Onora O'Neill: What we don't understand about trust

Translator: Edin Duraković Reviewer: Nika Kotnik

So I'm going to talk about trust,

Spregovorila bom o zaupanju,

and I'm going to start by reminding you

in pričela bom tako, da vas spomnim

of the standard views that people have about trust.

na običajne poglede, ki jih imamo ljudje o zaupanju.

I think these are so commonplace,

Mislim, da so ti pogledi že tako vsakdanji,

they've become clichés of our society.

da so postali klišeji.

And I think there are three.

Mislim, da so trije.

One's a claim: there has been a great decline in trust,

Pri prvem gre za izjavo: obstaja velik padec zaupanja,

very widely believed.

ki je zelo razširjena.

The second is an aim: we should have more trust.

V drugem primeru gre za cilj: morali bi imeti več zaupanja.

And the third is a task: we should rebuild trust.

In tretji je naloga: zaupanje je potrebno zgraditi.

I think that the claim, the aim and the task

Menim, da so tako izjava kot cilj in tudi naloga

are all misconceived.

napačno zastavljeni.

So what I'm going to try to tell you today

Zato bi vam danes rada povedala

is a different story about a claim, an aim and a task

drugačno zgodbo o izjavi, cilju in nalogi,

which I think give one quite a lot better purchase on the matter.

za katero menim, da ponuja boljšo rešitev.

First the claim: Why do people think trust has declined?

Najprej izjava: Zakaj ljudje mislijo, da zaupanje pada?

And if I really think about it on the basis of my own evidence,

Če to bolje premislim na podlagi mojih osebnih dokazov,

I don't know the answer.

bi rekla, da ne poznam odgovora.

I'm inclined to think it may have declined

Sem pa nagnjena k mišljenju, da medtem

in some activities or some institutions

ko je v nekaterih dejavnostih ali institucijah upadlo,

and it might have grown in others.

je v drugih naraslo.

I don't have an overview.

Nimam pregleda nad tem.

But, of course, I can look at the opinion polls,

Vendar pa lahko pogledam ankete javnega mnenja,

and the opinion polls are supposedly

in te so domnevno

the source of a belief that trust has declined.

vir prepričanja o tem, da je zaupanje upadlo.

When you actually look at opinion polls across time,

Ko pogledaš te ankete skozi čas,

there's not much evidence for that.

vidiš, da za to ni ravno veliko dokazov.

That's to say, the people who were mistrusted

Se pravi, da ljudjem, ki jim nismo zaupali

20 years ago,

20 let nazaj,

principally journalists and politicians, are still mistrusted.

v prvi vrsti novinarjem in politikom, ne zaupamo niti danes.

And the people who were highly trusted 20 years ago

In ljudjem, ki smo jim zelo zaupali 20 let nazaj,

are still rather highly trusted: judges, nurses.

še vedno precej zaupamo: sodnikom, medicinskim sestram...

The rest of us are in between,

Vsi ostali pa smo nekje vmes

and by the way, the average person in the street

in mimogrede, povprečna oseba na ulici

is almost exactly midway.

spada skoraj točno v sredino.

But is that good evidence?

Toda ali je to dober dokaz?

What opinion polls record is, of course, opinions.

Javnomnenjske ankete so namreč točno to, mnenja.

What else can they record?

Kaj drugega pa lahko pokažejo?

So they're looking at the generic attitudes

Torej, opazujejo nek splošen odnos

that people report when you ask them certain questions.

ljudi, ko jim postaviš neko vprašanje.

Do you trust politicians? Do you trust teachers?

"Ali zaupate politikom? Ali zaupate učiteljem?"

Now if somebody said to you, "Do you trust greengrocers?

Če pa bi vas vprašali: "Ali zaupate trgovcem sadja in zelenjave?"

Do you trust fishmongers?

"Ali zaupate ribarnicam?

Do you trust elementary school teachers?"

Ali zaupate učiteljem v osnovni šoli?"

you would probably begin by saying, "To do what?"

bi najbrž hiteli z odgovorom: "Da počnejo kaj?"

And that would be a perfectly sensible response.

