The Rhetoric and Reality of Trust between Managers and Employees - Essay Example

 “The glue that holds all relationships together -- including the relationship between the leader and the led is - Trust” Brian Tracy Introduction: Trust has historically been one of the most crucial foundations of society in general and organizations in particular, and has been adopted and exploited indiscriminately in the corporate world. Despite its significance and the ability to cause long term impact on the way in which organizations function, it is an often misinterpreted concept and has been frequently mishandled by organizations, thereby resulting in disastrous outcomes in terms of failure to achieve corporate goals, dissatisfaction among employees and the likes. Hence, developing an atmosphere of trust should be the fundamental organizational goal since it enables effective flow of communication between the managers and the employees, which helps them to overcome doubts and fears at both the ends. Context: The aforementioned quote reaffirms the significance of trust in all relationships and particularly that between the leaders i.e. the management and the employees, within an organizational setting. Aim of the essay: The basic aim of the essay is to establish the significance and relevance of the element of trust within an organizational environment, and examine the causes and effects difference on account of the rhetoric and reality of trust. Summary of structure of the essay: The essay begins with an introduction which lays foundation for the chosen topic, about its relevance and significance within an organizational setting. It is followed by the main body of the essay which is divided into several shorter paragraphs, each beginning with an opening sentence i.e. a basic idea / hypothesis which is established through discussion and substantiated through relevant references and finally ending with the conclusion which summarizes the basic idea behind the essay. Trust is defined as as: (Dutton, Ragins, 2007; Pp. 119) “A psychological state comprising the intention to accept vulnerability based on positive expectations of the intentions or behavior of another” Trust between managers and employees encourage positive outcomes: There is ample research evidence (see appendix 1) which supports the above statement and indicates that the values received by the employees in an organization have a significant impact on the organizational performance which far exceeds those achieved through an organized corporate strategy (Davenport and Prusak, 2000; Kaser and Miles; Garvey and Williamson, 2002). Although various means and strategies are regularly adopted and implemented by the management to encourage employee productivity / performance, which includes lucrative rewards, health benefits, as well as frequent training workshops, “trust” still continues to be the most vital element that governs the employees’ willingness to perform well beyond the management expectations ( Torlak and Koc, 2007). Managers, therefore, must invest in strategies which seek to develop an environment of trust, within the workplace by involving the employees in decision making, taking their grievances into consideration prior to decision making and regularly communicating with them, in order to encourage better employee performance (Cohen and Prusak, 2001). There is evidence to suggest trust affects on three aspects of job performer by Colquitt et al (2007) study the effect of trust on (Rotundo & Sackett, 2002) namely – task performance, counterproductive behavior and citizenship behavior. The finding revealed that the degree / level of trust between the employees and managers had a reasonably strong association with all the three key aspects of job performance. The employees who had higher amount of trust in their managers were found to be relatively more productive and enthusiastic in their tasks and performed better than those who lacked such a trust. Also, the desire or intention to quit their jobs was found to be relatively lower in an organization where the level of trust was higher (need evidence, (see appendix 1). There is ample empirical evidence which suggests a strong association between trust and organizational commitment, and hence the motivation to remain employed (Liou, 1995; Robinson, 1996; Robinson and Morrison, 1995; Konovsky and Pugh, 1994). The performance of employees which exceeds the managerial expectations is one of the key inputs to organizational success, and cannot be achieved through deliberate corporate strategies and stringent rules. The willingness to excel in their duties is an outcome of individual will, which can be fostered through mutual trust where the employees feel secure about their jobs as well as workplace and the motives of their managers. To encourage such discretionary performance on the part of employees, the management must create a suitable atmosphere and mutual approach whereby employees are persuaded to communicate and contribute their thoughts, ideas and beliefs with their colleagues as well as managers for the overall benefit of the organization. Lack of trust ushers in uncertainty, concern, and apprehension, which in turn negatively affects organizational performance Trust or the lack of it is negatively associated with counterproductive results, such as the desire to quit the organization (Colquitt, Scott & LePine, 2007; Dirks & Ferrin, 2002). An untrustworthy organizational environment is likely