Decoding Trust- A Mathematical Approach

Whether
naïve or experienced, young or old, we all in our lifetime have this one
5-letter word making us call out the usual 4-letter word that starts with
letter “F”.


But
why is ‘Trust’ as a word used more and understood less? Is it one of the
necessities of leading a meaningful life? Is it too basic a word to break it
further? What is it after all?


My
attempt at approaching this ‘Trust’ thing started 2 hour ago when idling on bed
to recover from a bad cold, I could not think of anything more meaningful. So
interpret what I say below at your discretion. May be for me it’s a time pass…


TRUST
= TRU + US + ST


In
simple terms:


TRU=
truthfulness; US= You and I ; ST = Statement (i.e. relating to communication,
expression)


Basic
Assumptions:


a. Unlike
‘Belief’ which is an individual attribute, ‘Trust’ is a dependent attribute impacting
the intensity of TRUST


b. Truthfulness
is a constant which is governed by habits, desires and passion. All of these
attributes develop over the years and are a function of family background,
culture, education, behaviors and past experience relating to ‘Trust’ as a
whole.


c. The
equality while presented as a simple function is not so. It’s a far more complex
due to introduction of lag variable of ‘TRUST’. In other words, TRUST equation
is a time-series function and hence past experiences impact the future
outcomes. 
In econometric (time lag variable)- Trust(t) is impacted by Trust(t-1….)

d. ‘ST’ Statement here is assumed to be a function of ‘Art of Communication’ X (Tone + Language).

e. The
equation differentiates between ‘Tone’ and ‘Language’ akin to the 4-letter work
starting from letter ‘f’…explained by Osho as Verb, Noun, adjective,
intransitive verb, anger, surprise etc. I hope my readers have heard that
famous preaching of Osho. Link to the video is here –
http://youtu.be/Lzu26Ur96mA
Once
I was done with stating the Trust Equation, I ‘googled’ to avoid re-inventing
the wheel and to my surprise Google had an answer:
Credibility +
Reliability + Intimacy    DIVIDED BY    Self-orientation
EQUALS
Trust
Anyways
the equation defined by me above is not very different from equation above. However,
the relation between the variables in above equation is better expressed as
given below:
Credibility + Trust
(from past) + {(Reliability X Intimacy)    DIVIDED BY    Self-orientation}
EQUALS
Trust
Trust
can have only two values -1 or +1 . I am deliberately avoiding the infinity
notion here since we all have a defined life.


To
simplify the interaction amongst the variables we assume that all the variables
can either have a minus 1 or a plus 1.


All
possible solutions to the equation are:


Note:
Please read + 1 as YES and -1 as NO.

Hence
the above illustration explains that we can either HAVE Trust or NOT HAVE
Trust. No other possibility exists.