Most organizations have important things that they want to measure well, but sometimes the goals feel too hard, too intangible or too subjective, such as innovation, reputation, partner relationships, collaboration and organizational culture. Often, these struggles to measure well, result in trivial and low value measures (such as number of meetings to measure the goal of collaboration) which deliver little or no knowledge for decision-making (i.e. is more meetings better than less meetings?).
The trouble is, if we don’t properly measure the things that are most-likely to transform how our organization performs (such as our organization’s culture, for example), we can’t meaningfully demonstrate that things are improving – and as we have learnt through history, this lack of insight can lead to many unintended consequences.
Dr. Spitzer* starts his measurement of Organizational Trust by first saying what it means in his context (circa 2007).
Organizational Trust:
“An expectancy held by an individual or group that promises will be kept and vulnerability will not be exploited. Thus, trust is an “expectation” of dependability and benign intentions.”
Do you notice how this step took a seemingly intangible goal and translated it to something that feels much more understandable and thus more measurable?
Dr. Spitzer continues in his article…
“Trust is typically viewed as a characteristic of personal relationships. But there is also trust in institutions, in roles, in information, etc. Increased dangers in the world, and increased media portrayals of breaches of trust have contributed to people being increasingly reluctant to trust others, and much more skeptical about organizational relationships. In addition, reduced personal interaction due to increased globalization, less co-location, more home-based employees, and fewer face-to-face meetings are further reducing trust building opportunities. Trust is becoming a scarcer commodity by the day.
In organizations, trust is typically seen as outside the domain of most managers and even Human Resource departments. Although public opinion surveys often ask questions about political and institutional trust, there are few, if any, measurements of “organizational trust” or “organizational trustworthiness” (other than its inclusion in some organizational climate or culture surveys, and on the occasional employee attitude survey). Until very recently, there has been little effort to measure trust as an organizational construct.
Fortunately, with an increased realization that trust is a crucial aspect of relationships with customers, employees, vendors, partners and other members of the extended enterprise, the trust measurement gap is beginning to close. One of the most crucial applications of trust relates to supply chain performance. As Tom Brunell has said “Trust is one of the most important tools within the supply chain today and it cannot be simply turned on or applied like technological tools….. The technology tools are in place, it’s the trust that has to catch up”. Furthermore, trust is highly situational, and because trust is so fragile, it can be destroyed almost instantaneously, by a single act that is perceived to be a “betrayal of trust.”
Dr. Dean Spitzer, in all his generosity of thought, developed an example questionnaire for measuring Organizational Trust based on his extensive research. He suggests that the terminology can be adjusted to fit terms more commonly used in your organization. And, as with all emergent measures, he recommends that the items be tested and fine-tuned through pilot use, before broader implementation.
Dr. Spitzer’s Organizational Trust Questionnaire (2007)
Please note: When the term organization is used, it could be replaced by other descriptions such as department, group, or team to fit the appropriate context in each of the questions are posed.
- I trust the expectations that have been communicated in this organization
- I feel that people in this organization are honest
- There is a mutual respect among members in this organization
- People in this organization are good at listening without making judgements
- I feel good about being a member of this organization
- I feel that the people in this organization are competent
- I feel confident that this organization has the ability to accomplish what it sets out to do
- People help each other learn in this organization
- Learning is highly valued in this organization
- I feel that I can be completely honest in this organization
- Honesty is rewarded in this organization
- There are clear expectations and boundaries established in this organization
- Delegation is encouraged in this organization
- People keep agreements in this organization
- There is a strong sense of responsibility and accountability in this organization
- There is consistency between words and behaviour in this organization
- There is open communication in this organization
- People tell the truth in this organization
- People are willing to admit mistakes in this organization
- People give and receive constructive feedback non-defensively in this organization
- People maintain confidentiality in this organization
- I can depend on people to do what they say in this organization
- People are treated fairly and justly in this organization
- People’s opinions and feelings are taken seriously in this organization
- I feel confident that my trust will be reciprocated in this organization.
Dr. Spitzer’s recommended 5-point scale for this survey:
- 5 represents strongly agree
- 4 represents agree
- 3 represents neither agree nor disagree
- 2 represents disagree
- 1 represents strongly disagree
He also added a section for interpretation guidance that follows the implementation of the 25 questions he proposes for the questionnaire.
Dr. Spitzer’s Interpretation Key:
- Highest score is 125
- High score range is 100-125
- Moderate score range is 70-110
- Low score is below 70
- Danger score is below 50
Are you inspired to develop more meaningful measure for intangible goals?
For those of you who are eager to develop meaningful measures for goals that seem intangible and subjective, I hope this example, provided with permission from Dr. Dean Spitzer, gives you hope. You certainly don’t always need as many as 25 questions in your surveys and careful attention should be given to considering what is most relevant and transformational for your organization to track and gain knowledge from.
Act now by registering for our next PuMP Performance Measurement Blueprint Training Workshop: https://adurastrategy.com/kpi-training/
Source: Dr. Dean Spitzer, Transforming Performance Measurement: rethinking the way we measure and drive organizational success.
Copyright: 2007 Dean R. Spitzer
Louise Watson is the licensed PuMP and EBL Partner for Canada and President of Adura Strategy Inc.
Stacey Barr is the founder and creator of the PuMP Blueprint and Evidence Based Leadership (EBL).