Building Trust Through Norm-Breaking

In which of these 2 scenarios, will a sales rep sell more blenders? a) She nails the demo, flawlessly blending a smoothie in front of potential customers b) Same exact pitch, but when she pours the smoothie, she spills it all over the table Dr. Richard Wiseman conducted this exact study. More people bought the blender when she made an absolute mess. This phenomenon is called the "other shoe effect." The underlying principle: We instinctively know people aren’t perfect. So when someone appears too polished in high-stakes moments—job interviews, pitches, first dates—part of our brain asks: “What are they hiding? When does the other shoe drop?” The longer someone appears flawless, the more suspicious we get. This creates a dangerous cycle: • You try to appear perfect in the first impression • The other person's brain gets increasingly distracted wondering about your hidden flaws • When your imperfection finally shows (and it will), it hits much harder than if you'd acknowledged it upfront I learned this the hard way. When I first wrote Captivate, I tried to sound like an academic. My editor called it out: “This doesn’t sound like you.” So I rewrote the intro to be me, very me in a vulnerable way: “Hi, I’m Vanessa. I’m a recovering awkward person.” That vulnerability built instant trust. By dropping my shoe early, I built trust immediately and let readers know they were in good company. This is also how I introduce myself in conversations, and I have noticed everyone laughs and relaxes when I say it. There are a couple situations where you can actively use this effect: • Job interviews: After sharing your strengths, say "One area I’m still growing in is public speaking—which is why this role excites me." • Investor pitches: After a strong open, confess: "One challenge we’re still working through is [X], and here’s how we’re tackling it." • Team meetings: Proactively raise project risks, then offer a solution. Don’t let others discover it first. Rules to remember: • Choose authentic vulnerabilities, not fake ones • Drop your shoe AFTER establishing competence, not before • Pair vulnerability with accountability - show how you're addressing it Remember: The goal isn't to appear perfect. It's to appear trustworthy. And trustworthy people acknowledge their imperfections before others have to discover them.

Traditional leadership sabotages trust. Are you unknowingly doing the same? Here’s how we, as purposeful leaders, build trust differently: #1 We make it safe for failure. They make it dangerous. Traditional leaders say failure is part of growth, but in reality, they punish mistakes through criticism, micromanagement, or disappointment. We build trust by creating a culture where failure is expected and embraced as a step toward success. Our team knows they can make mistakes without fear of judgment. Ask yourself: Does your team trust that it’s okay to fail, or do they play it safe to avoid blame? #2 We let people speak the uncomfortable truth. They reward silence. Traditional leadership rewards compliance. People stay quiet because they’ve learned that telling the truth often leads to isolation or consequences. We invite and reward the uncomfortable truths - even when it stings. We know that real trust means hearing what we don’t want to hear. Ask yourself: Do your people feel safe to challenge you, or are they keeping quiet to stay safe? #3 We measure trust by what’s said in private. They measure it by what’s said in public. Traditional leaders believe everything is fine as long as public conversations are polite. But they never ask what’s being said behind closed doors. We measure trust by the things people say when we’re not in the room. Real trust is when your team can openly discuss their frustrations without fear that it will reach you as a weapon. Ask yourself: What conversations are happening in private that you don’t hear and why? #4 We trust through action, not words. They expect trust by title. Traditional leadership assumes trust comes with the role. They think the title alone is enough. We earn trust by what we consistently do. We give autonomy, show vulnerability, and back our words with action. Ask yourself: Does your team trust you because of what you do every day or because they have to? Here’s the real shift all teams need (including yours): Traditional leadership doesn’t just sabotage trust. It creates a system where trust is impossible. If your team isn’t speaking up, taking risks, or being open, it’s not their failure. It’s the ‘traditional broader business system’ you’ve allowed within your team’s walls. Your challenge: It’s time to dismantle the very systems that are breeding silence, fear, and compliance within your own team. And yes, you can do it. P.S What’s one ‘traditional broader business’ behaviour you’ve allowed to exist that’s keeping your team from trusting you? (It’s time to break it). 👇 Share in the conversation and get our support! ♻️ Repost to help other leaders. 👋 Hi, I'm Laurie. I help individual leaders build human-centered team cultures by showing them exactly how to integrate purpose and emotional intelligence into their daily leadership and team systems.

CBS is canceling The Late Show with Stephen Colbert for financial reasons (wink, wink). Given the current climate of institutional pressure and media capitulation, that seems fishy. Regardless, the timing speaks volumes about how institutional behavior affects trust. After years of conversations in life sciences and marketing, I’ve noticed the path to trust isn't through control, but more so through shifting the context from institutional to personal. I've seen this in my "walk and talk" videos with life science marketers and scientists. These conversations, recorded while casually walking outdoors, consistently generate deeper engagement than other formats. I’m sure part of it is the novelty of the informal outdoor setting. But there's something more to it. When you change the physical context of a conversation, you change its emotional context too. Just as a late-night talk show guest sharing a personal story creates a different connection than their movie trailer, watching someone walk and talk about their work feels fundamentally different from seeing their corporate presentation. That shift mirrors how we build trust in human relationships. We don't trust people solely because of their credentials or their perfect product description. We trust them because we see glimpses of them as people, their thinking process, and the context around their work. Going back to Colbert and late-night TV: Sure, guests are there to promote their work, but the connection happens when the conversation moves past “the product”. When an actor shares a story about their childhood, or a scientist shares the origin of their passion, we want to know more. Where will influence come from in an age of declining trust for institutions? The more institutions try to control their message, the more they undermine their own influence. At the same time, individuals and brands willing to shift the context to show the human side and their process through informal conversations have an opportunity to build stronger, deeper trust. This has been playing out across media. While major institutions clamp down, one can see the trend toward individual voices building engaged audiences through podcasts, Substacks, and YouTube channels. For those of us in life sciences, this presents a challenge and an opportunity. The challenge is getting comfortable with loosening the grip and showing more of the process and the people behind it. The opportunity is the chance to build deeper, more authentic connections by deliberately shifting contexts. Sometimes that means taking a walk with a camera rolling. Sometimes it means sharing the thinking process behind a decision, not just the outcome. The institutions that succeed in this new era won't be the ones with the tightest control. They'll be the ones with the courage to let people speak, to show their human side, and to trust that authentic connection garners more influence than packaged perfection.