In Good Company with Nicolai Tangen - Rachel Botsman: How to build and maintain trust

Episode Date: May 8, 2024

What is trust, and why is it so easy to tear down? In this episode, world leading expert on trust, Rachel Botsman, addresses the challenges of building and maintaining trust. Nicolai and Rachel explore the key moments that foster trust and the essential elements of building strong, enduring relationships in today's digital world.The production team for this episode includes PLAN-B's Pål Huuse and Niklas Figenschau Johansen. Background research was conducted by Kristian Haga.Watch the episode on YouTube: Norges Bank Investment Management - YouTubeWant to learn more about the fund? The fund | Norges Bank Investment Management (nbim.no)Follow Nicolai Tangen on LinkedIn: Nicolai Tangen | LinkedInFollow NBIM on LinkedIn: Norges Bank Investment Management: Administrator for bedriftsside | LinkedInFollow NBIM on Instagram: Explore Norges Bank Investment Management on Instagram Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hi everybody, I'm Nikolaj Tangen, the CEO of the Norwegian SoN Wealth Fund, and today we have a bonus episode on trust. And we have the world's leading expert on trust, Rachel Botsman, here with me. She's written two books, What's Mine is Yours and Who Can You Trust? So I absolutely love the work you're doing. Big thanks for being here. Thank you. It's nice to have a bonus episode.

Well, you are like a real bonus. So let's just kick off with the basics here. So what is trust? What is trust? It's actually a very hard question. It's a word we use a lot, but when you ask people to define trust, you'll never get the same answer. So depending on the field, some people will say it's an asset. Some people describe it as a currency or an attribute. Some people might say it's a value, but trust is a belief. It's a belief towards someone or something. And what we're still figuring out is if the way we trust the someone, a human, and the way we trust a something are the same thing.

And the important thing, once you ground yourself that trust is a belief, all beliefs are highly subjective and contextual. And it's the contextual piece around trust that is often missing in the conversation. So you've probably heard people say, oh, I don't trust the media, or I don't trust this politician. I don't trust this tech company. oh, I don't trust the media or I don't trust this politician, I don't trust this tech company. It's a completely useless conversation to be having because whenever we talk about trust, we should follow up with to do what? What is it we're trusting someone or something to do? What is it we're not trusted to do? Because unwanted trust is a problem.

Why is trust so important? So it's funny, I really struggle answering this question because there's so many reasons. So I've been saying this now for 15 years. And what I've realized is that you cannot take risks. You cannot venture into the unknown. You cannot navigate uncertainty without trust. And it's interesting because when I first started studying trust, I probably would have spoken more about the social glue, the collaboration, those components. But I've realized actually, innovation, self-trust, this ability to cope with uncertainty, to cope with not knowing, is one of the most important roles of trust today. So that's why I put the emphasis there. Why does it take so long time to build trust? take so long time to build trust? I would challenge that question because most people have a natural propensity to trust. So most people will go into a situation

and they won't say, I don't trust you. They'll wait for reasons, signals, we call them trust signals, as to why they shouldn't trust that person. Okay, so the default is to trust. The default is to trust, which is great. But it's certainly very quick to tear it down. It's very quick to tear down, very quick to tear down. So there's a difference between what we call sort of transactional trust, which is very easy to tear down, and relational trust, which is built with experience.

It's built with information. It's built over time. And I think this is another mistake. Many organizations and companies and brands, they think about trust in a transactional sense. trust in a transactional sense. And what they don't think enough about is this relational human component of trust, which is actually harder to tear down. So if a product fails me, or if a service fails me, and the way that company tries to solve the problem is transactional, it's very hard to trust it again. If it's human and relational, you can actually earn trust back. Do we trust politicians? To do what? I'll challenge you with that question.

To run the country in a proper way. In which country? Well, let's start with this country. Well, no, not in this country. Certain politicians, so I'll go back to context. Just for the context here, we are now in the UK, okay? We are in the UK. There are certain politicians I trust to do certain things. But generally, when we look at trust in government, it is at an all-time low. Why is it? it is at an all-time low. Why is it?

