Rule 3: If Someone Doubts, Hesitates, or Questions, Bring Them Closer

The third rule of Trust Club addresses a fundamental issue in how organizations think about trust today. Trust is often approached as a checkbox exercise, with companies curating select trust artifacts that make them look good instead of offering full transparency. A policy here, a certification there, a carefully framed dashboard screenshot, some event logs over yonder. These elements are meant to demonstrate trustworthiness, yet they create friction rather than eliminating it. Trust buyers are forced into an adversarial posture, prying and negotiating for the validation they need. This approach does not build trust. It builds frustration.

Trust buyers, whether customers, partners, regulators, or investors, expect to evaluate a partner, not to extract answers. The solution is simple: if someone doubts, hesitates, or questions, bring them closer. Not just to what you want them to see, but to everything they need to see. Let them inspect not just your successes but your failures, your unfinished work, your systems in motion. The goal is not to present an unsustainable illusion of perfection but to demonstrate that your operations, taken as a whole, reliably produce safety, value, and alignment with stakeholder needs. If done right, the trust buyer will see so much overwhelming proof of trustworthiness, so much transparency and control in action, that they may no longer feel compelled to check again.

But this rule is not just about external trust buyers. It applies equally within the organization itself. Trust leaders, particularly those shifting from security and compliance into trust operations, will face the same doubts and skepticism internally. Most organizations still see trust operations as fragmented, inward-facing functions. IT, security, compliance, risk management, and governance trail the business rather than shaping it. They generate internal metrics rather than market impact. When a trust leader steps forward to integrate these functions into a strategic framework aligned with revenue and valuation, skepticism is inevitable. The instinct might be to dictate, to mandate change. But trust is not built that way.

Instead, trust leaders must lead communally. They must build trust within their own teams before extending it outward. This requires mastering the eight emotional constituents of trust (clarity, compassion, character, competency, commitment, connection, contribution, and consistency) and using them to engage, align, and accelerate internal stakeholders. Trust leaders must understand each stakeholder’s incentives, how they define success, and how trust operations remove friction from, and increase velocity in, their world.

If finance leaders hesitate, show them how trust value metrics align to the 15-20 core metrics they use to steer the business. Trust operations materially reduce diligence friction, increase trust value, and provide valuation assurance - directly impacting enterprise valuation, deal velocity, and revenue predictability. If product teams question the value, show them that trust personas already exist within product management and remain largely underserved. Then help them adjust their roadmap to prioritize these buyer needs. If Security and IT leaders resist, show them how the trust product reframes their work in terms of business impact rather than cost reduction metrics.

This last group, Security and IT leaders, is particularly important to bring closer. Many have spent their careers operating in a service paradigm, measuring success with internal efficiency metrics rather than external business outcomes. They focus on security and compliance as defensive or compliance-only functions, necessary but non-revenue-generating. In this operational model, trust is seen as an emergent byproduct of unconnected motions rather than a product itself, something to be maintained (if that!) rather than manufactured, measured, and sold. The idea that trust can be systematically produced and optimized using market-aligned metrics may seem foreign. But when they see it in action, when they realize that trust artifacts and trust stories are business accelerators, they begin to understand the shift.

However, not all will embrace it immediately. The transition from IT/Service to Trust/Product is not just a change in tools or terminology: it is a redefinition of purpose. The IT/Service model is designed to reduce risk and maintain operational stability, while the Trust/Product model exists to generate market differentiation and increase enterprise valuation. Those who continue to see themselves as technical practitioners rather than business leaders risk being left behind, their influence limited to compliance checklists and cost-center budgeting.

Through direct engagement with data protection leaders nationwide at SecureWorld events, business roundtables, and advising companies on integrating trust into their company and products, the author noted the following pattern: out of every ten security and IT leaders exposed to the trust product framework, six will outright reject it. They self-identify as hackers, engineers, auditors, compliance enforcers, and security gatekeepers rather than strategic leaders. This is not due to a lack of capability, but a deeply ingrained professional identity reinforced by industry norms, employers, metrics, incentives, and peers. Those who make the trust product pivot, however, redefine not just their own roles but the role of trust within the business itself.

Of the remaining four leaders, two immediately recognize trust as a product and are ready to implement the framework. The other two, while interested, must develop new skills to bridge the gap between traditional security thinking and trust value management. This is why bringing them closer is essential. The transition from security practitioner to trust leader is a process of apprenticeship, mentorship, and worldview shift.

Trust operations is not a cost center: it is a multiplier of enterprise value. The organizations that embrace trust value management find themselves not just improving security postures but increasing revenue, shortening deal cycles, reducing go-to-market friction, and improving valuation assurance. When trust is operationalized as a product, it eliminates unnecessary scrutiny in procurement and due diligence, increasing sales efficiency. It creates competitive differentiation, making trust a reason customers choose one vendor over another. It improves risk-adjusted valuation, giving investors and stakeholders confidence that the organization is resilient, predictable, and aligned with external trust expectations. These are not abstract benefits. They are quantifiable financial advantages that executives, particularly CFOs, recognize immediately. Productized trust generates financial leverage; organizations have already realized and protected hundreds of millions in trust value.

This is why bringing stakeholders closer is so critical. The more they understand how trust is built, the more they see its direct impact on their own priorities: whether that’s accelerating deals, improving customer retention, or de-risking investments. The third rule of Trust Club is an act of radical transparency, but not for transparency’s sake. It is a calculated approach to eliminating trust friction, accelerating decisions, and shifting trust from a perceived barrier to a tangible asset. Organizations that embrace this rule find themselves reducing diligence time, shortening deal cycles, and increasing stakeholder confidence in their long-term viability. They move from being questioned to being trusted at face value. And that is the highest form of trust there is.