Achieving and preserving stakeholder trust is an increasingly critical responsibility of an organization’s governing board, given evolving shifts in public attitudes and perspectives. These shifts are well-described in the 2025 version of the “Trust Barometer”, issued by the consulting firm Edelman.
In this regard, “trust” should be considered as an important, if under-recognized, intangible organizational asset, along with “reputation”. While both are valued attributes of an effective business enterprise, they have distinct characteristics that should be recognized by company leadership.
“Trust” usually refers to internal and external sentiment regarding organizational ethics, integrity and corporate responsibility. “Reputation,” on the other hand, usually refers to internal and external sentiment regarding the quality of a company’s goods and services, the success of its corporate strategies and initiatives, and its overall public image. There may be circumstances in which the perception of organizational “trust” may contribute to (or detract from) the perception of organizational “reputation”, but it’s not always a reciprocal situation.
The new Edelman survey makes a strong argument for greater board commitment to monitor and encourage management efforts to cultivate trust in the organization, as well as the organization’s reputation. This is especially given the primary survey conclusion, that describes a “Crisis of Grievance” that reflects an “unprecedented global decline for employer trust.” The suggestion of such a decline should attract the attention of corporate leadership; both board and management.
That decline is grounded in a series of highly negative survey findings: (i) a lack of optimism for the next generation; (ii) a fear of being discriminated against; (iii) grievances against business, government and “the rich”; (iv) a zero-sum “your gain is my loss” mindset; (v) a suspicion of artificial intelligence and (vi) an erosion in trust of business leaders. This should be of particular concern to business; that significant numbers of young adults willing to commit or threaten violence in order to effect change.
And it should be noted that the Edelman survey was conducted before the current environment of global and domestic turbulence, which is impacting the stability of traditional economic, social and government institutions and practices. It is uncertain whether the “grievances” cited in the survey have been abated—or exacerbated—by the year-to-date developments.
To restore trust and build optimism amidst this “crisis of grievance”, Edelman offers companies a four point plan: (a) understand and address the grievances of organizational stakeholders; (b) address where appropriate the social concerns of stakeholders; (c) work together with communities, government and the media to address the root causes of grievance; and (d) prioritize trust-building within the organization.
Guided by these and similar themes, the board can provide value in support of management’s efforts to preserve organizational trust as part long-term value preservation.
From a “macro” perspective, that support would involve assuring that the board and the management team have a shared perspective of the threat (and lessons related) to organizational trust arising from the so-called “Grievance Crisis”. Is there leadership-level agreement on the legitimacy of the concern, the factors that have spawned it, and its ultimate implications for internal and external trust?
From a “micro” perspective, that support would likely involve a board/management effort to strengthen operational characteristics that tend to most directly influence perceptions of trust; e.g., ethics, equity, compliance, quality, reliability and integrity.
These characteristics are most often manifested through workforce culture; corporate compliance; internal and external communications; the company’s exercise of a social voice; board and management oversight of artificial intelligence; compensation equity, quality control, enterprise risk management, vendor relationships and community engagement—among others.
There are several goals of such an exercise. First is to confirm leadership awareness of the distinction between trust and reputation, and why both are considered important intangible corporate assets. The second is to confirm the board’s role in exercising oversight of those assets. The third is to consider the lessons from the Edelman survey, and others like it. And the fourth is to strengthen internal controls over those operational areas most critical to preserving the company’s credibility and reliability.
The primary governance “take-aways” from the 2025 Edelman Trust Barometer are:
• the importance the board should attribute to trust as an increasing valued asset;
• the potentially corrosive effect that the so-called “crisis of grievance” can have or organizational trust; and
• the opportunities available to business organizations to preserve and promote trust in institutions.
