Trust

by David W. Edgerly, Ph.D.

You want to be "trusted". Someone you know or love wants you to "trust" him or her. The concept of trust seems to be widely used and rarely defined. Parents want to "trust" their children. Partners want to "trust" each other and be "trusted". Generalities piled upon generalities. The concept of trust, if it isn't defined, is for all intents and purposes useless.

Trust is an important concept. As a nation we struggle with this idea with our leaders. At home people struggle with this with partners and children. Employees struggle with employers and visa versa. But rarely have I ever heard anyone define what it is they want to "trust" about another person or they want trusted about themselves.

Chelona and I trust each other a great deal. That means we trust each other about a lot of things under a lot of circumstances. Guess what? I don't trust Chelona to manage our retirement portfolio. Sadly, for about five years, quite a few years ago, she trusted me to manage it. At the end of five years the portfolio had grown 1.5%. Not a wise placement of trust. Now we, together, trust a broker to guide us because that is what we trust he knows how to do. Over time he has proven that trust to be valid. But we wouldn't trust him to do psychotherapy, or manage our marriage or teach us horseback riding.

Trust has to be defined, as specifically as possible, before one can truly talk about trusting, or not trusting someone. As a first step this means you have to define what you are "trusting" the other person to do. What matters to you in regards to the other person's behavior? Often relationships are damaged, or even destroyed, when unspoken trusts have been violated. Relationships, whether you recognize it or not, are contracts. These contracts have numerous clauses and the clauses work best when explicit. For all of society's complaints about attorneys and legal jargon there is a reason for every possibility and every eventuality being included in contracts. No surprises.

Trust involves at least three components. The first component is the expectation. What is expected of the other party and what can they expect from you. This component has two sides. Don't miss them both. After you define what you expect, you have to define what the other person expects of you. Frequently in adolescent therapy, I listen to parents feeling betrayed because their adolescent "violated" their "trust". (Didn't we all?) Those parents heads spin when I ask if they have behaved in a trustable fashion? Most don't even know what their children want to be able to trust about them (an entire side of the contract) and just assumed, because they love and care for the child, that the child will return their definition of trustable behavior. Define both sides.

Second, in the equation of trust, is the test-of-time. Over the course of time has the other person fulfilled the trust contract? Probably, in long term relationships no contract is 100%. Our broker hasn't always picked winning investments, nor has he always been brilliant. Yet, over the course of time he has consistently held to his advice, brought in an adequate or better profit, and seemed to behave with our best interest in mind (I'd say our best interest first, but lets face it, he is in business for his best interest not ours).

This area of the test-of-time is fascinating as I watch people. Over and over I meet people where someone has violated their trust contract and the violation is ignored. The relationship proceeds as though nothing much happened. After each violation things either remain ill defined or no consequence is imposed and then the person is "surprised" when the contract is violated again.

The test of time is also a two-sided issue. Is your behavior dependable, over time, in fulfilling the relationship contract? The fact you get violated matters but are you violating contracts? The test of time needs to be met by both parties. My broker expects me to pay attention, return phone calls, send money on time and keep him informed of my agenda. If I fail to do that he can't do his part of the contract.

Contracts are best measured over the test of time and this measurement applies to all parties in the contract.

Third, is the area of consequences. If you don't pay your mortgage you will eventually lose your home. If you don't pay your taxes you will eventually go to jail. If you don't drive the speed limit you will eventually get a moving violation. Not every event is caught and not every event is punished but when the pattern is violation, consequences inevitably ensue.

Over the long haul contracts need to be fulfilled and as accurately as possible. Not that a person hits 100% of clauses 100% of the time. Have you paid every bill you owe exactly on time over your entire life? Ever bounced a check? These minor violations tend to get ignored if the global pattern is one of "honesty", meaning contract fulfillment. Only when the pattern is of non-fulfillment is the contract terminated. All too often, in relationships, the contract isn't terminated even after years and years of violations.

In business, which is a useful model, the pattern of consequences usually works in a predictable way. If you are late or under-perform there will be penalties, be they in terms of finances or privileges. If the pattern continues then the contract is terminated.

Please don't misunderstand, I'm all for forgiveness. But forgiveness, at least human to human, is about isolated violations not about chronic or habitual or intentional violations. These are dealt with by consequences. If that means a relationship ends then that is what it means. But often, there are lesser responses available. Many years ago a friend of mine was chronically late by 45-75 minutes. I'm usually early. We got together twice a week and I got more and more resentful each time. Eventually, in a state of fed-up self-righteousness I was ready to cancel our friendship. Fortunately, before I did, I realized there was an alternative. I waited 15 minutes past our time to meet then left. When he confronted my absence I told him this would be the rule from now on. After about 3 times of me leaving he was only late once in the next year. I also told him that if his lateness wasn't corrected within a month we wouldn't bother to get together anymore. Consequence were applied and then he met the test of time. As paths part we've rarely seen each other over the last 15 years but on each of the three occasions he was early.

As you evaluate your trust contracts look at what you expect and what you are willing to give. Don't enter unspoken contracts and don't lie about what you will and won't do. The truth isn't always pleasant but it is always useful.

There do seem to be two fairly universal issues related to trust. First, almost everyone seems to expect to be told accurate information (the truth). This is reasonable since in the absence of accurate information you can't make (or the other person can't make) reasonable responses. I expect my broker to give me truth. However, even this has to defined. I expect truth about my account, the market, his profits and advisors. I don't expect, nor have right to, "truth" about his personal life. It isn't part of our contract. In marriage or family it usually is. In friendships it has a limited but present role. But in all relationships most people have some accuracy, or "truth", clause.

Second, in most relationships there is a clause about "best interest". That is, there is some expectation that the other person will behave with our best interest kept in mind. Double edged and ill defined again. Does best interest mean that you will be considered in all decisions, or will you be the primary party in all decisions? I often call this the "Would you take a bullet for me, and would I take a bullet for you?" concept. In other words, is best interest simply consideration with due diligence or is it total self-sacrifice. Whatever your definition you need to be clear with the other party and you need to be clear about yourself. It's one thing to want self sacrifice and another to be willing to give it.

In the end trust is about defined behaviors under defined conditions. What do you expect and what would you give under certain circumstances and at certain times. And will you stand by these contracts whether it's applying the consequences or receiving them. For many years people have been repeatedly considering this concept in broad and meaningless terms; terms that only mean something to the person using the word not the ones hearing it. Whatever your values, hopes, dreams and current relationships it is time, now, to be clear! Clear with teeth!

Archives of previous articles:

Upgrading How You Relate by David W. Edgerly, Ph.D.

Friend, Stranger or Enemy by David W. Edgerly, Ph.D.

Protecting Soul and Psyche by David W. Edgerly, Ph.D.

The Answer is Mutual Respect by David W. Edgerly, Ph.D.

Certainty as the Cure for Anger II by David W. Edgerly, Ph.D.

Undertaking Marriage by David W. Edgerly, Ph.D.

Who Am I by David W. Edgerly, Ph.D.

Three Faces of Fear by David W. Edgerly, Ph.D. and Chelona Edgerly, Ph.D.

Hate Crimes Against Women by David W. Edgerly, Ph.D.

Do The Hard Things by Connie Pruss

Strong Is Sexy by Chelona Edgerly, Ph.D.