I thought this was a good time to republish this remarkable interview on my philosophies of leadership and trust with Kevyn Rustici and Tyler White.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=apezCmMDYAs
Interview with Kevyn Rustici and Tyler White On “Trust”
March 15, 2025Building Higher Trust 113 The Magic Ingredient
February 23, 2023
I have been studying trust in organizations for over 50 years, and I have found the “magic ingredient.” As a Division Manager in a large manufacturing firm, I studied the impact of trust on performance. After many years of comparing groups within my division, I came to a conclusion.
Trust is the magic ingredient
The success of any group rests most on how much trust there is in it. I observed that high-trust groups were able to tackle difficult tasks and come away successful. In low-trust groups, even simple daily challenges became huge obstacles.
The difference was so stark that I described trust as the magic ingredient. Groups that could maintain trust seemed to have a shortcut to success. Other groups where trust was lacking were always struggling to survive.
Trust was a magic ingredient for leaders too
I observed that leaders of high-trust groups found that leadership was a blast. They were allowed to be human beings and make an occasional error. The people would cut these leaders some slack. Basically, leaders of high-trust groups were having more fun.
The other side of the coin contains misery. Leaders of low-trust groups are always miserable because people in the organization are out to get them. I picture the people in low-trust groups to be like coined snakes ready to strike at the least provocation.
Let’s take a look at some specific functions to enhance the contrast.
Communication
Leaders of low-trust groups had to watch every word. If they did not spin every statement correctly people would misinterpret the message. They had to rehearse every communication to see if there was any way to get the wrong impression. There were several instances where people heard the leader say what they thought he was going to say. They would hear bad news even if the message was basically good news. Getting to a precise way of communicating was always a chore.
On the flip side, leaders of high-trust groups could relax and be authentic. If something did not sound right, people would ask for more clarity. The leader was not subject to a trust withdrawal.
Conflict
Low-trust groups had to battle inter-group conflict at every turn. That is because the individuals had to continually watch for what other people were trying to do to them. The energy wasted in just trying to keep things civil was staggering.
In high-trust groups, the focus was on what they were trying to accomplish. The group members didn’t have to protect their interests, so they were more creative and cooperative with others.
Productivity
Since low-trust groups spent their resources fighting each other; they were less productive. They were always under the gun because they did not get things done efficiently.
My observation of high-trust groups is that they were at least twice as productive as low-trust groups. They were continually receiving praise and gratitude from upper management due to their output. More than sheer output, they made it seem easy because it was for them.
Conclusion
The contrast between high and low trust groups could not be starker. That is why I am writing this series of blogs. I want leaders to know that the element of trust is the magic ingredient for any group to be successful.
It is curious that when I look into low-trust situations it is usually the behaviors of the leader that are causing the problem. Let me put it more directly. Most leaders do not recognize that their behaviors are the root cause of the problems that are holding them back. Leaders set the tone for everything that happens in an organization.
Bob Whipple, MBA, CPTD, is a consultant, trainer, speaker, and author in the areas of leadership and trust. He is the author of The Trust Factor: Advanced Leadership for Professionals, Understanding E-Body Language: Building Trust Online, and Leading with Trust is Like Sailing Downwind. Bob has many years as a senior executive with a Fortune 500 Company and with non-profit organizations
Reducing Conflict 76 Peer Conflict
January 16, 2023
Peer conflict within your organization can squander the energy and creativity of your team. Nobody enjoys conflict, but often the actions of some people kindle internal battles they could avoid.
Where is energy being consumed?
Measure where the energy in your organization is consumed. Most of it may be evaporating with internal squabbles. It should be applied toward customer satisfaction or beating the competition.
Peer relationships are especially prone to conflict
Conflict among peers is particularly hurtful. People who function in parallel roles must cooperate for the organization to achieve its goals. Lower peer conflict means more resources directed at the organization’s goals.
Why does peer conflict occur, and how can we reduce it? Peers see themselves in a conflict situation from the start, especially if they report to different units.
Too much “I win, you lose” mentality
Loyalty to one’s own parochial point of view often means a built-in conflict among individuals. In the scramble for scarce resources, peers struggle to gain the lion’s share for themselves. This “I win, you lose” mentality is the fuel for the fire of peer conflict. You can improve the track record within your organization by practicing some simple concepts.
