Trustworthiness and Its Impact on Leadership

This resource compares two companies. One company has a distrustful culture, and one has a trusting culture. The researchers look at the difference in managerial attitudes. One fostered fear and suspicion, which led to a lack of cooperation. The other fostered trust and collaboration. Be attentive to the different results when people are undervalued or appreciated. Also, think critically about the differences between authoritarian leadership and democratic (authentic) styles. Is there a way to use an authoritarian style yet still build trust?

Two Cases of Leader Trust

Case Company A

Company A manufactures and sells valves and pumps, and it operates worldwide. The company's headquarters are in Finland. At the time the research was done, 43 people worked in the company. Four of them were middle managers and one was a general manager. Half of the employees worked in the manufacturing department and the rest were office workers in marketing, purchasing, sales, and financial administration. Some of the functions, such as cleaning and maintenance, were outsourced. The company has sales representatives all over the world.

The leadership style in company A was fairly authentic and the organization structure was quite hierarchical. Middle managers had formal responsibility, but this was not actualized; the general manager made all the decisions. Also, the behaviour of the general manager was neither predictable nor equal toward employees. Open dialogue between managers and subordinates did not occur. Fear and suspicion were prevalent reactions to the general manager's attitude. Thus, co-operation and co-creation could not develop between employees and management in the organization.