Castelfranchi and Falcone (2010) systematize a general Trust Theory in a user-friendly book, providing an organic model of this complex and dynamic phenomenon on cognitive, affective, and social (interactive and collective) levels. They employ the Cognitive and Behavioral Sciences point of view, as well as the Artificial Intelligence (AI) domain, as approaches to the project. The theory of trust is presented in the book as an essential concept, as trust is unavoidable and a crucial subject for social interaction, as well as collective and institutional phenomena. Trust is a vital cognitive “mediator” of sociality and integration of mind and interaction. Therefore, the socio-cognitive model proposed here is based on the mental state of trust, which is defined by the combination of beliefs and goals. School leaders operate based on their beliefs and goals, which are significant components of the socio-cognitive model of trust. The theoretical model was chosen because it considers trust as a complex socio-cognitive phenomenon allowing us to examine trust in the selected school, considering it a socio-cognitive phenomenon that encompasses various affective and cognitive aspects.

By assuming an “Accommodation” attitude, Castelfranchi and Falcone (2010) simplified factual data to adjust concepts and schemes to the complexity and richness of the trust phenomenon, thereby developing the Trust Theory. They chose to use “Accommodation” because trust is ontologically complex, there is a solid separation of notions regarding trust, and there is a need to give attention to aspects that have been ignored (Castelfranchi and Falcone, 2010). They propose a trust model with the following main features: an integrated model, a socio-cognitive model, an analytical and explicit model, a multi-factor and multi-directional model, a dynamic model, a structurally related model and a non-prescriptive model. They aimed at a unified, covering, general and possibly shared definition of trust.

Considering the multidimensional nature of trust and an effort to simplify Castelfranchi and Falcone’s (2010) model, broad categories of their work, such as competence and sincerity, can be evaluated. The categories are shown to change across different domains, and this is common in school leadership, where complexities abound. Accordingly, this study drew on Castelfranchi and Falcone’s (2010). Trust Theory as an analytical foundation to examine how trust is formed, sustained, and disrupted within educational contexts. Evaluating school leaders’ belief in competence and sincerity provided a way to calibrate trustworthiness using the data collected for this study, highlighting the conceptualizations, experiences, and practices of trust in the selected schools.

Ubuntu is a deeply rooted African ideology that captures the spirit of community, interdependence, and humanity. The name “Ubuntu” is derived from several Bantu languages and translates to “I am because we are,” emphasizing the idea that relationships with others shape individual identity. This philosophy emphasizes social relationships and collective responsibility, advocating for a worldview that prioritizes community wellbeing over individual gain. Ubuntu serves as a guiding concept for moral and ethical behavior, emphasizing the realization of shared humanity and the development of compassion and empathy in human interactions (Tutu, 1999). Ubuntu is one of the most fundamental aspects of living a life of courage, compassion and connection, and it is seeing yourself in others (Matupire, 2016; Ngomane, 2019). Moreover, to us, this is so profound.

Ubuntu brings about kindness, caring, togetherness, solidarity, cooperation and sharing among the school leadership teams, which all promote positive relationships (Ukpokodu, 2016, p. 154). Therefore, the African philosophy of Ubuntu provides a perfect lens to explore the trust-Ubuntu nexus in a South African context. As a theoretical framework for the study, Ubuntu was used because it provides an alternative to the notion of individualism that pervades many Western philosophies. It contends that people are innately social beings whose identities are inextricably linked with those of others (Samuel, 2024). Ubuntu promotes people to constructively contribute to their communities by instilling a sense of belonging and mutual respect, thus strengthening social cohesion and peace.

