Restoring and renewing trust: why brands must once again become benchmarks in an uncertain world

Trust, a renewed strategic asset

Long considered a side effect of quality or reputation, trust has become a strategic asset. In a world saturated with messages, where consumers check everything and scandals break out in a matter of hours on X or TikTok, trust is no longer a ‘plus’: it is a condition of existence.

According to the Edelman Trust Barometer 2025 (1), 62% of consumers say they trust their brands (versus 43% who trust institutions). In a context of geopolitical uncertainty, digital disinformation and ubiquitous artificial intelligence, brands can now play a role that political and media institutions sometimes struggle to fulfil: that of reliable benchmarks.

But trust must be earned, and it can no longer be built solely on a good product or a catchy slogan. It is based on lived values, tangible evidence and perceived consistency in every interaction.

It should be noted that trust reinforces preference, but does not always determine usage when other benefits dominate (2). Shein, TikTok, Ryanair and Amazon are able to maintain their performance even when consumer confidence declines, because they compensate with other levers (price, dopamine, convenience, speed). These brands do not want maximum trust, but optimal trust.

Understanding brand trust today

Academic literature (2) (3) defines trust as the consumer's willingness to make themselves vulnerable to the brand, judging it to be reliable (competence, consistency, quality), honest (consistency, honesty, alignment of values and actions) and caring (customer focus, consumer best interests).

Marketing research identifies several fundamental pillars: reliability, transparency, integrity, customer focus and cultural alignment. Indeed, a reliable brand keeps its promises, specific to its universe. It meets the expected level of transparency, especially in the age of data and AI. At the same time, it acts in accordance with its values, even when it is difficult to do so, and places experience and satisfaction at the centre of its decisions. Finally, it resonates with the values, emotions and worldview of its audiences.

However, these pillars are evolving. For a long time, trust was based primarily on product performance or service quality. Today, it extends to the entire ecosystem: social behaviour, data use, environmental impact, crisis management. Trust has become a global indicator of consistency, not just quality.

Current major trends

Understanding and managing brands in 2026 will require integrating contextual markers. Four areas appear promising: generational mistrust, technological and ethical transparency in AI, cultural engagement, and human reconnection.

Generational mistrust

Younger generations—especially Gen Z—are naturally sceptical. Exposed from childhood to fake news, marketing promises and reputation crises, they only trust brands that are authentic and consistent.

Trust is perceived very differently across age groups. Millennials and Gen Z, who now account for more than 60% of global digital shoppers, have the highest levels of scepticism and the highest expectations.

According to NielsenIQ (4), 77% of Gen Z consumers say they do not want to buy brands from countries with low environmental standards. Is this just a statement or a real commitment? Only time will tell.

Technological and ethical transparency of AI

AI is on everyone's mind today. But consumer confidence in AI remains a hurdle. According to a recent CSG study (5), only 41% of consumers believe that chatbots are more effective than humans at solving problems, and 56% are uncomfortable with AI taking action on their behalf (i.e. agentic AI). So the answer is not necessarily more messages, more technology, more AI.

The growing use of artificial intelligence in marketing, recommendation and content creation is opening up a new divide: algorithmic transparency. Brands that use AI without explaining how or why risk eroding trust.

Following controversies over opaque personalisation, some brands such as Spotify and Netflix have published charters explaining their algorithms.

Taking this idea further, at a time when monetisation is becoming a crucial issue for Chat GPT and its competitors, the question arises of how to make the huge investments made profitable. Following the model of Google, which started out without advertising, the temptation to turn to advertising as a source of revenue is becoming increasingly pressing. But how much confidence will consumers then have in their conversations with the platform? Brand credibility has become the compass that will guide strategic decisions.

Consistent cultural engagement

Brands can no longer remain completely neutral. They must skillfully balance caution in certain markets with consumer expectations based on their culture(s) (local, digital, subcultures, etc.). The 2025 Edelman Trust Barometer reveals that 61% of consumers expect a brand to ‘authentically reflect culture’ (1).

The challenge is to avoid overdoing it: an opportunistic stance (‘purpose washing’) would destroy credibility faster than silence.

Patagonia has brilliantly built exceptional trust capital by aligning its actions with its rhetoric: radical transparency, redistribution of profits to environmental causes, refusal to engage in superficial campaigns.

Human reconnection

Digital technology has not killed the need for real connection: it has made it more vital. The latest Freeman 2025 study shows that 95% of participants in a face-to-face event say they trust the brand more after the experience (6).

Human interactions — events, human customer service, community engagement — bring back the ‘warmth’ to often dematerialised relationships.

Trust builders stand out from the crowd...

Take Decathlon, for example, which ensures price transparency, communicates its sustainability efforts and works to build community ties. Its ‘Made for sports lovers’ strategy has reinforced the perception of a simple, honest and useful brand.

Similarly, Lego has undergone a brilliant cultural transformation. By opening up to adult creativity, gaming and diversity issues, it has demonstrated its ability to evolve without betraying its DNA.

Or take Yves Rocher, which is reinvesting in the traceability and authenticity of its plant supply chains, bucking the trend of more anonymous cosmetics giants.

... While inconsistencies weigh heavily in the balance

Unfortunately, the press (Le Monde, the Financial Times) regularly reports on failures in managing brand trust capital (7). Several brands have seen their reputations collapse when their ‘green’ commitments proved to be incomplete. Greenwashing is the breaking point to be avoided.

Similarly, brands accused of using customer data without transparency (even for advertising purposes) have suffered an immediate drop in trust. Tech data and personalisation are strategic issues.

