Trust: Why It’s Essential in Organizations and What to Do When It’s Broken

0:00 The topics and opinions expressed in the following show are solely those of the hosts and their guests and not those of W Forcy Radio. It's employees are affiliates. We make no recommendations or endorsements radio show programs, services, or products mentioned on air or on our web. No liability, explicit or implied shall be extended to W forcy Radio or its employees are affiliates. Any questions or comments should be directed to those show hosts. Thank you for choosing W FORCY Radio. What's working on Purpose? Anyway? Each week we ponder the answer to this question. People ache for meaning and purpose at work, to contribute their talents passionately and know their lives really matter. They crave being part of an organization that inspires them and helps them grow into realizing their highest potential.

0:45 Business can be such a force for good in the world, elevating humanity. In our program, we provide guidance and inspiration to help usher in this world we all want working on Purpose. Now here's your host, Doctor Release Cortez. Welcome back to the Working and Purpose Programs shooting in again the sweet grade to have you. This program has been on Ayrson's February of twenty fifteen, and I love every single week of it. I'm your host, doctor Elis Cortez. If you don't know me, we've not met yet. I am and management consultant and organizational logo therapist, speaker and author. My team and I at Least Cortez and Associates help companies to enliven and fortify their operations by articulating their purpose and building inspirational leaders and cultures activated by meaning and purpose to turn those companies from a flatline EKG to a vibrant destination workplace. There, people are intrinsically motivated to perform with their best growner the fullest potential, and are committed to stay and dynamic and deliver on the company's mission. You can learn more about us and how we can work together at at least cortez dot com getting in today's program we have with us. Doctor Peter kim He is a professor of management and organization at the Marshall School of Business at the University of Southern California. He's devoted decades to his research on trust and is the author of How Trust Works, The Science of How religionships are built, broken and repaired to be talking about today, he joins in the Los Angeles area, Doctor Kim, Welcome to working on Purpose. Thank you, doctor Cortez.

2:08 It's a pleasure being here. It's really magnificent. As we were saying before we got on air, you know this beautiful thing that you produced, it's just stunningly gorgeous. And as I said to you, what I'm going to do, this is going to be one of those dead jokes. This is harder than bringing a baby into the world. So congratulations, thank you, You're welcome. I'm gonna make you blush, but really is. And I also before we get started, Peter, I really want to just acknowledge you for how beautiful your book is. It's incredibly well researched. I can feel your heart in there. I can feel your integrity, I can feel your elevated consciousness, and I can feel your intentions to make the world a better place. And I just really want you to know that all came through in your book. Well, I'm glad to hear that. It's hard to know when you're writing, you know, late at night, all alone in office, just trying to get these ideas across and I'm so glad to hear that it came through m indeed it did. So. One of the things that I found really compelling about your book and some of the legare that came with it, is just really, you know, what brought you to trust or to study trust all these years, And one of the things you said briefly, I'd look for you to expand on, as you say, regardless of their form, I have always been grouped by stories of guilt and redemption.

3:28 That is quite a thing to be obsessed with. Peter, Well, it's true, and I think one odd quirk in my background will help explain it. So I was raised in a devout Roman Catholic family. My father almost became a priest, actually and let's decided against it. But despite that, that was a very strong influence in my younger days, and so, you know, being exposed to to to the church. And you know, I'm no longer practicing, but at the time it was a very salient to me. How much of Catholicism is about guilt and redemption, and probably most religions have a strong focus on those issues, and maybe it's because it is such a universal challenge for all of us. And I love the stories that you also shared about, you know, your parents working and sometimes not getting paid for the work that they did, and some of the impressions that left on you. It was just as I said, you know, you just really led us into your world in a way that I guess, really want to think about it, your book wouldn't be nearly as effective you hadn't done that well. Thank you. I think one of the things that I decided to do when writing the book is well I it occurred to me that one

5:00 thing I needed to do at the start is to trust my audience, my reader, and to let them in. And it was important in the sense that it's very easy to focus on this phenomenon on a purely scientific level, to study this at arm's length, and you need to do that to maintain objectivity. But I wanted the reader to know at the beginning that despite my need to do that as a scientist, as a human being, this is far from arms length. It is a very personal topic to me, as it is for so many people. M I think at this juncture makes a lot of sense for us to you to find what you actually mean by trust and if you don't mind, What I'd like to do is read just a short passage of that and then have you comment on it, because I think what I'm clear about to Peter is you have chosen every word with strong precision and conviction, and it's really beautiful. So you you talk about how social scientists have defined trust as quote, a psychological state comprising the intention to accept vulnerability based on positive expectations of the intentions or behavior of another. That's very powerful. Can you talk a little bit more about the definition what's in there?

