Five Facets of Trust
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Five Facets of Trust
Hoy and Tschannen state that there are five facets of trust, and that is; benevolence, competence, reliability, honesty, competence, and openness.
Benevolence
Hoy and Tschannen (1999) argue that benevolence is the most familiar face of trust. Benevolence has been described to mean the confidence that a trusted person will protect one’s well-being. Where one is assured of the goodwill of the other person to act in a manner that favors their best interest. Benevolence is characterized by the spirit of goodwill and willingness to support the well-being of another person. Cummings & Bromily (1996) argue trust is the assurance that the other will not exploit one’s vulnerability or take undue advantage of one even when the opportunity is available. Baier’s (1986) argues trust involves the accepted vulnerability to another’s possible but not expected ill will.
Tschannen-Moran (1998) argues that benevolence and supportiveness constituted the facet of trust that was significantly mentioned by principals to the teachers. Principals who have successfully managed to win the trust of their faculties exhibit goodwill and genuine concern about teachers’ well-being. This creates confidence among the teachers since they realize their welfare is taken care of. Principals promote a trust-centered culture by exhibiting benevolence, that is, by meeting the needs of the teachers and ensuring their well-being is well catered for. Jones & George (1998) contend in trust-centered school environments; teachers will be more than willing to seek assistance and guidance without the fear of being judged by the principal.
Reliability
Reliability refers to the ability of one to depend on another when the need arises consistently. One is confident that one can count on another without necessarily having to worry. Evans (1996) found that trust is based on consistency in personal beliefs, organizational goals, and work performance. Teachers will have greater confidence when their principals behave consistently. Therefore principals are compelled to act in a predictable manner if they intend to gain complete trust from their teachers. This will consequently make teachers confident as they execute their duty of teaching the students. Bryk & Schneider (1996) found out that consistency, competence, and even-handedness in principals’ behavior promoted strong and healthy school communities.
The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. Therefore, principals who act reliably in a manner that extracts trust from teachers are more likely to earn and maintain the trust of their faculty than those who do not. Teachers expect to rely on their principal’s actions, and this impacts positively on teachers’ confidence in making their decisions. The teachers will be positive that the principal has their interest at heart and means well.
Competence
Butler (1978) explains competence as the ability to do well something worthwhile; the knowledge, skills, values, and attitudes needed to carry out properly an activity essential to success in one’s personal or professional life; the ability to meet or surpass prevailing standards of adequacy for a particular event. Solomon & Flores (2001) argue that is a teacher exhibits inadequate knowledge and skills, then in such a case, instances of incompetence are likely to be witnessed. This, however, does not mean that the professional is not to be trusted because anyone can make a mistake as long as they are willing to fix it. In such circumstances, failure should not be confused for betrayal as the person’s intention was not to betray but just a lack of skill. Tschannen-Moran (1998) elucidates teachers, when interviewed, stated that the level of their principal’s competence was crucial. Principals that have been able to gain the trust of their teachers are not only respected but also admired by their teachers. Principals who display a high level of competence deserve not only much respect but also hold teachers accountable in ways that seem fair and reasonable to their staff. Principals can demonstrate a high level of proficiency by being able to manage severe problems that may arise within the faculty.
Honesty
Baier (1986) honesty is a pivot facet of trust. Rotter (1967) defined trust as the expectancy that the word, promise, verbal or written statement of another individual or group can be relied upon. Comments are considered truthful when they comply with what happened from that person’s point of view. For principals to be trusted, they must be honest in their interactions with teachers. Honest behavior demonstrates the integrity of a character. When teachers begin to notice a mismatch between principal words and actions, this will raise eyebrows. Once a principal has been caught in a scandal of the lie, it becomes hard for the faculty to entrust their principal with the leadership. It becomes even harder to regain trust because trust is a very fragile element, and once broken, and sometimes it becomes close to impossible to recover.
Honesty does not only entail telling the truth but also includes a sense of integrity. Engelbrecht, Heine & Mahembe (2017) investigated how leader integrity and ethical leadership can influence trust in the leader and employee work engagement. The study involved investigating how leader integrity affects a worker’s engagement. They made a conclusion that points to the fact that leaders who are considered ethical create a trust-cultured working environment that improves the engagement of the employees.
