Deciphering the code of trust: science at the service of truly sustainable management

Trust, often mentioned in management discourse, remains largely unexplored in real-world practices. It is talked about as a climate, an expectation, a favorable factor. But too rarely is it discussed as something to be built, diagnosed, and strengthened. Simon L. Dolan and Kyle Brykman, in Cracking the Code of Trust, offer a rigorous approach to this concept. For them, trust is neither a matter of luck nor implicit culture. It is a skill that develops over time and involves both the quality of relationships and the strength of institutions.

A relational architecture to bring to life

Their proposal is based on a model that is simple to formulate but rich in implementation. Trust, they explain, is based on three dimensions: reliability, which concerns the ability to act consistently and keep one's word; concern, which expresses sincere attention to others; and harmony, which implies active respect for shared norms. When these three elements are present together, they enable the building of lasting relationships based on perceived stability and overall consistency. When one of them is missing, the entire bond becomes fragile.

This theoretical work is extended by a structured method. It is not simply a matter of advocating trust, but of enabling everyone to assess its actual presence in their professional environment. Tools are proposed, designed to be integrated into managerial practices or team dynamics. The goal is never to reduce the relationship to a score, but to highlight differences, put misunderstandings into words, and create the conditions for shared growth.

Trust and authority over time

One of the book's major contributions lies in its interpretation of leadership. A manager cannot rely solely on orders or objectives in the long term. They are judged on their ability to create a clear environment, give meaning to decisions, and offer a form of continuity in their actions. The authors remind us that this authority cannot be improvised. It is built, often silently, in the details of everyday life. They cite figures who embody this consistency: Nelson Mandela, who, upon his release from prison, chose not revenge but the patient reconstruction of a collective bond; Jacinda Ardern, whose clarity, stability of tone, and ability to face challenges head-on have enabled her to build strong support without manipulation or posturing.

The contrast is stark with other examples developed in the book. Enron and Wells Fargo are analyzed here not only as cases of scandal, but as illustrations of what happens when trust is systematically betrayed. In both cases, excessive pressure to perform, combined with opaque processes and a concealment of responsibility, led to a widespread loss of bearings. Employees were caught up in contradictory rationales, where official discourse contradicted tolerated practices. The result was a breakdown of organizational cohesion, even before the legal collapse.

Making trust a collective lever

What the book shows clearly is that trust is not a spiritual supplement. It determines the quality of cooperation, the flow of information, and the ability to solve problems together. It is not always spectacular, but it is decisive. When it is present, it smooths relationships, encourages initiative, and strengthens consistency. When it is lacking, it fuels silent resistance and avoidance behaviors, ultimately undermining everyone's commitment.

In this sense, Déchiffrer le code de la confiance does not propose an ideal model. It provides a realistic framework, adapted to the tensions on the ground, the complexities of organizations, and the ordinary fragilities of collective work. It identifies concrete levers that institutions can use to strengthen this fundamental bond without falling into control or standardization.

This book is for those who understand that organizations are not held together by the sum of their talents or the clear definition of roles, but by the quality of the bonds that connect them. It does not seek to simplify the complexity of human relationships. It provides guidelines for addressing the issues at stake, without succumbing to fads or technical jargon. It offers a path to a more solid, more transparent, and more respectful form of management that recognizes the strength of a collective: the ability to trust one another.

(Post created with the support of ChatGPT)