to be transformed into hostile employee relations, since employees view managers as leaders whose only objective is to achieve the organizational goals by any means. It is on account of this very reason that employee groups such as trade unions for instance, perceive the role of the leaders as that of merely securing the short term benefits for their members wherein “every additional task performed has to be paid for and every change in working practices is disputed”(Reilly 2001, Pp. 124). The negative consequences of lack of trust between managers and employees was further brought to light through a survey conducted by Marchington (1998) which revealed that trade union representatives saw management as elements whose only job was to ensure satisfaction of organizational goals and accomplishment of tasks listed on their corporate agenda, under the garb of ‘collaboration’. Such a management was hence criticized by the employees and their unions for being highly reticent and deceitful and only interested in employing whatever means possible to achieve their corporate goals without any regard for employee wellbeing (Reilly, 2001). “Leadership is not stagnant and does not happen through the efforts of a single individual alone; rather, it is dynamic and collaborative” - (Komives et al, 2009, Pp. 51) A considerable portion of research on ‘trust’ conducted in the past, has close association with the social exchange theory (Blau, 1964) which implies that the trust between both the parties concerned, (i.e. the managers as well as the employees), might prove to be an influential aspect in terms of organizational performance and on the manner in which the employees / workers behave and react. If there is an element of trust within the organizational environment, the employees are motivated to offer additional benefits in the form of enhanced performance and hence productivity. They exhibit more willingness to contribute to organizational goals and excel in their jobs and strive hard to retain it (Dirks & Ferrin, 2002; Konovsky and Pugh, 1994; Mayer & Gavin, 2005). Similarly, when the managers trust their employees they exhibit more willingness to grant additional benefits in terms of devising strategies to encourage employee involvement in decision making, improved work benefits, and a sense of self esteem among the employees (Pierce & Gardner, 2004). The divide between the rhetoric and reality of trust between managers and employees in the workplace is huge. In reality, the experiences of a majority of the employees comprise of experiences which are in stark contrast to the rhetoric. The organizations, more often than not, fail to implement theory into practice and appear to be least concerned with the psychological factors which stimulate employee participation and often wrongly focus their strategies on those which involve direct benefits such as additional wages, and / or health benefits and other similar rewards. As a result, the employees in turn, too do not consider themselves as an integral part of the organization and hence lack proper commitment required to enhance organizational performance. Top management is often found to be reluctant to implement entrepreneurial autonomy and prevent employees from taking initiatives by showing disinterest in their innovations, thereby giving out the message that all they want is for the employees to comply and adhere to the strict workplace guidelines. The management on the other hand, believes that it has certain set goals, for instance productivity targets, to achieve within a specified time limit and within a given budget and hence giving total autonomy to employees or involving them in decision making would delay critical projects thereby affecting organizational performance, causing immense costs and affecting its competitiveness in the process (Herriot, 2001). Conclusion: Trust is an important element in organizational development. It is a key to retain employees, a source of motivation and the most crucial aspect that ensures accomplishment of organizational goals. It is essential to eliminate the gap, if at all it exists within organizations, between actual implementation and illusion of trust. Since the subsistence of a massive divide between reality and rhetoric is a grave threat to the organizational well being and principally to the relationship between the employees and management. Thus irrespective of the content of the rhetoric, the key point of focus should be the imminent dangers of the upsetting reality of the actual experience of the employees. The likely emotional reactions to such rhetoric are that of distrust and skepticism towards those at the helm of affairs, i.e. the top management. Bridging the divide through formation of a healthy workplace environment which is governed by mutual trust and admiration of the contributions of the employees is hence the only suitable alternative at the hands of the management. The top management make a conscious effort to restore reliability and faith among the employees comes from a trusting relationship with management where the employees need to participate in the organizational activities, in order to prevent the breakdown of the employee – management relationship. In conclusion, improved trust ensures higher commitment and hence improved decision making thereby successful accomplishment of organizational goals. Appendix 1 Source: Great Place to Work (2009) [online] viewed: November 2, 2009 from: Read More