Trust – an essential element for NDKM

An essential element of socialising and communicating efficiently and successfully is

‘trust’. ‘Trust’ is a term frequently mentioned in the current literature regarding knowledge creation, sharing, learning, or KM. (Allee, 1997; Hüther, 2011; Khanbabaei, Lajevardi, &

Kohsari, 2011; Lesser & Prusak, 2004; Nonaka et al., 2006; von Krogh et al., 2000; von

120

Krogh, Nonaka, & Rechsteiner, 2012). In this regard, trust has been quoted and discussed as vital for relationships, a binder for socialising as well as for sharing and transferring

knowledge (Lesser & Prusak, 2004), which takes place by the dint of communication.

Nevertheless, although the term has been used so many times, it still lacks insight, especially in its emotional part (Fineman, 2005), as the intensity of trust has never been discussed or exemplified. It is worth highlighting again that personal knowledge is a highly emotional issue, and in this regard the intensity of trust plays a key role because it also a pre-requisite for knowledge creation, regulates the intensity of explicit knowledge and information sharing and its non-deliberate management. In a similar vein, Fineman (2005) explained that

knowledge is ‘more than a dispassionate construct; it is an emotionalized commodity’ (p.

565). However, the findings revealed that two different forms of trust are important for this phenomenon, namely ‘trust among employees’ and ‘trust into the employees’, which are to be established by the founder.

Trust among employees is the foremost aspect in knowledge sharing. Wolff Lotter (2014) started a discussion on this topic by writing an interesting paper on the knowledge community (Wissensgesellschaft) and management. He highlighted a research undertaken by the Renhard-Mohn-Institute of the University of Witten/Herdecke in his study. The research revealed that integrity or to ‘live according to values’ (Original quote, ‘Leben nach Werten’) (Lotter, 2014, p. 37) is of paramount importance, followed by trust. Although the elements are separate in the above-mentioned research, they also go hand in hand. The well-known pearl of wisdom ‘like attracts like’ is used several times in this section and in section 8.2.1.9.

In this case, it refers to a person who has the desire to build trust in another person and

searches for people who have similar values and mind-sets. The barriers to build relationships (first) and trust (second) are very low in such situations, and hence, most efficient and

successful for relationship building. In this regard, the founder of the organisation under

121

scrutiny, especially at the beginning, rallied around people who have been former colleagues from other companies, as he knew that these employees had similar mind-sets and values where trust has been already established.

Lotter (2014) also showed that ‘Personality is the material that trust is made of’

(Original quote, ‘Die Persönlichkeit ist der Stoff, aus dem das Vertrauen ist’) (p. 42). This quote explains that depending on one’s personality, trust can emerge, but this is only a half-truth. It does not matter what kind of personality one (sender) has because ultimately only the other person (receiver) decides whether to trust, drawing on different factors, such as cultural setting, history of the person, personality of a person, dress, language, society, context, and so forth. For instance, if there are two people with good and positive personalities from different cultural settings, they may be influenced by a past war or bad experience with another culture or country, which makes building trust difficult. Exceptions certainly occur, but it should be highlighted that trust can be built only when the barriers are low and both the involved parties are ready for it.

In an organisation, all the contributing factors of trust building boil down to ‘work’, but this renders the possibility for a high-level of knowledge creation impossible. If the relationship is not merely narrowed down to work but is enhanced beyond work as well due to the sender and receiver sharing certain mind-sets and values (like attract likes), it would reduce barriers and trust building on a high-level can take place. Sometimes, new ideas or innovations pop up unplanned through awkward and uncommon ways by sharing and talking about the innermost thoughts regarding different issues. Such information is very sensitive because people only share such ideas and thoughts when they ‘trust’ that the interlocutor will accord a certain kind of respect and seriousness to the shared matter and that it will not be used for ridiculing the person who shared the information.