Authentic leadership is positively related to improved followers’ performance (Wang et al., 2014, pp.5-21). Authenticity is the ability of one to be truthful and owning up to one’s mistakes. Principals who appeared as though they are selective on what they reveal were perceived as though they are hiding something. This consequently leads to teachers losing trust in the principal. It is only proper for principals to own mistakes in case one has been made and not shift blames to other staff to promote the culture of trust among teachers and other staff. Simon (1999) observed that a manager should walk his talk by clearly sticking to their words if they intend to guide their subordinates appropriately. When the subordinates are assured of their manager’s honesty, then whatever the managers say is believed to be accurate by the subordinates. However, for dishonest managers, they will need to invest so much time and resources in making their employees come to have trust in them. When a promise is broken, the trust may still survive, however, when there are a series of broken promises, and then trust is completely damaged.
Openness
Butler & Cantrell (1984) explained transparency as a process of leaders making themselves vulnerable to others by sharing information, influence, and control. By taking the initiative to make oneself vulnerable, trust is built during the process. Horsburgh (1960) argues that people who are considered trustworthy may also encourage other people to be also trustworthy. People who are careful with the information they share with people elicit suspicion as people will try and uncover what they are trying to conceal. Leaders in high positions should, therefore, be utterly open with all information if they want to earn the trust of their employees. Butler (1991) argues managers who show their feelings, intentions, and communicates openly to their employees, earned the trust of their employees without much struggle. A thorough explanation and giving feedback at the right time has the impact of promoting trust among the employees. Gabarro (1978) contends that for a leader to earn confidence from his juniors, then it is vital for the leader to be entirely open with his subordinates. Most leaders hide important information believing this will maintain their power; however, those who openly communicate vital information to their juniors are considered desirable by their employees.
Research has unveiled subordinates perceive their superior as trustworthy when they tend to share control. Driscoll (1978) argues employee’s trust is higher when they feel they are being included in the process of decision making. Tschannen-Moran (1998) asserts that principals who openly share information with their teachers and ensures that teachers participate actively in the decision-making process have consequently gained the trust of their teachers. This sense of a trust-centered environment motivates teachers to go the extra mile in delivering their services to students. The author goes on to state that principals who take the initiative of attending to teacher’s problems, communicating openly with teachers, and guiding them on the expected standards are bound to earn the trust of their teachers.
Red-Five Facets of trust schools.
Brown-Five Facets.
Purple-Principals Trust and Cultivating Vibrant Schools.
References
Baier, A., 1986. Trust and antitrust. Ethics, 96(2), pp.231-260.
Bryk, A.S., and Schneider, B., 1996. Social Trust: A Moral Resource for School Improvement. Final Deliverable to OERI.
Butler Jr, J.K., and Cantrell, R.S., 1984. A behavioral decision theory approach to modeling dyadic trust in superiors and subordinates. Psychological Reports, 55(1), pp.19-28.
Butler, F.C., 1978. The concept of competence: An operational definition. Educational Technology, 18(1), pp.7-18.
Cummings, L.L., and Bromiley, P., 1996. The organizational trust inventory (OTI). Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research, 302(330), pp.39-52.
Driscoll, J.W., 1978. Trust and participation in organizational decision making as predictors of satisfaction. Academy of management journal, 21(1), pp.44-56.
Engelbrecht, A.S., Heine, G., and Mahembe, B., 2017. Integrity, ethical leadership, trust, and work engagement
Flores, F., and Solomon, R., 2001. Building Trust: In Business, Politics, Relationships, and Life. Oxford Scholarship Online.
Hoy, W.K., and Tschannen-Moran, M., 1999. Five faces of trust: An empirical confirmation in urban elementary schools. Journal of School leadership, 9(3), pp.184-208.
Jones, G.R., and George, J.M., 1998. The experience and evolution of trust: Implications for cooperation and teamwork. Academy of management review, 23(3), pp.531-546.
Rappaport, A., 1999. Creating shareholder value: a guide for managers and investors. Simon and Schuster.
Tschannen‐Moran, M., and Hoy, W., 1998. Trust in schools: A conceptual and empirical analysis—Journal of Educational Administration.