The use of the two theoretical frameworks, Castelfranchi and Falcone’s (2010) model of Trust Theory and the African Philosophy of Ubuntu (Khoza, 2012), allowed both calibration of trust as a complex socio-cognitive phenomenon and its link to ethical leadership in an African context, hence the use of an African theory on ethical leadership. The link between the two theoretical frameworks is clearly shown in Table 1 that conceptualizes the trust-Ubuntu nexus. The theoretical frameworks chosen demonstrate how the ethical values of Ubuntu, including reciprocity, dignity, and communal responsibility, map onto the Trust Theory’s components of sincerity, competence, reliability, and goal orientation. The combination of these two concepts forms the “trust-Ubuntu nexus.” The trust-Ubuntu nexus conceptualizes trust as a socially embedded relational construct grounded in Ubuntu, rather than an individual psychological state or a mere contractual mechanism (Matupire, 2016). The nexus responds to the gaps in the mainstream literature, which rank individual rationality highly over relational ethics and undertheorized collective morality, dignity, and communal accountability, while emphasizing control, monitoring, and compliance (Cheteni and Shindika, 2017; Castelfranchi and Falcone, 2010). In this way, Ubuntu introduces a relational ontology, reframing trust as co-produced, morally situated, and systematically sustained, providing coding and theme construction that were useful in the findings and discussion.

Three interlinked analytical dimensions were theorized to assess the dynamics within the selected schools regarding the trust-Ubuntu nexus. The three dimensions were relational integrity, communal accountability and ethical leadership and stewardship. Relational integrity refers to how individuals experience trustworthiness in day-to-day interactions, as affirmed by a key Ubuntu lens that says “A person is a person through other persons,” as explained by Matupire (2016). The analytical indicators included integrity, respect, ethical decision making and safe interpersonal exchanges. These could be identified from the participants’ responses during the semi-structured interviews. The second dimension of communal accountability encompasses how trust is maintained or eroded within teams, departments, or committees. The key Ubuntu lens in this regard involves collective responsibility and shared destiny, attributes that also relate to collaboration (Sesinyi and Gcelu, 2023). The indicators are shown to be shared ownership of outcomes (success or failure), transparency in decision-making, fairness in conflict resolution, and willingness to correct harm. The third dimension of ethical leadership and stewardship views leadership as a form of stewardship, rather than a matter of authority. The indicators include alignment with ethical values and policies, equity in resource allocation, responsiveness to the community’s needs, and demonstrating moral courage in complex and risky decisions. Consequently, the trust Ubuntu nexus provides a rigorous, culturally grounded lens for understanding how trust emerges, erodes and regenerates within a schooling environment. Trust is treated not as a tool but as a rational condition to be understood.

There are definitional debates and confusion regarding the crucial ingredients of trust; however, an effort can be made to unify these ingredients. The incorporation of the dimensions mentioned earlier and leaning heavily on the definition developed by Tschannen-Moran and Hoy (1998), the multidimensional definition of trust is:

Trust is one party’s willingness shown by intention and behavior to be vulnerable to another party based on confidence developed cognitively and effectively that the latter party is (a) benevolent, (b) reliable, (c) competent, (d) honest, and (e) open.

Considering the definition given, trust in a leader becomes the willingness of the subordinate to be vulnerable to the actions, decisions and actions of the leader. This suggests that internal attributions toward the trustee originate from external cues (Castelfranchi and Falcone, 2010; Searle et al., 2024). In their literature review on trust, the facets shown in the definitions of trust from the literature indicate and agree with the multidimensional nature of trust. The multidimensional nature of trust aligns with the notion that trust is a dynamic and evolving phenomenon, adapting to time and context, rendering it a complex concept that requires exploration in various contexts.

