Trust in Virtual TeamsIntroduction

Trust is defined in the dictionary as reliance on the integrity of a person. If you equate this definition to a group it would be reliance on the integrity of each individual in the group. This is what makes trust so difficult to build and so easy to destroy. Each member of the group has to function with integrity in order for trust to be built. In this chapter we will first describe the components of trust. Then we will go into developing trust within individuals. Next, we will discuss methods in building trust in the aspect of a team. After that we will discuss trust at the managerial level. After that, we will discuss trust at an organizational level. Finally, we will go into trust in the sense of governance. At the end of this chapter a reader should have a firm understanding on what trust entails and build a successful group that maintains a high level of trust.

Components of Trust

Ghislaine Caulat once said “It is a basic assumption of life in today’s global world of work that to create the best work you have to have the best team, regardless of geography” (Maister). The existence of virtual collaboration has made this possible. When you have the ability to meet in remote locations, distance is not an issue. Virtual collaboration allows the best group/team to be created for the project despite the location of the members. As with any other group/team each member will be assigned a task to complete, and the other members have to trust that everyone will complete their part. Trust is the key component in successful virtual collaboration. You must have a team of people that are credible and reliable, also software that is fully functioning and secure.

Credibility

Establishing credibility is the most important factor in virtual collaboration. Credibility plays a large role in the output of the project. It includes knowing that each member of the group will deliver on time quality work, be at meetings when required, and be respectable to each other despite the location differences. If the group has decided to meet at a certain time and someone joins the meeting late, the group would then have to take time to catch that member up on the information missed. For an incident like this to occur one time would be understandable, but multiple occurrences would be very time consuming and unacceptable.

It is imperative that you be able to trust those you are working with and know that they can complete the tasks assigned to them. At the beginning of a new project the only thing you may know about the individuals are there names and that they too were assigned to that project. That does not provide much information on their work ethic. If you are working with individuals you have previously worked with. then you have likely already established a rapport with them. If you have never worked with the members of the group you are assigned, then this is your chance to establish that rapport. Either way credibility is the best way to develop and maintain a positive relationship with others.

When there is disconnect between group/team members, tension and a level of uneasiness is created. This occurs because at that point you are unsure who you can trust to complete their portion of the project therefore not knowing how much extra time you will have to invest in the project. It is ideal for everyone to complete their own portion correct and timely, but this may not always occur. Having a member of the group act as a facilitator or manager will aid in this process. They can oversee the overall performance of the group to assure that everyone is aware of what they should be doing and see that things are getting done. To monitor the project the whole way, assures that it’s not a disaster in the end.

Some factors that help build your rapport would include: asking for help when you are uncertain of something or get stuck and delivering on commitments that you have made. Asking for help is a sure way to inform your group that you do not know all of the answers and that when you are mystified you will ask for assistance rather than go forth making costly mistakes. Your group will then have confidence in the work you produce because they will be certain you understand the subject matter and will not just push papers through that will eventually have to be done over due to its poor quality. Delivering on commitments will guarantee that no one else has to complete those commitments you made.

Security

Security is another component of trust. When working via audio teleconference it is ideal that the only persons who know the access code to the conference are those invited to the meeting. Depending on the sensitivity of the data discussed, having unauthorized persons listening in on the meeting could be harmless or detrimental to the project.

Working via video conference is a bit more complex. The first thing that needs to be done before a video conference is preparation. Everyone who plans to attend the conference needs to make sure they have the software being used and security to protect it. “During a video conference, sensitive information and data travels across internal and external networks where it's susceptible to the prying eyes of hackers -- or in the case of the military, the enemy. If a network is hacked, the video-conference stream becomes the hacker's own private surveillance camera, recording and re-broadcasting corporate secrets and top-secret intelligence”. (Dileo)

The software that is being used for the video conference should require all accounts remain secure, all passwords be change frequently and should limit the number of times an incorrect password can be entered. In the event that a security violation exists, the account should be suspended until password clearance is resolved. Participants who are unable to correctly login to the video conference should not be able to attend.

It is imperative that everyone who uses their computer for video conferencing have secure connections and firewalls and check antivirus software to make sure that they are current. Group members need to be able to trust that everyone has taken every possible precaution to protect against system corruptions. There needs to be a dedicated system used just for meetings. You would not want to use the same system that is used to illegal download music, videos, movies or games to conduct a video

conference. When you download from an unsecured network, you expose your system to all the threat and vulnerabilities that exist in the cyber world.

Just recently Skype and Facebook have been in the media for security issues. Facebook which allows third party apps on its website were unaware that these apps were obtaining data from users who visited there sites. This type of activity is not okay on a system that has sensitive data on it. It would be rather difficult to explain to your employer that sensitive data may have been tampered with and your system was to blame. When you go on to these website and download, upload or stream things you again put your entire system at risk. To avoid these types of occurrences all together, keep your system safe if you plan to use it for collaborative purposes. Failure to do so can again affect your credibility which is the most important factor.