There's a whole host of factors, but if you keep stripping them back, the central problem is to do with alignment, that people no longer believe that the government's interests align with their best interests. And that actually runs across demographics, it runs across education, income class. So it could be alignment could be, I don't think the government does the right thing by my taxes, to all the way through to I don't think the government does the right thing for education or my healthcare. So when you have a misalignment problem, healthcare. So when you have a misalignment problem, it's the deepest, deepest trust problem to fix. It's interesting, when will you get the happiness scores across nations? So Finland, for instance, scores very high. One of the real differentiators there is that people trust the system, right? They trust the politicians, they trust that there is no corruption.

Mm-hmm. So why is trust so important for happiness? So the data and the research around trust and happiness, I mean, it is very cultural, I should say. So the Nordics do really well on this. Part of a big component of trust and happiness where they align is community, collective interest. So in cultures that become not just hyper individualistic, but narcissistic, where there is a lack of belief in the collective social good, they tend to be lower trusting cultures with lower scores of happiness. So one of the things I strongly believe is this lack of community, this lack of collective interests, this me over we is damaging

happiness and it's damaging trust. So you have to believe, like in Finland, like in Denmark, that these social systems, they serve you, but they also create a greater sense of belonging to something bigger than your individual self. And when that happens, you generate trust and you generate happiness. What's happened to trust over time? So where are we now compared to, let's say, 50, 100 years ago? So that's another huge question. So one of the things that has been a thread through my work and why I'm sort of still studying trust is the central question of, is trust in a state of decline or is it changing? So is it going down like you see these graphs or is it pivoting?

And what I've seen is that actually when you think of trust through this lens, you start to see society in these shifts. So the way these shifts map at the highest level is what I describe as local trust. So when people lived in small villages and communities, and it was largely based on people that you knew, highly interpersonal trust. That trust is hard to scale. So we invented institutions, That trust is hard to scale. So we invented institutions, institutions being physical institutions, mechanisms, so things like contracts and insurance, even concepts, things like trade unions. And that was an incredible period of innovation, those institutional mechanisms.

Technology came along, particularly networks and platforms, social media, and it distributed trust. Now, we are not through that phase. We're seeing the chaos that that's causing. And we're already entering the fourth phase, which I call autosapient trust. So the easiest way, Nicolai, to visualize this is actually through sort of energy flows. So if you imagine institutional trust, upwards trust, right? We looked upwards to experts and regulators and referees, distributed sideways. I trust another person for information more than I trust the news. And autosapient is another where it's through trust. We won't even be able to make this distinction between whether we're trusting

another person or whether we're trusting an intelligent machine. So I find like imagining trust through these flow arrows is a really powerful way of sort of getting my head around all kinds of dynamics and changes happening in society. So explain to us how the whole digital space and mobile phones and so on have changed this landscape and how it's gone from institutional trust to individual trust. Some examples. So it changed everything when it comes to trust. So it fundamentally changed the way we could trust total strangers and connect with people. And so when you can suddenly think very differently about supply and demand, so I want something and you have that thing, that thing might be a piece of

information, it might be a skill, it might be time, it might be love, it might be a house that I want to rent, and we can suddenly connect and facilitate trust through that technology, you change the flow of value. You change the flow of information. You change the flow of relationships. And we've seen how that creates innovation. So everything from platforms like Alibaba and eBay, Uber, Airbnb, education platforms, we've seen what it creates. But the problem is what happens when things go wrong? Uber, Airbnb, education platforms. We've seen what it creates, but the problem is what happens when things go wrong.

So Airbnb, you trust people enough to let them stay in your house? Yes, but not when I'm there, which is strange. But maybe that's because I don't really like... I trust to rent out my home when I'm not there, but I don't like people being there when I'm home right which is kind of weird from a trust perspective so it's like this way um I think it's because uh it's not actually through a trust it's I don't really like strangers in my home um but I trust when I'm no way that they'll treat it with respect. And I've only had a couple of bad experiences, but we won't go into those. What is going to happen with AI?

When are we going to start to trust machines? I mean, do we trust machines? It's another huge question. I mean, again, I'd say trusting AI to do what, right? So I think at the moment, the way most people think about AI is a tool. It's something that sits open on their phone or on their desktop, and they are using it for information. And they are using it for information. So they have a question, they put it into some, let's just say, chat GPT, and it gives information.

