Guest

The News Corp. chairman may not understand trust but he does offer some powerful teachable moments for the rest of us.

By Dennis and Michelle Reina


The phone-hacking scandal surrounding Rupert Murdoch and News Corporation is far from finished. The story reaches so deeply into British and American culture that it’s sure to play out for months and years. There will be new arrests, new civil suits, and new regulatory headaches. The turmoil has yet to fully unfold.

Still, in studying issues of trust in the workplace for some 20 years, we are certain of one thing: Murdoch has some grand illusions about trust. Appearing recently before a committee of Parliament, the 80-year-old News Corp. chairman tipped his hand with his own words. Here, for instance, are two short exchanges from a transcript of those proceedings:

“MAN: Mr. Murdoch, do you accept that ultimately you are responsible for this whole fiasco?
MURDOCH: No.
MAN: You are not responsible? Who is responsible?
MURDOCH: The people that I trusted to run it, and then maybe the people they trusted.


“WOMAN: This terrible thing happened on your watch. Mr. Murdoch, have you considered resigning?
MURDOCH: No.
WOMAN: Why not?
MURDOCH: Because I feel that people I trusted—I’m not saying who—I don’t know what level—but let me down, and I think they behaved disgracefully and betrayed the company and me. And it’s for them to pay.”
Murdoch’s illusions about trust helped damage News Corp.’s reputation and financial performance, contributing to major losses incurred by his doomed $12-billion bid for BSkyB, Britain’s largest pay television service. Those same illusions, however, hold some powerful teachable moments for the rest of us. Three key lessons:

1. Trust is multidimensional—and messy.

Murdoch seems to have a neat, narrow view of trust. Yet, by its very nature, trust is multidimensional and messy.

According to our research, in the workplace there are three distinct types, or dimensions, of trust: contractual trust (trust of character); communication trust (trust of disclosure); and competence trust (trust of capability).

Leaders we work with have asked us if their organization could have trust in one or two of these three dimensions and still maintain a healthy culture. Our answer: No.

One of our clients, a senior vice president at a global consumer goods company, learned that lesson the hard way. His business had been hitting its targets, yet several critical new initiatives were floundering. Leadership was worried.

Looking closer, we learned that competence trust abounded in the organization, but there was little to no contractual trust or communication trust. Employees routinely broke agreements, withheld information, and reveled in gossiping and backbiting. Many, in jockeying for position, took credit for others’ work.

Leadership was aware of these cultural patterns of distrust but looked the other way. Once they saw the light, they took action to develop all three dimensions of trust and get their new initiatives back on track.

2. Trust isn’t automatically reciprocated; it requires checks and balances.

Murdoch took trust for granted. He thought that once he handpicked people and helped open doors for them, they would reciprocate by being loyal and trustworthy.

But leaders like him make themselves vulnerable to betrayal when they fail to have checks and balances to hold people accountable for their actions, to assess the state of trust within groups or organizations, and to address questionable behavioral patterns. The costs to the business can be insidious and immeasurable.

Recently, another client, a vice president at a major entertainment and media company, had to deal with her new comptroller who was delivering strong results but had employees lining up at HR voicing dissatisfaction and requesting transfers to other areas.

“How can such a high-performing team have so many problems?” our client asked. She soon learned that the leader she had handpicked, and in whom she had placed unquestionable trust, was willing to achieve results at all costs, including using a deeply divisive management style.

Our client took swift and sure action and, by putting new checks and balances in place, helped her comptroller see the impact of her behavior and shift her style to build stronger, healthier relationships.

3. Trust is easy to talk, not easy to walk.

For a leader it’s one thing to espouse trust and quite another to make it manifest. The alleged phone hacking at Murdoch’s now-defunct News of the World doesn’t represent a single breach of trust. It represents a pervasive pattern of intentional and unintentional betrayals by leadership—and, in kind, by employees. We get what we give.

Such was the case for another client, a vice president at a major manufacturing company assigned to turn around a failing flagship plant. Upon his arrival, he said all the right things to his new team, including “People come first.”

Unfortunately, that executive’s actions didn’t line up with his words. He quickly became a mere figurehead to employees. Workers distrusted what he said and did, and an us-against-him mentality ensued. Worse, as employees lost confidence, commitment, and energy, they withheld the very talent and energy that a successful turnaround required.

With union grievances and corporate discontent dominating his days, the executive ultimately faced the fact that talk is cheap. To build trust with his people, he had to take responsibility for his actions, admit his mistakes, and deliver on his new promises. In other words, he had to talk the talk—and walk the walk. As Rupert Murdoch has not done.


Dennis Reina, PhD, and Michelle Reina, PhD, are co-founders of the Reina Trust Building Institute, which specializes in promoting workplace trust. They are also co-authors of Rebuilding Trust in the Workplace and Trust and Betrayal in the Workplace (Berrett-Koehler). For more information, visit reinatrustbuilding.com.