Dependability

Whenever you are in a group the team expects you to be a dependable member. This would include attending any meetings planned, completing the work that you were assigned, and most importantly dedicate the required time to make your work the best quality possible. The expectations are no different in a virtual group. If every time the group calls a meeting you are not in attendance, are late or not attentive, then it will not be long before the group realizes that you are not dependable and begin to micromanage your progress on the project. By doing just the opposite of the above, you will develop a level of trust within the group and they will know that you are actually an asset to the group and not a burden.

Another thing that can be done to establish dependability is make yourself available. If a group member is trying to communicate with you, respond. This would include answering their calls, replying quickly to emails, instant messages and again being at meetings on time, prepared. If you are up to date on your project, there would be no need to ignore group members when they are trying to contact you. The group should establish hours for communication to assure that no one is receiving calls, or called to a meeting during times that are not convenient for all. Avoidance does nothing but create irritability and tension within the group.

Individual Aspect of Trust

Building Trust between Individuals:

Within an organization, specifically teams, trust between individuals is extremely important. Team members need to trust that each team member and person within the organization will do their own work. Team members shouldn’t have to check up on other team members or worry whether each portion of the project is getting completed. When looking at a virtual organization or a virtual team, the individual aspect of trust has become even more important.

In order to build trust between individuals, the organization needs to establish an environment that encourages open communication. According to Building Trust, things such as reducing competition, becoming vulnerable, letting go of fear, hope in the goodness of mankind, and faith in fairness can

assist with the transition of getting team members or coworkers to trust each other (http://www.livestrong.com/article/14652-building-trust/). By reducing competition, individuals are able to feel less pressured and friendlier to coworkers because they are not out for each other’s jobs. Becoming vulnerable is important in building trust between individuals – it shows that sometimes people need assistance. It also allows teammates to understand that there are difficult circumstances and that even though people at work should not be bringing in personal problems that it does occur. When the article discusses letting go of fear, this could affect trust between individuals in many ways, but particularly virtual teams.

Understanding Complexities of Trust Issues with Individuals:

Trust is not something that people are willing to give to others easily. Trust must be earned by individuals and can easily be taken away. There are so many aspects and complexities of trust. According to “Trust and the Virtual Organization” there are seven rules for trust.

Trust is not blind Trust needs boundaries Trust demands learning Trust is tough Trust needs bonding Trust needs touch Trust requires leaders

These seven principles describe how trust is built and kept between individuals. It also explains how easily trust can be broken. (http://www.aslangroup.net/TrustandVirtual.htm).

Developing Communication Skills:

To ensure individuals continue to trust each other, communication is key. Whether it is through email, instant messenger, conference calls, virtual meetings, face to face meetings, or other modes of communication, the individuals need to be able to understand each other. Email has become a very common form of communication within individuals of an organization and a team. It is used for everything from social emails to coworkers that are friends, to informing team members that project information has changed. Unfortunately because it has become so common, there are many people who no longer feel the need to use proper grammar. Individuals use slang or sentence fragments or other unprofessional speech when typing up emails. This can make communication more difficult as well as bring up potential culture clash. Instant messenger creates similar issues as email, but typically is worse. People utilize sarcasm a lot more when communicating via instant messenger. Some employees forget that when communicating through instant messenger, companies keep the conversations. This can create problems if the individuals are discussing sensitive information or badmouthing teammates.

The other forms of communication such as conference calls, virtual meetings, and face to face meetings give the perception of being able to communicate more effectively. However, these forms of communication can also have backlash. On conference calls and virtual meetings, there can be body

language that is missed. Time zone differences also creates issues including the challenge of setting up a meeting at a time that works reasonably well for more than just the people in the home office. If the meeting time is inconvenient, it can create issues where other members may think they are not being taken into consideration as an equal. This sort of friction at the start of a project can end up causing problems with trust later on. Face to face meetings are easier for developing trust between coworkers and offices as long as individuals keep in mind that they need to switch off meeting locations every once in a while.

When part of an organization that spans countries or areas within a country, cultural differences must be factored in to communication methods. Some countries may favor one method of communication versus another (i.e. face to face versus email). In order to keep teams strong and individuals communicating effectively, these differences should be taken into consideration.

Team Aspect of Trust

A team like virtual organizations are not distinct structures but instead a means to knowledge dissemination, asset configuration and customer interaction. Teams like virtual organizations come together in different ways and vary in size, location and purpose. The purpose of this chapter is that there is a consensus that trust is preferable to distrust, that trust is not automatic and involves calculated risks and requires time to develop.

Building Trust among Teams

What does trust mean among your team? What does trust mean among cross teams?