The ideas listed below are not a set of underhanded tricks or manipulation of others. Rather, these concepts help define the high road to interpersonal prowess. Following them shows your level of integrity, maturity, and moral fiber. Do these things because they are right, not to come out on top. They represent the causeway to peer cooperation.
A dozen ways to improve peer cooperation
- Treat your peers and superiors with respect and integrity. Often that is a challenge because you compete with them for critical resources. The best advice is to always use the golden rule.
- Find ways to help peers in ways they recognize. Visualize yourself walking around the office with a bundle of olive branches strapped to your back. Each day, see how many olive branches you can give away to people who would normally squabble with you.
- Whenever possible, be a vocal supporter of your peer’s position in meetings. If you act like an ally, it is more difficult for peers to view you as an adversary. If you think of them as the enemy, they will reciprocate.
- Go the extra mile to help peers solve problems. Sometimes that means taking problem people off their hands to make a fresh start in your organization. It might mean the loan of equipment or other tangible assets. Be bountiful with your assistance. Favors lead to goodwill and often result in returned favors.
- Bond with peers whenever possible in social settings. This is more difficult in hybrid situations. Get to know their families and their hobbies. The closer you are as friends, the more they will help you at work. The basis of politics is that “friends do things for other friends.”
- Often, you will negotiate with peers for resources. Establish a track record of being fair and looking for win-win opportunities. Never try to win at the other person’s expense. It will usually boomerang, and you will lose in the end.
- Be visible with your concessions. Demonstrate that you deal with fairness.
- Resist the temptation to “blow in” a peer after a mistake. It may feel good at the time, but you have made an enemy. You can never afford an enemy if it can be avoided, and it usually can. Some people go around creating enemies to satisfy their ego, their lust for conquest, or just to have fun. They don’t last very long, and they create a lot of damage for others to clean up. If a peer makes a mistake, it is a great opportunity to help him or her regain equilibrium, not a time to twist the knife. Kindness pays off.
- Do not engage in email battles. If a peer is less than kind in an email, respond to it with courtesy and maturity. Getting into a public food fight over some issue has no place in the adult world, yet we see it all the time. Be bigger than that.
- Don’t belittle, berate, or embarrass people, even if they do things to deserve it. This is a test of your maturity.
- When you create a political faux pas, admit it immediately and ask for forgiveness. Don’t try to hide your blunders. People who admit mistakes earn the respect of their peers. Those who try to cover up gaffs often appear duplicitous and lower their credibility.
- Offer help when your peer is in a crisis. We all need help from time to time, and we remember those who were gracious with their assistance.
There are hundreds of other ways to foster cooperation among your peers and superiors. They are just common sense. They reiterate the advice of the famous football coach Lou Holtz: “Do what is right.” Doing the right thing is about being authentic rather than manipulative. Sparring and counterpunches should be focused on the competition rather than on your valued teammates.
Conclusion
When peers can rise above the temptation to be parochial, it allows the greater good to happen. Reducing conflict and tension makes people enjoy their work more. It also allows them to focus more energy on activities critical to organizational health.
Bob Whipple, MBA, CPTD, is a consultant, trainer, speaker, and author in the areas of leadership and trust. He is the author of The Trust Factor: Advanced Leadership for Professionals, Understanding E-Body Language: Building Trust Online, and Leading with Trust is Like Sailing Downwind. Bob has many years as a senior executive with a Fortune 500 Company and with non-profit organizations.
Building Higher Trust 62 Engagement and Empowerment
March 11, 2022
Engagement and empowerment are two words that we hear in organizations and OD circles. These words are often confused. I have heard the terms used interchangeably, which is a mistake.
The best way to demonstrate the difference between these words is to contrast two scenarios. I will focus on a specific job (customer service representative) for the description, but you can easily extrapolate the concepts to any job once the distinction is clear.
Engaged but not Empowered
Here the customer service person is fully on board with the goals of the organization. She knows her job and wants to help the customer. Unfortunately, the organization constrains her by numerous rules that tie her hands from fully providing great service. For example, she may not be able to issue a refund until the customer returns the incorrect merchandise. She may have to get “approval” from her supervisor to authorize a shipping waiver.