6:17 Absolutely? So, it is a rather lengthy definition on one level, but it's lengthy for a reason, and it's because even though trust may seem like a simple idea, it can be easily confused with others ideas. And it's only by looking at these components and taking them seriously that we can really distinguish trust from other things. And so one a psychological state. So this gets to the fact that many times we gauge trust simply through behavior, and so the traditional research on trust up to that point had primarily focused on whether or not you simply cooperate or not. And the problem with that approach to understanding trust is that there are many times when you act as if you trust when you don't really trust at all, and so sometimes the situation will compel you to act as if you trust the other person or the incentives are oriented in a certain way, but that doesn't necessarily mean that you think well enough about the other person to make yourself vulnerable. And so this vulnerability component is another essential element, and that gets to the fact that sometimes we might cooperate when there isn't any real downside. We need to believe that there's some risk involved in a situation in order for us to manifest this trust. And this

7:53 gets to the fact that sometimes people try to enable cooperative behavior by mitigating risk as an alternative, and that can have its uses. It can be very important to do that in many cases. But if if that's the approach, what you're doing is enabling cooperative behavior without the need to trust by just making the vulnerability unnecessary because the risk has been removed. And so those elements are essential for distinguishing trust from things like cooperation or cooperative behavior more broadly, and situations where you enable that through this mitigation of risk by just protecting yourself or by just forcing others to behave in a certain way so that you can cooperate with them. Those are very different kinds of approaches to getting to an endpoint, but not approaches that are as synonymous with trust. M okay. So, now, because we've been speaking a bit conceptually here, it occurs to me that I wanted to throw it to just a phenomenon or experience that I had just today, and maybe you could speak to that and what you just were trying to separate in terms of those concepts. So what happened was, and I'm sure I wouldn't have even had this on my mind had I not read your book, But I drove to meet a client today for lunch.

9:24 And as I was driving there along six thirty five mindor, traffic was moving fairly, fairly quickly, so that was the first impediment here. But I observed a man who was out. He was walking or a standing, i should say, And I thought, why is this man standing on the media and you know this, you know, five lane freeway. You know it's maybe there's some some mental issues here or something. Then I saw that he was sort of, you know, waiving this red gas can, and I thought, okay, so he's run out of gas. Understand that, however, I can't see a car. Where's the car that goes with the can of gas? So on the basis of how fast traffic was moving, which I could have found a way to pull over even though, but and that I couldn't see a car, which really made me question, missus man you know, and I'm a woman going to stop and pick up a man.

10:13 I didn't do it. So having said what you said before about those different concepts, maybe you could kind of help us understand what was happening there. Wow, that's a very interesting scenario. Well, and I think one of the things it raises is this distinction between this behavior. How behavior can be affected by both trust and risk. So you may have stopped to help this person if the risk wasn't so high, for example, if if there were many many people on the side of the road, for example, who weren't in cars, but who could give you the sense that if thing want to write, there would be people to stop that that individual from attacking you or robbing you or some one. So whether you stopped can be determined by that assessment of risk, irrespective of how much trust you have in that person.

11:20 So there's that individual involved there, uh, And so that's one of the factors that that you know, can affect that behavior. And again it's why we need to look at those positive expectations uh as a as a as a cognition that isn't necessarily something that we or is something that we consider independently of these other influences, because a lots of if things can influence behavior, and so that kind of assessment is very important. And so you know, whether you stop to help that person may have also been influenced by a host of other considerations. For example, what did the person look like, did the person seem disheveled or did the person seem clean cut? Did did you encounter a similar incident like this yourself running out of gas? You know? And did you have to walk a few miles and an attempt to find a gas station? And that might explain why the guests, you know, this person didn't have a car nearby. There are a variety of things that we attend to when we make these decisions about whether to trust another and we can't discount the fact that we are influenced by news reports. So the things that we

12:50 might have encountered, maybe a story about someone a good samaritan that was attacked by the person they were trying to help. Just one new story like that can be enough to affect our willingness to stop. So a trust can be influenced by all these considerations, and it gets to how this initial trust and others people we don't know, can be affected by societal considerations. What are the laws, rules, norms. It can be affected by your personal disposition, So someone in your exact same in your car with you might have had a different inclination in that exact same situation based on their disposition. And then third, what are the cues that we are getting based on the situation.

