Facebook

Google

Twitter

Linkedin

Email

by Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic

Trust is the essence of collaboration: as Yuval Harari eloquently noted, we as a species would not exist if it weren’t for our superior ability to collaborate so effectively—and it’s largely down to trust.

In the days of our hunter-gatherer ancestors, decisions on trust were relatively straightforward, even when it came to appointing leaders. Indeed, our ancestors lived in small groups of closely related individuals and spent all of their time together. Furthermore, the key attributes they were interested in evaluating or judging were easy to observe: courage, practical knowledge, hunting and fishing dexterity, and physical strength. There was no need then for psychometric assessments, AI, or scientific tools to assess either leadership potential or integrity, and mistakes were extremely costly because if they picked the wrong leader the whole group would just vanish at the expense of better led rival groups.

But, fast-forward to our modern times, things are uncomfortably complex and hard for everyone. At work we must infer whether we can trust our colleagues, coworkers, and bosses, even when we never met them in person—they are, in physical terms, purely pixels on the screen of our Zoom calls. In politics voters are asked to pick between shrewd politicians who have mastered the art of deceit and manipulation and specialize in telling people what they want to hear, irrespective of their actual leadership capabilities. Unsurprisingly, the world is led by heads of states who enjoy dismal levels of popular approval, even when they rose to power with legitimate voter support. As I illustrate in my latest book, politicians are the ultimate example of the disconnect between our perceptions of leaders’ authenticity, and their actual honesty or genuineness.

And yet, there is still reason to be hopeful and no reason to give up. Fortunately, science provides serious lessons for improving our ability to trust the right person and minimize the risk that we end up trusting the wrong person. In fact, the science of trust includes hundreds of robust studies decoding the predictors or determinants of individual differences in trust, as well as practical learnings on how to infer them in the most objective, reliable, and risk-free way.

Here are five key lessons to consider:

1)    Despite the complexity of trust inferences, people make trust evaluations and decisions in a fraction of a second: As Amos Trervsky and Daniel Kahneman put it, humans may be capable of thinking “slow” or rationally, yet most of the time we think “fast”, which is a euphemism for not thinking at all. Indeed, not only do we make rapid, careless, and furiously fast inferences of other people’s character traits, we are also overconfident about the accuracy of our inferences, and stubbornly wedded to them to the point that no amount of evidence will change our mind. This may be the best explanation for why no amount of facts or evidence may change voters’ preferences even after its blatantly obvious that they chose poorly (not least because they themselves are disadvantaged by their own choices). The solution? Well, we must learn to distrust our instincts and refrain from following our gut feeling. It is only through gathering reliable and predictive data, and following the facts, that we can hope to focus on substance rather than style. This is particularly important when we are assessing potential candidates for leadership roles, whether it’s the president of a country or a senior leader in a firm.

2)    Leaders who are “just being themselves” ought not to be trusted: As I illustrate in my latest book, there is a paradoxical relationship between how authentic we feel and how authentic other people think we are. In particular, behaving without any pressures to conform and displaying your uninhibited and uncensored thoughts and feelings to others will feel authentic to you while polarizing, alienating, and annoying others (it is, alas, what powerful and entitled leaders do when they stop caring about how others see them). In contrast, the leaders who are seen as not just trustworthy, but also competent by others, know how to manage their reputation, engage in strategic impression management, and go to great lengths to show only the best version of themselves—that is, the elements of their character and identity that align with the situational demands. In other words, they know where the right to be themselves ends and their obligation to others begins. This is why empathy, self-control, conscientiousness, agreeableness, and EQ are far better predictors of leadership integrity and performance than self-perceived authenticity is.

3)    Charisma is a dangerous signal. Although charisma is a clear enabler of effective leadership, not least because it helps people to emerge as leaders, it can also help leaders to mask their incompetence or unethical motives. In that sense, you can think of charisma as an amplifier: when leaders are honest and competent, it will help them in their quest to turn a group of people into a high-performing team; but when they are dishonest or incompetent (or even worse, both), their charisma will turn them into pretty harmful, destructive, and toxic creatures. Since charisma is often conflated with trustworthiness—we like and admire people who seem charismatic and therefore gravitate towards them, including when it comes to trusting them—it would be useful to resist the allure of charisma when we infer integrity or competence in leaders. Quiet, low key, serious, and intelligent people make excellent leaders even if they don’t seem entertaining. Charismatic, charming, entertaining, and attention-seeking leaders may use their social skills to manipulate, influence, and seduce, especially when they have psychopathic, narcissistic, or Machiavellian tendencies.

