Trust vs. "There's No Such Thing as a Free Lunch"

Trust forms the essential "glue" that allows synergy and innovation to take place between people--in business and personal relationships. Without it we have isolation and maintenance of the "status quo" (and, in a growing organizm, the beginning of decay and death.

For a graphic that will help explain this concept, go to the link tied to the title of this post and to
http://joelmonty.wikispaces.com/meta-models and open the Learning Models.pdf file. Look for the "Trust Dimension in Team Performance" model.

People develop habits of trust and distrust--often with good reason. Just like learning to walk, we have to stand up and move (trust) one more time than we fall down (distrust). This is another case of common sense vs. common practice--see my earlier blog. Trust is absolutely essential for learning and change.

We are vulnerable when we learn. (Visit http://joelmonty.wikispaces.com/meta-models and open the Learning Affect Model Collection.pdf file. Look for the "Shame Affect Decision" model. (Small copies of both of these models are also on this web site: http://www.joelmonty.net/innovations. )

Because we are vulnerable we become concerned about the people we may be learning from. The common practice warning has merit--"There is no such thing as a free lunch." In most cases, when something is "free" there are strings attached. This is not always something negative and it doesn't always cost money. On the other hand, in e-mails, I have often found that the strings attached to many "free" offers cost more than whatever was being offered.

When we become jaded and start from a position of distrust, we can have a negative impact on real possibilities for learning and change.
What was in it for me? Is it really "free?"

Recently I had started a project with a group of member associations with the goal of helping their members identify the learning needs of their workforces.  I estimated the value of my contribution to this project to be in the neighborhood of $10,000 which I was offering for free to this group. Because I didn't know everyone who should be involved, I began by contacting people I knew were stakeholders and asked them to recommend others who should be included in the project. I would then contact the people I had been referred to and would mention who had suggested that I contact them about the project. To save lenghy e-mails, I provided copies of the e-mails on the web site used for the project and asked everyone to read the e-mails.

I never asked for money for my services in pulling the project together or for the expertise I was offering.  The purpose of this project was to benefit their members and their community and to be a pilot project for my firm which could be duplicated in other places.  I never intentially said that I was affiliated with anyone else on this project. 

Everyone I contacted at the beginning of this project was interested in participating.  The focus and goal seemed to be well timed and was of perceived value to everyone invited to participate.  One or two people were away from their office and could not readily be contacted, yet they were included in all the correspondence so that they would not be missing out on anything when they returned.

About three weeks into the project, someone who had been away read part of the correspondence and decided that, in some correspondence, I had misrepresented him.  While I had not done so, he made the assumption and proceeded to "poison the pool" of member associations and other stakeholders.

"My mind's made up.  Don't confuse me with the facts."

Even though I cleared up his misconception and that of one of the stakeholders, the brakes were on.  Instead of 10 organizations participating, two followed-through on our next meeting and we were left with half of the needed questions for the organizations. 

While the project could still be completed and still add value, the early momentum and trust had been lost--merely by someone making a false assumption and acting on it.

The project is dormant at present.  While it could be resurrected, at this point I can offer the same process to another group of stakeholders (remember, my free services for this project were valued at about $10,000) with as much ease as starting over with the previous group.

I appreciate the continued trust of the two professionals who continued to work on the project with me.  The community and their members lose out on the opportunities for learning and changes that could have been uncovered by the project.  Perhaps they will find the resources to do it on their own in the future.

Trust is worthwhile. It is important to start group work with trust and to bring questions into the open without acting on assumptions based on previous experiences. A lack of trust brings lots of consequences--including isolation and maintenance of the "status quo." Check out the graphic on the link connected to the title of this post. It is designed to tell a story without words. What does it tell you?

By the way, if you check out the http://drm-resources.wikispaces.com/projects page and know of another group who would like to work on a needs analysis, feel free to let me know.