And that trust leap is happening really, really fast. I would say when you look at the data across most sectors, they don't trust it for decision making. So finance is a good example, right? So I trust it for information, but to actually make the final decision is a different trust leap. But what we're seeing is that, and I think the law is really interesting. So my husband's a lawyer, and he's really interested in this space. And we were talking about how a year ago, judges said, you know, lawyers cannot use AI to help prepare briefs. And there's been a 360 turnaround on that in less than a year. Because what they're realizing is actually, you know, AI can search through data like the Panama Papers. Great example, right? So our initial reaction when something comes along, there's a new technology, particularly

in high stakes, high risk environments, is to say no, to reject it, to not trust it. And I think what is really interesting and slightly frightening is how fast those turnarounds are happening in different sectors. So let's talk about trust in the workplace, working from home. What are the talk about trust in the workplace. Working from home, what are the issues with trust there? So this is an interesting one. So let me try to unpack this on different levels. Working from home can bring out the worst micromanagement in some people. So it can actually trigger very low trust. So, and this is a two-way thing. So this is both the employee and the boss. So the employee might sit there going, I'm not sure this person trusts me. Because when there isn't that face-to-face interaction,

it creates a vacuum, it creates a gap. And we form in our minds a narrative in that gap, which is often not positive, right? So no one sits there going, oh, yes, my boss really trusts that I'm working all the time. They go, right, I've got to demonstrate that I'm working, right? So you have all these kind of productivity, not hacks, but performance, like productivity performance, we call it. So people needing to demonstrate they're on Slack, people staying on email longer, that's the first problem, right? That people second guess whether they're trusted. Now, in some scenarios, that may actually be true. So many bosses and leaders didn't grow up in the era of remote work, right? They physically had to come into the office.

They have not been taught, even through the pandemic, how do you manage people remotely? How do you let go? What are the things that you do as a boss that actually can be perceived as controlling by the other person? So they will often signal things that they don't trust the other person to do. So there's this really interesting tension that goes on that we don't really know how to fix yet. The second thing, and the data is just starting to come through on this, starting to come through on this is how remote working is impacting interpersonal trust. So can you really nurture trust virtually in the same way as you can face to face? Why can't you?

I personally believe no, because there is something that happens when two human beings, so we could do this through a Zoom call, right? Or start through the screen. We wouldn't feel the same kind of energy. I couldn't read you in the same way. And with the very best technology in the world, And with the very best technology in the world, that human connection, that human energy, when you sit down with someone, it's very hard to replicate virtually. And one of the things that worries me is whether we're losing this skill. I mean, I have leaders tell me all the time that they have huge cohorts of workers that are now uncomfortable sitting physically in a room with a client in a meeting, not even in a contentious meeting, just sitting and being with people because they're so used to the technology being the mediator. And that for me

is a really big worry. Is this an argument for being more in the office? is a really big worry. Is this an argument for being more in the office? With purpose. So I'm a huge believer in hybrid working. I'm a huge believer in different types of work that happen at home and in the office. I'm a huge believer in how it helps with inclusion, especially as a woman with two young kids. But I think we are underestimating how we are losing a skill. It's a weird thing to say that people are uncomfortable being in a room with a group of people because their experience, their way of entering the workplace is being on their own in front of a screen looking at lots of people.

Well, there is more social angst at schools, for instance. A lot of absence because of it. I see it now on planes. Well, that may be just because of me, but people put their earplugs in, don't want to talk to me. Has this got anything to do with trust? I don't know if that's got something to do with trust. I don't know if that's got something to do with trust, but learning how to nurture trust and facilitate trust and also to be a lot of trust forms in moments of discomfort. What do you mean? in those moments of vulnerability, in those moments where something's gone wrong, when those moments where you're really listening to someone and trying to solve a problem. And I don't have

the data on this, but how do those moments come about virtually where you really have to listen and show up for that person? So I worry that we're sort of going into these micro moments of transactional relationships at work, but these moments of deep trust aren't really forming. So what kind of moments are these? I mean, what are the key moments to look out for in terms of Um, so when something's gone wrong. So that could be that a project has failed, an investment has gone wrong. Something people have been working on for years hasn't taken in the market. It could be someone's received a negative piece of media, that their reputation's under attack. There's so many different reasons and causes, but it's that moment where someone feels exposed. And to build trust, then what do you do?

