2025 Edelman Trust Barometer unveils a “crisis of grievance”

In 2023, as discussed in this PubCo post, the Edelman Trust Barometer found that business was viewed as “the only trusted institution” at 62%—“the sole institution seen as competent and ethical.” Although, in the 2025 Edelman Trust Barometer, that perception of business might still hold sway among the majority of respondents, this 25th anniversary edition of the Barometer brings to light a different zeitgeist—one that is more fraught and more disturbing.  The subtitle of this edition—“Trust and the Crisis of Grievance”—tells the story. As described in the press release, the 2025 Barometer “reveals that economic fears have metastasized into grievance, with six in 10 respondents reporting moderate to high sense of grievance. This is defined by a belief that government and business harm them and serve narrow interests, and ultimately the wealthy benefit while regular people struggle.” This edition of the Barometer also exposed “a profound shift to acceptance of aggressive action, with political polarization and deepening fears giving rise to a widespread sense of grievance.” So, while business was still the only institution seen as competent and ethical, among those with a high sense of grievance, business was “seen as 81pts less ethical, 37pts less competent.” According to CEO Richard Edelman, “[o]ver the last decade, society has devolved from fears to polarization to grievance….Incumbents in the U.S., UK, France, Germany, South Korea and Canada were ousted amid voter anger over job loss to globalization and inflation. We now see a zero-sum mindset that legitimizes extreme measures like violence and disinformation as tools for change. The Barometer finds a 30-point trust gap in institutions between those with high and low grievance (Trust Index of 36 versus 66). Closing this gap fosters hope for a brighter future.”  Does business have any role or responsibility in addressing this “crisis of grievance”? How might business leaders ameliorate the crisis?

Fieldwork for the survey was conducted in 28 countries among over 33,000 respondents between October 25 and November 16, 2024.  The survey indicates that the data “collected is representative of the general population across age, gender, region and ethnicity/nationality (where applicable) within each country.”

In a related article, CEO Edelman attributes the descent into grievance to four factors, which, he contends, have been building for the past decade. The first factor he identifies is a “pervasive lack of belief in a better future. Only one-third of respondents believe that the next generation will be better off. In every Western democracy 30% or fewer believe so.” The second factor he points to is the class/income divide: “Low-income respondents have profoundly less trust in institutions than the top quartile. For instance, 48% of low-income respondents trust institutions, averaged across business, government, media, and NGOs—compared to 61%, on average, among high-income respondents. Business sees the greatest divergence of any institution, with a 16-point trust gap between high- and low-income groups.” The third factor he identifies is an increasing lack of faith in institutional leaders: “[g]lobally, two-thirds of respondents worry about journalists, government officials, and CEOs intentionally lying to them.” And finally, in a related point, there is an increasing lack of confidence in the credibility of information: almost “two-thirds of respondents find it difficult to differentiate between news from a reliable source and disinformation.”

Most disturbing is that many now believe that “violence may be necessary,” a particularly chilling data point in the wake of the murder of an insurance company CEO at the end of last year. According to the Barometer press release, in the 2025 survey, “four in 10 respondents—53 percent of those aged 18-34—approve of one or more forms of hostile activism to bring about change, which includes attacking people online, intentionally spreading disinformation, threatening or committing violence, and damaging public or private property.” In addition, the release suggests that a “zero-sum mindset also prevails, with respondents believing gains for those with opposing politics come at their expense—more than twice as common among those with high grievance (53 percent) than low grievance (23 percent).”

Below are the Top 10 Findings from the 2025 Trust Barometer:

1. “Majority hold grievances against government, business, and the rich. Sixty-one percent globally have a moderate or high sense of grievance, which is defined by a belief that government and business make their lives harder and serve narrow interests, and wealthy people benefit unfairly from the system while regular people struggle.
2. Widespread grievance erodes trust. Those with a high sense of grievance do not trust any of the four institutions (business, government, media, and NGOs), CEOs, and artificial intelligence.
3. Globalization, recession, and technology fears are heightened. The percentage of employees who worry about losing their jobs because of these forces has risen significantly since last year.
4. Fear of discrimination surges. Nearly two-thirds of respondents worry about experiencing prejudice, discrimination, or racism—up 10 points in the  last year, and with significant increases across countries and demographics, including among white respondents  in the U.S.
5. Majority lack optimism for the next generation. Only 36 percent of  respondents believe that things will be better for the next generation.
6. Low income mired in distrust. Those in the bottom income quartile have a Trust Index of 48 (average percent trust in business, government, media, and NGOs). Business is 16 points less trusted among low-income respondents than among high-income respondents.
7. [Four] in 10 approve of hostile activism. To bring about change, this group would approve of one or more of the following actions: attacking people online, intentionally spreading disinformation, threatening or committing violence, damaging public or private property. This sentiment is most prevalent among respondents ages 18-34 (53 percent approve).
8. High sense of grievance puts pressure on business. Among those with a high sense of grievance, business is seen as 81 points less ethical and 37 points less competent than among those with a low sense of grievance. Those with a high sense of grievance say business is not doing enough to address issues like affordability, climate change, job retraining, misinformation, and discrimination.
9. CEOs: Take action where you can make a difference and improve performance. CEOs have permission to address a societal issue when their business contributed to the problem, it harms their stakeholders, they could have a major positive impact, or it would improve their business’s performance.
10. Business cannot do it alone: All institutions must help build trust to address grievance. All institutions must work together to deliver results that benefit everyone fairly, repair the social fabric, advocate for trustworthy information, and rebuild economic optimism.”

