Interpersonal web of trust

in #thoughts5 years ago

The company I work for has a very good local reputation and and over the last 10 years or so, has proven itself a successful tech startup and a quality employer. This has meant that there is always a long line looking to join the firm but of course, not all make it.

At some point a disgruntled applicant took to a social media platform and complained about the inbred structure and cronyism of the company. They sited that one of the global VPs (John Smith) hired his wife (Jane Smith) into another global position. The only way to work for the company they concluded was to know someone with influence.

John Smith was indeed married to Jane Smith, just not that particular Jane Smith.


What does it matter?

In my view, even if the case was they are husband and wife, that shouldn't preclude Jane Smith from taking a position of she is qualified to fulfil that position. On top of this, depending on the various functions of the company, it makes good business sense to hire through relationships as there is more likelihood of finding suitable candidates, not just on paper, but also personality.

At SteemFest (feels am eternity ago) I listened to @blocktrades talk through an idea for a web of trust network. Essentially trying to codify what a community does naturally through the way it builds its structure and something that has largely been lost in the online world of anonymity and disconnection from face to face interaction. Trust is in short supply on the internet.

When I was hired at my company I wasn't looking for a job like this at all, I wasn't even looking. My friend who works there dropped a text and asked if I could be interested in a position he thinks I would suit. As he works there, he has to trust his evaluation of what he knows of me and put me forward (he was not on the hiring team at all). Based on me trusting his evaluation of the company, I threw my hat into the ring and expressed interest. The person hiring me trusted the evaluation of me by my friend and therefore extended an interview to see if I was suitable for the actual job on offer. This is a web of trust and is facilitated through habdshakes of known parties to introduce unknown parties.

Is it unfair? Cronyism? Potentially. However, one also has to consider the idea of suitability for the position and while on paper one might be qualified, rarely does that indicate whether a person's personality is suitable for the position, the company culture or the team in which they will work.

The costs of poor hiring process are immense, so any aid that can reduce risk is welcome and interpersonal relationships should absolutely be factored into the equation as they are real world experiences with the person, rather than a numbered list of impersonal indicators.

Nothing personal?

The idea of having no personal identifiers on an application is a reaction to various forms of prejudice which is great but, it has its downsides too. For many positions it is vital to have a personality that can gel or adapt to the position and this goes beyond the needs of the company. Ever worked a terrible job yet your colleague doing the identical thing loves it? Is it the job that is the issue or suitability of personality?

No one breaks your trust in them, they break your trust in your ability to evaluate them. Trust is an important factor and it is always personal and excluding it from the influencing factors of decision making leads to many unintended and poor consequences.

Last night I wrote a post on being about more than content and this is an extension of that. The relationships we build have value because of the levels of trust inherent that indicate expectation of delivery or service. That doesn't sound very personal but this is what we are doing when we evaluate someone on any level, we are creating a personal heuristic that assumes factors and their potential paths.

I mentioned @theycallmedan's article in that one and then woke up to a post about trusting him by @nathanmars who called attention to adding @theycallmedan as a voting proxy. What did he mention? Trust.

I TRUST @theycallmedan and If you trust me then, Please use his witness voting proxy! @nathanmars

That right there is a call to action on a web of trust based on relationships formed through observation and interaction between two parties who as far as I know, haven't met.

Can it be codified on Steem?

Yes it can but it is going to have to get a lot smarter than how it is done now through steem-ua or other similar systems because there is more data hidden in relationships than can be shown through follows and comments as well as what is performed off-chain.

When it comes to trusting the transactions themselves, the Blockchain is pretty bulletproof at this point. When it comes to trusting people on the Blockchain, that is a different story isn't it? Perhaps in time there will be enough transaction data surrounding individual accounts that people could be trusted based upon it and have a confidence level factored in somewhere.

The unknown folds

What would this mean for new users who know no one? Well, they would have to earn their trusted place in the community and that is going to take more of an effort than just providing great content for most people since most people likely do not create the greatest content on earth. I know that I don't.

Part of the proof of brain process I consider important is the ability to develop trusted relationships and even though someone like @warpedpoetic might not be the most social of animals, he attempts to engage well (and succeeds) as well as delivers some of the best poetry out there at the moment. I can trust his content and, I trust his delivery of his personality.

Delivery of personality means being authentic in approach as even the worst among us will find people who trust them enough to collaborate. Honor among thieves. The best of us however will be able to find a great deal more people who will trust them as that is the way of the world where those with skills and the ability to attract support tend to attract more support like a gravitational pull.