In to bi bil tudi izjemno smiseln odgovor.

And you might say, when you understood the answer to that,

In če ste razumeli odgovor na to, bi lahko rekli:

"Well, I trust some of them, but not others."

"No, nekaterim zaupam, nekaterim pa ne."

That's a perfectly rational thing.

To je povsem racionalna stvar.

In short, in our real lives,

Skratka, v našem realnem življenju

we seek to place trust in a differentiated way.

zaupamo na razpršen način.

We don't make an assumption that the level of trust

Ne domnevamo, da bo stopnja zaupanja,

that we will have in every instance of a certain type

ki jo lahko sicer v celoti uživa nek določen

of official or office-holder or type of person

uradnik ali vodja pisarne in podobni,

is going to be uniform.

nekaj, kar bo enotno za vse.

I might, for example, say that I certainly trust

Lahko na primer rečem, da zaupam

a certain elementary school teacher I know

meni znani učiteljici v osnovni šoli,

to teach the reception class to read,

da uči brati prvošolce,

but in no way to drive the school minibus.

vendar pa ji ne bom zaupala, da vozi šolski avtobus.

I might, after all, know that she wasn't a good driver.

Navsezadnje bi lahko tudi vedela, da ni dobra voznica.

I might trust my most loquacious friend

Morda bom svojemu najbolj zgovornem prijatelju zaupala,

to keep a conversation going

da skrbi za razpravo,

but not -- but perhaps not to keep a secret.

najbrž pa ne tudi tega, da lahko drži skrivnost zase.

Simple.

Preprosto.

So if we've got those evidence in our ordinary lives

Torej, če imamo v konkretnem življenju dokaze,

of the way that trust is differentiated,

da je zaupanje nekaj razpršenega,

why do we sort of drop all that intelligence

čemu potem zavržemo to vedenje,

when we think about trust more abstractly?

ko o zaupanju razmišljamo abstraktno?

I think the polls are very bad guides

Menim, da so ankete slab pokazatelj

to the level of trust that actually exists,

stopnje zaupanja, ki obstaja v resnici,

because they try to obliterate the good judgment

to pa zato, ker zabrišejo zdravo presojo,

that goes into placing trust.

ki jo uporabljamo pri oblikovanju zaupanja.

Secondly, what about the aim?

Drugič, kaj pa glede cilja?

The aim is to have more trust.

Cilj je imeti več zaupanja.

Well frankly, I think that's a stupid aim.

Resnici na ljubo, mislim, da je to neumen cilj.

It's not what I would aim at.

To ni nekaj, k čemur bi sama težila.

I would aim to have more trust in the trustworthy

Jaz bi težila k temu, da bolj zaupam tistim, ki so tega vredni,

but not in the untrustworthy.

ne pa tistim, ki tega niso.

In fact, I aim positively to try not to trust the untrustworthy.

Pravzaprav sem bolj gotova v to, da ne zaupam tistim, ki niso zaupanja vredni.

And I think, of those people who, for example,

In menim, da tisti, ki so npr.

placed their savings with the very aptly named Mr. Madoff,

zaupali svoje prihranke g. Madoffu (finančni goljuf, op.p.),

who then made off with them,

le-ta pa jih je odnesel s seboj,

and I think of them, and I think, well, yes,

in ko pomislim nanje, pomislim, da

too much trust.

je šlo za preveč zaupanja.

More trust is not an intelligent aim in this life.

Več zaupanja ni pameten cilj v tem življenju.

Intelligently placed and intelligently refused trust

Pametno dajanje in pametno zavračanje zaupanja

is the proper aim.

pa je ustrezen cilj.

Well once one says that, one says, yeah, okay,

Nekoč je nekdo rekel, prav,

that means that what matters in the first place

torej v prvi vrsti ni pomembno

is not trust but trustworthiness.

zaupanje, temveč vrednost zaupanja.

It's judging how trustworthy people are

Gre za presojo, kako zaupanja vredni so ljudje

in particular respects.

v konkretnem pogledu.

And I think that judgment requires us to look at three things.