13:45 So all those combine to affect our willingness to take that risk. Beautifully explicated doctor Kim. So listeners of you are supposed to you who have not yet read the book as I have. His book is full, just beautifully full of all kinds of events that you're going to recognize, where he goes on to explain and help us understand why we trusted one person and didn't another. It's just really well done. So that was another great example of you doing it on the fly, that you didn't get any any notice that that was coming your way, So thank you for that. Okay, So that makes me then have to ask you then based on that was just my interaction, one little small thing today. Now I want if you could to talk about how understanding how trust works helps us as individuals first and then society. The main thing to consider when it comes to trust is that all social interactions, well maybe not all, but the vast majority are mixed motive in nature.

14:48 So we all benefit when we cooperate with one another, but we also have individual incentives to take advantage, and that accounts for how we engage with one another in work settings, in disputes and negotiations, are views about taxation and you know, and public goods and public bads and so on. So what we know about trust is that, given given that fact of life, that these situations are mixed motive in nature, the evidence indicates that those who are more willing to trust, when there's higher trust, those kinds of interactions are more successful. We wind up better off when there's greater trust, not only individually but also as a society. The more cooperation trust enables cooperation, and the more cooperation, the better off we are and our willingness to trust not only others but also our elves. It enables constructive action. So if we believe someone is worth that trust, we're more likely invest to invest in that relationship. And when we invest in that relationship, turns out that rather than treat this as an opportunity for exploitation, most people, when they're trusted,

16:19 they want to prove us right, so they reciprocate that behavior. So we can create a self fulfilling prophecy in this respect. So when we trust others, they are inclined to treat that as a precious resource to maintain for the future, and they're more likely to trust us in turn, and again that leads to better cooperation and more constructive behavior overall. And we can see this in society at the most macro level, where studies have looked at the relationship between societal level of trust and economic prosperity, and in fact there is a strong, direct core relations between the two that is incredibly powerful. So listen to me, Wors. We're going to dig more into how he did his research and ask you the determinants of trust. After our first regul let's grab that first. I'm your host, doctor Elise Cortez. We're on the year of doctor Peter Kim, who is a professor of Management and Organization at the Marshall School of Business at the University of Southern California. He's also the author of How Trust Works, The Science of how relationships are built, broken, and repaired. See what this will be right back. Doctor Elise Cortez is a management consultant specializing in meaning and purpose. An inspirational speaker and author, she helps companies visioneer for a greater purpose among stakeholders and develop purpose inspired leadership

17:56 and meaning infused cultures that elevate fulfillment, performance and commits within the workforce. To learn more or to invite a lease to speak to your organization, please visit her at Elise Cortez dot com. Let's talk about how to get your employees working on purpose. This is working on Purpose with doctor Elise Cortez. To reach our program today or to open a conversation with a lease, send an email to elease Ali se at Elise Cortez dot com. Now back to working on purpose. Thanks for thinking well us and welcome back to working on Purpose. I'm your host, doctor Elise Cortez. As I too, am dedicated to my craft, and I'm out to help create a world where people realize the potential at work and are led by inspirational leaders who help them find and contribute their greatness, and we do business that betters the world. I keep writing my own books, and so my latest it came out in March at twenty twenty three. It's called The Great Revitalization. How activating meaning and purpose can radically enliven your business. I wrote it to help readers understand what today's workforce wants, and then I offer twenty two best projecices to equip them to provide it to the leadership and their culture. You can learn about all of my books at least Cortez dot com and find them on Amazon if you are just joining us. My guest today is doctor Peter Kim. He's the author of How Trust Works, the science of how relationships are built, broken and repaired. So now, at this juncture that we have, I think at very adequately what the appetite of our listeners and viewers is just to what

19:26 you've been doing and why it's important now. I want to hear about their research. I too have done research and it's no small, easy affair, and you've been doing it for decades, So can you say a little bit about how you've done your research? Absolutely so, over the past twenty years or so, I think it's closer to twenty five at this point. I've been exploring this question by studying thousands of people at this stage through surveys, adaptations of real life situations, and other types of experiments. Usually, what I've done with this work on trust in particular, is to take inspiration from events that have occurred in real life, something that might be in the news, and use that as a basis for exploring questions that are not only of practical importance, but also of theoretical importance, questions that we don't really have much insight into. And so this might take, for example, the form of some incident that's occurred in the news, and then creating versions of that scenario where we might ask, well, what would have happened if this person said something else instead or done something else instead? Well, I have the