The contradiction

The interesting thing about Steem in this regard is that while people are absolutely fine leveraging their relationships in the real world to various degrees and are happy being untrusting if strangers and favouring those they know, on Steem they expect to have their content rewarded as strangers by strangers. While this might work sporadically, it is unlikely to result in consistent support.

This is why those who have developed a trusted relationship network over time or trust in their content (which is generally facilitated by building interpersonal relationships) do better than those who have done something like only buying votes, not answering comments they receive or not engaging with others on and off the platform.

Trust in people is a much more complex issue than trust in a single transaction but, it is transactional. There are millions upon millions of transactions that build up trust between two individuals and most of it passes through unseen and unconsciously. After a lot of experience though, one might feel that they can trust another.

Even on Steem.
Are you experienced?

Taraz
[ a Steem original ]
(posted from phone)

Sort:  

No one breaks your trust in them, they break your trust in your ability to evaluate them

Bam. So much truth in this. People don't act out of character, that's impossible.

on Steem they expect to have their content rewarded as strangers by strangers

Again, spot on. I think all the talk of circle-jerks (which evokes some pretty vivid imagery and should probably be replaced) has turned sentiment against nepotism; when it's really just the other side of the community coin.

Seems it's community when you're in the circle, and nepotism when you're not.

Seems it's community when you're in the circle, and nepotism when you're not.

Nepotism.. I was looking for that word but my mind failed me.

At least on Steem I have been on both sides of the curve and have found that if this is what it takes to be in a circle jerk, they deserve all they get. Unfortunately, it isn't how they got there. The result doesn't speak of the lead in process.

I have a question you might be interested in for my next post idea.

How many people on Steem owe more Steem than they have in their wallet in Steem?

It's an interesting question. Any big, flashy asset, like a mansion or lambo, can be underwritten by a tonne of debt and just kept to keep up appearances. No reason to believe SP couldn't be the same.
Hard to convince the bank to hand over a big, fat loan secured by crypto though :)

Hard to convince the bank to hand over a big, fat loan secured by crypto though :)

What I wonder is that while people who bought will be all kinds of down in fiat, unless they converted back to fiat do they have less Steem now? Would anyone (maybe friends) loan more in Steem than someone has locked up in Steem? Potentially, unless they repeat their habits of the real world, one may never be in Steem debt. Might be worth something or, might not be but Steem always grows in volume even if only slightly but only ever depreciates in fiat value. Yes, there is a buying power thing but that is measured against fiat, not Steem itself.

Maybe it isn't worth much but on Steem, everyone could live Steem debt free if they choose.

I totally agree with the idea that trust plays a role in recruitment as even the recruiter has to have trust in your ability to handle the job for him to guarantee you employment.

I have managed some relationships with people who I have never met here on steemit and some have even done more than those who I live with on a daily basis have ever done.

If we can build a system that is based on transactions between over time, we can definitely have a certain level of trust in the blockchain space.

I have managed some relationships with people who I have never met here on steemit and some have even done more than those who I live with on a daily basis have ever done.

Don't you find it incredible?

If we can build a system that is based on transactions between over time, we can definitely have a certain level of trust in the blockchain space.

We have an immutable Blockchain underpinning is, it is just a matter of time, development and usage away.

Love this line you talked about trust that

""No one breaks your trust in them, they break your trust in your ability to evaluate them. Trust is an important factor and it is always personal and excluding it from the influencing factors of decision making leads to many unintended and poor consequences" i guess you are right about this.they break your trust in ability to evaluate them

If you think about it enough, every problem we face is self-induced and self-inflicted, and these days, that likely includes some of the challenges faced by nature.

Yea. You are right about this

Hey, hope you are having a nice day!

We stopped by to invite you to participate in the "Caption this photo" and "Finish this story" contests and win prizes worth 12 Steem!

Also check out 1Ramp on Android and Web.

Congratulations @tarazkp! You have completed the following achievement on the Steem blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

You published a post every day of the week

Click here to view your Board
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

To support your work, I also upvoted your post!

Support SteemitBoard's project! Vote for its witness and get one more award!

I had never considered this yet it is absolutely true as I would entrust a couple of authors here without never meeting them. In addition, the DPOS structure helps in this process as the delegation portion provides the flexibility to encourage trust and action.

Posted using Partiko iOS

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.35
TRX 0.12
JST 0.040
BTC 70601.40
ETH 3576.96
USDT 1.00
SBD 4.75