In ta presoja od nas zahteva, da pogledamo na tri stvari.

Are they competent? Are they honest? Are they reliable?

Ali so ti ljudje kompetentni? Ali so iskreni? Ali so zanesljivi?

And if we find that a person is competent

In če ugotovimo, da je oseba kompetentna

in the relevant matters,

v določenih zadevah,

and reliable and honest,

da je zanesljiva in iskrena,

we'll have a pretty good reason to trust them,

potem imamo dober razlog, da ji zaupamo.

because they'll be trustworthy.

Ker bodo zaupanja vredni.

But if, on the other hand, they're unreliable, we might not.

Če pa so po drugi strani nezanesljivi, potem jim ne bomo zaupali.

I have friends who are competent and honest,

Imam prijatelje, ki so kompetentni in iskreni,

but I would not trust them to post a letter,

ampak jim ne bom zaupala, da mi odpošljejo pošiljko,

because they're forgetful.

ker so pozabljivi.

I have friends who are very confident

Imam prijatelje, ki so zelo samozavestni,

they can do certain things,

lahko naredijo nekatere stvari,

but I realize that they overestimate their own competence.

toda spoznala sem, da so precenili svoje kompetence.

And I'm very glad to say, I don't think I have many friends

Z veseljem lahko rečem, da mislim, da nimam veliko prijateljev,

who are competent and reliable but extremely dishonest.

ki so kompetentni in zanesljivi, a skrajno neiskreni.

(Laughter)

(Smeh)

If so, I haven't yet spotted it.

Če pa so, tega nisem opazila.

But that's what we're looking for:

In vendar je to tisto, kar iščemo:

trustworthiness before trust.

vrednost zaupanja pred zaupanjem.

Trust is the response.

Zaupanje je le odziv.

Trustworthiness is what we have to judge.

Vrednost zaupanja je tisto, kar je potrebno presojati.

And, of course, it's difficult.

Seveda je to težko.

Across the last few decades, we've tried to construct

Zadnjih nekaj desetletij smo si prizadevali zgraditi

systems of accountability for all sorts of institutions

sisteme odgovornosti za različne vrste institucij,

and professionals and officials and so on

strokovnjakov, uradnikov ipd.,

that will make it easier for us to judge their trustworthiness.

pri katerih bi lahko lažje presojali, koliko so zaupanja vredni.

A lot of these systems have the converse effect.

Velik del teh sistemov deluje z obratnim učinkom.

They don't work as they're supposed to.

Ne delujejo tako, kot se od njih pričakuje.

I remember I was talking with a midwife who said,

Spomnim se, ko sem govorila z babico, ki je rekla:

"Well, you see, the problem is it takes longer

"Veste, problem je, ker nam več časa vzame

to do the paperwork than to deliver the baby."

delo s papirji, kot pa porod otroka."

And all over our public life, our institutional life,

V celotnem javnem življenju, našem institucionalnem življenju,

we find that problem,

vidimo ta problem,

that the system of accountability

da ta sistem odgovornosti,

that is meant to secure trustworthiness

ki naj bi skrbel za vrednost zaupanja

and evidence of trustworthiness

in dokaze o vrednosti zaupanja,

is actually doing the opposite.

dela ravno obratno.

It is distracting people who have to do difficult tasks,

Gre za oviranje ljudi, ki naj bi izvajali težke naloge,

like midwives, from doing them

kot npr. babice, da se namesto svojega dela

by requiring them to tick the boxes, as we say.

od njih zahteva, da delajo kljukice, kot pravimo.

You can all give your own examples there.

Vsak od vas lahko ponudi kakšen tak primer.

So so much for the aim.

Toliko o cilju.

The aim, I think, is more trustworthiness,

Cilj, tako mislim, je vrednost zaupanja

and that is going to be different

in to se bo spremenilo le,

if we are trying to be trustworthy

če bomo poskusili sami biti zaupanja vredni

and communicate our trustworthiness to other people,

in to prenašali tudi na druge.

and if we are trying to judge whether other people

In če bomo presojali ali so ljudje,

or office-holders or politicians are trustworthy.

najsi bodo vodje pisarn ali politiki, vredni zaupanja.

