Trust is the quiet architecture of leadership. It enables coordination, creativity, and growth. When trust is present and workable, relationships become more efficient, resilient, and human. When it’s weak or unclear, even talented teams struggle.

Each time we trust, we choose to make something we value vulnerable to another person’s actions.

The Four Predicates of Trust

Trust is informed by four distinct but interacting assessments, or predicates, we make about another person’s behavior and intent. Each can be observed, developed, and repaired.

1. Can (Competence)
Can they do what they say they will do?
Competence reflects skill, judgment, and the ability to execute within relevant constraints. Trust grows when people demonstrate capability and acknowledge limits.

2. Will (Reliability)
Will they do what they said they would do?
Reliability is built through consistency, follow-through, and timely renegotiation when conditions change. Over time, patterns matter more than intentions.

3. Honest (Sincerity)
Do we experience them as truthful and transparent?
Honesty shows up when people speak plainly, state motives, and align words with actions. Sincerity reduces uncertainty and allows issues to surface early.

4. Best Interest (Care)
Do they consider my interests alongside their own?
Care reflects respect, fairness, and restraint in the use of power. We tend to trust those who do not exploit our vulnerability.

How trust works

Trust functions as a set of ongoing assessments we make, often implicitly, about another person. These judgments are shaped by experience, observation, and context, and they evolve over time.

Making these assessments explicit invites curiosity rather than judgment. When teams share language for how trust is formed and strained, conversations shift from vague frustration to specific, workable dialogue. Addressing trust directly can deepen relationships and strengthen psychological safety.

These predicates influence one another, yet each can be examined separately. A breakdown in trust often traces back to one dominant predicate rather than a general failure of character.

Applying the Trust Model

Choose a colleague. Assess each predicate: Can, Will, Honest, Best Interest. Where is trust strong? Where is it strained? Clear distinctions create better conversations, and better conversations create the conditions for trust to recover.

Why this matters now

Leaders often treat trust as binary: either it’s there or it’s not. When trust breaks, conversations stall because no one can name what’s actually broken. The predicates give leaders language to diagnose trust precisely—not as character judgment, but as workable assessment.