How to become more trustworthy, from Fast Company magazine

While it seems like being honest and reliable is enough to make us trustworthy it's actually not. People trust people who notice, understand and assist them without being asked. 

Fast Company: The Three Habits Of The Most Trustworthy Person In Your Office, 2016-Apr-1 by Karissa Thacker

It’s all too easy to get locked into patterns of perceiving and behaving that don’t build trust, leaving us unaware of them and even further from understanding what things we actually can do in order to build it. As a result, our own feelings toward others—how much and whether we trust them, and vice versa—remain a bit of a mystery.

Changing that can dramatically improve how well your team works together, and it starts by understanding what the most trusted people actually do in order to get that way. Here are three of the primary habits of those who command others' trust at work.

According to @KarissaThacker

They consider the signals they're sending	Are you behaving in ways that send similar signals that others can rely on you?
They take time to understand the pressure others are under	We tend to trust people who listen and pay attention to us more than those who don’t.
They help out unexpectedly	Make the conscious effort to do something nice that you don’t have to do.

A Critique of the "Attention Economy"... maybe attention is not finite

As a marketer, I appreciated Tom Davenport and John Beck's The Attention Economy when it was first published in 2001. Recently Matthew Crawford has been writing about the "Attention Commons." Both are focused on how advertisers battle to capture attention. But maybe attention is something we manage ourselves. 

Here's to the idea that we nurture our attention span in such a way that we can become stronger and more aware of the things we care about. 

Pacific Standard: A Better Way of Talking About Attention Loss, 2016-Feb-23 by Caleb Caldwell

I would like to suggest, instead of an economics of attention, that we think about an ecology of attention. We've already discussed "attention-as-resource," an ecological framing of attention as a natural resource to husband and defend, rather like the rainforest, clean water, or breathable air. But to think of attention as a depletable resource is actually to think of it as a particular kind of private property, one that can be stolen from us, or be dealt out or cruelly withheld at will. It is to align attention almost completely with consumption.... 

I’m not offering a fully formed solution so much as a brief endorsement of a different way of describing and discussing attention: a lexicon that neither worships technology nor romanticizes nature. I want to move past a vocabulary of emancipation vs. enslavement. To think about attention through the language of ecology is to see it as a sound-wave that a bow draws from a violin: in constant flux, not just existing in its surroundings, but actually unable to be abstracted from the constituting conditions of the resin on the bow, the quality of the horsehair, the density of the wood, the moisture in the room’s air. Attention is contingent on shifting attachments between individuals, collectivities, histories, technological and material conditions. To husband our attention requires a commitment to digital and analog life at once because, in so many ways, we are each other’s attention.

And when we recognize this fully, we must feel the responsibility that comes from being sutured together through common acts of attention. Our neighbor, like our smartphone, is now always with us.