"Trust cannot be evaluated, but it can be observed" — Beyond profit and loss, what kind of organization makes people want to stay? —

(Approx. 1400 characters)

I feel that the moment you try to evaluate trust, it slips away.
It would be easy if it could be turned into numbers, but the moment you quantify it, its essence is lost.
That is why it tends to be treated as something "invisible."

However, on the other hand, in real organizations, things cannot be sustained if they remain "invisible."
The more trustworthy a person is, the more likely they are to leave without being evaluated.
Isn't this one of the major contradictions that society and workplaces face today?

This continues from the previous post, so if you are interested, please take a look at the following as well.

Trust cannot be evaluated, but it can be "observed"

Trust cannot be turned into numbers, butit can be observed as a phenomenon.
For example,

• People gather to consult with them when they are in trouble

• The turnover rate is low in teams where that person is involved

• The atmosphere of the project is somehow calm for some reason

These situations are clear "traces of trust."
In other words, the state of being "trusted" is not a score, butappears in the movements of those around them.

The important thing is not to try to score it directly.
Instead of making trust an "evaluation item,"
I think the first step is to have an attitude of "observing the phenomenon where trust is born."

Don't foster trusted individuals, foster a "place where trust is born"

In many organizations, a situation occurs where "things won't work without that person."
But that also means that trust is "concentrated in an individual."
It carries the risk that the relationship will collapse the moment that person leaves.

To sustain trust, you needthe idea of designing a "place" rather than an "individual."

This kind of "environment where trust circulates" is an asset to the organization.
Instead of hoarding trusted people,
creating a culture where trust is easily bornis what ultimately keeps people connected.

Gently acknowledge the "capitalization of trust"

That said, if a person who holds trust is not evaluated at all,
it is natural that they will eventually move to another place.
What is needed here is not the idea of "evaluation," but of "recording."

For example,

• Save voices of gratitude and recommendation as "culture points"

• Do not use them as a basis for promotions or compensation, but record them as "cultural contributions"

• Build a "trust network" that allows for continued relationships as alumni even after leaving the company

By doing this, trust becomes a "reason for belonging" rather than an economic reward.
"That person is at this company," "I like the atmosphere of this team."
The emotional connections that lead to such thoughts ultimately strengthen the organization.

Transform trust from a "structure of being rewarded" into a "culture of giving back."
I believe that is the true meaning of supporting people beyond profit and loss.

From evaluation to culture

Ultimately, trust cannot be protected by numbers or rules, but only as aculture.
It is not something to be managed within a system, but something to be spoken and passed on.

The fact that such voices continue to be spoken naturally
is proof that the organization continues to hold trust.

No matter how precise the evaluation system becomes,
if that "spoken trust" disappears, the culture will eventually wither.
Conversely, organizations where trust is passed down can stand back up even when exposed to economic waves.

Trust cannot be evaluated.
But it can be observed.
And,it can be protected as a culture.

How do we preserve invisible value?
I believe the answer lies outside of numbers.

#Trust #OrganizationalCulture #Humanity #EvaluationSystem #PsychologicalSafety #TeamBuilding #PhilosophyEssay

I would be very grateful if you could like and follow ☺️