Trusting Each Other

Big topic. Trust is one in itself. Trusting others is another. Trusting organizations yet another.

I form my trusts in individuals and concepts. The latter helps me understand the context in which I’m living. The context in which I know the other – idea, person, organization. Forming a general sense of the person or situation helps me see the working components. The context tells me if important pieces are present to help understand the situation.

Is the other person knowledgeable of the particulars of this particular context? Is that person representing his/her talents and skillsets properly, and honestly? Clues are assembled that inform me that this is so. Now I feel I can trust the person. Testing understanding of the context leads to discussion and sharing ideas. Sorting those helps spotlight reliability of my assumptions that I can trust the other person.

These are transactions of living with others. Each context provides a fresh testing ground in which we build trust. I have discussed this in simple terms thus far. But let’s make it more complicated.

Do I trust the shop keeper where I am buying goods? It depends on his/her reputation, doesn’t it? The array of goods available to purchase also helps me understand how well the shop keeper knows his market. The quality of the goods, variable qualities and features available at appropriate prices is another clue to trustworthiness. I know the shop keeper is in the business of selling goods for a profit. I understand he hopes to buy low and sell high. Knowing this background for myself helps me trust that the deal he is offering is fair and appropriate.

Now complicate this context with that of a corporation, or public institution or even an agency of government. Has the assumption of trust changed? I think it has.

The critical nature of our public discourse tells me that a lot of people have trouble trusting other people, especially large organizations and institutions. Trusting government at any level seems particularly troublesome these days.

I fall prey to this feeling, too. But I am reminded of the years I spent working in a public university, the years spent on city council and the board of park commissioners. Those jobs tackled the issues and problems encountered while doing the public’s business. Did we do a good job? Were we professionally prepared and trained for the work we did? Was our motivation dedicated to the mission and vision of the employer?  I think the answer to all of those are yes, but I doubt the pubic would be so quick to agree.

The separation of the trustor or trustee is the point of divergence. I wonder how that can be managed so the principals are working together.

What are the shared outcomes both parties hope to see from this institution in the public realm? In fact, is that the crux of the trust issue? If so, outcomes as goals need examination. Are they understood by the parties? Is there dialog on the desired outcomes? Do the parties understand each other on these matters?

The park district assignment was easier to manage. Our job was to find enjoyable activities that would engage the public in healthy activity, play that built teamwork with others, and learning opportunities. The public enjoyed those outcomes and trusted the institution to produce more of the same. Only two specifics created trust issues: are we doing too much and causing taxes to be too high; and are we pricing this fairly, after all, this activity is being paid for by our tax dollars.

Big government versus small was and is an ever-present issue. Appropriate fit with the community is the key ingredient to understand the larger issue. Participation fees help control the size of the program and limit costs. Move this discussion to municipal and county government agencies and the complication factor soars. Move on to the state and federal levels of government and the complexity is obvious.

Trust in government is a topic we need to examine more closely. I will attempt to do that in coming posts.

November 1, 2022

 

 

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Intimacy

As we mature, we become deeply involved in relationships. Some of this is basic family relations – siblings, parental – and the like. Next is friends who enter our homes and we theirs. Neighbors, classmates, mutual hobbyists and so forth. Then we develop friendships that go much deeper. We comfort one another when we are hurting physically or emotionally. We discuss the matters of life and learn much more about ourselves and each other. We can even anticipate how others will react to various situations and stimuli. Good friendships do not spread to everyone we know. No, good friendships are special, close and deeply personal. We focus attention and brainpower on these few friends. Some special relationships focus on specific topics of interest and importance. Yes, we have specialized friendships. Most common. But one day, we get to know one person very well. An emotional connection forms with deep roots. A need to know the person more fully expands in personal ways. We sense this b...
Read more

Bits & Pieces

Pie: Apple pie more specifically. With Thanksgiving just passed, many of us enjoyed a good apple pie. Sure, there was pumpkin to accompany the turkey, but in our family multiple pies are offered in the holidays. Apple is surely one. Pecan, pumpkin and others, too. But I almost always choose apple. When I was in college, I was asked what kind of pie did I eat most often. In front of my mom, I answered apple, because I was always looking for a pie as good as mom’s own. Of course my mother was pleased, but it was a true statement just the same. When I was married, Ann’s pie was darned good. Her mother’s recipe. But we fiddled with the recipe until it took on its own generational name, and boy, was it good! Today I still order apple pie for dessert because I am always looking for a great pie to challenge our family recipes. I rarely do find such a prize. Do others do the same? Do you search for a great pie of choice, continually? If you do, what’s your story? Why do you do this? ...
Read more

Remembering Tom Sherlock

Tom Sherlock died on Wednesday, April 3rd. He was 65 years old and did not survive a heart surgery. That was his unexpected end and sad enough. But there is more to his story. Tom joined Dan Schuyler and George Safford to create what became the Village Chronicles, a weekly newspaper serving Warrenville, Illinois. That paper expanded to serve Winfield and then West Chicago. The paper published for eight years and built a good reputation for itself. Tom served the paper in several ways. He was our information technology guru, provided hardware and software to support the paper's operations. He was our sole bookkeeper, accountant and financial manager. He designed our distribution process and provided office space for meetings and layout and typesetting. His efforts supported the work of 32 volunteers who wrote and reported on the communities we served.  The newspaper broke even financially most of the time, but it was a struggle. Tom managed to find money to keep the newspaper afloat...
Read more