Trust, Trustworthiness, and the Three Cs
While preparing for an event with Bridget Baker, we found ourselves exploring an idea that seems to be appearing with increasing frequency across discussions of leadership, coaching, organizational development, education, and media: the notion that we are experiencing a trust recession.
Charles H. Green used the phrase in a 2008 article examining declining trust during the global financial crisis. The idea is compelling, but I think it is worth examining more closely.
What if the issue is not simply that people are less willing to trust? What if we also need to consider whether the people and institutions we rely on are giving us good reasons to trust them?
Trust and Trustworthiness Are Not the Same Thing
We often use trust and trustworthiness interchangeably, even though they describe different things.
Trust is the willingness to rely on another person, often while accepting some degree of vulnerability.
Trustworthiness is demonstrated through the qualities and behaviors that give us reason to believe that reliance is justified.
For example, I trust my mentors because they have consistently demonstrated trustworthiness. I do not automatically extend that same trust to Sergeant Pepper, Bungalow Bill, or Rocky Raccoon (pictured above). While they are charming, entertaining, and exceedingly confident in their own abilities, they have yet to provide sufficient evidence that trusting them with or around anything important is a wise decision.
They have some work to do.
The distinction matters beyond our relationships with mentors and mischievous cats.
Rather than asking, “Why don't people trust anymore?”, I wonder whether it would be more useful to ask:
Trust in whom? Leaders, institutions, colleagues, experts, or strangers?
Trust in what? Competence, honesty, intentions, consistency, or fairness?
What experiences shaped that trust? Broken commitments, exclusions, misinformation, or demonstrated reliability?
What would justify trust? Would it be accountability, transparency, consistent behavior, or follow-through?
These questions move us away from broad societal diagnoses and toward something more useful - specific behaviors and experiences that shape trust.
I am not convinced that everything comes down to a "trust recession." I see the phrase as a useful way to frame a conversation, not a settled scientific diagnosis that explains every decline in confidence or every experience of distrust.
The more productive question may not be how to convince people to trust more. It may be how individuals, organizations, and institutions can become more trustworthy, and how we recognize when trust is warranted.
What Does This Mean for Coaching?
For coaches, leaders, and educators, I find it helpful to consider three interconnected ideas that can shape how trust develops: confidence, competence, and credibility.
The Three Cs: A Practical Lens for Understanding Trust
The Three Cs are not a universally standardized or scientifically validated model. Rather, they offer a practical way to examine the different reasons we may, or may not, feel comfortable relying on someone.
Each raises a different question.
1. Confidence
“Can I feel secure relying on you?”
Confidence develops when someone's behavior demonstrates consistency, reliability, sound judgment, and respect for others.
In practice, confidence grows when we:
Follow through on commitments.
Communicate honestly when circumstances change.
Welcome questions, concerns, and different perspectives.
Respond to mistakes with accountability rather than defensiveness.
When confidence is lacking, people may hesitate to speak openly, question intentions, or protect themselves rather than engage.
In coaching, this might mean creating an environment where clients feel comfortable exploring difficult questions without fear of judgment.
2. Competence
“Can you do what this situation requires?”
Competence reflects the knowledge, skills, judgment, and ability needed to perform effectively. It also includes recognizing our limitations and knowing when to seek support.
For a coach, competence may look like:
Listening attentively and without rushing to judgment.
Asking thoughtful, purposeful questions.
Maintaining ethical boundaries.
Adapting to a client's needs rather than relying on a script.
Recognizing when a situation falls outside one's expertise.
Good intentions matter, but they do not substitute for competence. We may genuinely like someone and appreciate their intentions while still questioning whether they have the skills to help.
Competence is not about knowing everything. Sometimes, it is demonstrated most clearly by recognizing what we do not know.
3. Credibility
“Do your words and actions give me reason to believe you?”
Credibility is the extent to which others perceive us as believable and worthy of being taken seriously.
It can grow through:
Relevant knowledge and experience.
Honesty and transparency.
Accurate representation of qualifications.
Evidence that supports our claims.
Consistency between what we say and what we do.
For example, a leadership educator who shares evidence-based recommendations, accurately represents their qualifications, and acknowledges uncertainty when appropriate gives others good reasons to take their work seriously.
When credibility is lacking, even useful advice or accurate information may be dismissed because the person delivering it has not established a reliable basis for being believed.
How the Three Cs Work Together
Imagine an employee working with a new manager.
Confidence: “My manager follows through and treats me fairly.”
Competence: “My manager can make informed decisions and help us solve problems.”
Credibility: “My manager is honest, knowledgeable, and consistent in what they say and do.”
A manager may be highly competent but undermine credibility by exaggerating accomplishments. Another may be respected for their expertise but weaken confidence by repeatedly breaking commitments. Someone else may inspire confidence through warmth and good intentions while lacking the competence needed to navigate a difficult challenge.
The Three Cs are connected, but they are not interchangeable. Each highlights a different aspect of why someone may be trusted, or why that trust may be challenged.
Looking at the Trust Recession Through the Three Cs
This is where I believe the framework becomes particularly useful.
When people say trust is declining, they may be describing different underlying concerns:
A confidence concern: People no longer feel secure relying on leaders or institutions.
A competence concern: People doubt that leaders or organizations can deliver what is needed.
A credibility concern: People question whether information, promises, or claims can be believed.
Each calls for a different response.
Communication alone will not resolve a competence gap. Training alone will not repair dishonesty, and demonstrating expertise may not restore confidence after repeated broken commitments.
Before deciding how to rebuild trust, we need to understand what has weakened it in the first place.
A Question Worth Asking
In coaching, leadership, and organizational development, is the better question simply,
“How do we build trust?”
Maybe we should also ask:
“What is missing here: confidence in our intentions, competence in our ability, or credibility in our words and actions?”
The answer can help us move beyond general statements about trust and identify the specific behaviors, skills, or changes that might make a difference.
Trust cannot be demanded. It cannot be manufactured through messaging alone. It develops when our actions give others good reasons to rely on us.
I wonder if the opportunity hidden within the idea of a trust recession is not simply to restore trust, but to become more worthy of it.
If Sergeant Pepper, Bungalow Bill, and Rocky Raccoon are reading this, the door is still open. There is always room to improve one's trustworthiness.
Comments