Defining what trust means for an individual team or among cross teams is a step in the right direction. By brainstorming and communicating the definitions among the team or across teams increases the open communication and helps set expectations as well as establish the expected behaviors of the team(s). Using this brain-storming activity of defining trust will also help the team establish some of its processes as well. For example how it will report conflict or how will it resolve conflict. This activity should take place relatively early before the team starts work on the project, it can also use a collaboration tool(s) that the project lead intends to use to gather the team's ideas. This will also allow the team exposure or introduction to the lead's collaboration tool of choice.

The team may also notice that it is hard to construct the definition of trust because of assumptions, experiences or observances. For example team members cannot assume all members have worked in a virtual team project. The team through this brainstorming activity will also display how it values each other’s input, how to collect data and disburse it which can also be mediated by the lead. The team can also identify its trust components and prioritize those components.

Trust Components

My virtual team identified the components of trust as honesty, dependability and security. DePaul University's professor, Dr. Ter Bush, defined the components of trust as integrity, competence and

benevolence. The components of trust identified I concur with and that they are interchangeable or a subset of another component.

Integrity as defined in dictionary.com is an adherence to moral and ethical principles; soundness of moral character; honesty. It is from an individual perspective that honesty, credibility and soundness of moral character is trivial for other team members. But as the team creates and establishes a set of guidelines to adhere to, a set moral and ethical principles help build the team’s cohesion and trust. The team’s mission statement could include these principles. Then as the team aligns itself to the values set forth, and as individual members of the team they are in effect committing to stand behind the team, their team members and the principles. Then communicating it among themselves as well as to all others with whom they work with.

Competence is the adequate possession of a required qualification, skill or knowledge provides the team a sense of dependability that as an individual or team, each of you has the capacity to complete the task at hand. Performing as an individual and as team to provide what was communicated and following through with those efforts creates that stability in competence.

Benevolence is the inclination to do kind acts or good will towards others, providing a sense of security that you will not harm anyone intentionally. You or your team’s responsiveness to team needs or others is an important factor in communicating and committing to others that you will not undermine them or the goal.

Building and maintaining mutual knowledge

A byproduct of this brainstorming or other team building activities helps to develop the team’s shared communication. According to Catherine D. Cramton, Associate Professor at George Mason University with a PhD. in organizational behavior from Yale University defines mutual knowledge as knowledge that the parties to a communication share in common and know they share in common, often called common ground.

The awareness of the team’s ethics and principles aid the team in successful communication and coordinated activity and reduce individual interpretation or information. In dispersed teams though it is more challenging since you are not always face to face or in the same room and electronic means of communication hinder discoveries of misunderstanding or interpretations. Even when the misunderstanding is discovered the effects linger and damage the working relationship.

To prevent damage to mutual knowledge, maintain trust and nurture good collaboration knowing the vulnerabilities to dispersed teams is critical. Cramton suggest the following vulnerabilities are damaging to mutual knowledge and the problems exacerbate each other:

Failures to communicate and remember information about the context Uneven distribution of information Differences in what information is salient to sender and receiver Differences in speed and timing Uncertainty about the meaning of silence

Understanding different cultural traits

One factor of these new virtual teams is that they physically do not stand on the same common ground and can quite easily be in another state or country. Maintaining common ground for dispersed teams can be reinforced by taking advance action to the vulnerabilities discussed above. This chapter is not to intend to replace chapter 5 on Cross Cultural Collaboration but merely to link some similarities when it comes to building or destroying the team's aspect of trust. Secondly, understanding that virtual teams even if all members are within the U.S., that there does not exist different cultural traits in dispersed team members. For example, as side from time zone, West Coast IT professionals like developing using agile development methods where IT professionals in the Midwest may not prefer it. In other cases, when collaborating with virtual teams not all members may be from the same industry, for instance cultural traits between manufacturing and information technology industries may also differ. 

Communication content and failures

Teams should take note differences among team members as well as the teams they are working with. Communicating these differences will decrease communication failures and enrich content. By documenting the differences teams can quickly confer with the publish document if communication starts to falter. Differences include but are not limited to location, but the quality, accessibility and features of equipment and the availability of software such as licensing issues as well as the version of the software.

Creating measurements of standards and processes assist the team in cohesion because everyone knows the standard that should be observed as well as how facilitate any concerns using an established process. This is not to say the standards and processes cannot be changed but rather should be evaluated as the team and/or project work is continued.

Distances that team members must travel to accomplish tasks should also be considered, this can hinder team morale if the team is unaware of the challenges their team members face to get to their facilities to accomplish a task or how often they are away from loved ones due to travel. This can also strike a chord if there are competing responsibilities or pressures from local management or coworkers in particular if their time is divided among multiple groups.

Establishing a group calendar that everyone has access to, to update on a daily basis communicates to the team when holidays, customs or emergencies prevent a team member’s presence during “work hours”. Failure to establish “work hours” alienate the content of communication because team members do not know when it is an appropriate time to contact other teams members or their availability. This way dispersed teams are always aware when members are actively working or are away when the need for support or decision making arises. The calendar should also have notations if teams are working in different time zones. As well as the team members location for the working day in case this causes friction with poor delivery of communication or the need for additional communication.  

