; as a participant in my breakout room put it, there couldn’t be too much emphasis on the “touchy feely” stuff. What stood out to me, however, was the overwhelmingly positive result of leveraging and spotlighting those stakeholders who had championed the change. Linking arms with influences deep within the organization (“The Incredibles,” as they were called in the simulation) created a driving force beyond just the people leader that ultimately helped reduce resistance and get the boat moving ahead more efficiently. These efforts also included empowering employees with the coaching, tools, and resources needed to succeed in their new roles. 

Finally, in the trust equation, the sum of a leader’s competence, reliability, and personal connections is divided by the team’s perception of the leader’s self-interest. In other words, the stakeholders needed to see and believe that their leader was acting with the best interest of the company in mind. This, to me, explains why teams found success in articulating new company policies or working with their stakeholders to reestablish fundamental company values and norms. It also explains why, by Chapter 3, some leaders decided to take a firmer approach – either confronting resistance head-on (“Stop It!”) or moving forward despite opposition. Ultimately, if a leader is truly committed to the company’s success – and they must be – then making progress through change becomes non-negotiable.  

While I am still relatively early in my career, I’ve already faced my fair share of organizational transitions – and I know that many more lie ahead. When it's my turn to lead others through these changes, I’ll first look within to ensure I’m doing enough to earn and keep my team’s trust – to ensure that whatever boat I’m rowing is heading in the right direction, and that the right people remain on board with me. 

3 Questions to Ask Yourself in the Face of Major Change 

If you've been tasked with leading people through a major company change, it's important to check in with yourself to ensure you’re truly embodying trust-based (and trustworthy) leadership. Ask yourself: 

1. Am I effectively communicating the “why” behind this change? Your team’s trust, especially in the beginning, will hinge upon them understanding the purpose and direction of the transformation.
2. Am I maintaining personal connections with my team during this process? In times of change, stress can lead us to forego meaningful connections altogether for the sake of productivity and progress. But building and maintaining trust with your team means supporting and uplifting them, especially in times of uncertainty.
3. Am I acting in the best interests of the company and my team? Nobody wants to follow a leader who only looks out for herself. Check your motivations and align your intentions with overarching company goals, and take care of your team along the way. 

Leading people through change requires trust. What are you doing to actively build and strengthen trust with your team?