Trust is a scarce resource these days. Political polarization and misinformation have reduced trust in public institutions, the media, science, and even in the workplace.

But trust can be built over time, says Kellogg’s Andrew Sykes. To durably build trust, he suggests that leaders draw inspiration from a familiar sight to many Chicagoans: skyscrapers.

Plus, how using incentives to attract talent can go wrong.

Build trust floor by floor

Skyscrapers like the Willis Tower and the Empire State Building have long stood as symbols of American ambition and success. But Andrew Sykes, adjunct professor of executive education, says that these towering buildings can also teach us how to build trust.

“What you see is impressive, but what truly matters is what’s beneath the surface … the deep foundation, the careful planning, the relentless teamwork,” Sykes writes in his newsletter, Trust Talk. “Building a trustworthy organization is no different.”

Sykes suggests looking to the methodical construction of the skyscraper for guidance on how to create a trusting work environment. A foundation of values and high-impact habits plus a skilled crew collaborating toward a common goal are essential first steps.

But once the construction begins, it’s important not to rush the job.

“Skyscrapers don’t appear overnight, they rise story by story, each level tested for strength before the next is added,” Sykes says. “Trust is no different.”

Consistency and accountability are key at every level, with everyone from leaders to team members responsible for upholding trust. The organization should also resemble skyscrapers in how they are designed to “sway with the wind, not snap under pressure,” he says.

“Building a trustworthy organization is not a one-time project, it’s a daily commitment, a habit and a craft,” Sykes writes. “Like a skyscraper, it requires vision, planning, teamwork and the courage to keep building, even when the winds blow strong.”

Read more on LinkedIn.

When bonuses backfire

One way leaders may consider to improve the quality of their organization’s workforce is to offer pay incentives. But research from Kellogg’s George Georgiadis suggests that a poorly designed bonus system may cause more harm than good.

Georgiadis and coauthor Henrique Castro-Pires from the University of Miami built a mathematical model of how prospective employees respond to changes to incentive pay structures. They wanted to test the common wisdom that incentives such as bonuses, stock options, or commissions help companies attract and retain higher-quality talent.

Instead, they found the opposite—increasing incentives can inadvertently increase the proportion of low-skilled applicants, ultimately harming the quality of the employer’s workforce.

“Steepening incentives is not a panacea for worker selection,” Georgiadis says. “In some situations, it can actually hurt selection. Companies, therefore, need to actively think about how to structure incentives to improve their applicant pool.”

Read how at Kellogg Insight.