Trust is the New Transparency

The concept of private and confidential is taking a beating lately, and it's a pity.

The age of transparency seems to be understood as a way to blow the doors open to all sorts of information that we may not have the need - or appropriate clearance - to disclose.

It's not just that people may get hurt in the process, they will.

Disclosing private information betrays the very trust someone has placed in you. Trust takes time to build, lots of time. It takes one careless - and selfish - act to destroy.

No, I'm not talking about whistle blowing on scams of which unfortunately we've had our fill in the last several years.

What I'm talking about is more the personal kind of betrayal. The kind of indiscretion that a company wouldn't expect of its agency, for example - that's why there are enforceable NDAs. Or when a colleague knowingly throws you under the bus. This is an expression used to describe blatant and sudden betrayal in cubicle nation.

Today, it's not only companies that face the privacy in the age of transparency dilemma. Note that the article linked here is from 2004. "Privacy is about self-possession, autonomy, and integrity," wrote Simson Garfinkel, "Over the next fifty years we will see new kinds of threats to privacy that don't find their roots in totalitarianism, but in capitalism, the free market, advanced technology, and the unbridled exchange of electronic information."

And opinion, we might add. Private and confidential have been linked in so many instances, aside from being on the same line in official documents.

Sharing information that is confidential with the media, or anyone, is equivalent to stealing. Often though, the person leaking information - from a company, or a relationship - may be not fully aware of the damage they may be causing and its consequences - to themselves first and then others.

What can you do to highlight the importance of trust?

1. Talk about the importance of respect - the most vicious kind of betrayal is that of misquoting someone for the purposes of placing yourself in a good light. That is by far the worst kind of spin and although it shows up as no respect for the other, it ends up being no respect for yourself.

2. Go by the "golden rule" - deep down in your gut, you often know when you're doing something that is not right. It feels off. Stop and consider what you'll gain carefully. Because what you lose in exchange may be too dear. There's a reason why sayings like "making a pact with the devil" exist. You end up being owned by the very betrayal you made.

3. Take the issue up with the person or parties involved first - this is more transparent than going above or around them, actually. Breathe deeply and face the conversation and you will breathe more easily, too, afterward.

Whether you're in the camp of trust needing to be hard earned or it being given freely will also say a lot about the kind of person and company you are. In the age of transparency, we still have a need for responsible and helpful filters. Are you going to be one of them?

Is betraying someone's confidence ever justified? We're so enamored with transparency - and immediacy - that we might be missing out on the opportunity to let people emerge as their true selves over the course of relationships.

Plenty is being written about transparency today, and much of it is worthwhile. But transparency is simply a tool: a process, a way of doing business. It also is a matter of self-preservation. With all this connectivity, you can be sure your "sins" will find you out.

Trust is the new transparency. Trust is earned. Trust is more valuable than gold. People will pay for it. And if you're working to earn it now, you're already creating equity in the next economy.

__________

Other resources:

Trust and Corporate Blogs

Mad Men, Self-Interest, Trust Agents, and Collaboration

Social Capital and Trust

Trust

Thriving on Chaos? Only When You Have Trust

Trust, Listening, and Doing Something with it are all Connected

Privacy: Trading Trust for Cash

© 2006-2009 Valeria Maltoni. All rights reserved.

Comments

[Mike]

Here's a good exercise: Before saying something about anyone, ask yourself "Would I say this to their face?" If not, find a way to do so or change your opinion in order to eliminate the conflict entirely. At the very least, show loyalty and respect by following the old advice "Praise in public, criticize in public."

[Valeria Maltoni]

Good way to take the temperature out of a potentially sticky situation, Mike. More than eliminating conflict, we should look to stay productive and professional. Critical thinking is welcome.

We should not all look to conform to one idea or opinion. What we should work on is learning to accept and embrace differing points of view without needing to minimize, put down, or trivialize that of someone else. There is no right answer. We all have different experiences. There are context-driven solutions that work until better ones are found.

I'll also add, that it's in the manner of execution that you see if there is malice. Someone who sends you say a great piece of code (if you're a developer) that someone else wrote with a note that you might find it interesting is trying to be helpful.

Someone who sends the same message, but this time copies your boss and colleagues in the cover note "hey, look at how these folks do code!" is looking to score points.

[Lauren Fisher]

I'm often seeing examples of posts or Twitter messages that are just the wrong side of feeling comfortable. People leaking information that you know is wrong, personal opinion being peddled as fact. It's a tricky line. The web has opened up communication and transparency is a good thing. But I don't think enough people are aware of the rules we all have to abide by when it comes to libel etc..
I think that some people think of their opinions as private because it's done through their own communication channel, without thinking of the consequences.

[Scott Hepburn]

Hey, thank you for writing this, Valeria.

I have a difficult confession to make: A few weeks ago, I blogged about some rather childish Twitter comments made about our profession by some local acquaintances.

Rather than speaking with the individuals privately to express my dissatisfaction, I took advantage of the fact that their comments were public and called them out publicly on my blog.

Was I within my right? Sure. Was it the right way to handle it? Probably not.

We get so dogmatic about these concepts of transparency and authenticity that we forget equally important principles such as discretion, decency and restraint.

Before we rant about companies lacking human compassion, we oughtta look more closely at ourselves.

[Aaron Templer]

Thanks for this post. We can never talk enough about building trust because in the day-to-day world, there's no practice field. You're constantly executing.

Are you familiar with "The Platinum Rule?" Instead of "Do unto others as you would be done unto," I find it helpful to try and "Do unto others as they would be done unto." Values are individual and require flexibility when aligning with them.

[Jeff Esposito]

Great post. With all of the anonymity of the online space, there needs to be a rule that we should all follow.

While I would love to think that everyone is ready to treat these conversations as sacred and in trust, we can't assume that they will be.

Much like traditional relationships, we need to hone our online and "social" ones with confidence.

[Brian Driggs]

It can take a lifetime to earn someone's trust. That someone could be a long time friend or business partner, or it could be an entire target demographic of customers.

A simple breach of trust can undo everything you've worked long and hard to create in seconds.

The Golden Rule stands, although I find I'm using it more these days like this - "The more I genuinely try to help others, the more they seem to end up trying to help me."

[Valeria Maltoni]

@Lauren - "clever" doesn't show well in digital, permanent form. People still mistake email for conversation, it's not. We're not face to face. Real time has limitations, especially, as you point out, when making statements that could get someone in trouble, lightly.

@Scott - indeed, we see examples every day of taking the controversial route and getting attention. But drama has a way of spilling over into life and hurting people. Taking the high road can be challenging when you see so many others getting away with stuff. Long term, though, it's the best course. About your example, sometimes people really don't know or see themselves. Emotional intelligence and situational awareness are not a given. Just like common sense is, after all, not that common. Good of you to think about that instance a bit more carefully. The good news is that we learn all the time.

@Aaron - I wasn't familiar with the platinum rule, although I confess the metal is a favorite. I like that, we're constantly executing on trust. Well said.

@Jeff - never assume anything. Remember that we see the world as we are, all of us. yet. we're not all the same.

@Brian - and it doesn't have to be the same ones, either. The best help comes from the most unexpected places.

[Nick Stamoulis]

I think people are starting to forget the fact what they say online in most cases will be there for a while. You have to really think before you speak online because the power of viral marketing is quite strong.