It's not easy. It is judgment, and simple reaction,

To ni enostavno. Gre vendarle za presojo in preprosta reakcija

attitudes, don't do adequately here.

ali nagnjenje ni nujno ustrezno.

Now thirdly, the task.

In tretjič, naloga.

Calling the task rebuilding trust, I think,

Reči le, da je naloga ponovno zgraditi zaupanje,

also gets things backwards.

nas ne bo pripeljalo prav daleč.

It suggests that you and I should rebuild trust.

Kajti to bi pomenilo, da bi jaz in vi morali ponovno zgraditi zaupanje.

Well, we can do that for ourselves.

No, lahko bi to naredili zase.

We can rebuild a bit of trustworthiness.

Nekaj zaupanja vrednosti lahko ponovno zgradimo.

We can do it two people together trying to improve trust.

Lahko to naredimo v dvoje, da izboljšamo zaupanje.

But trust, in the end, is distinctive

Toda zaupanje je nenazadnje drugačno,

because it's given by other people.

saj je nekaj, kar dobiš od drugih.

You can't rebuild what other people give you.

Ne moreš kar zgraditi nečesa, kar ti lahko dajo drugi.

You have to give them the basis

Morate jim dati osnovo

for giving you their trust.

za to, da vam pričnejo zaupati.

So you have to, I think, be trustworthy.

Torej biti morate vredni zaupanja.

And that, of course, is because you can't fool

To pa zato, ker ne morete slepiti

all of the people all of the time, usually.

vseh ljudi ves čas - vsaj običajno ne.

But you also have to provide usable evidence

Toda pri tem morate zagotoviti tudi uporabne dokaze,

that you are trustworthy.

da ste vredni zaupanja.

How to do it?

Kako to narediti?

Well every day, all over the place, it's being done

Vsak dan in vsepovsod to že počno

by ordinary people, by officials, by institutions,

običajni ljudje, uradniki, ustanove,

quite effectively.

in to kar učinkovito.

Let me give you a simple commercial example.

Naj vam dam preprost trgovski primer.

The shop where I buy my socks says I may take them back,

Trgovina, kjer kupujem nogavice, pravi, da jih lahko vrnem

and they don't ask any questions.

brez vsakih vprašanj.

They take them back and give me the money

Vzamejo jih in mi povrnejo denar

or give me the pair of socks of the color I wanted.

ali pa mi ponudijo par nogavic v barvi, ki jo želim.

That's super. I trust them

To je super. Jaz jim zaupam,

because they have made themselves vulnerable to me.

ker so se mi pokazali, da so lahko ranljivi.

I think there's a big lesson in that.

Menim, da je v tem velik nauk.

If you make yourself vulnerable to the other party,

Če ste pripravljeni vašo ranljivost pokazati drugemu,

then that is very good evidence that you are trustworthy

je to kar tehten dokaz, da ste vredni zaupanja.

and you have confidence in what you are saying.

In tudi vi verjamete temu, kar govorite.

So in the end, I think what we are aiming for

Torej na koncu mislim, da to, proti čemur stremimo,

is not very difficult to discern.

ni prav težko dojeti.

It is relationships in which people are trustworthy

To je odnos, v katerem so ljudje zaupanja vredni

and can judge when and how the other person

in lahko sami presodijo, kdaj in kako je druga oseba

is trustworthy.

vredna zaupanja.

So the moral of all this is,

In nauk vsega tega je,

we need to think much less about trust,

da moramo manj razmišljati o zaupanju,

let alone about attitudes of trust

pri miru je potrebno pustiti odnos do zaupanja,

detected or mis-detected by opinion polls,

ki ga zaznavamo iz javnomnenjskih anket,

much more about being trustworthy,

več pa o tem, kako biti zaupanja vreden,

and how you give people adequate, useful

in tem, kako ljudem dajete ustrezne, uporabne

and simple evidence that you're trustworthy.

in preproste dokaze, da ste zaupanja vredni.

Thanks.

Hvala.

(Applause)

(Aplavz)