Distribution of Information

Differences in the distribution of information affect the communication of a team detrimentally and often are caused by human or technical errors. All too often decisions are still made with the lack of information or input from team participation. Relaying, confirming or repeating communications sent or receive can also be attributes of failed distribution of information. Setting response times or notifications of technical downtime, or the inability to retrieve information must be communicated evenly and often.

Distribution of information should be communicated to all members of a team and not a part of the team because the perception of excluding them tears down the openness of the team as well as their willingness to participate as part of the team. This selective exchange of communication also destroys the group’s common knowledge and creates an uneven playground for assumptions. This is a contributing factor the team’s energy and pace. For example those in the loop of communication will feel that group is working well at an energetic pace and some members of the team that are not responding are not active participates. Where team members not in the loop of communication feel that the pace slow, energy is down and that input is not valued as much as others. These errors in communicated information do not allow all members of the team to have the exact same information and destroy mutual knowledge. 

Salient Information

Even when team members have the same information differences in mutual knowledge can develop especially if the information disseminated is excessive long and receivers of that information deduce different information as salient. To increase the salient of information keep all email communications short and limited to one topic. Set a standard practice of changing of updating the subject line of email communication. Avoid using the reply button unless absolutely necessary. Consider a different venue for communicating multiple topics, state which topics you would like feedback on and set the priority of each topic. Keep teams and their members in mind when sending information, about how much information they are receiving and how much they can absorb. If messages need to be repeated or there are restrictions in cues among dispersed teams it makes information very difficult to carry out and/or lack of confirmation of the messages received can create information that is not salient.   

Differences in speed and timing

When teams are working face to face the differences in speed and timing of communication are hardly even noticed because of the proximity of the group members. But there are contributing factors when teams are dispersed that team leaders and members must take note of. For example team members working in the same city or state may notice a lag time for response time when working with others outside of their location, even though you’re communicating via synchronous “chats”. Continuing with the chat without the input of the other members gives the appearance that their input is not valued and they were ignored completely.

This delay in speed or timing can be attributed to some members of the team having limited access to communication tools or less sophisticated tools or a different platform altogether. Reduced access to email due to travel, different work schedules or dial in accessibility to email can also cause difference in speed and time. Generating information or sending information in the wrong format also create lag time in communication, which slow down the feedback cycles and can set back trust.  

Defining Silence

When you don’t hear from your team mates your first reaction is to go to their cubicle to investigate why you haven’t heard from them, which is easier said and done when you work in the same office. But often in virtual teams all the vulnerabilities discussed above compound the issue of silence from your dispersed team members. Additional adding more uncertainty and complications to understanding your team members silence because you are left in the dark why they are silent.

There are multiple interpretations for silence which Cramton suggests can mean all of the following:

I agree I strongly disagree I am indifferent I am out of town I am having technical difficulties I don’t know how to address this sensitive issue I am busy with other things I did not notice your question I did not realize that you wanted a response

Also according to Cramton that silence among team member or teams halts the process of establishing and maintain mutual knowledge in two ways, first she suggests its meaning is ambiguous. That due to the multiple meanings of silence that in a dispersed team it just means the message was never delivered. Second, Cramton suggests that silence halts the process of determining what information others do and do not know and what conclusions they drew.

In conclusion the top 5 things that destroy team trust are not following up in a timely manner. Allowing favoritism to undermined your team interactions or with interactions with team management. Not delivering your part of the task or turning over incompetent work that does not measure to the team’s or team leader’s metrics. Publicly criticizing your team members or leaders and not dealing with toxic behaviors as a team.

To build trust on the team and foster good teamwork make sure to celebrate the strength of all team members, promote fairness, communicate, design team measurements and metrics, establish good co-ordination and start to think in a matter of “we” versus “me”. Finally despite the many challenges of team work and team building, the pay off from a highly effective team is well worth the effort. Online tool aids to teaming online or team building as suggested by Professor Ter Bush are:

Huddle.net Project.Zoho.com Wikispaces.com OfficeZilla.com Ning.com HiveLive.com

There are additional references in the bibliography page that provide ideas for team trust building and cohesiveness.

Managerial Aspect of Trust

Without a doubt, technology plays an important role in the modern workplace. Most organizations, expect their employees to have some kind of skill set with word processors and spreadsheets to complete there every day duties. With technology moving at a rapid pace, do these same skills apply when hiring a virtual team member or even the modern job today? When hiring for a virtual team many managers believe that younger generations are the answer because they are more proficient with document sharing, online chatting virtual worlds, and social networking technologies, making them stronger candidate for virtual teamwork positions. These types of assumptions about younger generations could get a lot of organizations into trouble as they increasingly conduct virtual teamwork. The younger generations maybe more comfortable in the virtual arena, but I think it’s important to look at the cognitive and behavioral skills of the individuals.