Empowered but not Engaged
In this case, the customer service rep has the power to do anything she thinks is useful, but this particular person does not follow the business goals. She really does not care if the organization does well; all she wants to do is make the customer feel great. In this case, she might overcompensate the customer to the detriment of the organization.
It is obvious that neither of these conditions is the best situation for the employee and the organization. We need to have employees who are fully engaged in the business and fully empowered to accomplish their tasks. Consider this 2X2 matrix to take all possible combinations into consideration.

Let us take a look at the impact of these two words on the viability of an organization.
Engagement
In “Smart Trust,” Stephen M.R. Covey reported on some research showing that in the average company there are only two engaged employees for every one disengaged employee. In this case, much of the inherent power of the individuals is leaking out and not available to the organization. Contrast that situation with world class organizations where there are nine engaged employees for every one disengaged employee. You can see the huge difference, and that difference goes quickly to the bottom line.
Having people engaged in the business means having them truly understand the vision for the organization and fully comprehend their role in making that happen. Beyond understanding, to be fully engaged, a worker needs to be fully committed to accomplishing her role, not just involved in the work. Someone once said that the difference between involvement and commitment is like the difference between eggs and bacon. In the case of the eggs, the chicken was involved; in the case of the bacon, the pig was committed!
Empowerment
Empowerment is more closely related to trust. Employees bring their own internal level of empowerment and confidence in their abilities to do their jobs. Managers can increase empowerment through clear communication and a trust-building management style. Unfortunately, managers can decrease an employee’s empowerment and confidence level through negative communication or too many restrictions.
The extent to which people use their personal power for the benefit of the organization, and the level of freedom they have to do things right, will determine the level of empowerment experienced by the organization. In OD circles, we use the term “maximum discretionary effort.” The goal of empowerment activities is to solicit maximum discretionary effort from all people. How can we accomplish that in the real world?
The secret sauce to create a culture of higher empowerment is trust. As trust increases, people naturally feel more empowered because they can make decisions based on a firm understanding of the goals, but they can accomplish those goals in their own unique way.
In the environment of the past couple years, the ability to build and maintain trust is much more difficult. Many people are feeling frayed by the numerous pressures they face every day. It is more important that leaders show empathy and demonstrate they really care about their employees. It is about how they do what they do and how they say what they say that matters in these times.
Conclusion
Try to avoid mixing the concepts of empowerment and engagement. They are two very different things, although they sound almost the same. Seek to obtain both of them through the liberal application of trusting behaviors, and you will experience the best effort that people have to offer.
Bob Whipple, MBA, CPLP, is a consultant, trainer, speaker, and author in the areas of leadership and trust. He is the author of: The Trust Factor: Advanced Leadership for Professionals, Understanding E-Body Language: Building Trust Online, and Leading with Trust is Like Sailing Downwind. Bob has many years as a senior executive with a Fortune 500 Company and with non-profit organizations.
Simple Truths of Leadership
January 27, 2022
This outstanding book is being released in a few days. You will want to order your copy as it contains 52 ways of enhancing Servant Leadership and Trust in your organization.
The material is presented in a simple format that makes it highly accessible and especially memorable. Apply the techniques today, and your effectiveness as a leader will be enhanced substantially.
Talent Development 27 Change Management
February 27, 2021
Section 3.6 in the CPTD Certification program for ATD is Change Management. Section A reads, “A knowledge of change management theories and models, for example Lewin, Kotter, Bridges’ transition model, Kubler-Ross change curve, and appreciative inquiry.”
In this brief article, I will share three change models that I have found to be particularly useful in helping people accept and implement change at work.
Adaptation of Kotter’s Model
I found Dr. John Kotter’s theories of change to be most helpful. His eight-step change process was first described in his 1996 book, “Leading Change,” and he followed it up with a neat fable in 2006 entitled’ “Our Iceberg is Melting.” He also described change in his 2014 book “Accelerate.”
The eight steps proposed by Kotter were as follows:
1. Create a sense of urgency
2. Build a guiding coalition
3. Form strategic vision and initiatives
4. Enlist a volunteer army
5. Enable action by removing barriers
6. Generate short term wins
7. Sustain Acceleration
8. Institute change
In my own work in a manufacturing unit of a large company, I ended up adapting and adding to his steps so people would understand the concepts easier and adopt them in our specific environment.