Farnsworth et al. (2019) conceptualize trust as focusing on the willingness of one party to accept vulnerability and risk due to a perception of another party. While this definition foregrounds vulnerability, it becomes analytically productive when read alongside Castelfranchi and Falcone’s (2010) Trust Theory, which emphasizes that such a willingness is not spontaneous and emerges from underlying cognitive and relational assessments of the other’s characteristics, intentions, and reliability. Trust, in this sense, functions as a mediating mechanism that transforms perceptions of the other into a decision to suspend control and accept risk. Hence, there is an understanding that the willingness or decision of one party has a background, in this case, the perceived characteristic. Synthesizing these perspectives, trust will be conceptualized as relational, interpersonal, and organic in this study. The emphasis of trust as a relational practice aligns with Leithwood et al.’s (2020) revised conceptualization of leadership influence, which posits that trust constitutes a critical mediating condition for leadership success. The study will utilize Castelfranchi and Falcone’s (2010) Trust Theory.

Previous research has highlighted the characteristics of trustworthiness, including benevolence, competence, honesty, integrity, reliability, predictability, good judgment, concern, and openness (Ellison and Firestone, 1974; Butler and Cantrell, 1984; Mishra, 1996; McKnight et al., 2002), as vital for any relationship. What was evident from this study was that words such as “trustworthiness,” “honesty,” “reliability,” “integrity,” and “good judgment” are linked to the characteristics of an ethical leader, which focus on doing the right things right. Trust is clearly an indicator of ethical leadership. Highlighting trust, Yukl et al. (2013) suggest that high trust and respect characterize high-quality exchange relationships, which can be interpreted as indicating collaboration. The standard terms in discussions involving collaborative school leadership are trust and respect. The trusted leader will be adored and respected, influencing followers to become committed and loyal.

Ethical leadership is defined as the “demonstration of a normatively appropriate conduct through personal actions and interpersonal relationships and the promotion of such conduct to followers through communication, reinforcement, and decision-making” (Brown et al., 2005, p.120). It is a leadership style sought after because it can bring about positive social change and has been shown to improve employee performance and reduce misconduct and absenteeism (Sam, 2021). Therefore, ethical leaders can be trusted as they are seen to be fair, honest, reliable, brave, virtuous, and trustworthy role models (Chibaya, 2021). The core characteristics associated with ethical leadership include integrity, honesty, fairness, accountability, dignity, cultural and moral values, diversity, and respect for individuals. These core characteristics are also present in the African Philosophy of Ubuntu, which is covered as one of the theoretical frameworks. This links ethical leadership to the mechanism of Ubuntu and trust.

What constitutes ethical leadership is not a set of isolated moral actions, but rather it emerges from the interaction between a philosophical foundation, individual conduct, and environmental conditions. Rather than functioning as a discrete leadership style, ethical leadership operates as a relational and normative mechanism through which leaders interpret moral obligation, enact values and shape the ethical climate of their environment. Early formulations of ethical leadership within transformational and servant leadership theories (Ahmed, 2025; Ahmed et al., 2023) highlight this mechanism by demonstrating how moral influence is exercised through relational engagement, modeling, and shared purpose rather than positional authority. The relational mechanism is further illuminated through Ubuntu philosophy.

Ubuntu philosophy conceptualizes leadership ethics as inherently communal (Samuel, 2024). The link to leadership styles can be explained by how ethical leadership influences personal and interpersonal relationships, which are also vital for collaboration and are evident in Ubuntu values – “I am because we are.” Another theoretical framework that has been used to understand ethical leadership is the Multiple Ethical Paradigms (Shapiro and Stefkovich, 2021), which helps analyze complex ethical dilemmas. The complexity of school leadership can be analyzed through the lens of Multiple Ethical Paradigms. In African contexts, the philosophy of Ubuntu is preferred because it embodies values such as communal independence and shared responsibility, which provide the foundation for collaborative settings. The institutional and environmental factors indicate how external and institutional contexts significantly influence the ability to practice ethical leadership. Research has highlighted several factors, including economic, political, support systems, involvement, and motivation (Matupire, 2016; Vikaraman et al., 2021), to influence the practice of ethical leadership. At the individual level, ethical leadership is enacted through personal actions that involve self-responsibility, leading the way, and role modeling (Cheteni and Shindika, 2017), which also affects how one is trusted and the institution as a whole.