Do you listen to them? Do you understand them? I mean, just what do you do? Well, the first thing is actually identifying what the real trust issue is for that person. is actually identifying what the real trust issue is for that person. So often when there's a trust issue, there's something that you're losing or you're worried about losing. And whenever humans think they're going to lose something, their instinct is to want to control things, right? So that's why sometimes our knee-jerk reaction in a crisis is not a good reaction because it's that feeling of, put me back in control, just put me back in control. And so how you help that other individual

identify, first of all, what is the real trust issue here? What is really at stake? That's actually the first step because your interpretation of that as someone emotionally removed from the situation is going to be very different from the individual or the leader that is in the midst of the emotional crisis, right? So they're in the midst of the heat. So that's where I start is actually helping them identify what the real issue is. And then the second thing they need to feel seen, they need to feel heard. And then where many leaders and organizations go wrong is they get that listening phase right, and then there is no action. There's no support that follows through.

And what kind of action should it be? So it's how is literally that person held through this, right? So what kind of support do they need? What kind of specialist support do they need? Who do they need at their side? What needs to be taken away from them? What needs to be given to them. So the stakes don't even have to be that high. You've probably sat through this, right,

where you go through a performance review and someone collects incredible feedback. I hate them. Do you hate them? I hate them because I've had some really bad ones. So what's the worst thing that someone said in a performance review about you? That I was just completely and utterly useless. And there was no qualification? Well, there was a whole long list of things I had done wrong.

It was my first job. I mean, the list was as long as a roll of toilet paper. Do you remember some of the things on the list? Oh, totally. Yeah. So I remember one where... But I got my act together. I kind of got my finger out and I've worked hard ever since to prove the person wrong.

And so you tried to prove them wrong because you were angry or you just... No, no, it's just like I realized they were right. Oh, they were right. I had been pretty useless and I just needed to speed up and perform and deliver stuff. Yeah, so I had a performance review where a boss told me I was totally unemployable. Right. Is that when you went into academics? No.

And he said, I kind of mean that as a compliment. And I said, okay, you've got to qualify that, right? I'm unemployable, but that is a compliment. And it actually led to a really interesting discussion, which is that, you know, my natural thing is to go into systems, to go into cultures and to see where they're broken. I want to fix things. Right. I can see. So my focus on sort of this was when I was consulting on client delivery was secondary to wanting to fix the company. But anyway, but then he didn't do anything with it right like so i'm i'm now sitting there thinking i'm unemployable i'm unemployable what am i doing in this organization

like that's that's an example of like feedback with no catch right no support no follow-through yeah i am unemployable so he was right as well so well you seem eminently employable to me. But just a bit more on, in terms of working from home and so on. So digital productivity tracking tools, like they use, it's terrible, right? So they use that in some countries. We're not really, you know, quite rightly so and we don't use them in our company. But what do they do to people?

They're awful. I mean, first of all, I think if you're a company that has, I mean, and there's a spectrum, right? So there's some companies that are tracking your time online, right? There's some companies that go to the extreme of video cameras. So they're filming what people are doing. Others that are monitoring everything that people look at. I mean, these are all incredible signals of low trust. And it's surveillance. It's surveillance. It's not monitoring. It is surveillance, right? So, you know, one of the things, though, I have an issue with is what are you actually measuring? Because you're not really measuring value. You're not really measuring productivity. You're just measuring how people physically show up. And

this is one of the worst ways to value human beings. It's the worst ways to get quality of work out of people. You're just basically going back to factory days where people are clocking in and clocking out. So look, it's a huge challenge for organizations. I have a huge amount of empathy when you are trying to manage tens of thousands of people that are working remotely, that aren't necessarily engaged, that don't necessarily care about their jobs. How do you monitor those people? I would say if you have to implement any kind of surveillance system, you've got a culture problem which stems from a lack of trust. What does it do to bring laptop into meetings? That's an interesting question.