Now you have to throw in the trust aspect of hiring someone for a virtual team. All the traditional hiring guidelines apply for virtual teams with a few adjustments. Managers cannot assume that technological is the only variable that makes for a productive and trust worthy team member. The resume is only the first step of the process weeding out those who fit the job description. When interviewing a candidate it’s important to quiz them on their resume, to make sure they were honest as many resumes can build up just to get an interview. Whenever, possible take the time to see the candidate in action, having them spend some time with current employees to see how they interact and have them work on tasks that are similar to the position. While this can be time consuming, but in the long run it may save resources and headaches.

When in a managerial position it is important to trust the members of your team. In order to gain trust with your team, a trust managerial landscape must be created. What is a trust managerial landscape? It’s simply a plan a manager has put together before the project starts to foster and maintain trust throughout the project. When creating a plan the manager should include: credibility, integrity, reliability, and commitment. All are key factors in fostering and maintaining trust.

Credibility is the quality or power of inspiring belief. It is important for a manager to build a reputation for being a credible source of information and support. A manager may not be an expert at the workplace, however he or she can establish credibility among other team members by showing an understanding of, and interested in, their work issues, demonstrating technical skills in the field, and being respectful to your peers.

Integrity involves the adherence to ethical values and practices. Team members rarely trust managers who are vague and do not seem committed to the team’s best interest and goals. Managers who do not demonstrate integrity may be perceived as distant, basing their decision and behaviors on fulfillment of personal agendas. Managers can show their team members that they can have strong ethical standards, values and show willingness to support their staff by fostering trust from within the team.

Reliability is the quality of being dependable or reliable. Managers who behave inconsistently can create confusion and discomfort among team members. Effective manager will tend to make decisions in consistent ways because they are anchored in their beliefs and their vision of what is best for the team. The team may not always appreciate the way the manager react to situation and make decisions, but if they can count on the manager to be consistent in their approach, the team will feel comfortable and will be to trust you.

Commitment is the act of being committed. Team member will trust a manager who is committed to them as individuals and the success of the team. A manager should be willing to sacrifice time and energy to make things work as well as possible. Manager who lead by example and have a strong sense of commitment can be contagious. Commitment can include showing interest and empathy in your team, being willing to address issues rather than avoid them and demonstrating the ability to articulate vision for the team.

One of the most important aspects of being part of a team, whether it’s in a virtual setting or in the workplace is learning to depend on your team members. Today, manager find they have one or more individuals working independently isolating themselves from the team because they feel they cannot trust other team members. One way to build trust within the team is trust building activities. Many of these activities come in the form of games. Some examples of trust building activities are: mine field, willow in the wind and running free.

Mine field is an activity where you divide team members into pairs and one member of each pair in blindfolded. The blindfolded person is then led to an area where different object have been place around the room, making it difficult to move around the room without hitting an object. The partner who is not blindfolded it is his or her job to guide there partner around the room without hitting any obstacles. The partners when switch placed.

Willow in the wind is designed for a group of 8 to 10 people. One person stands in the middle of the circle formed by the rest of the team. He or she then closes their eyes and leans back into the arms of the person behind them. The person in the middle now relaxes and is passed around from one member of the group to another. It is the responsibility of the group to keep the person in the middle from falling. Each team member should take a turn in the middle.

Running free is a simple game in which the team is divided into groups of two with one partner blindfolded. The partners hold hands; the sighted person leads the blindfolded team member as they gradually work their way up to a full run, and is responsible for not allowing the team member to hit anything.

Trust in Organizations

Trust in an organization is not built overnight; it is developed over many years but can be destroyed in an instant. This is why it is essential for a company to build and maintain trust within its organization. Trust in an organization is enacted by the CEO and passed down from the managers to the line staff. As you have already found out trust has many levels in which it can be built and destroyed. In this section we will be discussing how trust works within an organization.

