Comments on: Carnival of Trust

By: Trusted Advisor » Blawg Review #275

Trusted Advisor » Blawg Review #275 — Fri, 17 Dec 2010 17:37:36 +0000

[...] wait—what’s this? More common lineage: Doug just happens to have hosted last month’s brilliant Carnival of Trust as well. It’s getting all incestuous around [...]

By: Trusted Advisor » Carnival of Trust for July, 2010

Trusted Advisor » Carnival of Trust for July, 2010 — Fri, 17 Dec 2010 17:27:18 +0000

[...] Welcome to the July edition of the Carnival of Trust. [...]

By: michael webster

michael webster — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 14:54:33 +0000

@Charles, I think it is important to sort out those situation which require a personal understanding of the motives of the other person, and those in which such an examination would be irrelevant.

We only have so much time to investigate, and building conventions which circumvent the need for constant vigilance is important.

By: michael webster

michael webster — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 14:52:13 +0000

@Doug;

When you say you “trust” an institution, I suggest that what you really mean is that the standard operating procedures give you reliable results.

Just like a the 4 way stop convention, if I know people are following it, coordinates a group without there being any trust so do many other conventions.

As for the regulators in the financial system, here is a different view:

http://www.bizop.ca/blog2/ponzi-schemes/the-regulator-and-the-blowoff.html

By: Trust … it’s the glue that holds us together | Spirit of Trust in Business

Tue, 20 Jul 2010 19:38:46 +0000

[...] post was selected to be part of July’s Carnival of Trust, hosted this month by Doug Cornelius of Compliance Building. Carnival of Trust is a brainchild of [...]

By: Charles H. Green

Charles H. Green — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 23:00:24 +0000

Michael, interesting and thoughtful comment, thank you.

I suppose it depends a little bit how you define trust. In my own lexicon, I include the concept of reliability, which I think speaks to Doug’s idea of trust in the system. Whatever you call it, that phenomenon covers a wide range of human behavior, from bank tellers to stop lights to rental car companies; we willingly put ourselves at theoretical risk.

I tend to call that trust, but I hear you as suggesting perhaps that word is getting overused; certainly you are right in pointing out situations where personal reputation is not required for things to work.

By: John Gies

John Gies — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 12:33:06 +0000

Doug,

Great collection of Stories and i award style points for the circus motif. I think that is the best done I have seen with the clowns, fortune tellers, etc.

Articles were well chosen.

Thanks

By: Doug Cornelius

Doug Cornelius — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 11:59:50 +0000

I don’t necessarily trust my bank or my bank teller. I’m still willing to deposit my vast fortune with them. It’s not that I distrust them. I just have trust in the system.

So if it’s not about have trust in people, then I think it’s about having trust in the system. In the highly regulated financial services system, the regulators are trying to instill trust in the system even though you may not trust the individuals.

Trust in the individuals is an important part of business (and life). In most cases it’s merely trust that they will get the job done.

By: michael webster

michael webster — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 16:48:47 +0000

I liked this collection of stories, but I wish people would stop categorizing all coordinated activities as requiring trust. The reason we have many of the conventions we do is to eliminate the requirement that I know sufficiently enough of your reputation to trust you.