4)    Our ability to trust is significantly reduced under stress, anxiety, or pressure. This is obviously a huge problem, since in these instances it is usually imperative to trust the right person. In other words, the more we need to trust people, the more vulnerable we are to trusting the wrong person. The lesson here is obvious: don’t make trust-related decisions when your emotions are clouding your judgment; first relax, breathe, look for the right moment and the right mental zone, then try to think rationally.

5)    Some people are naturally more trusting than others: this depends not just on their personality, but also the culture in which they grew up. Paradoxically, prosocial and healthy cultures are more likely to engender trust, since free riders and imposters are less likely to emerge—but this also makes those cultures more vulnerable and susceptible to such toxic agents. In contrast, corrupt, antisocial, and failed cultures will have low levels of trust, since everybody is rightly paranoid of being cheated or deceived by others. However, this will make it impossible to cooperate and collaborate in such cultures, which further contributes to their downfall. At the individual level, it is helpful to understand whether your bias is too much trust or too much skepticism, so you can always recalibrate or adjust your impressions towards a more objective center point.

In the end, trust remains the ultimate leadership currency: hard to earn, easy to lose, and impossible to fake for long. Titles, charisma, or confidence may help leaders gain followers, but only integrity, a reputational accolade that must be gained through long-term actions rather than short-term impressions, keeps them there (unless they decide to keep themselves there through excessive force, power, or unlawful means). In an age where image routinely outpaces substance, the most trustworthy leaders will be those who act as if someone were always watching; not because they fear being caught, but because they don’t need to hide.

This post originally appeared at fastcompany.com

Facebook

Google

Twitter

Linkedin

Email

by Irina Wolpert

A decade ago, I spearheaded my organization’s strategic expansion into a new Eurasian market. Almost immediately, it became evident that our conventional playbook was inadequate. Success in this complex landscape required not just an understanding of business metrics, but a profound appreciation for cultural nuances and regional dynamics.

We made a pivotal decision: We set aside our polished PowerPoint presentations and embraced a more human-centric approach. Instead of relying on formalities, we engaged in candid, face-to-face negotiations—often over a steaming cup of tea. This deliberate shift in strategy was about building genuine relationships, and it worked.

By prioritizing trust and open dialogue, we laid the groundwork for a partnership that has not only endured but flourished.

In my own career, shaped through roles at world? admired organizations like American Express and Amazon, I’ve come to rely on five core leadership traits that have consistently driven results, built strong cultures and turned ambiguity into opportunity. And as a leadership advisor at one of the world’s preeminent executive leadership advisory firms, Egon Zehnder, I’ve seen those same five core qualities distinguish transformational leaders across industries.

No one embodies these five traits perfectly every day. But the most effective leaders I’ve worked with—and aspired to be like—are the ones who commit to practicing and developing these traits over time.

1. Emotional Intelligence and Empathy

Great leaders don’t just manage work: They read the room. Emotional intelligence (EQ) enables leaders to pick up on unspoken cues, navigate tense conversations, and build authentic relationships grounded in trust. Continue reading →

Facebook

Google

Twitter

Linkedin

Email

by Eve Upton-Clark

Job interviews are nerve-wracking at the best of times. But for those who see themselves as introverts, they can be extra intimidating.

It’s not due to a lack of skill. The ability to think on your feet and sell yourself—no doubt important in the interview process—tends to come more easily to those who go through life a little more extroverted.

And yet more Americans see themselves as introverted than extroverted. Contrary to conventional wisdom, that’s not necessarily a bad trait in the workplace: Research has found that introverted leaders outperform extroverts by 28%, driving higher productivity from their teams.

Connar Walford, student success lead at the U.K. jobs and career advice website TargetJobs, offers five strategies that introverts can utilize to ace a job interview.

The Energy Anchor 

The idea of being put on the spot in an interview is enough to make any introvert’s heart race and palms sweat. That’s why thorough preparation is essential for anyone, but for introverts in particular.

Walford suggests identifying up to five “energy anchors” before even setting foot in the interview room. “These are previous work wins that you can recall with ease. These can be anything from receiving a compliment from a peer to working on a successful project,” he says. “These ‘anchors’ help to regulate the nervous system and maintain your confidence throughout the interview.”

The Power of Silence 

While some extroverts might dominate conversations, introverts can be skilled listeners, giving them an edge over the competition. Those pauses to compose your thoughts before speaking? They’re not awkward. In fact, they can be a superpower.

“People often feel that they need to fill a silence. However, instead of rushing to speak, utilize it,” Walford says. “A calm pause can signal authority, thoughtfulness, and composure—all great working traits.”

Reframe the interview

Rather than regarding the interview as your one shot to impress the hiring manager, heightening an already intimidating situation, you could flip the script. Look at it as an opportunity to determine if the role is the correct fit on both sides of the coin.