Since culture plays a major role in corporate trust I want to quickly explain Schein’s three major levels of culture (2004). According to Schein there are three major levels of culture within an organization. The first is artifacts. Schein states these are visible organizational structures and processes. According to Schein artifacts are hard to decipher. The next level of culture according to Schein is espoused beliefs and values. Schein states that espoused beliefs and values are strategies, goals and philosophies that are supported within the organization due to past social validation. The final major level of culture according to Schein is underlying assumptions. According to Schein this is unconscious, taken-for-granted beliefs, perceptions, thoughts and feelings or ultimate source of values and actions. So what does this mean to an organization trying to run virtual groups around the world? Simple, staff takes in information every day, processes and analyzes data to form their own opinion about trust and other issues within a corporation. Artifacts can be in the means of corporate structure or how projects are managed and run. Espoused beliefs and values are in the means of corporate goals, strategies, philosophies and the mission statement it expresses to its employees. Finally, underlying assumptions are feelings that staff members may have due to the direction of the company. This is within an employee and can be manifested due to failure or success within the company. For example a company fired staff because a project failed and promoted workers because a project succeeded. The staff would be very afraid of failure in a project because of the past precedent the company set. This can be built up over time and affect the way individual staff interacts in the organization as a whole. So what does this mean to an organization in the terms of trust? Simple, if a company does not understand Schein’s major levels of culture they may be misunderstanding why staff members do not trust the organization. According to Schein cultural differences can cause misinterpretation within the organization this can be especially true in the terms of trust. Someone from one country could interpret the meaning of trust differently than someone from another country. With that said a company’s structure, their strategy and mission statement or maybe individuals’ assumptions regarding the company do not foster an environment of trust. Thus making it important for a company to understand and evaluate Schein’s three major levels of culture within their organization and what message of trust they are conveying to their staff members.

What else could affect trust within an organization? Different cultural categories of culture could affect the way trust is implemented or foreseen. According to Lewis (2006) he contends that cultures can be placed into different categories. The first cultural category is Linear Active, in this category members do one item at a time and within the scheduled time frame and concentrate immensely on that one item. While multi-active cultures are very flexible, are not interested in schedules and punctuality but more interested in reality and do not leave conversations unfinished. The next group, retroactive cultures according to Lewis, listen to others discussions and understand their position and then make their own

opinion or position. So what does this mean to organizational trust? A company needs to understand the different cultural categories and put into place a plan that everyone perceives everyone as being truthful thus creating trust in an organization. So you ask how trust can be misconstrued within different cultural categories. Let’s say members of one office are working with members of another national office and an office that is in another country. The one office is linear, another one is multi-active and the last one is retroactive. This could cause some problems due the different traits that each group carries during a project. The offices could mistrust the other offices because of their different methods of getting a project done and vice versa. By understanding Lewis cultural categories an organization can understand the differences and mitigate the problem before a culture of mistrust sets in. It is also very important to understand that one group can start out as linear and move towards multi-active or retroactive as time goes on and vice versa. So it is very important to understand the dynamics of groups within an organization.

If you look further Hofstede and Pedersen identify five dimensions of culture (2002). They are identity, hierarchy, gender, truth and virtue. Let’s discuss truth in more detail; within truth there are what the authors call synthetic cultures so for example truth varies from extreme uncertainty avoidance to extreme uncertainty tolerance. Those who fall into the category of extreme uncertainty avoidance do not like change, rules are important and believe there is one truth and they have it. They do not like strong uncertainty at all and believe in traditional values. Those who are in the extreme uncertainty tolerance group find change curious, working hard is only valued when need be, innovative ideas are tolerated, rules should be limited to only when needed or absolutely necessary. This group likes change and does not always follow the traditional normal set. The groups also have different speaking volumes, space distancing while interacting and planning time. An organization needs to understand the differences because if one group does not understand the other, trust issues could arise due to the fact that these groups interact differently. For example those who are in the group of extreme uncertainty avoidance speak loudly while those who are in the group of extreme uncertainty tolerance speak softly. If the two misunderstand the way the other is speaking they could assume that particular group does not trust them or vice versa. It is very important for organizations to understand this so they can avoid trust issues all together.

Thus far we have found that culture can play an important role in making or breaking trust in organizations and the different ideas that encompass culture at a high level. What can organizations specifically do to create an environment of trust and maintain this environment? According to a research article written by Shockley-Zalabak Ph.D., Ellis Ph.D. and Cesaria entitled Measuring Organizational Trust Cross-Cultural Survey and Index (2003) they identified five factors that create organizational trust. They are Competence (staff’s effectiveness), Openness and honesty (shared communication), concern for employees (safety), reliability (consistent and dependable) and identification (sharing common goals, values and beliefs). In the research article they describe tools that can measure Organizational Trust within your company. The tool has a scoring guide to help you evaluate your trust level. Upon completion your organization will receive an Organization Trust Index allowing you to compare your score to other organizations in each dimension. This research article also explains how to address and mitigate concern areas within your organization. Another article entitled

"Has the Enron Debacle threatened Your Organizations Trust?" by Price (2002) gave ten tips on how to ensure organizational trust. They were as follows; Be sure to have an open communication environment, Tell the truth, Do what you say, Be consistent, Listen intently and give worthwhile advice, Follow through, Be accountable, Forget about Popularity, Be honest during performance reviews, and Share the knowledge. An organization needs to build a trusting and productive work environment through integrity and humility.

When an organization openly communicates, stands up to their commitments, keeps their staff safe, consistent and honest and creates an environment that employees identify with organizational trust then trust is created. Organizational trust not only boosts morale, it increases creativity, productivity, communication and efficiency amongst employees. This is a process that takes many years and hard work that an organization has to be willing to foster, grow and maintain. If a company is willing to work towards achieving organizational trust, they will undoubtedly see an increase in commitment and overall satisfaction from employees. As previously state, there are many variables that can derail this process that a company and its leaders must be well aware of. In the end, organizational trust is built by every employee within the organization and by understanding what creates organizational trust, employees can be responsible for creating a trustful organization.

