Military Review English Edition September-October 2013 | Page 81

TRUST achieve consensus regarding what benevolence means at the collective level is difficult. Since benevolence-based trust is inherently relational and idiosyncratic, synthesizing consensus at the aggregate level of public trust is not easy. However, public consensus may coalesce over time around legitimate claims of victimization to an individual (or a group sharing some common identity). Such incidents may negatively impact public trust linked to benevolence.27 Public trust violations based on benevolence are generally remedied by increased external control and monitoring, limiting managerial flexibility, and suspending professional discretion.28 Determinations of public trust associated with integrity, competence, and predictability are arrived at through reason. People often base these on incomplete knowledge informed by the public’s perception of the practices or principles on which the organization has agreed to abide. Integrity determinations reflect perceptions of an organization’s adherence to implicit or explicit commitments, and normative assessments of its honesty and fairness in meeting those commitments. Lack of integrity can easily lead to perceptions of opportunism. Benevolence Violations Members of the 30th Civil Engineer Squadron participate in a squadron-organized run to raise funds for the Pat Tillman Foundation in honor of fallen service member Cpl. Pat Tillman, Vanderburg Air Force Base, Calif., 17 April 2010 (U.S. Air Force,Tech. Sgt. Herman Ybarra) Mishandling of contemporary cultural issues could lead to violations of benevolence-based public trust. Benevolence violations are most likely to occur over issues associated with the difference between U.S. civilian and military cultures. The benevolence component of public trust is dependent on affective notions related to feelings and emotion triggered when normative values associated with kindness or goodwill are violated. When the Army gets ahead of or lags behind social norms, it provides fertile ground for perceived benevolence violations of public trust. The Army’s assessment of the role of women in combat is a contemporary example of the Army’s culture evolving at a faster pace than American society. Despite reports of sexual assaults that challenge public trust, people perceive the Army’s culture as more progressive and tolerant of women in combat and mixedgender training than American society.29 Conversely, despite the transparency and limited number of adverse incidents associated with the policy change, the repeal of “don’t ask don’t tell” is a case where the public perceived the Army’s ??????????????????????????????????????e???????????????????????????????????????????????????=??????????????????????????e????????????????????Q???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????%??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????%????????????????????????????????????????????e?????????????%????????????????????????????????????????????????e??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????Q????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????Q?????????????????????????????????????????????????M?????????????????????????????????????????????????Q?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????(??()5%1%QId?IY%\????M???????=?????????((0