Executive Eye
Öffentliche Institutionen wie Kirche, Gerichte oder auch die Monarchie verzeichnen einen Rückgang des Vertrauens, das ihnen entgegengebracht wird. Könnte das durch mehr Transparenz geändert werden?
Adrian Furnham on openness and trust
Public trust in public institutions is on a steady but dramatic decline. Nearly all the great, cherished institutions of the past are now held in much less esteem: the church, the courts, the monarchy. And those at the bottom of the scale, politicians, have fallen even further. People vote less, respect authority less, feel more alienated. So, what to do about it?
There is talk of replacing the “s” words — “secrecy”, “self-interest”, “spin” and “suppression” — with the “t” words — “transparency”, “trust” and “truth”. The solution, it seems, is openness. If the public can see how the great public institutions operate, they will come to respect and trust them again.
So far, however, it seems that the more organizations talk about openness, the less they are trusted. That is because transparency is complex. To start with, how do you tackle openness? Should all public organizations be equally transparent? What about national security agencies or the armed forces? And what should be transparent: the kinds of decisions being made, or how they are being made? And should organizations be reactive, answering the questions we ask, or proactive by keeping us constantly informed?
And is trust in authority a function of transparency and openness at all? Perhaps it’s a cultural value. It’s certainly an individual property. The neo-psychoanalyst Erik Erikson pointed out that trust is one
of the earliest and most important stages of psychosocial development. He argued that a child whose mother’s care is sensitive, confident and consistent is more likely to see the world as safe and supportive, and a place where one can rely on others. Children who don’t receive such care, never learn to trust others and may go through life with feelings of anxiety and estrangement.
There are other issues to do with trust. Some people are more trusting than others. Children are trusting and learn to be less so. Trusting sounds naive. To be sceptical and wary seems wise. People also tend to trust or mistrust individuals, rather than organizations.
Finally, has our trust in institutions been lost because of a lack of transparency — or has there been a shift in the zeitgeist towards a more savvy, individualistic society? Indeed, where are the examples of organizations winning more trust through greater transparency? It did not work for the British monarchy. That’s because there’s also a difference between privacy and secrecy, discretion and dishonesty, speaking out and spin.