Why Vulnerability Matters for Trust in Organizations

04-06-2026

Trust sits at the center of effective organizations. Whether leaders are delegating authority, teams are collaborating on complex projects, or partners are entering strategic alliances, trust allows people to act despite uncertainty. But trust always involves something deeper: vulnerability.

“The big circle (conceptual space) of vulnerability,” coauthored by the Daniels School’s David Schoorman, Gary Ballinger and Kinshuk Sharma and published in the Journal of Trust Research, argues that understanding vulnerability more precisely can significantly improve how leaders build, maintain and repair trust in the workplace.

The authors explore what they describe as the “big circle” of vulnerability — a broad conceptual space that spans many contexts, from environmental threats to interpersonal relationships. Within this large space, however, only certain forms of vulnerability are directly relevant to trust in organizations.

For leaders and managers, this distinction provides useful insight into how trust forms, evolves and sometimes collapses inside organizations.

Understanding the “big circle” of vulnerability

Across disciplines, vulnerability is often associated with risk, uncertainty and the potential for harm or loss. But not all vulnerability is created equal. Some types are imposed on individuals without choice, such as exposure to natural disasters or public health risks. Others involve situations where individuals consciously accept risk in pursuit of a desired outcome.

The study frames this conceptual landscape as a large circle that contains two major categories:

• Non-volitional vulnerability: Situations where individuals have little or no control over exposure to risk.
• Volitional vulnerability: Situations where individuals willingly expose themselves to potential harm or loss.

Trust emerges primarily within the second category. In organizational settings, trust involves a person choosing to become vulnerable to another party’s actions based on expectations about their behavior.

This idea aligns with a foundational definition of trust in management research: the willingness to be vulnerable to another party’s actions when you cannot fully monitor or control them.

In other words, when leaders delegate authority, share sensitive information or rely on employees to deliver on commitments, they are deliberately entering a state of vulnerability.

The relational nature of trust

One key insight is that vulnerability relevant to trust is relational. It exists only when two parties interact in a way that creates the possibility of harm.

If someone were completely isolated, trust — and the vulnerability associated with it — would not exist. Trust requires a trustor (the person taking the risk) and a trustee (the person whose actions affect the outcome).

This relational aspect has important implications for organizations. It means trust dynamics emerge not just from individuals’ personalities or attitudes, but from ongoing interactions between people.

For example, an employer trusting an employee with a sensitive project creates a relationship-based vulnerability: the employer depends on the employee’s competence, integrity and goodwill.

Another important takeaway is that vulnerability is not a static, one-time calculation made at the beginning of a relationship. Instead, it evolves continuously and dynamically as people receive new information and reassess risks.

Consider a leader who assigns a major client project to a team member. Even after delegating the task, the leader continues to evaluate signals about the employee’s performance, reliability and intentions. These ongoing assessments can increase or decrease the leader’s sense of vulnerability.

This dynamic process helps explain why trust can change quickly in organizations when new information emerges.

Practical insights for leaders and managers

Understanding the dynamics of vulnerability can help leaders manage trust more effectively. Several actionable insights emerge from this study.

1. Recognize that trust involves choice and risk.
   When employees rely on one another or on leadership, they are often making a conscious decision to accept vulnerability. Leaders should acknowledge and respect that risk-taking.
2. Monitor trust continuously.
   Trust is not set once and forgotten. Employees constantly reassess whether others remain trustworthy, especially during critical projects or uncertain periods.
3. Pay attention to signals during “vulnerability phases.”
   When people are waiting for outcomes, such as project completion or promised support, they actively interpret cues about others’ intentions and competence.
4. Understand that relationships involve multiple overlapping trust exchanges.
   Employees often trust the same colleague or leader in many different ways at the same time: with deadlines, confidential information or strategic decisions.
5. Manage emotional dynamics.
   Because vulnerability triggers emotions such as hope, fear and anxiety, leaders who communicate clearly and provide reassurance can stabilize trust during uncertain periods.

Vulnerability is not just a side effect of trust, it is the core mechanism that makes trust meaningful. By recognizing that vulnerability is relational, voluntary and constantly evolving, leaders can better understand how trust operates within teams and organizations. It isn’t built only when people decide to rely on one another. It’s built — or broken — during every moment they feel vulnerable while waiting to see what happens next.