It is no secret that trust is at the heart of building and maintaining social license for projects. To accept new developments in their communities, people must have faith that the developer and successive owners will do the right thing by them.

This is no small task… especially given the worldwide trend toward increasing levels of distrust and polarisation.

The 2023 Edelman Trust Barometer suggests that not only have trust levels at their lowest levels in Australia, but our social fabric is weakening and we are on a path to polarisation. Business is the only institution that is seen as competent and ethical; 75% of respondents saying they trust their employer to ‘do what is right’ – more than any other institution including government, NGOs and media. Australians also expect business leaders to take a stand on social issues (eg treatment of employees (91%), climate change (78%)) and meet their obligations (eg pay a fair wage (89%), pay fair corporate taxes (83%), ensure their home community is safe and thriving (79%)).

Developing trusting stakeholder relationships requires a level of vulnerability by all parties. For example, when discussing a project proposal, companies are vulnerable to the reaction of stakeholders to the information they share about the project; whilst communities are at the mercy of the quality of a company’s communication and engagement process. Importantly here – as the owner of the project, the company holds almost all the cards. To develop stakeholder trust in this situation, we need to address the inherent power-imbalance so that all parties feel some comfort around their vulnerabilities.

So, how can we address this power imbalance to build stakeholder trust?

Here are three strategies to consider.

1. Tell them everything

All projects have negative impacts and risks. And potentially impacted people have a right to know and understand how they may be affected. It’s our responsibility to respect the rights of the communities that host projects by addressing the tough topics and having the tough conversations as uncomfortable and risky as it may seem. Done well, stronger relationships will result.

Half-truths, omissions, disinformation and rumour undermines credibility and leads to community angst and opposition. Without credibility, you won’t have trust. The antidote: Radical transparency.

Carefully consider your communication strategy and move toward full disclosure, delivered in a way that not only equips people with all the information that they need to understand the project but also contributes to healthy debate and discussion.

2. Listen and take positive action

Really take time to listen to the issues and concerns of your host community. Understand that these are legitimate points that are important to them, and seek to fully appreciate the matter at hand without judgement or agenda. Consider: if you were in this situation, how would you feel?

When responding, rather than simply reassuring or justifying, consider what else can be done to remedy or address the issue. Some actions may be big and some may be small, but some kind of action is always possible. You have the power to make a positive difference on issues and concerns affecting your community – when people feel heard, understood, and see their concerns are taken seriously, trust grows.

3. Give some of your power away

Many aspects of your project may be fixed and not up for negotiation with external stakeholders. There are likely to be some aspects, however, that are flexible or where you are open to ideas, suggestions or direction from others. Get clear on these negotiables as early as possible, and consider how you can genuinely involve stakeholders and the community in the related decisions. The International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) Public Participation Spectrum is one framework for thinking about this.

Stakeholders and communities that have greater say in the decisions that affect them are more likely to accept the decisions that are made, and those decisions are more likely to provide lasting community benefit. Relinquishing some of your decision-making powers is a small price to pay for such an outcome.