122

The intensity of trust required for high knowledge creation can be best demonstrated through the example of what takes place between best friends. In such a relationship, a very high-level of trust develops over time (history) mostly, which draws upon different situations;

such a level of trust allows the friends to discuss their innermost thoughts and can be

considered as a ‘trigger’ to develop ideas. In this regard, interviewee 24 explained that a very high-level of trust exists between a few employees in the organisation under scrutiny. The smaller the company, the higher is the possibility to build trust among everyone in an

organisation. In a multinational company, there are just a few best friends with a high-level of trust among the vast number of employees, like in real life. The interviewee further explained that he had experienced trust in his former company also, but it never has been on the same level as in the organisation under scrutiny. Achieving a high-level of trust needs time and a

‘history together’ as well as a similar mind-set and the ‘like attracts like’ principle also counts.

Trust in the employees is very important to the founder of the organisation under scrutiny. The findings revealed that ‘having trust in their employees’ is not only a statement occasionally made by the managers or leaders of the organisation under scrutiny, but is also truly lived. Trust is particularly recognised through different incidents and highlighted by elements such as autonomy. This is in line with Lotter (2014, p. 44) who explained that where there is trust, control is reduced, and autonomy is enhanced. Such a setting leads to an organisation where fear regarding, for instance, making experiments, is reduced or non-existent and shows that the element of trust can lead to knowledge creation.

An often-mentioned incident was shown through the quote, mentioned in section 8.2.1.3.2, on the ‘role-model function’ (Observation 40/23). The interviewees used this quote to highlight why they do not need to fear in their organisation because the organisation trusts that every employee will do their job as best they can. Such instances highlight the

123

significance of trust and is important for the organisation studied in this research. With respect to this, some interviewees gave a similar example, which took place in the course of their practical work during their summer school holidays.

The interviewees also compared their time in this organisation with their schoolmates who did practical work in other international companies and highlighted how amazed they were about the high-level of responsibility and trust the interviewees got from the outset and found that their organisation is different. It has to be noted in order to not misunderstand that the interviewees have never been thrown into cold water because there has always been a coach for discussions, someone who supported their work in all respects, but the interviewees have had to elaborate the concepts, organise events from A to Z, and so forth. Moreover, as the organisation also trusts their practical workers, they receive responsibility too. The

interviewees found that their work has been interesting compared to their schoolmates, whose work is not necessarily creative or amazing, or in other words, work considered as boring or

‘lower work’.

Trust is shared in advance and through a top–down approach. In this regard, Lotter (2014) explained that ‘Trust is a private affair. And it rules the principle of advanced

payment’ (Original quote, ‘Vertrauen ist eine persönliche Angelegenheit. Und es herrscht das Prinzip Vorauskasse’) (p. 44). Simply put, if an organisation wants to build ‘trust’, someone must start. To successfully and sustainably establish trust in an organisation, there is no better position than the position of a founder (leader or manager) with their possibility of a top–

down approach and a role model function.

Trust into the organisation emerges as an organisational attribute by inculcating trust among the employees and trust in their employees, as the organisation under scrutiny keeps their word. This reduces interpersonal barriers to a minimum and the working place became more ‘interesting’ because of the comfortable feeling that emanates from such values. In this

124

regard, the interviewees highlighted how important it is that their organisation keeps their word and not make claims about what is important for the organisation (e.g., values or employees) and then renege on their word, which often happens in other organisations; this makes the organisation under scrutiny different. Therefore, the combination of trust in the employees and keeping one’s word is important because it is a prerequisite for the passion of the employees, another important factor for knowledge creation without deliberate KM.

Other elements that enhance the ‘trust into the organisation’, such as the founder’s value, are difficult to connect to trust because on the surface there is no obvious and direct association. Additionally, these elements are not directly presented through the permanent presence of the founder, but it has been established through the founder’s philosophy and what is important to him (objectified reality) and shows the role-model function again.

Howsoever, there are many values that are important to the founder, but especially the values introduced in the following section have been mainly highlighted through stories by

interviewees, and these values are safety, equality, and modesty.