Our guest for episode 99 is Frédérique Six, Associate Professor of Public Governance at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam and a visiting professor at the GOVTRUST Centre of Excellence at the University of Antwerp. She explores the complex relationship between trust and control within organizations, particularly those that perform public tasks such as healthcare, education, and policing. She explains two main perspectives on the relationship between trust and control. The traditional view sees them as substitutes, where more control means less trust, and vice versa. However, she advocates for a more nuanced view, where trust and control can complement each other. When controls are experienced as enabling rather than coercive, they help build trust by promoting fairness, predictability, and ethical behavior.

She also discusses her use of motivation theory, which distinguishes between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. According to this theory, employees perform better when their basic psychological needs—autonomy, competence, and relatedness—are met. Frédérique explains how these needs are influenced by control systems and how this balance affects both trust and motivation within organizations.

Frédérique highlights the multifaceted nature of trust, noting that it is context-dependent but guided by a universal sequence: a trustor assesses the trustworthiness of a trustee and decides whether to take a trusting action based on that assessment. She explains that while trust is influenced by situational factors, there are common elements across different contexts, which makes trust a universal yet complex phenomenon.

As the discussion concludes, Frédérique reflects on the challenges faced by young researchers studying trust. She believes that identifying and challenging deeply held beliefs about trust and control will be crucial for advancing trust-based governance. While this is high-risk research, she encourages young professionals to question the status quo to drive meaningful change.

Our guest today is Henry Brady, Professor of Political Science and Public Policy at UC Berkeley, California, about the decline of trust in American institutions. Henry explains that trust in key sectors, such as the military, media, and higher education, has been steadily eroding since the 1970s, influenced by events like the Vietnam War, Watergate, economic inequality, and political polarization. He discusses how different events and historical contexts have led to varying levels of trust in these institutions, noting that while trust in the military has fluctuated due to wars and national crises, trust in other institutions has generally declined due to broader societal changes.

He also examines the growing polarization of trust along party lines, with Democrats and Republicans displaying contrasting levels of trust in institutions like the media, police, and higher education. This polarization complicates efforts to address institutional reform and governance, making it harder to find common ground. He emphasizes how declining trust affects daily life, such as during the COVID-19 pandemic, where mistrust in public health institutions led to widespread misinformation and vaccine hesitancy.

Henry highlights the role of economic inequality in eroding trust, arguing that rising inequality and increasing diversity have fostered a sense of distrust and division among Americans. To rebuild trust, he advocates for stronger local media, improved civic education, and initiatives like citizens' assemblies that encourage dialogue and understanding across divides. He also emphasizes the importance of addressing systemic issues to build trust at a societal level, suggesting that focusing on fairness, institutional performance, and civic engagement is key to fostering a more trusting society.

As the discussion concludes, Henry reflects on the challenges facing young researchers studying trust. He suggests that while there is some understanding of how to build trust on an individual level, more research is needed on how to foster trust on a larger, societal scale. His insights offer a thoughtful exploration of the complexities surrounding trust in American democracy and potential strategies for rebuilding it.

Our guest today is Sidney Dekker, Professor and Director of the Safety Science Innovation Lab at Griffith University in Brisbane, Australia. He explores the negative effects of a blame culture in organizations and advocates for a restorative justice approach. He explains how blaming leads to a lack of honesty and authenticity, negatively impacting organizational learning, performance, and safety. He explains that a blame culture causes individuals to hide mistakes rather than address underlying systemic issues. He emphasizes that restorative justice focuses on impacts, needs, and obligations rather than rule violations and consequences. He also touches on the concept of human error, arguing that it should be seen as a consequence of deeper organizational troubles rather than the cause. The focus should be on understanding why people made certain decisions based on their goals and knowledge at the time, rather than blaming them for errors.

Throughout the interview, Sidney provides practical examples to illustrate his points. He cites the Apollo 13 mission as an example of successful crisis management through trust in frontline operators and focusing on what is working rather than what is broken. He discusses the importance of including multiple stakeholder perspectives to learn and improve organizational practices. When addressing severe cases like a dam breaking due to government negligence, Dekker argues for a restorative approach to accountability. This involves truth-telling, repentance, and actions to repair harm and address the needs of affected individuals.

