── ── Mental model
Trust Brand Architecture
Brand trust builds through three sequential layers: Functional Trust (does the product do what it claims?) → Emotional Trust (does this brand handle problems with empathy?) → Identity Alignment (does this brand represent who I want to be?). The constraint is always the lowest broken layer. Investing in a higher layer before the lower one is solid does not transfer…
Run Trust Brand Architecture on a real problem
Bring something you're actually deciding — free, in the browser.
How it works
Output artifact: Trust Layer Audit Report + Layer Gap Diagnosis + Layer-Specific Mechanism Plan
Stop rule: If Layer 1 audit reveals inconsistent functional delivery, stop. No Layer 2 or Layer 3 investment until Layer 1 is restored.
1. Audit each layer with behavioral metrics — not perception surveys. Layer 1: repeat purchase rate, refund rate, support resolution rate, uptime. Layer 2: support CSAT, complaint-to-resolution cycle, customer recovery rate. Layer 3: organic referral rate, unprompted social sentiment, community participation. Gate: absence of data is a signal — document gaps before proceeding.
When to use it
- brand perception lags product quality
- a values campaign generated backlash ('they say X but do Y')
- NPS and brand sentiment diverge
- marketing underperforms despite a good product
- someone asks 'how do we build brand trust?' or 'why isn't our marketing working?'
When not to use it
a single catastrophic event requires immediate legal or crisis-communication response first; the product genuinely does not work and needs engineering fixes before trust is addressed.
Worked example
Johnson & Johnson Tylenol Crisis Recovery (1982–1983)
The Johnson & Johnson Tylenol crisis of September–October 1982 is one of the most primary-source-documented brand trust recovery cases in business history, and it provides a near-perfect illustration of the Trust Layer Architecture sequence.
Install this skill (free, MIT)
npx skills add deciqAI/knowledge-skillsUseful? Star the repo — stars help other builders find it.
Related mental models
When urgent demands consume all your bandwidth, the future becomes cognitively inaccessible — not a choice, but a structural block.
User research produces data.
Utilitarianism holds that the right action produces the greatest net well-being across all affected parties, weighted by magnitude and probability.
The winner's curse is the systematic tendency, in a common-value auction — one where every bidder is estimating the same uncertain value from noisy private signals…