What does it do? It depends. So you know, you sit in those meetings and everyone has a laptop and then everyone is typing on that laptop. And there's some meetings where, you know, people are actually taking notes because they're looking up, they're looking like they're still engaged in the meeting and they're using that laptop as a tool within that meeting. But when people are there and they're not there, what's the point of having the meeting? I mean, I think the laptops are worse than the phones in that sense. I think there is, I sometimes sit with people and I literally want to grab the phone out of their hand and throw it out the window. Because I don't think people realize that they're being rude. I really don't think they realize that they're signaling that

you are not as important as the thing that's in their hand. And you've probably had this situation, right, where you're talking to someone, and then they look down, and they start swiping. They're not even typing, right? And what they're saying is, you're boring. You're not important. I've disengaged. Well, true love is to be with somebody without looking at your phone. Yes, true. Now, I have a slogan, which is that speed is a mindset. And I think speed is very important. So what do you mean by that? that speed is a mindset and I think speed is very important. So what do you mean by that?

That you can do pretty much everything twice as fast as you had planned or speed in an organization, how quickly you pick up the phone, how quickly you answer an email. And I think it's interesting, the quicker you do things, the more time you save. If I answer an email within one minute, it can be one sentence. If it takes an hour, it needs to be a paragraph. And if it's a day, it needs to be a page. So you save time by being quick. Responsive. Absolutely. Now, I read that you say somewhere that speed is the enemy of trust. What is that? So I would argue, I think what you're talking about there is responsiveness versus, so you may respond quickly to emails because what you're saying is in the gap, the person is wondering what you're thinking, right?

So you then, why do you, just explain to me why you think it's a sentence versus a paragraph. Well, because you'd be impressed by how quickly I answer, so I don't need to impress you by what I say. Interesting. Okay. But how thoughtful are you in the one-sentence answer? Always, of course, very thoughtful. Always, right. So if you rush that, there would be a problem.

Sure. Okay, so there's a difference in sort of how quickly you respond to people. I'm not saying that's bad for trust. What I'm saying is when people don't slow down and they don't think about the information that they're sharing. So, you know, sometimes someone sends you an article and you know they have not read that article. This happens to me all the time.

I think this will be really useful to you. And you dig in and you're like, this is rubbish, right? Because they've seen the headline, they've seen where it's being written. That's an example of speed being the enemy of trust. And I try to go to press reject sometimes and then I get caught in a loop. So I just accept it because I want to get to the thing. Right. I'm really annoyed by the friction. Banking, you know, when you get those texts and it's like UPS cannot deliver your package. Please click here. And you just want it. You want the package. So you click there and you've suddenly given your credit card details to a scam, right? When you're not slowing down, when there is no friction in those experiences, what I call a trust pause,

that's really damaging for trust because you're giving your trust away too easily. And this is a huge problem because what technology wants to do is remove that friction. But you speak to most entrepreneurs, you talk to experienced designers, what are they trying to do? you speak to most entrepreneurs, you talk to experienced designers, what are they trying to do? Make things efficient, make them quick, make them seamless. Well, if everything is frictionless, our tolerance for friction goes down. Now, I see this all the time, right? You know, self-service checkouts in the supermarket, terrible design, right? Because every three things you hit, the person is coming to help you right now. So this is just an example. I was in the supermarket the other day and this guy is like

shouting at the machine, right? And then he's banging the machine because he can't check out. And I'm like, dude, you're trying to buy an 11 liter bottle of vodka, whatever it is, right? Someone has to say that you're old enough to buy it. Hitting the machine is not going to help. And he's like, I got to get out of here. Why is this a self-service checkout? It's just one example. We see it all the time. We have no patience for any kind of friction because everything has become so on demand, so quick. And so when we are slowed down, we don't like it. But slowing down helps us think about, is this person, is this product, is this piece of information, is this money I'm going to send, is it actually worthy

of my trust? What's the relationship between empathy and trust? So empathy is huge. So when we look at trustworthiness, the behavioral side of trust, we talk about someone's capability and someone's character. And on the character side, social sciences have been studying for over 50 years, why do you trust certain people? Why do you give them their trust? And on the character side, there are two high order traits. The first is integrity, and the second is empathy. They carry equal importance. Well, actually, they don't carry equal importance. It depends on the situation. So if you are a teacher, you need very high empathy. If you're a lawyer, you need very high integrity. And then on the capability side, we have reliability and competence. And it's interesting

because you need different amounts of these traits in different situations but empathy is interesting so when you say to leaders why do you why do you think empathy is important they'll say well i think it's because it shows people that i'm a good listener this way here or um i think it demonstrates that i care And what's really interesting is that the most empathetic leaders often score very high on curiosity. And I find this fascinating. Why is the relationship there? Because they ask questions. What you have to say is interesting to them.