He also connects his views to Kant's philosophy, suggesting that while past actions cannot be undone, the relational consequences can be addressed through restorative practices. He reflects on recent incidents of inappropriate behavior in organizations, stressing the need to address broader sociological issues rather than just individual behaviors. Trust, built on compassion and empathy, is fundamental to fostering a just and safe organizational culture. Sidney concludes by emphasizing the importance of trust in both professional and personal contexts, highlighting its role in collective success and his commitment to promoting restorative justice in organizational safety practices.

In the interview, Erik Schoppen discusses his forthcoming book "Trust Reset: A Radical New Vision on Trust" and the need for a new perspective on trust theories. He believes that traditional theories are insufficient in the face of rapid technological advancements and global changes. Erik emphasizes that his upcoming book integrates new insights from biological and artificial research, offering a comprehensive view on trust that spans from its molecular origins to complex social and digital systems. He explains that trust has evolved as a survival mechanism, starting from early neural networks in ancient organisms. This evolution has led to the development of three biological forms of trust: cognitive, affective, and behavioral attitudes, known as the CAB model. He elaborates that these attitudes play a role at various levels, from self-trust to interactions in social networks, and larger organizational structures, to system and societal trust.

He highlights the need to understand trust as expanding networks that increase in complexity., describing trust as information that flows through these networks and levels, allowing for the measurement of trust attitudes in various contexts.

He also introduces the concept of the circular trust loop, consisting of three transformational processes: regaining, rebuilding, and renewing trust. These processes help restore trust in individuals and societies, especially in the face of current global conflicts and uncertainties.

Addressing the integration of biological aspects of trust, Schoppen acknowledges Paul Zak's research on the neurochemical oxytocin but emphasizes the need for a broader, multidimensional approach. He introduces his “integrated multilevel trust framework”, which considers trust from a molecular to a global scale, addressing challenges such as the climate crisis. He further breaks down the cognitive, affective, and behavioral responses that shape trust today. He provides examples, such as hiring decisions, to illustrate how these responses influence our interactions and decisions based on trust.

Discussing the future of trust and AI, Erik raises concerns about whether AI will trust humans rather than the other way around. He explains that AI processes information much faster and more logically than humans, potentially perceiving us as untrustworthy and irrational. This shift necessitates a new field of research on trust in the context of AI.

Our guest today is Fabian Zuleeg, CEO of the Brussels-based think tank European Policy Center (EPC). He discusses EPC’s role in advising decision-makers and influencing policy engaging in events, publications, and networking, with trust being crucial in its operations, including the trust of decision-makers, personal trust, and trust in confidentiality and ethics.

Zuleeg reflects on the EU’s creation to foster trust among member states through cooperation, laws, institutions, and economic interdependence. However, he notes that recent challenges have decreased trust due to increased diversity and complex crises. He introduces the concept of “cognitive dissonance”, where unrealistic views lead to ineffective actions, and discusses "permapolycrisis," referring to ongoing overlapping crises. He argues that crises can foster trust if faced collectively, as seen during COVID-19 and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, though unity is harder in international relations with the US or China.

Zuleeg criticizes the "collective progress illusion," where Europe’s actions are insufficient to meet major challenges. He calls for honesty about the difficult, costly nature of overcoming these challenges, using climate action as an example, and emphasizes strategic planning and involving citizens in long-term solutions. Addressing far-right and populist movements, Zuleeg describes these "anti-parties" as opposing policies without offering solutions. He stresses that democratic leaders must prove democracy can handle complex problems by being honest, admitting mistakes, and emphasizing collective action.

Zuleeg touches upon the role of think tanks like EPC in an environment where facts matter less. He emphasizes producing and explaining facts, adapting to the competitive information marketplace, and engaging in accessible debates. He notes the challenge of ensuring proposed solutions are practical and effective. On EU expansion, he argues that trust is impacted by the. Promises to new members must be credible, but reforms are necessary to ensure the EU functions effectively. He highlights the Western Balkans’ prolonged accession process as a trust issue. Finally, Zuleeg discusses EPC’s future challenges, including adapting to policy developments, crises, and new technologies. Attracting high-level analysts and dealing with technological changes, such as artificial intelligence, are key.

In episode 94 we explore the unique dynamics of family businesses with Jim Davis, a professor at the Huntsman School of Business at Utah State University. Jim explains the critical roles of trust and legacy in family enterprises and the differences between stewardship and agency theory. Stewardship theory suggests that leaders can be trusted to act in the best interests of the organization and its employees, while agency theory posits that leaders are self-interested and need to be controlled.

