By Col. Tony Kanellis, USA (Ret.), Executive Director, SARCA
Trust at work is not just a feel good idea. It’s evident in performance numbers, turnover rates, and employee morale. Army Doctrine Publication 6-22 says, “trust builds over time through mutual respect, shared understanding, and common experiences. Communication contributes to trust by keeping others informed, establishing expectations, providing feedback, and developing commitment.”
What trust means at work
In plain terms, trust is choosing to rely on someone else when there is something at stake. Organizational scholars such as Roger Mayer describe it as a willingness to be vulnerable to another person based on what you believe about that person’s ability, integrity, and benevolence, a definition that has shaped much of the later research on workplace trust. Put differently, trust grows when you think someone can do the job, will be honest, and actually cares about doing right by others. You see it when an employee shares bad news with a supervisor, when a squad follows an order into danger, or when a colleague admits a mistake and expects a fair hearing.
Many practitioners talk about trust as having two main sides. One side is about competence: Do you believe the person knows what they are doing and can deliver? The other side is about character: Do you believe they will act honestly and keep others’ interests in mind, not just their own? Research shows that people pay attention to both who you are and what you do when deciding whether to trust you.
In workplaces where trust is high, employees tend to be more engaged, take fewer unnecessary sick days, and stay longer, according to reports from professional groups such as the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology and articles in MIT Sloan Management Review. They speak up with ideas, raise concerns earlier, and put in extra effort when it counts. In low trust environments, studies show that communication declines, people play it safe, and organizations pay the price through higher turnover, more errors, and stalled initiatives. Some management writers describe high trust cultures as moving “at the speed of trust,” with less friction and bureaucracy, while low trust cultures pay a hidden “trust tax” in the form of delays, extra controls, and constant second guessing.
How the military talks about trust
Military leaders do not treat trust as optional. The Army’s core leadership doctrine (ADP 6-22, Army Leadership) calls mutual trust a foundation of command and says commanders must build cohesive teams through mutual trust if they want units that can adapt quickly and operate with disciplined initiative. From ADP 6-22, “trust encompasses reliance upon others, confidence in their abilities, and consistency in behavior.” Other essays emphasize that leaders build this trust by being honest, competent, and consistent, especially under stress. The core idea is simple: When Soldiers trust their leaders and one another, they will carry out intent even as conditions change.
Trust runs in several directions. Subordinates have to trust that leaders will use them well, tell them the truth, and protect them from unnecessary harm. Leaders have to trust that subordinates will execute orders, report honestly, and uphold standards even when no one is watching. Peers need to trust that teammates will do their jobs and not leave others exposed when any of these links break; cohesion and mission effectiveness suffer.
When you don’t trust your boss but can’t leave
Almost everyone will work for a boss they don’t fully trust at some point. First, get specific. Instead of telling yourself, “I just don’t trust them,” list the specific actions that concern you. Next, reduce unnecessary risk. Confirm key instructions in email or meeting notes, avoid overpromising, and give realistic estimates you can keep. Until you have better options, focus on professionalism, performance, and your reputation with others.
How leaders can build trust
Leaders at every level, from squad leaders and platoon sergeants to department heads and CEOs, build or damage trust through their daily choices. Research on authentic leadership finds that people trust leaders who are consistent, self aware, and open about their values and decisions. Other leadership studies show that trust grows when people see both solid character and solid competence—leaders who try to do the right thing and deliver results.
Consistency starts with matching words and actions. Army doctrine and business case studies alike stress basics: show up on time, enforce standards fairly, and avoid public favoritism. When you make a promise, follow through; when you can’t, say so and explain why. Over time, people notice whether your behavior lines up with your stated intent and values, and their trust rises or falls accordingly.
Competence is important. In the field or in the office, people watch whether leaders understand the work and prepare for it. Leaders don’t have to be the smartest person in the room, but they do need to know enough to ask good questions, set clear priorities, and make informed calls. Research suggests that admitting what you don’t know and seeking expert input actually strengthens trust, because it shows humility and focus on the mission rather than ego.
Candid communication ties it together. Articles in MIT Sloan and other management journals show that employees respond better when leaders share the “why” behind decisions, acknowledge tradeoffs, and tell hard truths early. It’s not always possible to share every detail, especially in sensitive operations or confidential deals, but even a simple “Here’s what I can tell you, and here’s what I can’t,” does more for trust than silence or spin.
Respect shapes how this communication lands. Studies of trust and workplace culture show that leaders build respect by listening, inviting dissenting views, and handling conflict without humiliation. The Army’s leadership doctrine links mutual respect and trust directly to a leader’s ability to influence subordinates and maintain effective command and control.
Finally, leaders build trust by empowering their people. That means pushing decisions down to the lowest level that can responsibly make them, providing the resources needed, and then stepping back. Leadership research finds that when people experience real autonomy and see that initiative is rewarded rather than punished, their trust and performance rise together. In practice, for a company or a battalion, that can mean issuing a clear commander’s intent or strategic direction and then giving teams room to execute, learn, and adjust.
How co workers can build trust
Trust is not only a leadership issue. Co workers often determine whether a workplace feels safe and collaborative or political and guarded. Surveys on workplace trust show that employees quickly judge peers based on reliability, openness, and whether they act for the team or mainly for themselves.
The basics are straightforward. Do what you say you will do, meet your deadlines, or give early warning if you can’t, show up prepared, and own your mistakes without excuses. These small acts add up to a reputation that colleagues talk about when you’re not in the room.
Communication matters here, too. High trust workplaces are marked by colleagues who keep each other in the loop, surface issues early, and speak candidly without taking cheap shots. When you ask for input, acknowledge others’ expertise, or accept feedback without getting defensive, you make it safer for others to rely on you. Over time, those informal networks of peer trust often become the real backbone of resilience, especially if formal leadership falls short.
Wrapping up
The Army R2 Performance Center puts it well – “Trust is the foun¬dation of any successful organization. In the Army, it is essential for mission success, unit cohesion, and effective leadership. A strong culture of trust ensures that Soldiers operate with integrity, commu-nicate openly, and hold one another accountable to high standards. When properly cultivated, it leads to increased morale, operational efficiency, and unit effectiveness.” Make building trust an explicit goal in all aspects of your life.
About SARCA
SARCA was organized in 1949 to serve as the professional associa¬tion of Army Reserve senior leaders. Through the years, SARCA has played an important role advocating for the Army Reserve, serving as a key resource for the Chief of the Army Reserve, and mentoring future general officers. You can contact SARCA at sarcamembership@gmail.com