What you think is important to them. They're open to difference. they're open to difference, they're open to disagreement. So I think empathy, and this is just my opinion, has sort of been rebranded in a way that isn't helpful. So if you're a leader and you think of empathy of, I've got to demonstrate that I can hear and listen to thousands of people, that I'm in their shoes. That's what empathy is. That's really hard to scale. If as a leader, you have to demonstrate that you are curious, that you're generally interested in people's stories, where they've come from, why they're working for you, what they want to achieve, how they want to impact the company, what they think. That's, I think, much easier to

sort of emulate their empathy. So if people perceive you as curious, they also think that you have a lot of empathy? Yeah, it's a sign that you care. And they trust you more. Yeah, because you're saying, you're important to me. What you have to say is, I mean, you're a curious person. Is this something that you try to do with people? It's just asking questions where they go, I haven't heard that before. I've never been asked that before. Those are actually ways of signaling empathy that you're there, you're present, you're interested in that person.

Why is consistency important? You write that in a recent newsletter. Have you read Atomic Habits? Yeah. the newsletter. Have you read Atomic Habits? Yeah. So there's a line in there by James Clear where he says, intensity makes a great story, but it's consistency that leads to progress. Now he's talking about that in the context of habits, but he could be writing about trust. So leaders, not just leaders, people who show up in a big intense way so this could be in a family situation right so you know the relative that never picks up the phone you can't rely on them but they show up

for christmas with the big gift right that's intensity or the leader that is often late is really unpredictable their energy changes all the time, but give them a leadership summit and they are there, right? They're going to show up. That's intensity. But where real trust forms is the person, the friend, the grandparent, whoever it may be, who shows up consistently, that remembers the small things that you said six months ago that were important to them. So what people often conflate with this idea is you can be an intense person and you can be consistent. You can have bad days and you can have good days. You can have high strides days where you achieve loads of things and low strides days where you

get nothing done you can still be consistent in the way you show up for people so what i mean by consistency is people know what to expect of you they know what the experience of you is going to be and it's those inconsistent leaders family members friends we're like i just i don't know how is this person going to show up how they are they going to react? How are they going to respond? Are they going to show up? That really damages trust. When things go wrong, when we make mistakes, what is that to trust? So what kind of mistakes are you thinking of when you ask that question? What could be all kinds of things. Well, let's say now I'm a CEO. I've made a big mistake. I admit it in front of the whole organization.

So I think if there is an omission and then tied to that omission, there is accountability. Because sometimes leaders can omit mistakes, but they don't actually own the mistake afterwards, right? So I'm responsible, I'm accountable, and then really important, this is what we're going to do to change this. So accountability to fix trust has to move to change in action. And where many companies make the

mistake, and we don't. I'm sorry, but if you, so if you do that, do people trust you more or less? They can trust you more. So it can actually have a positive effect on trust. Um, now where it backfires is it can be a leader. It can be an entire company. Uh, it can be a small trust breach or a massive crisis. And we see this all the time. They point to the system. So, oh, it had nothing to do with me or any individuals. It was

the algorithm or it was a product failure or something happened to the data. And you see companies go through this, right? Whether it's Boeing, whether it's Facebook meta, right? It's very hard for those companies to recover from those trust crises until there is accountability in the character side of trust, not the capability side of trust. So it's not, we're going to fix the product, we're going to fix the system, we're going to fix the algorithm. It's what are you going to do in the character side of trust, not the capability side of trust. So it's not, we're going to fix the product, we're going to fix the system, we're going to fix the algorithm. It's what are you going to do in the culture, particularly around the integrity piece, that ensures me this isn't going to happen again. And it amazes me how long it can take companies to arrive at that point of saying, you know

what, this wasn't just a capability issue. Actually, there's something in the culture and the character of the way we're measured, the way we're incentivized, the way we're held accountable to each other, our reporting structures, regulation, whatever it might be, the problem lies there, not in the product or the service or the system. Mm-hmm. not in the product or the service or the system. Moving on to the fund where I work.