Trust is widely recognized as a fundamental element in enabling effective collaboration within school environments. Internationally, scholars argue that trust functions as the social glue that supports shared decision-making, professional cooperation and the collective pursuit of school improvement (Bryk and Schneider, 2002; Tschannen-Moran, 2020). Leithwood et al. (2020) caution against seeing leadership practices as context-free and argue that effectiveness depends on how leaders adapt core practices to local conditions. In collaborative school settings, trust fosters ethical leadership practices, such as open communication, and reduces interpersonal risk, promoting a culture where teachers and stakeholders can work interdependently toward common goals. Scholarship on successful school leadership converges on the argument that leadership effectiveness is mediated through relational, organizational and motivational conditions rather than direct instructional control (Keravnos and Symeou, 2024; Leithwood et al., 2020). This not only highlights the power of collaboration but also underscores how trust becomes a central leadership outcome and a key means of influencing school improvement.

South African leadership research highlights that trust is central to collaborative school improvement, particularly within professional learning communities (PLCs) (Bhengu and Blose, 2022). Since 2020, the Department of Basic Education has promoted PLCs as a means to enhance teacher collaboration, but studies reveal that the effectiveness of PLCs is strongly linked to relational trust (Hudson, 2024). Hudson (2024) emphasizes that PLCs encourage collaboration and depend on relational trust. When teachers trust one another and trust their leaders, they participate openly, reflect honestly, engage meaningfully and are motivated. This aligns with Keravnos and Symeou’s (2024) recurrent leadership practices, namely: fairness, respect, consistency and reliability, trusting teachers, setting the example, competence and organization, and open-door support. Therefore, at the institutional level, collaboration, just like ethical leadership, is constrained by broader socio-economic and organizational conditions.

Recent scholarship emphasizes the relational dimensions of leadership as pivotal in cultivating trust. Transformational, distributed, and participatory leadership approaches are shown to create conditions for shared decision-making and a collaborative culture (Keravnos and Symeou, 2024; Bouwmans et al., 2017; Nadeem, 2024). These leadership styles are built on consistent communication, transparency in decision-making, recognition of teacher expertise, emotional support for staff, and modeling ethical behavior. These attributes are also tenets of ethical leadership; however, there is a scarcity of literature that links ethical leadership to trust, especially in a collaborative context. Furthermore, there is a need for further research in contexts marked by historical injustice, socio-economic inequality, and institutional challenges (Leithwood et al., 2020). We note that successful school leadership cannot be adequately understood without paying attention to trust as a relational, moral and organizational condition.

South Africa’s contemporary educational landscape is shaped by sustained political, economic, and social volatility, which has profound implications for how school leadership is enacted and perceived. Rather than functioning as a neutral backdrop, this context actively structures conditions under which trust in leadership is formed, eroded or contested. Pillay’s (2017) research suggests that many leaders today struggle to earn public trust due to their lack of ethical leadership and inability to demonstrate effective leadership in times of crisis. South Africa has faced its fair share of crises, whether artificial, such as state capture and load shedding, or natural disasters like floods (Gibson, 2009), the “lost years” of State Capture, when corrupt activities were exposed in government (Jonas, 2019). Or the threats and opportunities at the dawn of a Government of National Unity (GNU), which envisaged a collective pursuit for improvement (Thwala and Vilakazi, 2025). The formation of a GNU illustrates how collective, inclusive leadership can serve as a trust-repair mechanism, signaling a reorientation toward shared responsibility and ethical renewal.

Within schools, these broader societal dynamics intersect with internal ethical challenges, including financial misconduct, chronic lateness, bullying and sexual harassment (Chibaya, 2021). Such practices operate as micro-level trust disruptors, particularly when they are involved in or tolerated by school leaders. Observed unethical behavior by leaders triggers relational evaluation by staff, learners and communities, through which trust is withdrawn or cautiously extended. In these instances, trust functions as an interpretive judgment, shaped by perceived consistency between espoused values and enacted conduct. Ethical breaches within schools are not interpreted in isolation; they are filtered through a broader societal context marked by ethical fatigue and institutional skepticism.