Finally, brands that remain silent during social or environmental crises have, in a sense, ceded the field to their competitors. In the Edelman 2025 report (8), more than 60% of consumers say they ‘expect a response’ from a brand on a major social issue. Silence can now be interpreted as a stance.

Management recommendations

Today's leaders and marketers must manage trust as a measurable, fragile and strategic resource.

Managing trust begins with measuring it, such as by creating an internal Brand Trust Index that combines perceived reliability, transparency, integrity and relationship quality. For example, Unilever now tracks the ‘Trust Equity’ of its brands in the same way it tracks market share.

It is then necessary to ensure consistency between words and actions. Consistency becomes the main indicator of credibility. What the brand says must be reflected in what it does — products, management, communication, public relations.

Pursuing transparency becomes a permanent mindset. This makes it possible to reveal what goes on behind the scenes: product origin, working conditions, carbon emissions, algorithmic choices. Decathlon and Veja have made this transparency a lever for differentiation.

The brand can then commit to more than just the transaction. To think in terms of a lasting relationship rather than a simple conversion: communities, useful content, post-purchase services. Programmes such as ‘Nike Run Club’ and ‘Lego Ideas’ extend the relationship well beyond the purchase.

To rebuild the brand, it is also necessary to develop an internal culture of trust, as employees are the first ambassadors in the field on a daily basis. A consistent external brand starts with an aligned internal culture (tangible evidence, HR indicators, internal ethnography, etc.). According to Edelman, brands perceived as ‘trusted internally’ are three times more credible to the public (8).

Brands that aspire to be benchmarks must also adopt a digital ethics policy and be very clear about their use of data, AI and targeting. They publish algorithmic ethics charters to inform and reassure customers.

When faced with a proven crisis of confidence, it is important to respond quickly and sincerely. Response time becomes an indicator of trust. Sincere apologies and quick redress are better than silence. The work of Kim & Dirks shows that redress requires three elements: clear acknowledgement, causal explanation, and corrective action (9). Silence is rarely a winning strategy.

Finally, to cultivate cultural relevance, it is necessary to better understand local expectations, values, and sensitivities, which can sometimes be very specific. The Edelman 2025 study shows that local brands score 15 points higher in terms of trust than foreign brands, in the same context (8).

Conclusion: today, trust cannot be decreed, it must be proven

Trust is now a currency of exchange between brands and their audiences: it circulates, accumulates, is lost and rebuilt. In an uncertain environment, saturated with information and doubt, brands that are able to create consistent, sincere and useful experiences become stable benchmarks.

Understanding this mechanism means grasping the future of marketing: marketing based on renewed evidence, not just self-proclaimed promises. We are moving from storytelling to storyproving.

For managers, this is an essential reminder: trust is not an intangible asset, but capital that must be managed with the same rigour as a budget. In this context, balancing trust and economic performance is a subtle task, a constant endeavour. Brands must optimise their status between ‘acceptable’ trust and ‘maximum’ trust.

And this is a crucial issue because in a world where everything can be imitated — products, design, storytelling — the only thing that cannot be copied is credibility.

References

(1) Edelman Trust Barometer 2025 : Special Report “Brand Trust, From We to Me” - https://www.edelman.com/fr/fr/trust/2025/trust-barometer

(2) Delgado-Ballester, E., & Munuera-Alemán, J. L. (2001). Brand trust in the context of consumer loyalty. European Journal of Marketing, 35(11/12), 1238–1258 - https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006475

(3) Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995), An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709–734.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080335

(4) NielsenIQ. (2024, June 5). Spend Z: A global report on Generation Z’s spending power and values. NielsenIQ. https://www.nielseniq.com/global/en/news-center/2024/niq-and-world-data-lab-unveil-spend-z-report/

(5) CSG & Wakefield Research. (2025). 2026 State of the Customer Experience: Winning loyalty in the age of overwhelm. CSG Systems International.
https://www.csgi.com/state-of-the-customer-experience

(6) Freeman Trust Report 2025 (and related Freeman live-events research), Freeman & The Harris Poll, 2025 - https://www.freeman.com/resources/2025-freeman-trust-report/

Freeman Trust Report 2023 “Face-to-face interaction is key to building brand trust” (Freeman/Edelman) - https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/freeman-trust-report-2023-demonstrates-face-to-face-interaction-is-key-to-building-brand-trust-301782107.html

(7) Le Monde. (2024, 6 décembre). Greenwashing dans « Le Monde », des éoliennes de Total au bluff olympique de Coca-Cola. https://www.lemonde.fr/m-le-mag/article/2024/12/06/greenwashing-dans-le-monde-des-eoliennes-de-total-au-bluff-olympique-de-coca-cola_6433383_4500055.html

Financial Times. (2025, 3 décembre). Nike, Lacoste and Superdry advertisements banned for ‘greenwashing’. https://www.ft.com/content/420775aa-dbce-42a5-958b-4df2fc7036fc

(8) Edelman, “The New Role for Brands: From Change the World to Change My World”, 16 juin 2025 - https://www.edelman.com/insights/new-role-brands-change-world-change-my-world

(9) Kim, P. H., Ferrin, D. L., Cooper, C. D., & Dirks, K. T. (2004), Removing the shadow of suspicion: The effects of apology versus denial for repairing competence- versus integrity-based trust violations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(1), 104–118 - https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.1.104

Kim, P. H., Dirks, K. T., & Cooper, C. D. (2009), The repair of trust: A dynamic bilateral perspective and multilevel conceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 34(3), 401–422 - https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.40631887

Photo by Dan Gold via Unsplash