K E Y  C O M P O N E N T S  O F  T RU S T

​

In general terms, trust relationships involve risk, reliability, vulnerability, and expectation (Hoy & Tschannen-Moran, 2003; Young, 1998). If there is nothing at stake, or if one party does not require anything of the other, trust is not an issue. In school settings, however, risk and expectations abound. Staff and students alike are constantly put in positions in which they are not only expected to perform certain duties but in which their well-being depends upon others fulfilling certain obligations, as well. As researchers Bryk and Schneider (2003) explain, Distinct role relationships characterize the social exchanges of schooling: teachers with students, teachers with other teachers, teachers with parents, and all groups with the school principal. 

Each party in a relationship maintains an understanding of his or her roles' obligations and holds some expectations about the obligations of the other parties. For a school community to work well, it must achieve agreement in each role relationship in terms of the understandings held about these personal obligations and expectations of others (p. 41). 

A more precise definition of trust, drawn from Tschannen Moran and Hoy’s (1998) comprehensive review of the literature includes five key components commonly used to measure trustworthiness: Benevolence: Having confidence that another party has your best interests at heart and will protect your interests is a key ingredient of trust. Reliability: Reliability refers to the extent to which you can depend upon another party to come through for you, to act 3 consistently, and to follow through. Competence: Similar to reliability, competence has to do with belief in another party’s ability to perform the tasks required by his or her position. For example, if a principal means well but lacks necessary leadership skills, he or she is not likely to be trusted to do the job.

Honesty: A person’s integrity, character, and authenticity are all dimensions of trust. The degree to which a person can be counted on to represent situations fairly makes a huge difference in whether or not he or she is trusted by others in the school community.

Openness: Judgments about openness have to do with how freely another party shares information with others. Guarded communication, for instance, provokes distrust because people wonder what is being withheld and why. Openness is crucial to the development of trust between supervisors and subordinates, particularly in times of increased vulnerability for staff. “In the absence of prior contact with a person or institution,” add Bryk and Schneider (2003), “participants may rely on the general reputation of the other and also on commonalities of race, gender, age, religion, or upbringing” to assess how trustworthy they are (pp. 41–42). The more interaction the parties have over time, however, the more their willingness to trust one another is based upon the other party’s actions and their perceptions of one another’s intentions, competence, and integrity