A problematic legacy of unethical practices in South African schools is assumed to lead to the breakdown of trust. What is clear is that trust is conceptualized as a relational and enacted phenomenon that is produced through daily leadership behaviors and interpersonal interactions (Keravnos and Symeou, 2024). The noted unethical practices affect trust, which is dynamic and contingent, influenced by experiences of the school leadership’s ethical practices. A breakdown of trust would further exacerbate the occurrence of unethical practices in school. Some of these problems include a lack of support from parents, teachers being absent from work and learners due to conflict and economic issues, and other professional and social misdemeanors (Mthiyane and Mudadigwa, 2021). For a leader to be trusted, he/she must be accountable for his or her decisions and behavior and must also make his or her subordinates accountable to influence them to behave ethically (Mishra and Mishra, 2013). What is clear is that school leaders must strive to improve trust by being ethical and democratic.

Taken together, this context highlights that trust in schools is not solely contingent on individual leaders’ behavior but is also mediated by historical legacies, crises, conditions, and institutional ethical climates. Ethical leadership thus emerges as a context-sensitive trust mechanism capable of entrenched mistrust or initiating the process of trust repair. This study contributes to the understanding of trust and ethical leadership, which will help improve school leadership practices by examining how trust influences school leadership. School environments are often dynamic and complex, undergoing constant change. As school leadership is a social issue, this study aims to explore ethical leadership in a South African context and contribute value to society.

The three classes of participants, through the data collected from them, emphasized how sometimes the dictators of the profession conflict with their personal views. When professional dictates are pitted against personal views, the participants indicated that the most noble thing is to abide by the professional code. Following the professional code of conduct promotes trust and maintains decorum in schools.

Mrs Moeti: Teacher at Tharu High School: A principal with a professional orientation will not emphasize bureaucratic mechanisms for control (Tschannen-Moran, 2020). Tschannen-Moran (2020) reasons that these principals trust their teachers to exercise sound judgment in responding to the needs of students and would go beyond what is governed by the rules and regulations to do their duties. This eliminates the need for close supervision of teachers and eliminates micromanagement, which most teachers have shown to be ineffective. Although micromanagement may be eliminated, clear guidelines must be in place to ensure order, trust, and professionalism. Trust fosters professionalism in teaching, allowing mistakes to be seen as opportunities for learning and improvement rather than focusing on blame and retribution, while nurturing honesty and openness (Hoy and Sweetland, 2001). The involvement of teachers as professionals in trust issues in collaborative school leadership is also underscored by research.

Another participant said:

Mrs Moeti: Teacher at Tharu Secondary School: Mrs Moeti clearly shows that the standards in school leadership must not be based on personal views. South Africa, the School Management Team comprises the principal, the deputy principal, departmental heads (HoDs) and co-opted post-level 1 teachers. What is portrayed here is a high level of collaboration, which Tutu (1999) describes as Ubuntu in how it brings a sense of unity and celebration of diversity. Teachers are the individuals who are primarily in immediate contact with learners, more so than the principal, and hold a leadership role due to the autonomous nature of their job. At a personal level, it is essential to emphasize the importance of personal actions, such as leading the way and role modeling, in enacting ethical leadership (Cheteni and Shindika, 2017), which also involves relating to others. In agreement, Falcone and Castelfranchi (2002) perceive trust as a relational construct involving a trustor, a trustee and the act or performance. This aligns with the relational dimension of leadership, as emphasized by Hudson (2024), which relies on consistent communication and ethical behavior to foster trust (Bouwmans et al., 2017; Nadeem, 2024). In this case, stakeholders in various contexts, individually and/or collectively, assume the roles of the trustor and trustee. This helps explain why teachers and principals are, in this study, viewed as vital components of collaborative school leadership.

