You Can’t Optimise for Trust (But You Can Earn It)
Trust has become a fashionable word in marketing.
We talk about optimising for it.
Measuring it.
Building frameworks around it.
But trust doesn’t really work like that.
You can’t switch it on with a checklist, add it with a plugin, or optimise your way into it using the right terminology. Trust isn’t something you engineer directly, it’s something people decide to give you, often quietly and often without realising it.
And that matters.
Why trust resists optimisation
Optimisation works best when the rules are clear and the outcomes are measurable. Load speed can be improved. Structure can be refined. Visibility can be increased.
Trust doesn’t behave in the same way.
It forms through a series of small, human judgements:
- Does this feel legitimate?
- Does this make sense?
- Do these people sound like they know what they’re doing?
- Do I feel confident taking the next step?
Those judgements are influenced by many things: language, experience, clarity, consistency, but they aren’t controlled by any single tactic.
That’s why attempts to “optimise for trust” often feel hollow. The signals may be present, but the confidence isn’t.
Trust is an outcome, not a tactic
One of the easiest ways to spot inauthentic trust-building is when it becomes performative.
You see it in:
- Over-polished language that says very little
- Pages full of claims, awards and assurances, but no explanation
- Content written to sound authoritative rather than to be useful
None of these things are wrong in isolation. But when they exist without substance they create distance instead of reassurance.
Trust isn’t built by saying “you can trust us”.
It’s built by showing that you understand what you do, customer pain points/solutions and explaining it clearly enough that others can see it too.
What trust looks like on a website
Trust is rarely built by a single element. It’s formed through a collection of quiet signals that, together, reduce uncertainty.
Most visitors won’t consciously analyse these things, but they register them all the same.
Most of us recognise this instinctively. You land on a website, scroll for a moment, glance at the About page, notice a few familiar standards, read a paragraph that explains something and without consciously deciding it, you feel more comfortable staying there.
Clear, grounded language
Language is one of the strongest trust signals.
People instinctively respond to:
- Plain explanations over clever phrasing
- Measured claims rather than superlatives
- Specifics instead of vague promises
When everything sounds exceptional, nothing feels credible.
Clear language signals confidence. It suggests you understand your subject well enough to explain it without hiding behind complexity.
A detailed, human “About” page
People don’t read About pages to be impressed.
They read them to orient themselves.
They’re looking for:
- Who you are
- Why you exist
- What you actually do
- Whether you feel credible and relatable
Trust grows when About pages explain rather than perform, when they give context, name people, and talk plainly about experience rather than positioning.
A good About page doesn’t persuade. It reassures.
Accreditations that quietly reassure
Accreditations and standards play an important role in trust, often at a subconscious level.
Logos such as ISO, TrustMark or Gas Safe signal professionalism and competence. The reader may not stop to analyse them, but their presence reduces perceived risk and increases legitimacy.
In many cases, simply seeing them there is enough.
A light touch of context, a sentence here or there explaining what a standard relates to in practice, can reinforce that reassurance without over-explaining or labouring the point.
Trust isn’t built by shouting credentials.
It’s built by placing the right signals, in the right places, and letting them do their job.
Evidence with context
Case studies, testimonials and examples matter, but how they’re presented matters just as much.
Trust grows when:
- Testimonials are specific and attributable
- Case studies include context, not just outcomes
- Evidence reflects real situations, not idealised ones
Generic praise is easy to dismiss. Specific experience is much harder to ignore.
Consistency across the site
This is subtle, but powerful.
People notice when:
- Tone changes from page to page
- Messages contradict each other
- Design polish varies
- Content feels written by different voices
They may not articulate it, but inconsistency creates friction, and friction erodes trust.
The “so what?” test still applies
A simple discipline we return to often is the “so what?” test.
Every claim, every message, every piece of content should be able to answer it:
- So what does this mean for the person reading it?
- So what changes as a result?
- So what should they feel more confident about?
If the answer isn’t clear, trust doesn’t have much to anchor itself to.
Why this matters more now
As marketing tools become more sophisticated and content easier to generate, surface-level trust signals are everywhere.
But people are surprisingly good at sensing the difference between:
- polish and understanding
- volume and substance
- optimisation and intent
Trust is cumulative, but it’s also fragile. It’s built slowly, through repeated moments of clarity and reassurance, and it can be undermined quickly when confidence feels forced or language starts to drift.
Trust has always been earned through judgement, not tactics. The only thing that’s changed is how visible that gap has become.
The Last Word
At The Last Hurdle, we don’t see trust as something to be engineered or gamed. We see it as the natural result of clear thinking, thoughtful communication and doing the fundamentals well, consistently.
That means asking harder questions than “does this tick the box?”
It means being comfortable leaving things out as well as putting them in.
And it means remembering that trust is built from the outside in, not the other way round.
You can’t optimise for trust. But you can earn it!