I used the following nine-point list of steps to change:
1. Create the right environment
2. Demonstrate an urgent need
3. Carve out sufficient time
4. Create a compelling vision
5. Reinforce the small wins
6. Integrate the new methods in the culture
7. Develop a tolerance for risk
8. Demonstrate constancy of purpose
9. Understand the psychology of change
I found the final item to be particularly helpful for guiding groups through the change cycles much faster by using the grief-counseling model of change.
Grief Counseling Change Model
In 1969 Elisabeth Kubler-Ross proposed the five stages of grief. These were as follows:
1. Denial
2. Anger
3. Bargaining
4. Depression
5. Acceptance
Her observation is that human beings go through the five stages whenever faced with extreme grief. Using the model as a pathway to a better future is one method of coping with loss and shortening the time to a return to a normal life.
Transition Model
William and Susan Bridges suggested a four-stage model for dealing with transitions at work. They included:
1. Anticipation
2. Ending
3. Transition
4. Beginning
I found this model to be particularly helpful at accelerating the time from an impending disruption to full acceptance of a change.
For example, I once was involved in shutting down an operation of nearly 300 people and moving it to a new location with much improved processes. The move had been anticipated by the production workers for a few months.
When the decision was announced, it represented the “Ending” stage, and the workers were dead set against the change, even though it meant a better existence on the other end. They described it as a “death.”
We used the transition model to help workers through the various transition stages of anger and bargaining and included them in visualizing the physical set up in the new plant. Their energy shifted from trying to preserve the old way to helping invent the new way.
We had expected the entire process to take over a year to accomplish, but by involving the employees in this way, we were able to accomplish the change in less than two months. The result was a huge cash savings, and people were happier all the way through the process.
Conclusion
Using a formal change model, like the ones mentioned in this article, to help people cope with difficult changes in life is an excellent way to mitigate the pain and return life to a good quality once again.
Bob Whipple, MBA, CPTD, is a consultant, trainer, speaker, and author in the areas of leadership and trust. He is the author of: The Trust Factor: Advanced Leadership for Professionals, Understanding E-Body Language: Building Trust Online, Leading with Trust is Like Sailing Downwind, and Trust in Transition: Navigating Organizational Change. Bob has many years as a senior executive with a Fortune 500 Company and with non-profit organizations.
Building Higher Trust 8 Trust and Focus
February 3, 2021
It is quite easy to determine the level of trust within a group simply by observing what the people in the group focus on most of the time.
High Trust Groups
I have observed that very high trust groups spend the majority of their time and energy on what they are trying to accomplish. Maybe it is because high trust groups have an exciting vision they are pursuing.
Let’s say the group is coming out with a new product. If you listen to the conversations members of the group are having, they are going to be centered on the new product. That is what they are trying to accomplish.
If they are trying to accomplish better customer service, then that dynamic will dominate the conversations.
Whatever the vision is will be the main topic of discussion, and people will do very little griping because they have good feelings about the other people in their group. Those good feelings and affection tend to raise the level of trust even higher.
Low Trust Groups
By contrast, people who work in low trust groups seem to focus their energy on each other. They are myopic and talk about the problems they are having getting along.
You might hear one person complain that another person spends too much time on the phone or is frequently late to Zoom meetings. You may hear people that are stationed in different countries complain that the time zone differences make life very difficult for their families.
The focus becomes “how can I protect my own interests from these other people who have their own agendas.” The conversations become mostly negative and often are hurtful.
That dynamic tends to perpetuate the lower trust atmosphere, so it becomes a vicious cycle of negativity.
Conclusion
Listen to the conversations that are happening in your organization and see whether they demonstrate low or high trust. It will be an accurate indication of the current level of trust inside your organization.
Bonus Video
Here is a brief video on Trust and Focus.