What becomes more apparent in the findings regarding the contestation of professional and personal values is the complexity of trust. According to Falcone et al. (2022), trust is a complex socio-cognitive phenomenon that comprises mental attitudes, such as those expressed by the participants, as well as the affective and cognitive aspects reflected in this study through the participants’ beliefs, purposes, intentions, and expectations. Those mental attitudes and affective and cognitive aspects can also be expressed in the form of the values of Ubuntu, which, as a philosophy, involves cognitive aspects and is based on African beliefs regarding ethics.

Some participants specified that where there is communication that hints at transparency, trust is possible. The opposite is true, as the lack of transparency may be interpreted as though something is being hidden.

To illustrate the importance of communication in establishing trust, one of the participants said:

Mrs Gudla: Teacher at Pedi High School: The participant claims that if a leader communicates openly, they will be trusted enough to be informed of one’s personal struggles. Communication fosters trust, and this finding aligns with Farnsworth et al. (2019), who demonstrate that trust is established when one shows a willingness to be vulnerable to another. Therefore, open communication, characterized by mutual respect and shared goals, fosters trust among team members and cultivates a safe environment for collaboration (Sesinyi and Gcelu, 2023). A leader whom one feels at ease communicating with is shown here to be informed of challenges that people are struggling with. Open communication is even more critical in times of crisis (Gallup, 2016), where collaboration must be intense to enable the school to navigate successfully.

Highlighting the importance of communication, other participants had this to say:

Ms Pillay: Principal at Unne High School: I think it’s very important that the leaders must build trust and to build trust one needs to communicate effectively, be open, let the colleagues be free to communicate, not as a leader you always talking, but you don’t want people maybe to ask questions or what.

Mr Mabaso: Teacher at Nne High School: The participants emphasized the importance of communication in building trust and demonstrated that effective communication is a two-way street, where the leader initiates communication. This is underscored by trust being a vital cognitive “mediator” of sociality and integration of mind and interaction in an organization. In organizations where there is no trust, communication is condensed and summarized (Tschannen-Moran, 2020), but in environments that foster trust, communication is consistent and transparent (Hudson, 2024). Rather than accurately transmitting information, a subordinate prioritizes their own interests and is hesitant to take risks that could lead to trouble. Similarly, teachers in low-trust schools described communication as hampered by mistrust and admitted to frequently obstructing or altering communication to prevent confrontation. Furthermore, teachers deliberately limited interactions with the principal, which hindered access to crucial information necessary for proactive problem-solving (Tschannen-Moran, 2020). The ensuing absence of trust in such circumstances renders whatever form of Ubuntu may be present idealistic and ineffective.

The findings demonstrate the participants’ conceptualization of trust and its relationship to leadership style. One of the interview questions required participants to share their understanding of what trust means. Some of them had this to say:

Ms Tau: Departmental Head at Pedi High School: Part of the definition of trust from Ms Tau shows trust as an expectation, belief, willingness and attitude in agreement with (Castaldo, 2002). When she refers to the roles that people in her department have in meeting specific targets, the identification of targets and roles, which also lead to the functions of her colleagues, relates to the integrated model in defining trust (Castelfranchi and Falcone, 2010). The integration of a person’s belief with motivation and action defines the level of trust, as shown by the socio-cognitive model of trust. What was also clear from the data was the link between trust and leadership styles. Due to the differences in human characteristics, leaders tend to adopt various leadership styles. The differences in leadership styles were shown to influence trust. One of the participants said:

Mr Pete: Deputy Principal at Unne High School: The participant struggles with an autocratic leadership style. Mr Pete finds it difficult to trust such a leader. Another participant, the head of the department at Pedi High School, Mr Ritz, said.