Governance and Trust

First we will define four related concepts:

Governance = the creation of a mechanism to apply a method or system of government or management within an organization which defines specific activities and the responsibilities associated with decision making for those activities.

Project management = the planning, organizing, directing, and controlling of company resources to achieve a short term objective.

Program portfolio management = is an evolving collection of organizational initiatives and activities that contribute to the goals of the organizations

Enterprise Business Strategy = an Enterprise business strategy is a long-term plan of action designed to achieve a particular goal or goals for the organization utilizing projects, initiatives, and programs.

Governance and Trust

Governance is a critical part of any organizations ongoing operations. Program portfolio management guides the direction of initiatives, projects and programs toward completion while maintaining compliance with organizational goals and objectives known as Enterprise Business Strategy. Does governance help develop a level of trust within the organization by providing a clear direction on how to accomplish and resolve issues related to the successful completion of these activities or does it hinder those same operations by providing additional and unnecessary oversight? Do the team members feel as if governance is big brother looking over their shoulders which promotes a feeling of distrust between senior management and the staff?

Development of trust within the program, project or initiative  

The importance and inter-related nature of these activities cannot be overstated. On the initiative and project level, individuals work together in a variety of activities to build trust among their team. They must depend on each other to produce assigned work which in turn allows other team members to thus complete their own work. The management of these projects depends heavily on each individual pulling their weight and completing their tasks on time and without errors.

The project manager is responsible for developing, promoting and maintaining that trust between his/her team as reporting, tracking and analysis, and periodic and milestone review validate whether the project is on track and fulfilling the goals of the business enterprise plan. As each checkpoint comes and goes, trust builds and the team builds the critical mass necessary to bring the project to completion.  

Transparency  

The upward trajectory of this reporting process leads us to two issues that are addressed above the level of the team member. Transparency, which is the act of providing openness, communication, and accountability for the results of all projects and initiatives which are bundled into programs, tracked and reported. The consistent reporting, tracking and analysis, and periodic and milestone review pushes this information into the hands of the program manager and next the senior manager or stakeholder responsible for the program, project, or initiative who then assists in the determination as to whether the program, project or initiative is still in line with the original business case and ultimately the enterprise business plan.  

Governance

The act of governance within an organization is the most critical of activities related to program, project, and initiative trust. As stated previously, governance is the creation of a mechanism to apply a method or system of government or management within an organization which defines specific activities and the responsibilities associated with decision making for those activities. The key here is that governance overlays a systemic process that covers all organizational functions which gives managers and team members specific directives on how to resolve issues that require decision making. It ultimately defines who has responsibility, how that responsibility is granted, and how the responsibility will be used to make critical decisions regarding all operations that affect compliance with the enterprise business plan.

This implies a different type of trust than what is found in programs, projects, and initiatives. As opposed to relying on your workmate to produce assigned result which lead to the successful completion of an initiative, the teams, managers, vendors, customers, other employees, government agencies and employees and many others depend on the senior management, specifically the executive office of the organization to provide leadership in creating and applying governance principles throughout the organizational structure. Accountability and responsibility are the key words here. The senior stakeholder or manager has ultimate accountability and responsibility to ensure all activities promote the enterprise business plan even at the expense of closing out popular but inappropriate or

non-producing assets or programs. The staff, by following the mandates of these governance decisions, supply the executive office with the trust/support it needs to make the decisions necessary to keep the organization healthy and consequently the executive office provides the trust/support needed by the staff to continue to be productive.

I witnessed a current example of this type of two way trust on the show, Undercover Boss, which focused on Frontier Airline. Frontier acquired or merged with two other carriers within a short amount of time which led to overstaffing and other operational issues while the carriers were being merged into Frontier. The CEO and executive board of Frontier promised there would be as few layoffs as possible. They kept their promise but in the process of avoiding layoff were forced to ask all employees to take a 10% pay cut. This is an example of executive office governance in setting the direction and adjusting the enterprise business plan to ensure the long-term survival of the airline. The employees trusted the executive officers, reviewed the financial state of the airline, accepted the pay cuts and after some tumultuous times the airline is now on solid footing.

The second part of the trust sequence goes from the executive office back to the line employees. In the show, the CEO goes undercover to train in different parts of the airline only to discover many employees are struggling to make ends meet because of the 10% pay cuts. Even though they are being paid less they still work hard to ensure the airline is a success. The overall enthusiasm and work ethic of the line employees was so impressing that the CEO has committed to restoring the 10% pay cuts over the course of three years.

