The Dark Side of Trust: When Trust Becomes a ‘Poisoned Chalice’
Skinner, Dietz and Weibel argue that trust's true dark side lies within the dynamics of the trust relationship. Misplaced trust, the most common depiction, as in Gargiulo and Ertug's threshold of confidence, is to them trust's regrettable side, since betrayal is always possible. On their account, the dark side arises when trust draws the focal party, giver or recipient, into an 'uncomfortable exchange dilemma' in which most of the options available are neither viable nor attractive. This seemingly good 'poisoned chalice' can arise unintentionally or be manipulated deliberately.
They treat trust as a process whose defining stage is the risk-taking act. Trust is symbolic, particularistic and socio-emotional, with the potential to create and structure obligation. Social exchange theory's norm of reciprocity makes implied obligations formidably hard to resist, and for trust, they argue, the pressure can become coercive; the gift-giving literature pays more attention to the intentions behind a gift.
The paper is conceptual; five illustrative scenarios show forms the dark side can take. In reluctant trust, rejecting an appeal to be trusted casts aspersions on the would-be trustee's status that could damage the relationship, particularly in public, and may need an awkward justification. In unwelcome trust, the recipient doubts they can fulfil the obligation, or does not wish to, but finds the offer hard to refuse, as when managers 'empower' under-skilled employees. Trust lock-in extends it to long-standing ties. In withdrawn trust, the threat of removal can be used as a sanction and control, though withdrawal itself may be justifiable; in insincere trust, trust is given in word but not in deed, as in micro-management. Motive, they suggest, might distinguish a positive chain of obligations from a pernicious one, and power asymmetry in trust relationships, especially across hierarchical divides, has, they say, been underplayed.
The agenda asks how people process trustworthiness cues and interpret trust language, what rules govern trust exchanges, how public exchanges and employment power matter, and whether invocations of trust could serve as linguistic 'smoke and mirrors'. They want trust measures to incorporate risk-taking acts, and hold that most trusting interactions are likely to be honest and sincere.
The paper does not name psychological safety, voice or speaking up. The bridge is ours. In reluctant trust, declining an appeal to be trusted casts aspersions on the person making it, and the paper notes that those with power may use such appeals to avoid close scrutiny of their actions. On that account, trust can make questioning someone costly, not because vigilance has lapsed but because doubt can read as a slight on their standing.
Save this paper to a bibliography, keep notes on it, and export citations. Create a free account →
Neighbours (10)
- An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust
- PS & Trust
- Affect- and Cognition-Based Trust as Foundations for Interpersonal Cooperation in Organizations
- Not So Different After All: A Cross-Discipline View of Trust
- Typologies of Power
- Reducing Power Gradients
- The Dark Side of Trust
- The Role of Trust in Organizational Settings
- Trust and Power
- Too Much of a Good Thing? Negative Effects of High Trust and Individual Autonomy in Self-Managing Teams