Drilling down into some of the findings related to business, the survey data show that only business was viewed as both competent and ethical, with the competence score up slightly since 2020, but the ethics score up 19 points. However, those with a high level of grievance viewed business as 81 points less ethical and 37 points less competent. For example, in response to a question regarding level of trust in CEOs in general to do what is right, 64% of those with a low sense of grievance said that they had trust; of those with a high sense of grievance, only 30% had trust. Those percentages improved to 72% of those with low levels of grievance, compared to 51% of those with high levels of grievance, who trusted their own CEOs to do what is right. According to the Barometer, 84% to 86% of respondents, with only a small spread based on grievance level, said that, to ensure a better future, business is obligated to “provide good-paying jobs in its local communities“ and “train or reskill employees to be competitive.” On some issues, however—affordability, climate change, retraining, misinformation and discrimination—a high sense of grievance mattered.  For example, on affordability, 64% of respondents with high grievance levels demanded more action from business, not less, compared to only 39% of those with low grievance levels. Similarly, on climate change, 62% of those with a high sense of grievance wanted more attention from business compared to only 44% with a low sense of grievance. Grievance levels did not seems to have as significant an impact on the question of when CEOs can act on a social issue; 79% of those with low grievance levels (compared to 76% of those with high grievance levels) responded that CEOs could act if they could make a major impact on the challenge. Similarly,  77% of those with low grievance levels (compared to 71% of those with high grievance levels) responded that CEOs were justified in addressing a societal issue if doing so would improve business performance.  From 68% to 73% (depending on grievance levels) responded that CEOs were justified in addressing a societal issue if the issue harms their customers, employees or communities or their business contributed to the problem. Employers were also tasked with preventing grievance from undermining collaboration at work: 80% to 81% responded that business was obligated to “nurture workplace civility to facilitate discussions about contentious issues.”

According to Edelman, given the perception of business as more competent and more ethical, “[b]usiness has emerged as the default solution on societal issues,” And, as illustrated by the data above, Edelman sees a permission structure for business to address social ills in some circumstances. However, business may be limited in its ability to take the lead alone because “views of business ethics plunge as people become more aggrieved.” In addition, as the press release points out, business now “faces new guardrails.” Presumably, in part, “new guardrails” is a reference to the recent backlash against DEI and ESG, among other things. Edelman suggests that “[b]usiness is facing backlash from those opposing its role as a catalyst for societal change….Moving back from a grievance-based society will require a cross-institution effort to address issues like information integrity, affordability, sustainability, and the future of AI.”

How do we “move back from the precipice of a grievance-based society where ideology becomes identity and violence is seen as a viable option”? One of the conclusions in the Barometer is that increasing trust allows economic optimism to overpower grievance. To restore trust and build optimism, the Barometer advises businesses to do the following:

1.  “Grievances must be addressed. The institutional failures of the last 25 years have produced grievances around the world, stifling growth and innovation in turn. To lead through this crisis, understand the economic realities of your stakeholders, champion shared interests, and create opportunities for optimism.
2. Business has a license to act. Those with a higher sense of grievance are more likely to believe that business is not doing enough to address societal issues. To navigate these expectations, understand where you have obligations, act on behalf of your stakeholders, and advocate for your organization.
3. Business can’t act alone. Business, government, media, and NGOs must work together to address the root causes of grievance and enable trust, growth, and prosperity. Invest in local communities, quality information, and job skills. Deliver results that benefit everyone fairly.
4. With trust, optimism eclipses grievance. When institutions can’t be trusted to do what is right, grievances fester and outlooks darken. To dissipate grievance and increase optimism, prioritize and rebuild trust across your organization and local communities.”