Getting trust out in the open makes it safe to raise these concerns between people and in the team. In approaching a trust conversation with an individual, consider an opening such as:

• “I’d like to talk about something that’s concerning me.”

• “May we talk about your work on the project?”

• “I need to explore with you where we are on the project.”

Let’s look in on Maria opening up a trust conversation with her new hire, Alain.

“Alain, I really have to talk to you about your reliability. There isn’t any concern about your ability—you can do this work, and I sense that you want to do well here. However, you promised to get the work to me on Monday morning and it’s now Thursday afternoon and it’s not done. I just need you to deliver on your promises. It’s disappointing me, holding the team back, and I’m beginning to sense a reluctance among your peers to work with you.”

In the CCL-developed Situation–Behavior–Impact model for giving effective feedback, behavior-changing potential arises when the employee understands the impact his or her behavior is having on someone else or on the team. In the trust conversation starter above, Maria is clear about which of Alain’s behaviors (reliability/integrity) threaten to derail his career. She upholds his ability by saying he can do the work and his loyalty by saying she feels he wants to do well in his new role. She’s building her own trustability by showing genuine support (loyalty) for Alain and by executing her own leadership responsibilities and adhering to her values (integrity).

One natural response to criticism is defensiveness. Maria doesn’t shy away from her tough message but neither does she diminish it through her support of Alain. She doesn’t use the sandwich method of providing feedback by sharing something positive, something negative, and something positive again, potentially leaving Alain confused about her intention. Notice also that Maria doesn’t say she does not trust Alain, even though trust is the issue. In the first stage of discussion she enters gently enough to remain in partnership with him. By keeping Alain’s lack of reliability as the main message she stays focused on what she must accomplish in the conversation. She also sets up the beginning of a productive, outcomes-oriented leadership coaching conversation.

His Heart Is In the Right Place. His Ability Is Not.

Henri is truly a nice man: pleasant, helpful, and unassuming. The kind of person you’d want on your work team except for one thing: He hasn’t done independent work as a team member. His reports have been quickly written but insufficiently researched, his arguments poorly supported, and his conclusions often superficial. His manager, Aru, has given him specific feedback on the impact of his performance on several occasions. Aru now finds himself beginning to review Henri’s progress at multiple stages in order to ensure he is producing usable work product for the team. Aru has decided Henri is close to derailing and it is time to have a trust talk to get the issue out in the open.

Aru: “Henri, you and I are spending a lot of time in periodic review of your projects. We’ve spoken now several times about the kind of work outcomes you’ve been producing versus what we need from someone in your role. I need you to be functioning more independently in terms of your processes and the quality of your work products. Can you tell me how you think you’re going to accomplish this?”

Henri: “Aru, I’m breaking my back on these projects, doing everything you tell me to do. What else should I be doing?”

Aru: “Let me be clear, it’s not your heart or your dedication. I truly respect your attitude and wish more people were as dedicated as you; it’s the work product. As you and I have discussed before, you only touch the surface of the issues and miss important elements and connections when you do your background work. In most cases the data is there in our system, but you’re not accessing it or relating it to the challenge and potential solutions. We’ve talked about this in the last two projects.”

Henri: “Not all of this is a surprise to me, but I thought I was doing well enough. What are you saying to me?”

Aru: “I’m saying that if I could trust you to produce high-quality, researched work you would be positioned for rapid promotion. But that’s not the case now. I want you on my team, but you and I have to get clear about what acceptable work product looks like and you need to apply yourself to it.”

Henri: “What would you say to teaming me with Paco on the upcoming Chartman account so I can see his approach to the work. Then I can sit down with you periodically and share my observations and what connections I’m making between your feedback today and what you want from me in the future. Does that sound reasonable to you?”

Aru: “That sounds great. Look, I’m on your side, but this is beyond giving you some routine performance feedback. This is a trust issue, and I want to trust you—and you’re the one who’s going to have to be able to do the work. Now I’d like you to send me a short e-mail outlining what we just talked about and we’ll both be clear and have no surprises the next time we meet.”