Compounding Trust

Framework · The five drivers

Competence

Definition

Competence is whether employees believe the organization has the capability and judgment to succeed. It is assessed continuously and largely unconsciously, through the quality of decisions, whether declared priorities translate into resources, and whether leaders visibly understand execution. Competence is the foundational driver: fairness without competence feels like being treated equally on a sinking ship.

Competence is judged from the inside, and the people judging it have better evidence than any external analyst. They see which decisions get revisited, which priorities survive contact with the budget, and how long it takes the organization to notice a problem they spotted weeks ago. None of this is written down. It accumulates as a running estimate of whether this organization is capable of winning.

Three signals carry most of the weight. The first is decision quality: not whether decisions turn out well, but whether they are made with the information available, at the level where the information lives, and revisited when the facts change. The second is priority translation: whether a stated priority is followed by people, budget and calendar time, or by nothing. The third is execution literacy: whether leaders can describe what the work actually involves, or manage a version of it that exists only in reporting.

Competence is foundational because it gates the other drivers. Fairness inside an organization heading somewhere no one believes in is not reassuring. Reciprocity is worth little if the returns are promised by a leadership team that may not be able to deliver them. When competence is in doubt, the strongest performers leave first, they have the most options, and the most to lose from staying.

Diagram: Competence, from Compounding Trust
Diagram to follow. Diagrams from Compounding Trust are released under CC BY 4.0, reuse with attribution to Timen Baart, Compounding Trust (Rethink Press, 2026).

As described in Compounding Trust, Part II: the model.

Cite this page

Baart, T. (2026). Compounding Trust: The structural conditions behind organizational performance. Rethink Press. “Competence.” compoundingtrust.com/framework/competence/

How this is measured

TrustXP measures the five drivers continuously, at whatever interval suits the organization, which is what makes the lag visible while it can still be acted on. Read the measurement methodology →

Related concepts

The letter

The Compounding Trust letter

What I am working out about trust and how organizations actually perform. It goes out when there is something worth sending.

No spam, unsubscribe anytime.