Increasing credibility through visibility, communication, and active listening

Painting for credibility through visibility

It is important to not only listen to what people are saying in return, but to show that you are listening through active listening techniques. If you lean forward and look directly at a person while they are talking, you are clearly showing interest; leaning back might be dismissive.

Summarizing and rephrasing arguments—though not by rote, and not with every sentence—shows you were paying attention and prevents misunderstandings. Asking questions shows that you care or respect the speaker. Not arguing until the person has had a chance to develop their point can make a huge difference, not just in their perception of you, but in your understanding of their argument — which might surprise you by being valid when explained.

Try not to “fill in the gaps” (break the silence when the other person might still have something to say). Some people talk more quickly than others.

Resources: body language

Our research shows that credibility is linked to visibility. We believe that, if a manager keeps their employees informed of the decisions and changes they're considering, they can understand the manager’s rationale. Decisions will also not contradict the manager’s comments (or at least the reasons for the contradiction will be clear).

If a manager presents changes or decisions all at once, they may be seen as capricious or uncredible, especially if their new ideas reverse the status quo or their previous policies. If they communicate more, their reasoning becomes clearer, and they seem more rational.

To be effective, visibility must include discussing changes with people who are affected by them—at every step from diagnosing problems to finding solutions. This improves credibility by showing thoughts from beginning to end, and by avoiding tokenism (“I will bring you in now that I’ve made up my mind.”) Change may be accepted more readily because people understand its purpose and feel some control over it.

An important byproduct of discussing changes with people who will be affected by them is that you will be able to get their input and ideas. In addition to improving morale and reducing resistance to change, it can help you to make much better decisions.

The other side of the coin is that, if a top manager is not accessible to employees, they are often not be seen as credible—they are often seen more as arbitrary or biased or out of touch. If a manager doesn't practice what they or the company preaches, they will not be seen as credible. This is illustrated by the strong relationship between supervisors’ accessibility and their integrity and trustworthiness. The more accessible the supervisors are, the more integrity they are seen as having.

The table below shows correlations—numbers between 0 and 1 which show how strong the linear relationship is between two things. In this case, we are comparing items from a survey of a medium-sized organization. There is only a 1 in 100 chance that any of the relationships described below are due to chance. A correlation over 0.6, in these conditions, is quite strong.

The numbers show how involving employees in decisions, actively seeking out their ideas, and keeping them involved in decision-making increases their perceptions of a manager's integrity, credibility, and trustworthiness. Executives and managers should consider involving their employees more if they want to have more credibility; less resistance to change, greater morale, and new ideas are beneficial side-effects.

Issue I	Issue II	r
Senior management
Executive visibility	Executive credibility	.64
Executive visibility	Senior management credibility	.47
Executive credibility	Senior management credibility	.76
Senior management and immediate supervisor
Executive visibility	Supervisor is accessible when needed	.26
Executive credibility	Supervisor trustworthiness	.22
Senior Management credibility	Supervisor trustworthiness	*
Immediate supervisor
Supervisor is trustworthy...	Is accessible when needed	.62
	Discusses my performance quarterly	.37
	Doesn't play favorites	.68
	Encourages me to make suggestions	.68
	Demonstrates integrity day-to-day	.77
	Discusses changes with us first	.64
Has integrity day-to-day...	Discusses my performance quarterly	.37
	Doesn't play favorites	.70
	Encourages me to make suggestions	.65
	Is accessible when needed	.58
	Discusses changes with us first	.60

* Not statistically significant

Executive credibility is not meaningfully linked with supervisor credibility, though both are linked to visibility.

The nature of communication is clearly important. For supervisors, at least, discussing performance is less critical for credibility — though it’s still necessary for performance management — than encouraging suggestions, discussing changes, and accessibility in general. Actively encouraging suggestions appears to be the most powerful; discussing changes, the next most active act, is a close second.

Zatz, D. (2023, December 4). Increasing credibility through visibility, communication, and active listening. https://www.toolpack.com/a/contact-cred.html

dave David Zatz focuses on using research to support change; he has experience in employee and customer surveys, linkage, process mapping, and process consulting. His work has helped organizations to cut costs while increasing service.

Dr. Zatz has spoken at conferences and published articles in journals (such as HRMagazine, Quality Digest, and Effective Executive), trade publications, and books. He has written three books on other topics, and is currently teaching graduate courses at Fairleigh Dickinson University.

Before joining Toolpack Consulting, David was a consultant with Metrus Group. He has worked with clients such as the American Management Association, the Coast Guard, Enhanced Vision, Mattel (American Girl), Santen, and the City of New York.

David holds an M.Phil and Ph.D. in social and organizational psychology from Columbia University.