“This reframes the power dynamic from performing to connecting, eliminating the fear of being judged,” Walford says.

The interview doesn’t end when the door closes 

Many introverts might be tempted to run from the room as fast as possible and wipe it from memory before the overthinking kicks in. Remember, although the interview itself may have ended, the process hasn’t.

“Always send an email post-interview thanking those present, including any info that may have slipped your mind, and ask any additional questions,” Walford says. “This shows professionalism, gratitude, and a strong interest in the role.”

Navigate Energy 

The interview process can be draining for anyone, but particularly for introverts who typically lose energy during social interactions.

“Remember to manage your energy pre-interview by fitting in quiet time,” Walford says. “This helps navigate potential overstimulation, buildup of nervous energy, and fatigue.”

Afterward, schedule some well-deserved alone time, and reward yourself with whatever fills your cup back up. Perhaps that’s coffee and a sweet treat.

Or a glass of wine in the bath. You’ve earned it.

This post originally appeared at fastcompany.com

Facebook

Google

Twitter

Linkedin

Email

by Michael A. Tennant

Questions aren’t just one-off icebreakers for team building. Instead, they’re an operating system for clarity and connection.

Eight years of building a values-driven question game taught an unexpected leadership lesson: Asking better questions can transform how you lead. Intentional prompts can build five critical skills that many leaders chase: self-awareness, deep listening, values alignment, perspective taking, and reframing limiting beliefs.

Building a values-driven question game began while I was battling burnout and social anxiety. As an introvert, even facilitating group play was hard. Working through the questions privately, and then with small teams, rewired how feedback landed, how conflict de-escalated, and how decisions moved faster. The good news is you can apply the same practices without any special tools.

1. Strengthen self-awareness and awareness of others.

Questions surface the stories and motivations that drive decisions. Prompts like “What were the holidays like for you growing up?” or “When do you feel most free?” reveal patterns you may be carrying into today’s work. They also help you notice how emotions show up in groups.

Try this:

2. Practice deep listening, not just waiting to talk.

The only hard rule of our game, Actually Curious, is “listen to understand, not to react.” That’s simple to say and hard to do, especially in conflict or negotiation. Practicing with structured prompts gives you reps turning off the fight switch and finding win-win outcomes.

Try this:

With a trusted colleague, choose two value-centered question prompts. The speaker will answer while the listener only takes notes. The listener reflects on one thing they didn’t agree with at first but now understand based on the response.

3. Align on values so decisions get easier.

When it comes to value-driven questions, “tell me what you believe” is too broad. People default to safe answers. Targeted prompts uncover shared principles faster. Questions like “What are you willing to fight for?” or “What is guaranteed to bring you happiness?” surface nonnegotiable that guide trade-offs.

Try this:

When someone answers, jot two to three values you hear. For example, fairness, autonomy, and reliability. Confirm with them, “I heard autonomy and reliability. Does that resonate?” Invite them to do the same when you answer. Capture a visible team values list to reference in mitigating debates.

4. Build your perspective-taking muscle. 

Perspective taking is a relationship superpower, and it improves with practice. Even light prompts such as “Name five musicians for your ultimate supergroup,” or “Pick one: introvert or extrovert” train your brain to imagine another person’s view before hearing them or even reacting.

Try this:

This practice is called the mind-reader game. Choose a few fun prompts and one thoughtful prompt. Everyone privately writes their answers. The group guesses each person’s responses before the reveal. Notice when you’ve read each other well and where you miss. That’s coaching material.

5. Reframe limiting beliefs into actionable “yes, ands.”

Great leaders hold two truths at once: decisiveness and possibility. Prompts like “What does ‘perfect’ mean to you?” or “When did you last cry and why?” surface subconscious beliefs that narrow options. Once visible, you can reframe those beliefs into fuel for innovation.

Try this:

• Run a solo or team journaling session with three to five challenging prompts.

List the beliefs that show up. For example, “Perfect means never making mistakes.”

• Reframe each into an abundance statement. This should be something affirmative and within one’s control. For example, “Perfect is consistent progress and shared learning.”
• Convert one reframe into a concrete habit for the week. For example, “Ship v1 on Thursday. Review learnings Friday. A perfect evolution of the project.”

Make questions part of your operating rhythm. 

Questions aren’t just one-off icebreakers for team building. Instead, they’re an operating system for clarity and connection. Layer one practice into your calendar: weekly prompt, monthly values check, or a quarterly perspective-taking game, a scarcity to abundance reframing exercise. Measure the shift in trust, speed in decision-making, and quality of ideas. With steady reps, you build empathetic leaders at every gamified engagement.

This post originally appeared at inc.com.