Trust networks are an adaptive team structure that evolved or emerged without a plan or leader to solve an industry need. This structure coincidentally mirrors the agile methodology’s core principles of self-organizing teams and iterative development. Here I undertake to provide some insights into how organizations can learn for this structure to build resilient, creative, and efficient teams.
Picture this: It’s 7:30 AM on a high-stakes commercial film shoot. The Art Director’s heart sinks as she unwraps the hero prop—a custom-built piece that cost thousands of dollars—only to discover its colors clash violently with the client’s brand guidelines. The client team arrives in thirty minutes, and the day’s entire shot list depends on this prop.
At this moment, the trust network springs into action. The Art Director doesn’t waste time pointing fingers or panicking. Instead, she immediately huddles with her art department leads, rapidly sketching modifications while her assistant pulls up the brand guidelines. She dispatches a runner to gather supplies, knowing her team’s expertise will make the impossible possible.
Meanwhile, she’s already texting the producer: “Potential 30-minute delay. Working solution in progress.” The producer, trusting her judgment, adjusts the morning’s schedule unquestionably. When the client arrives, they find not a crisis, but a confident Art Director presenting two viable solutions, complete with time and budget implications.
By noon, the modified prop is camera-ready. The Art Director has orchestrated a minor miracle through three simultaneous channels: taking full ownership of the problem, maintaining clear communication with all stakeholders, and making swift, informed decisions.
This is the trust network in action—turning what could have been a budget-destroying disaster into merely an interesting anecdote over lunch.
A film project has around 100 team members who work together over a period of 2.5 months. This short-term and fast-paced nature of advertising filmmaking demands highly effective temporary team structures, where diverse personalities and departments develop robust communication systems and relationships. To achieve that, film teams create complex webs of interdependence with mutual reliance and shared commitment to quality, to enable quick decision-making, creative risk-taking, and exceptional results.
The system works because in film production, each role is taught like an informal apprenticeship. While juniors rise through the ranks, they learn their part of the trust structure. So, once they become head of their department, they are a natural part of the trust network.
These mechanisms create adaptable teams that can respond quickly to challenges while maintaining high standards.
As advertising film production costs soared in the 1990s, traditional hierarchical management structures proved too rigid for the fast-paced, creative decision-making required by modern film production. The industry’s solution emerged through economic growth: rising advertising budgets and more frequent projects enabled professionals to specialize and build lasting relationships with reliable collaborators.
This evolution was shaped by three interconnected forces:
The trust network model naturally emerged as the ideal structure to support this evolution, balancing creative freedom with accountability through relationships built on demonstrated expertise rather than formal authority.
This offers vital lessons for today’s organizations, particularly in three key areas: risk management, team dynamics, and innovation.
In risk management, trust networks enable decision authority to flow naturally to specialists with proven expertise. This creates swift adaptation through pre-established relationships, while maintaining the delicate balance between creative freedom and financial accountability. Rather than relying on rigid oversight, these networks regulate themselves through trust-based relationships.
Trust networks also foster adaptive team dynamics by allowing specializations to remain clear while keeping boundaries fluid when needed. Teams solve problems through cross-functional collaboration, drawing on proven capabilities rather than formal hierarchies. This approach creates collective responsibility for project success while developing expertise through natural mentorship.
Perhaps most importantly, trust networks create environments where innovation can flourish. When trust relationships are established, teams can take calculated creative risks and iterate rapidly. Multiple specialists can collaborate on complex problems without bureaucratic barriers, leading to continuous learning through both successes and failures.
Trust networks demonstrate their greatest value under pressure because these organic structures enable rapid, quality decisions. As we saw in the above example, when challenges arise, specialists can immediately implement solutions through trusted channels. The network’s foundation of expertise-based authority and shared accountability allows teams to adapt roles fluidly without disrupting workflow.
The effectiveness of trust networks stems from their distributed authority structure, where each specialist holds decision rights within their domain. This eliminates traditional approval bottlenecks while maintaining quality control. Role boundaries remain fluid, allowing specialists to step in where needed, supported by cross-training and trust relationships. This enables collective problem-solving, where multiple perspectives come together quickly and solutions emerge through network interaction.
Trust networks in film production evolved through three core mechanisms:
As did film production in the 1990s, today’s organizations also face pressures of complexity, speed, and innovation, making trust networks a compelling model for balancing control with flexibility.