21:00 resources to create alternative versions of these scenarios. Sometimes this involves just pen and paper descriptions what happened and what was said. Other times it involves usually using the actual video clips and combining them with photos or images. And there have been occasions where I've gone into TV studios to create news stories that that that report on the events in slightly different ways, so that I can, through a scientific, rigorous process, compare people's reactions depending on the different tweaks that I might have made to these situations. Well, I love research, so I would love to be working with you on those things. That sounds incredibly fascinating, and having those kind of resources is really amazing. Okay, So next, if you would you talk in your book about really severing two powerful and determinants of trust, can you let us end that secret? Absolutely?

22:04 So. There are a variety of considerations that can affect our trust, and others and researchers have identified as many as ten different characteristics. But what we've find across different studies is that even though there's variation, depending of variation in terms of what's important depending on the type of relationship, that two characteristics tend to be the most important across situations and across relationships. And those considerations are competence and integrity. So that affects our evaluations of leaders, subordinates co workers, and so on, and those considerations are specially important because it turns out their odd elements of our mental basement that leads us to weigh information about competence and integrity quite differently. So it turns out that there's an asymmetry, there's a positive bias. When it comes to matters of competence, we weigh positive information about competence much more heavily than negative information about competence. But for matters of integrity, that's reversed. We weigh negative information about integrity much more heavily than positive information about integrity. And these asymmetries are important because a lot of responses that are used after trust violation tend to be double edged in nature,

23:38 like an apology that is beneficial in the sense that it conveys remorse, but it can also convey the fact that you are in fact guilty, So it has both negative information about guilt and positive information about the likelihood of redemption. And if we wag those signals differently depending on how the situation is viewed as a matter of competence or integrity, that means that the exact same response like an apology, can be very beneficial in some situations, but really harmful in others. I found that to be an incredibly I don't know, elucidating, alluring what you how you explained that that made it made so much sense to me. Doctor Kemnet was like, Wow, that just really opened my understanding.

24:30 And then further if we can, I want to take this notion of you said earlier, and I want to build on this, especially for insider organizations and how leaders consider this. As you said that for most of us, when someone trusts us, we want to prove them right. So likewise, you say, consider the seemingly questionable practice of gauging the trustworthiness of other space from their faces. Evidence suggests that even this seemingly arbitrary reason to trust other people can sometimes have a predictive value. What I want to get to on this for the application of the world of work. One of the things that I have come to understand in my work as a management consultant is in this world where people are increasingly wanting to stay with a notion of some kind of virtual hybrid workforce workplace scenario, what we see increasingly as many organizations pushing back on that, and when you really press them on why that's so, they will oftentimes reveal that they don't trust the workers to do actual work when they can't see them. And so I find this really this idea of giving people trust because they want to make sure and treat it as a precious resource, as you said before, and keep it to be quite interesting. And it'd be interesting if you could say a bit about maybe how that might play out in today's workplace. I know that's a lot to take on, but just the notion of trust when it comes to not being able to see your workers and believe that they're actually working for you, I think it's an interesting cross roots we're facing nowadays, precisely because we've we've had to change our work

26:04 habits so dramatically through COVID. And I think you're right that part of the reason why organizations are so eager to get workers back is that they don't necessarily trust them to be as productive, to be as conscientious at home then at work, and so they want to monitor them. And this gets to and orientation organizations have about trying to reduce risk through through through this monitoring system. So they want to encourage cooperative behavior by reducing risk by having bosses watch these people and and and make sure they're they're they're doing all this work. HR practices are often designed around the mitigation of risk and what can they do to sort of keep people in line, and so that is one way of going about it. The issue there is that there's a clear downside, and that downside from the employee perspective certainly is that they can't work at home. But even from an organizational perspective, there are real downsides in the sense that to have this monitoring system really keep track of all these employees and really watch them and keep them in line, you need an enormous bureaucracy. HR departments need

27:40 all these rules and regulations about what people can or cannot do, and that may prevent some people who might abuse the situation from going ahead and doing that. But what you clearly give up is the resources that you that are devoted to that monitoring system to maintaining this enormous bureaucracy that could have been devoted to other ends that might have been good for the organization. So one example that I teach in my MBA classrooms is the case of Netflix, and they talk about this problem, and they talk about how as small organizations grow, they just develop all this bureaucracy, these rules and regulations to keep control over what's going on, and that stifles innovation, that keeps people from doing things because they're not quite sure if this is allowed and so on, and there's a real downside to that. Netflix recognizes that, and what do they do instead?