Conclusion

Governance and Trust are a two way street between the executive office of an organization and its staff. They must trust each other has the best interest of the organization as its foremost objective and be willing to communicate and act according to the governance standards presented by the executive office. Consequently the executive office must be willing to listen to and accept that their line employees are subject matter experts capable of providing many useful ideas, suggestions, and plans, and deserve a voice in the governance process.

Summary

As you can see Trust is a balancing act and must be maintained for a group to be successful. In the days of virtualization it is even more imperative to create groups that have a great deal of trust within in them. These groups can be regional, national and international and do not have the ability to develop face to face relationships thus trust becomes a building block to build a relationship that will help the group succeed. Without trust a project has a greater chance of failure or overrun. Group members may not want to be part of the organization or work may falter because of lack of trust. Finally, trust can cause dissatisfaction within a company that can cause highly qualified staff to leave resulting in projects that lack in expertise. It is very important for a company to monitor trust within its group and organizations for those reasons. In this chapter we discussed the components of trust, individual trust, trust building, managerial, organizational, and governance of trust. You as the reader should now be able to assemble and maintain a highly trustful collaboration group within your organization.

Bibliography

Introduction

Trust. (2006). In United States (2006 Ed.), The New International Webster’s standard Dictionary (Page 286, 2006 Edition). United State of America: Trident Reference Publishing.

Team Aspect of Trust Building

Cramton, Catherine D. (2002) Finding Common Ground in Dispersed Collaboration, Organizational Dynamics, V30, No. 4 p. 356-367

Team work and team building essentials

http://www.time-management-guide.com/team-building.html

Building team trust and Cohesiveness, Collection from Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation http://www.beingabetterleader.com/docs/building%20team%20trust%20and%20cohesiveness.pdf?LanguageID=EN-US

Organizational Aspect of Trust

Schein, Edgar H.. ( © 2004). Organizational culture and leadership, third edition. [Books24x7 version] Available from http://common.books24x7.com.ezproxy2.lib.depaul.edu/book/id_11277/book.asp.

Hofstede, Gert Jan & Pedersen, Paul B. & Hofstede, Geert. ( © 2002). Exploring culture: exercises, stories and synthetic cultures. [Books24x7 version] Available from http://common.books24x7.com.ezproxy2.lib.depaul.edu/book/id_6723/book.asp.

Lewis, Richard D.. ( © 2006). When cultures collide: leading across cultures, third edition. [Books24x7 version] Available from http://common.books24x7.com.ezproxy2.lib.depaul.edu/book/id_13710/book.asp.

Shockley-Zalabak Ph.D., Pamela, Ellis Ph.D., Kathleen Cesaria, Ruggero (2003, April-May). Measuring Organizational Trust Cross-Cultural Survey and Index. Retrieved October 22, 2010, from http://www.iabc.com/researchfoundation/pdf/OrgTrustAprMay2003.pdf

Price, Bette (2002, May 1). Has the Enron debacle threatened your organization's trust? Business Credit retrieved from http://www.allbusiness.com/accounting/3486750-1.html

Governance References

Portfolio Management: An Introduction, IBM, Hanford, Michael F., Chief Methodologist, Summit Ascendant Methodologies, 10/15/2005 http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/oct05/hanford/index.html

Portfolio Management: Overview of new IBM Rational Methods, Michael F., Chief Methodologist, Summit Ascendant Methodologies, 03/15/2006 http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/mar06/hanford/

Program Management: Different from Project Management, IBM, Hanford, Michael F., Chief Methodologist, Summit Ascendant Methodologies, 05/14/2004 http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/4751.html

Getting started with Portfolio Management, IBM, Hanford, Michael F., Chief Methodologist, Summit Ascendant Methodologies, 05/15/2006 http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/may06/hanford/

Portfolio Management: The IBM view of PM essentials, Hanford, Michael F., Chief Methodologist, Summit Ascendant Methodologies, 10/15/2005 http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/nov05/hanford/index.html

Project portfolio management organizes a series of projects into a single portfolio consisting of reports that capture project objectives, costs, By Melissa Solomon. March 18, 2002 http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/69129/Project_Portfolio_Management?taxonomyId=14&pageNumber=2

A CIO's Guide to IT Portfolio Management http://www.ciozone.com/index.php/Editorial-Research/A-CIO-s-Guide-To-IT-Portfolio-Management.html

Portfolio Management Done Right - CIO.com By Todd Datz on Thu, May 01, 2003 http://www.cio.com/article/31864/Portfolio_Management_Done_Right?page=1&taxonomyId=3154

Analyze This. The fundamentals of portfolio management are being applied to corporate technology assets. John Goff and Edward Teach - CFO Magazine www. cfo .com/article.cfm/3011139/c_2984295/? f=archives

Best Practices in IT Portfolio Management. By Mark Jeffery and Ingmar Leliveld. April 15, 2004 sloanreview.mit.edu/.../ best - practices-in-it-portfolio - management /