Several sectors demonstrate how trust networks could transform traditional organizational structures.
In software development, teams often struggle with knowledge silos and slow approval processes that create critical bottlenecks. Communication gaps between development and operations teams frequently lead to deployment issues, while quality suffers from fragmented responsibility. Trust networks could transform this landscape by fostering natural knowledge sharing across specializations and enabling rapid response through expertise-based authority. When developers and operations teams collaborate through established trust channels, they create seamless workflows driven by shared quality standards rather than rigid oversight.
Emergency response units face similar challenges, where rigid command structures and inflexible role assignments may hamper effective crisis management. Traditional hierarchies often create trust issues between departments and slow adaptation to rapidly changing situations. By implementing trust networks, these units could develop flexible authority structures based on expertise rather than rank. This approach allows for fluid role boundaries during crises, supported by built-in trust relationships that enable quick adaptation through established channels.
Manufacturing operations particularly suffer from hierarchical bottlenecks that slow down decision-making and create artificial barriers between departments. Traditional quality control through rigid oversight leads to delays, while disconnected departments struggle to respond effectively to supply chain disruptions. Trust networks could transform these operations by enabling expertise-driven problem-solving and fostering cross-functional collaboration. When quality management emerges from shared responsibility rather than top-down control, manufacturing teams can respond more effectively to challenges through trusted relationships and collaborative problem-solving.
Trust networks represent a powerful organizational model that offers broad applicability across modern industries. The success of trust networks in film production demonstrates how organizations can move beyond traditional hierarchies to create more dynamic, responsive teams. The key insight for modern organizations is that trust networks aren’t just about relationships—they’re about creating systems where expertise naturally flows to where it’s needed, decisions can be made quickly by those best qualified to make them, and accountability emerges through shared commitment to quality rather than top-down control.
For organizations looking to implement these principles, the path forward begins with identifying areas where expertise-based decision-making and rapid decisions are crucial. Organizations should start small, allowing natural leaders to emerge through demonstrated expertise while fostering natural mentorship relationships. The gradual building of trust infrastructure enables swift, effective collaboration.
While challenges include resistance from traditional hierarchies and difficulty measuring trust-based interactions, the transition requires patience and commitment. However, the potential rewards—in terms of innovation, adaptability, and team performance—make trust networks a compelling model and worthwhile investment for organizations seeking to thrive in complex environments.
Bechky, B. A. (2006). Gaffers, gofers, and grips: Role-based coordination in temporary organizations. Organization Science, 17(1), 3-21. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1050.0149
Bechky, B. A., & Okhuysen, G. A. (2011). Expecting the unexpected? How SWAT officers and film crews handle surprises. Academy of Management Journal, 54(2), 239-261. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.60263060
Caldwell, J. T. (2008). Production culture: Industrial reflexivity and critical practice in film and television. Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822388968
DeFillippi, R. J., & Arthur, M. B. (1998). Paradox in project-based enterprise: The case of film making. California Management Review, 40(2), 125-139. https://doi.org/10.2307/41165936
Hadida, A. L., Lampel, J., Walls, W. D., & Joshi, A. (2020). Hollywood studio filmmaking in the age of Netflix: A tale of two institutional logics. Journal of Cultural Economics, 45, 213–238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10824-020-09379-z
Jones, C. (1996). Careers in project networks: The case of the film industry. In M. B. Arthur & D. M. Rousseau (Eds.), The boundaryless career: A new employment principle for a new organizational era (pp. 58-75). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195149586.003.0006
Jones, C., & DeFillippi, R. J. (1996). Back to the future in film: Combining industry and self-knowledge to meet the career challenges of the 21st century. Academy of Management Perspectives, 10(4), 89-103. https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.1996.3145322
Meyerson, D., Weick, K. E., & Kramer, R. M. (1996). Swift trust and temporary groups. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 166-195). SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452243610.n9
Obstfeld, D. (2012). Creative projects: A less routine approach toward getting new things done. Organization Science, 23(6), 1571-1592. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1110.0706
Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 393-404. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1998.926617
Skilton, P. F., & Dooley, K. J. (2010). The effects of repeat collaboration on creative abrasion. Academy of Management Review, 35(1), 118-134. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.35.1.zok118
Storper, M., & Christopherson, S. (1987). Flexible specialization and regional industrial agglomerations: The case of the US motion picture industry. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 77(1), 104-117. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8306.1987.tb00148.x