29:00 They just have one rule and led us to work in Netflix's best interest, and that's it. They don't even have a vacation policy. So if you believe that you need a vacation and you're titled to a vacation, you can take a vacation. And you know, there's certainly stories about Netflix that talk about the downsides of this. There's a lot of social pressure to not abuse these rules. But the main point of this is that you don't get off scott free by just insisting on this monitoring approach. And in fact, I just read that Apple has an interesting policy for their higher performers. The more the higher you are as a performer, the better you do, the more freedom you have. And interesting it's an attempt to trust people that are worthy of trust. This is really really incredibly useful, doctor Kim. This is something that I'm just really am passionate about trying to help create these work these workplaces where people can thrive. And that's really a sticky point today, So thank you for really illuminating that. What I want to do next.

30:17 This really is also quite interesting here is you've got a section in your book where you talk about how what we can do to make ourselves less vulnerable to those violators that might want to do something that you know would actually make us not want to trust them. There you talk about how some people that actually are out to harm us are targeting certain people, and I think it's interesting that's you've got a whole section that talks about that. So if you could just say a little bit about what can we do to make ourselves not targets of somebody who might want to violate our trust, or why we actually or our risk goes with it. Well, you know, clearly every time we we trust someone, we do make ourselves vulnerable, and there is a real risk that's that's undertaken in those situations. And so so one one of the things that people do they you know that we talked about a bit before, is this idea of protecting themselves, creating some sort of system that will prevent them from a taking advantage. When you do that, it creates another problem that we didn't discuss before, and it's that this might lead them to behave in a trustworthy manner, but you will always have the question of did they do that because of the monitoring system or because they're actually trustworthy. You don't

31:51 know, because you've created this system to keep them from exploiting you, And that problem that creates a problem in other situations, gray area situations where that monitoring system isn't going to protect you as well. That if we were to think about different cultures, Japan has a system that a social system that's designed to keep people in line through social norms and that keeps people behaving in a trustworthy way. The problem is that it also keeps people from moving in and out of networks, entering new partnerships with new companies that are outside their networks, and so on, and so there has been a real downside there when it comes to that focus. So for us, you know, I think a lesson is that we do need to give people the benefit of the doubt.

32:58 It doesn't necessarily mean that we make ours entirely vulnerable, but it can mean that we initiate little acts of trust and see what happens. And so I know George Bush is from Texas, and I recall a story about him that is Jermaine, and it's how he when he would meet someone, he would share a little secret with them, and so he would trust them with something that was not a national security risk, but he would share a little tidbit with them, and that was a way of exhibiting trust and allowing the other side to either nurture that trust or you know, if they weren't inclined to do that, well, he would find out without making himself entirely vulnerable.

33:55 So so those kinds of steps can can can help. You don't have to trust entirely right away, but to have a bias towards trust and give people the opportunity to live up to that expectation I think is going to be a better road, because the evidence indicates that even people who have this irrational bias towards trust, they wind up better off. Precisely for the reasons that we talked about, people want to fulfill that expectation. And even you know this this trust based on arbitrary reasons that how they their faces look it turns out the evidence indicates that people who are trusted for that reason wind up being more trustworthy precisely for the reasons what we talked about. I'm drinking all this sand, Doctor Kim, It's wonderful. I'm your host, Doctor Elie's quartet.

34:58 Who don't you have? Doctor Peter Kim. He's Professor of Management and Organization at the Marshall School of Business at the University of Southern California and the author of How Trust Works, The Science of how relationships are built, broken, and repaired. After work, we're going to get into the key components of an effective apology and why sometimes an apology is a bad idea. Stay with us, We'll be right back. Doctor Elise Cortez is a management consultant specializing in meaning and purpose. An inspirational speaker and author, she helps companies visioneer for a greater purpose among stakeholders and develop purpose inspired leadership and meaning infused cultures that elevate fulfillment, performance, and commitment within the workforce. To learn more or to invite a lease to speak to your organization, please visit her at Elise Cortez dot com. Let's talk about how to get your employees working on Purpose. This is working on Purpose with doctor Elise Cortez. To reach our program today or to open a conversation with Elise, send an email to elease A l I se at Elise Cortez dot com. Now back to working on Purpose. Thank you for staying us, and welcome back to Working on Purpose. I'm your host, doctor Elise Cortez. I mentioned in the last

36:29 break that my latest book came out in March. It's called The Great Revitalization. I also created an assessment for you on my website. You can go to at lease Cortes dot com and find this assessment. You'll be able to download. It's a three page thing, and you'll be able to ascertain the extent to which your company actually is meeting the needs of today's workforce through that that assessment. If you are just joining us, my guest is doctor Peter Kim. He's the author of How Trust Works Scientified relationships are built, broken and repaired. Before we get into the components of an effective apology, I would love if you could say a little bit you talk for the book about Homeboy industries and how it conserved to restore trust on a societal level. That seems appropriate to talk about at some point in this conversation, So could you could you know? So Homeboy Industries is located in Los Angeles, and they are an organization devoted to reintegrating former offenders, people with criminal backgrounds back into society. And so they have these programs for these individuals that would allow them to work in various kinds of businesses. Bakeries for examples, one of the classic businesses that they operate to give people the opportunity to gain employment, and that's one of the major hurdles for those who are released from prison. A

38:00 lot of repeat offenses are the result of people being released and having no employment prospects and being in a situation where they just see future crimes as the only option for them. And it really speaks to the challenges we face in society because regardless of where you stand and the political spectrum, I tend to be independent, you know, maybe centrist independent, But regardless of where you stand, they people agree that we need to fix the system. And surveys have looked at, you know, this issue, and there is consensus on the need to find better solutions, and yet we still face this problem after decades and the US is in a really bad spot relative to most of the rest of the world in terms of incarceration. And why is this. It gets to the fact that we are so conflicted about how to manage this process.

39:19 On the one hand, we believe that there's this sense of justice being about, you know, paying a certain price for your crimes. But on the other hand, there's another side of us that that gets to these gut reactions we have to people who have that kind of background, and and it gets to in part one of the things that gets to is how we way matters of integrity. If we believe someone has committed an offense intentionally, there's a serious uphill battle that we create that makes it very, very difficult for anyone to overcome. And so that's the challenge for us. I don't have a quick remedy. I mean, there are people who study that area in particular, but that chapter in the book was really designed to explore, well, what are the things in our mental basement that's affecting this process. And it turns out that one of the problems is that we shift back and forth between these views. On one hand, we believe that we need to allow for redemption. On the other hand, when something bad happens, we are quite intolerant of those who might advocate for our redemption. And the question is,

40:50 well, if that's the case, how do we rectify this problem? And then the other element of it is that how we wear manaters of guilt and redemption? Like the calculus, you know, what does it take to come back from something that's terrible, Well, that's affected by other things in our subconscious that that leads us to to do that calculus in ways that we don't even realize. And so many times when we perceive one another, we can get to a situation where we might feel like we have paid the price and were we should be reintegrated into society, and others have a very different view.

41:37 And so that was an attempt to explore some of those challenges as an attempt to at least help us better understand what we need to resolve. I wanted you to speak about that, Peter, because I part of what I what I'm out to do is I go to speak to audiences about you know, really elevating business, you know, from the stakeholder capitalism lens, from a conscious capitalist lens, the evolved lens, et cetera. My last book talks about this, is encouraging employers to look at to you know, employing those who have been previously incarcerated, because it helps strengthen communities. It makes the world a better place. You know. If all we're doing is giving these people just a row back to where they came, I don't see how that helps society. So I've been navocating for this as well. So that's part of the reason I really wanted you to speak about that, because I believe very strongly in this. So thank you for that. Okay, did you want to say something else, Well, I was just going to add, you know, that is the we talked about the the virtuous cycle of trusting others. There's a vicious cycle when we don't trust others, and it is easy for people to fulfill that expectation. And and it doesn't mean that we just make ourselves vulnerable to everyone that's released, of course as a day there, but we do need to work towards systems that can better manage that