Bob Whipple, MBA, CPLP, is a consultant, trainer, speaker, and author in the areas of leadership and trust. He is the author of four books: 1.The Trust Factor: Advanced Leadership for Professionals (2003), 2. Understanding E-Body Language: Building Trust Online (2006), 3. Leading with Trust is Like Sailing Downwind (2009), and 4. Trust in Transition: Navigating Organizational Change (2014). In addition, he has authored over 1000 articles and videos on various topics in leadership and trust. Bob has many years as a senior executive with a Fortune 500 Company and with non-profit organizations
Leadership Baromter 75 Make Good Decisions
December 23, 2020
There are hundreds of assessments for leaders. The content and quality of these assessments vary greatly. You can spend a lot of time and money taking surveys to tell you the quality of your leadership.
There are a few leading indicators that can be used to give a pretty good picture of the overall quality of your leadership. These are not good for diagnosing problems or specifying corrective action, but they can tell you where you stand quickly.
Here is one of my favorite measures.
Make Good Decisions
This measure sounds so trivial and axiomatic that you probably wonder why I list it at all. Unfortunately, many would-be great leaders make rather stupid decisions for one reason or another.
I often puzzle at how it is possible for a leader to do something that takes him or her in exactly the opposite direction he or she is trying to go.
That sounds illogical, I know, so let’s examine some of the forces that could allow this to happen.
1. Stupidity – This is a simple situation of making a bonehead decision. It is like the leader who intellectually knows it is better to admit a mistake than to hide it because that actually increases respect, but chooses to hide it anyway. Sad to say there are many stupid leaders out there who make wrong decisions rather consistently.
2. Too pressed for time – I had a teacher once tell me “You can write a term paper in 3 months or 3 hours, the only difference is the quality.” So it goes with decisions. Quality goes up with more thought, at least up to a point. After a while the old syndrome of “analysis paralysis” takes over, and the decision process becomes entirely too cumbersome.
3. Poor information from underlings – often decisions are based on input from others. If a leader blindly takes bad information and makes big decisions based on it, they will turn out bad. That was the problem when George Bush decided to invade Iraq to get rid of the weapons of mass destruction. After sifting the sand of that entire country for years, we never did find the problem we allegedly went in to eliminate.
4. Going along with bad advice from above – there are times when your boss will toss out a half-baked idea and say “Why don’t you try it.” Be careful to get good reasoned advice before taking the plunge.
5. Not accounting for risk – Every decision has an element of risk. If you make a decision based on optimism and faith but do not consider the potential downsides of it, you will eventually get caught in a nasty situation. Get the facts and consider what could go wrong as part of your planning process.
6. Sub-optimizing on only part of the story – it is really easy to please one constituency while alienating another one. You can please the shareholders by eliminating salary increases for a year, but the employees will suffer. There are numerous situations where there are tradeoffs. Go in with your eyes wide open on the holistic impact of your decisions on everyone.
7. Not thinking of the customer – for every action or decision, there is a customer. Make sure you know who the customer is and that the customer is well served by your decision.
8. Repeat of something that did not work before –Making the same bonehead move you have made in the past hoping for a better result should qualify you for a white jacket with very long sleeves. It is the classic definition of insanity.
9. Distracted by a bigger issue – often there are numerous decision processes going on simultaneously. You need to consider each one carefully and not put so much energy into one decision that you starve another. There is no forgiveness if you make a bad decision on the cart because you were focused on the horse.
10. Hubris – Decisions made to feed the ego can often lead to disastrous consequences. Try to not get married to your ideas too early. Think carefully about the full consequences before becoming an advocate of one approach.
11. Lack of communication – If you make a brilliant decision, but everyone else thinks it is stupid because you failed to explain your rationale, you are in trouble. You need to bring others into the process as early and completely as you can.
So, on first blush, the notion of making good decisions sounded trivial, but after considering some of the ways leaders get tripped up, the above checklist ought to be a good starter kit for a master list in your organization of how to make better decisions. I am sure there are several things I missed on my list that you can think of.
Bob Whipple is CEO of Leadergrow Inc., a company dedicated to growing leaders. He speaks and conducts seminars on building trust in organizations.
Posted by trustambassador
When you consider your role as a human being, your legacy surfaces as a critical element. This article is about your legacy and how to maximize it.
Culture is critical to the performance of any organization. When I advise CEOs how to improve the performance of their organization, I first analyze the situation, then report back to the top officer with some advice. Quite often my advice will sound something like this: