How to Manage Amid Mistrust: Lessons on Communication, Values, and Human Nature
Organizations are increasingly adopting behavioral threat assessments and preventative security measures to move left-of-bang, addressing tension points within workforces and operations before they escalate into an incident. But to make that shift, organizations need to make a conscious investment in one crucial element: trust.
In a GSX Game Changer session on Tuesday, 24 September, Diana Concannon, PCI, will guide attendees through today’s tangled trust landscape. Discussion points will include how mistrust can threaten security efforts, how technology factors into trust and mistrust, and the role of human nature in combatting future mistrust.
The road to trust is not an easy one to travel, especially today. The U.S. public’s confidence in institutions remains at a historic low. Just 28 percent of U.S. adults surveyed by Gallup in 2024 said they have a great deal or quite a lot of confidence in major institutions like the medical system, organized religion, public schools, technology companies, financial institutions, big business, and government institutions. This marks the third consecutive year that confidence has been below 30 percent.
Part of this mistrust can be attributed to the permacrisis that organizations and individuals currently face, says Concannon, who is associate provost of strategic initiatives and partnerships and dean of the California School of Forensic Studies at Alliant International University. Concannon is also the 2024 chair of the ASIS Extremism and Political Instability Community Steering Committee.
“Within those populations that security typically protects, there is an erosion of trust in leadership,” Concannon says. “So, we’re going to talk a little bit about what contributes to that, because there are things that leaders do inadvertently that sometimes add to it.”
Some core concepts behind mistrust that Concannon and the other game changer participants will explore with examples, case studies, and exercises include:
Ambiguity bias. This comes from either poor communication or a lack of communication.
“It is human nature, in the face of ambiguity, to fill in those gaps with negative attribution,” Concannon says. “It is how we survived. If we heard a rustle in the bushes, we assumed it’s a lion, not a pussycat, and that is how we survived from an evolutionary perspective. But it works against us in our higher-order thinking. It is how rumors come forward and how distrust gets bred when we’re not careful with our words.”
For example, if a company announces that there will be no more layoffs after a reduction-in-force, the intention is likely noble—trying to reassure remaining employees about their job security. But if some notable individuals are later fired for undisclosable disciplinary reasons, that perceived back-tracking could make employees distrust the original statement.
“This is where security, which is very sensitive to these dynamics, can help and aid leadership in communicating about abnormal or difficult events,” Concannon says.
Integrity gap. This addresses seemingly contradictory messages, like the dialog around return-to-office initiatives after the COVID-19 pandemic calmed down. Workers were told that they could work—and work effectively—from home during the crisis, but then when offices reopened, leaders sent out the message that workers couldn’t effectively do their jobs without in-person contact.
“The contradiction of that messaging was not well-tolerated by many,” Concannon says. “Managers and security professionals were reporting that they were getting threats, that their employees were behaving in conflict-building ways. Even if it did not reach the level of violence, it was very disruptive.”
Part of addressing the integrity gap, again, lies in better, more nuanced communication with context. For example, explaining to employees that they did very well while working remotely, but some in-person activities are important to the business—especially for more creative tasks like brainstorming that are difficult to manage online. Outlining the thought-out reasons behind the decision to return to the workplace can diffuse tensions and start a more productive conversation.
Misalignment. When a company’s actions are perceived to be misaligned with its stated values, or employees’ perception of those values, trust can erode, and insider threats can escalate.
If an electric car company announces its dedication to environmental stewardship and sustainability, for instance, but then uses non-sustainable materials in batteries, its workers will notice. They could then take action—either with protests, sharing information with reporters, or physically attacking the site.
Organizations should be aware of how business decisions could be perceived as either supporting or conflicting with their reputations and values, Concannon advises.
Grievances and expressed anger. Mistrust can lead to anger, which can lead to violence. In the GSX Game Changer session, attendees will look at how security can use current best practices and behavioral threat assessments to train ambassadors within frontline security and other departments to see when mistrust is fomenting. This will empower leaders to take appropriate action to address perceptions of harm or miscommunication.
Security teams can also work to prevent mistrust in the first place by helping build a culture that supports reporting and honest questioning about motivations, misalignments, and suspicious behavior.
“If [employees are] feeling that a colleague, coworker, or customer is behaving in a manner that is not beneficial to the environment, they can report it,” Concannon says. “Or if they themselves have a question about a practice that they see, they can bring it forward in a productive and civil manner, rather than in one that is counterproductive or—worse—harmful.”
But security will need to walk-the-walk to be a “magnet for trust on all levels of the organization,” she adds. Without security being a trusted entity within the organization, it will be difficult—if not impossible—to effectively gather good intelligence, get in front of problems, and serve in a more preventative role, Concannon explains.
This GSX Game Changer session, “Do You Trust Me? How to Thrive in a Mistrustful Era,” will be held on Tuesday, 24 September, from 2:00-3:00 p.m. ET, in Orlando, Florida.
Claire Meyer is editor-in-chief of Security Management, the publication behind the GSX Daily. Connect with her on LinkedIn or via email at [email protected].