43:07 balance. And so I'm so glad to hear that you are working towards the same purpose. I think we're a good pair. Okay, So I have also seen this research before and what makes for an effective apology? And you've got I think it's six components here and I've seen them before. I think it bears us talking about them just briefly, and then I want to also really talk about the other side of sometimes why that could be a bad idea, which you talk about beautiful in your books. So I know you were citing the research of Roy Louicki, Beth Poland, and Robert Lund Junior. So I want to I know that you're a very very methodical about your research. You want to put it off that this is your saying this, this is from their advantage point, But could you talk about those six components of an apology? So they have identified these six components from previous studies and they wanted to explore, well, okay, how important are these components. And so they had these studies that they developed using variations of these responses that would offer just one or multiple components, and they find that so these six components are an expression of regret that's number one. Two, an explanation that conveys the reasons why the offense occurred. Number three, an acknowledgement of responsibility.

44:37 Number four a declaration of repentance, number five and offer of repair and number six a request for forgiveness. And what the bottom line of the research is that they find that the more components are included, the more effective the apology is. And if you were to think about the specific components, the acknowledgment of responsibility and the offer of repair were the most important in their studies. So that is an indication that the type of apology can matter. And I do know of various efforts to help people apologize more effectively. I think in hospitals with doctors, there is a recognition that after medical errors, getting a doctor to apologize can in some instances be very helpful in terms of reducing the likelihood of litigation and so on. But the apology needs to be conveyed effectively, and so there's some attempt to do that. But the other side of the coin that my research raises is that if you just focus on the apology, then you are missing a big part of the equation. It's like going back to your driving illustration at the beginning. If you were to drive on a road trying to avoid traffic accidents by only looking straight ahead and ignoring the

46:08 cross traffic. That would be a really bad idea. You'd risk being involved in a side collision. And it's the same thing for attempts to repair trust. If you just focus on how thorough the apology is, you may wind up quite surprised to to witness that that it actually made things worse. And there are plenty of incidents that the book points to that that that illustrates this point. The reason why we focus on apologies as sort of the main remedy is the result of the tailanol pill tampering case that occurred in Chicago decades ago.

46:53 To talk about your book, yeah, yeah, yeah, And and it can help in many instances. What a lot of the the attempts to apply that lesson overlook is that there was a specific type of violation involved here, and it was a competence based violation. And you know what, for matters of competence and apology is effective because we don't weigh the negative information about guilt as heavily as a positive information about redemption. And so by Johnson and Johnson Johnson taking full ownership over what happened, we believe that they're going to fix the problem. But for matters of integrity that relationships have reversed. So we focus on the negative confirmation of guilt and we discount positive signals of redemption.

47:47 And that's why you need to have a better sense of how the situation's viewed, how the violation is viewed before you you think about what kind of response may be appropriate. And there, Doctor Kim, is why I believe your work is revolutionary. You really can radically change and improve the world if people will will embrace what you have taught us. And that's I really believe that. So I want to say thank you for coming out and working and purpose for writing this beautiful book. I think your work is profoundly important and I'm very happy to share my listeners and viewers across the world and working in purpose. Thank you, doctor Cortez, It's been a pleasure chatting with you, listeners and viewer. If you want to learn more about this magnificent man, doctor Peter Kim, his research in trust, or his book How Trust Works, The Science of how Relationships are built, broken, and repaired, start by visiting his site, which is Peter h Kim dot com. Again Peter the initial h Kim dot com last week If you missed the live show you can always catch it be recorded podcast where on the air of Steve Farrell talking about his book A New Universal Dream and the nonprofit that he started called Humanity's Team. We learned about the work he and the Humanity's Team are doing in transformational education to elevate people towards a sacred understanding of the oneness and beautiful interdependence of all life forms. Why is that important? Because when we can actually focus on serving others beyond ourselves in self transcendence, everybody wins. Next week, we'll be on the air with doctor Matt post Popsul talking about his

49:17 new book, Expand the Circle and light leadership for our own world of work. See you there, and remember work is an essential part of our lives, ultimately the way we spend our lives and can be one of the best adventures and means of realizing our potential and making the impact we crave. So let's work on Purpose. We hope you've enjoyed this week's program. Be sure to tune into Working on Purpose featuring your host, doctor Elise Cortez each week on W four C. Why Together, We'll create a world where business operates conscientiously leadership inspires and passion performance and employees are fulfilled in work that provides the meaning and purpose. They crave see you there. Let's work on purpose.