David's lessons on leadership - Trust

In a series of posts I reflect upon what we can learn about leadership from David, King of Israel.  If this is the first post in the series you have read, please do a quick review of the January 2, 2009 blog titled  “David’s lessons on leadership – Intro”; that post outlines why I am looking into David’s life.

The previous blog dealt with knowing that until people see us “Take a Stand” they will never know our values or be in a position to choose to accept our values or move on.  This post deals with “Trust”

The backdrop for a lesson on trust comes in an interaction between Jonathan, David’s best friend (see “Jonathan Moments” – February 9^th) and his soldiers.

Jonathan becomes disgusted with his dad, Saul the king.  He is disgusted because right after Jonathan led a great victory that Saul claimed was his own victory, Saul tries to lead 600 men into battle without weapons.  We read in the story that not a blacksmith could be found in the whole land of Israel, so Israel had to pay their enemy to have their plowshares, mattocks, axes and sickles sharpened. As a result, on the day of the battle not a soldier with Saul and Jonathan had a sword or spear in his hand.

Jonathan takes matters into his own hands and tells one of his soldiers, “Let’s you and me go into the enemy camp and destroy it”.  His soldier tells him, “do all that you have in mind; I am with you, heart and soul."  Jonathan's soldier "Trusts"

Contrast the soldiers response, with Jonathan’s retort to one of his father’s commands.  Saul had told the army not to eat until they had their victory.  But Jonathan found some honey on the ground and ate it any way.  One of the soldiers told him, "Your father bound the army under a strict oath, saying, 'Cursed be any man who eats food today!' That is why the men are faint."  Jonathan’s response, "My father has made trouble for the country. See how my eyes brightened when I tasted a little of this honey.  How much better it would have been if the men had eaten today?”  Jonathan's words and actions show his men he has no "Trust" for his father.

What a difference in the way the soldier spoke of his leader and the son spoke of his father.  The soldier has trust and deference and the son only has condescension.  Why the difference?

The level of trust that we have in a leader dictates the speed and obedience of our following (the concepts are derived from a book by Stephen Covey Jr. called “The Speed of Trust”).  High trust, high speed and high obedience.  Low trust, questions, debates and delays.  Where does trust come from?  Character and competence.  Character is comprised of integrity and intent.  Competence is built on capability and results.   Let me break this down a bit further:

• Integrity – when there is no gap between intent and behavior.  You see this in people when they act in harmony with their deepest values and beliefs.
• Intent – based upon motive, agenda and related behavior.  It is the reason why you do something.
• Capability – the knowledge, skills, ability and attitude that a person brings to a situation.
• Results – getting stuff done matters. Or as Master Yoda says, “Do or do not, there is no try”

Each of us falls short on one of more of these four items at any point in time.  The more we demonstrate a complete picture to our team and improve each of these areas, the more they trust us, the faster we operate together and the more effective we become.

So what was the difference between Jonathan and Saul?  The soldier saw a few specific things in Jonathan.  First, he demonstrated capability and results in the first attack he led.  Second, his character was on display before heading into the raid on the Philistines when he told the soldier “Perhaps the Lord will act in our behalf. Nothing can hinder the Lord from saving, whether by many or by few”.  Jonathan was a capable man of action who walked the talk in terms of his belief system.  He showed integrity and intent.

Contrast the view of Jonathan with the view Jonathan might have of his father.  Saul could not put arms into the hands of his people and took credit for actions that were not his.  He could not get results and his intent was suspect.  Although Saul was strong and effective, his flaws caused him to do things that negatively influenced the way his people viewed his character and competence.

What is the lesson?  Objectively review our integrity, intent, capability and results.  Score ourselves, where do we fall short?  Be surrounded with a few trusted advisors.  Seek their input, ask them to articulate the areas where we are lacking and ask them to help us improve.  And then – trust your people.  Operate with an internal compass that says most people really want to do the right thing.  Henry Stimson, who was an American statesman, served as Secretary of War, Governor-General of the Philippines, and Secretary of State said, “The chief lesson I have learned in a long life is that the only way you can make a man trustworthy is to trust him; and the surest way to make him untrustworthy is to distrust him.”

Know you have to earn their trust, but trust them first.