Now, we run capital on behalf of the whole Norwegian population. What do you think is the key to build trust? Well, let me turn the tables on you because I have an answer, but I'm intrigued in your answer because you must spend time thinking about this question. Of course, all the time. Huge responsibility, right? And I would argue it's probably the thing you think about or should think about the most, right? What do you think is the most important thing? Well, I think it is to build knowledge about the fund and what we do, because what we see is that people who know about the fund, they trust us more. We even see that

the people who listen to our podcasts trust the fund more than the people who don't listen to the podcast. And we see it in various age groups and so on. It's just consistent that knowledge builds trust. We need to be consistent. We need to do things according to our mandate. And we need to communicate correctly. And of course, we need to behave. We need to do the right things. So the way I hear that is the first thing that you're talking about is familiarity. Yeah. So we tend to trust things that we are more familiar with.

And that can be because what you're doing is you're taking something that is unknown and you're making it known to people. So that's the first step. The second thing that you're talking about, I think, is openness. So you're not talking about transparency. What you're talking about is funds are often... Well, it is also transparency because we are the most transparent fund in the world. In what sense?

That we make information available to everybody, that we tell everybody how we are voting in various annual meetings, these kind of things. Okay, let's come back to that because I'd be interested in this, if there's anything you can't tell people, if you don't tell people and they want to know, but let's come back to that. And I would say the behavioral piece that you're talking about is the integrity piece. So I would say, and this goes with the openness piece, the thing with funds is that 99.9% of people don't know how they work, right? They're these mysterious things that are run by powerful, wealthy people. How do they make money? But more importantly, how does that money serve me? So this gets back to

where we began, right, with politicians and government. Like, how do the funds' interests align with the citizens of Norway, right? Not the wealthy and the elite, but the average person, that they believe that in some way, the fund is benefiting their life. And it's a mistake. We also, we don't tell those stories, right? So we tell the stories of growth. We tell the stories of how well we're managing the wealth, but how that wealth is positively impacting people's lives, what it unlocks, what it enables Norway to do, how that impacts my life for the better. That's the piece that often gets missed in the trust story. So the people on the inside, they will talk about performance, right? So the fund is performing really well, and therefore we should be trusted. But those percentage points, those increases,

they don't mean anything to the average person. So the trust bridge is the narrative of what's in it for me. How does this benefit me? Talking of which, we have tens of thousands of young people listening to this podcast. What should they do so that people trust them more? When they're joining a new job or? In any situation. What's the key? You are 20 years old and you're thinking about your career and your life. How do you build that trust, that trust capital?

Interesting. So I would say early on in your career, you're trying to demonstrate your capability on equal footing with your character. So your capability is what's going to get you an interview. Your character is what's going to get you the job. And what you see often, and this isn't just the thought of young people, it's the people interviewing them. It becomes about their experience, what they're qualified to do.

And both sides often don't communicate their interests, their motives, their intentions. Why do they really want that position? And so I think in an interview situation, when you're trying to demonstrate who you are and what you can bring, thinking about that capability side and thinking about that character side is really important. And then in the early stages of your career, I honestly think one of the most important traits is reliability. It's how you show up and behave over time. And you talk to leaders, and this is anecdotal, and managers, and they'll say their pet peeve is inconsistency, right? Like, oh, I don't know if I can trust them, that they're going to get this thing done, or they're always late.

I rarely speak to people these days and they rave about their teams and these new cohorts. It's usually a list of complaints around changing attitudes in the workplace and it used to be that people were lucky to have a job here and now they think we're lucky to have them and the power shifted. That relationship between employer and employee is never going back. And you have to understand that power dynamic to really understand how trust works. So this idea that now a young person is going to be deferential to the organization, to the leader, that they're going to show up every day and demonstrate they really want that job. It's just not the way power and trust works. So as a young person, I'm not saying being deferential, but if you are reliable and you are consistent, that trait will really shine

through and make the effort to show up in person. Absolutely. Rachel, you have shown up in person. You are clearly very reliable. I know a lot more about trust than I did an hour ago. Big thanks for coming. Thank you.