Jim discusses how these theories uniquely apply to family businesses, highlighting the challenges and opportunities in balancing tradition with the need for innovation and sustainability. He addresses the paradox of legacy; while it provides continuity and a strong cultural foundation, it can also become a source of strategic inertia, limiting entrepreneurial behavior. Jim emphasizes the importance of co-creating legacy, where each generation decides which values and traditions to retain and which to adapt. He also touches on the concept of social emotional wealth (SEW), which leads family businesses to prioritize family benefits over purely financial returns.

The interview explores the psychological traits of good stewards, including needs for personal growth, achievement, affiliation, and self-actualization. Jim explains that businesses can cultivate stewardship by sharing responsibility and opportunities for growth rather than imposing control. He highlights the evolving landscape of business, where sustainability and multiple performance measures among stakeholders are becoming increasingly important. He calls for more research into the dynamics of trust, especially how to restore it once broken, and the distinction between low trust and distrust.

In this episode, Steve van Riel, Senior Strategy Director and EMEA Head of Trust Development at Edelman UK, discusses his journey from UK politics to consumer trust research. Reflecting on the 2015 UK general election, Steve explains how trust influenced the outcomes. Labour wasn't trusted to manage finances effectively, while the Conservatives weren't trusted to do so compassionately, leading to an inconclusive result. This experience highlighted the importance of trust in high-stakes elections.

Steve's academic research, influenced by Daniel Kahneman's "Thinking Fast and Slow," examines how System One (fast, intuitive thinking) and System Two (slow, deliberate thinking) processes affect trust decisions. He applies this framework to consumer trust, explaining that low-stakes decisions often rely on fast thinking, where simple rules of thumb and heuristics guide choices. In contrast, high-stakes decisions require slow, deliberate thinking, where individuals weigh the evidence and consider potential risks more carefully.

He explains the concept of trust games, which provide a more nuanced, risk-based measure of consumer trust compared to traditional surveys. These games, involving real money, offer insights into consumer behavior towards brands, demonstrating how people use different cognitive processes when trust is at stake. For example, participants might make quick, intuitive decisions in familiar, low-risk scenarios, while they engage in more deliberate, thoughtful decision-making in high-stakes situations.

Steve also discusses the practical implications for businesses. For quick, intuitive decisions, companies can leverage simplicity and familiarity to build trust, using elements like simple logos, straightforward messaging, and user-friendly websites. For more deliberate decisions, businesses need to provide detailed, reassuring information and emphasize their reliability and regulatory compliance. He explains that in high-stakes scenarios, consumers are more likely to trust companies that demonstrate transparency and accountability.

He addresses the challenge boards face in turning abstract trust concerns into actionable strategies. He advocates for a unified framework across all business units to ensure trust is an integral part of business strategy and evaluation. He shares examples of successful implementations, such as Tesco's approach to pricing and McDonald's efforts to rebuild trust over decades.

Steve concludes by highlighting the ongoing challenge of maintaining precision and discipline in trust research. He stresses the need for practical applications of academic insights to solve real-world problems, using the example of how Boeing could apply trust research to rebuild its reputation after a series of accidents.

In this episode, our guest, Joe Hamm, a trust scholar from the School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University, explores various themes centered around the concept of trust, particularly in the realms of criminal justice, policing, and environmental health.

Joe discusses how trust plays a crucial role in the interaction between the public and law enforcement. He differentiates trust from legitimacy, explaining that while legitimacy concerns the acceptance of authority and its inherent power, trust focuses more on managing the vulnerability associated with this power. Hamm emphasizes that trust in police is significantly influenced by the public’s perception of potential internal harms (e.g., misuse of authority or excessive force) rather than just the external harms (like crime) that police are expected to protect against. His studies highlight variations in how different racial and ethnic groups perceive these harms and trust law enforcement.

Joe also talks about trust in the context of environmental contamination, specifically referring to a case involving Dow Chemical in Michigan. He illustrates how high levels of trust in Dow Chemical led the local community to underestimate the risks of dioxin contamination in nearby waters, which, in turn, affected their engagement in protective behaviors like avoiding consumption of contaminated fish. This part of the discussion underscores the complex impact trust can have on public health behaviors and risk assessment.

Joe advocates for bridging the gap between academic research on trust and its practical applications. He suggests that media platforms like podcasts can facilitate better communication between researchers and practitioners, potentially leading to more effective trust-building strategies in various sectors.