Mr Ritz: Departmental Head at Pedi Secondary School: The above quotation highlights some attributes of a leader that foster trust. Following the analysis of the work done by Bryk and Schneider (2002), Farnsworth et al. (2019), it can be inferred that the antecedents of relational trust include competence, benevolence, openness, and integrity, which are related to the core components and critical processes associated with learning-centered leadership. While literature clearly links transformational and servant leadership to styles of leadership that create trust (Ahmed, 2025; Ahmed et al., 2023), the attributes mentioned by Mr Ritz concur with the antecedents of ethical leadership highlighted by Shapiro and Stefkovich (2021), encompassing the ethics of care and justice. When a leader acts in the “best interest” of others, as mentioned by Mr Ritz, they practice servant leadership, which is envisioned as both a product and an antecedent of leader and organizational trust. Doing things focusing on the best interest of others is in line with utilitarianism, an attribute of Ubuntu, which is known as the greater good (Tutu, 1999). A leader with the people’s interests at heart, showing Ubuntu, will be trusted. This underscores the trust-Ubuntu nexus. However, the occurrence of trust without Ubuntu is simply compliance-based and will not stand the test of time; it is fragile.

Leadership becomes effective when it is needed (Leithwood et al., 2010); hence, in this era, where ethics are rationalized and the relative application of ethical values is emphasized, there is a need for ethical leadership. There is more effect of leadership where it is needed most. There is sufficient documentation that speaks to school leadership, but one of the critical questions facing practizing leaders and leadership scholars is about “how” (Leithwood et al., 2020). How does school leadership influence student learning?

The heads of schools, departmental heads, and teachers agreed on what constitutes an ethical individual who is perceived as deserving trust. According to Farnsworth et al. (2019), one is perceived to be trustworthy if he/she is open and reliable. There is a perceived character trait that one attributes to another before trusting them. Castaldo (2002) refers to specific actions and behaviors from a leader that contribute to them being trusted. Could these be ethics?

Ms Motaung: Principal at Nne High School: The participant highlighted the issue of trustworthiness as one of the reasons why school leaders can be trusted or not. What is clear is that the school leader is subject to a judgment process influenced by public opinion, which may render the leader trustworthy or untrustworthy. The socio-cognitive perception of trust (Falcone and Castelfranchi, 2002) characterizes the notion of trust. When a school leader is perceived as ethical, stakeholders trust and support the school leader’s vision, which in turn leads to successful collaboration. In this way, it becomes clear that trust, though multidimensional (Farnsworth et al., 2019), has a strong correlation with ethics.

What was evident from this study was that words such as “trustworthiness,” “honesty,” “reliability,” “integrity,” and “good judgment” are linked to the characteristics of an ethical leader, which focuses on doing the right things right. On doing the right things which is related to ethics, Mrs Moroka said:

Mrs Moroka: Teacher at Nne High School: Mrs Moroka hints at some way of following up on the goals set when she says, “We wait for the achievement of it,” which means someone must account. One of the essential attributes of ethical leadership is accountability. Literature links accountability to transparency. Ethical leadership will be shown to be a vital antecedent of trust. At an individual level, ethics are enacted through observable practices such as self-responsibility, moral courage and consistency between values and behavior (Cheteni and Shindika, 2017). What was evident from this study was that words such as “trustworthiness,” “honesty,” “reliability,” “integrity,” and “good judgment” are linked to the characteristics of an ethical leader, which focus on doing the right things right. Doing the right things is related to ethics. Mrs Moroka, a teacher at Nne High School, hints at a way to follow up on the goals set when she says, “We wait for the achievement of it,” which means someone must be held accountable. One of the essential attributes of ethical leadership is accountability. Literature links accountability to transparency. Ethical leadership will be shown to be a vital antecedent of trust. Considering this:

Theoretically, the combination of Castelfranchi and Falcone’s (2010) Socio-cognitive Model Trust Theory and the African Philosophy of Ubuntu show a linkage that forms the trust-Ubuntu nexus, making a theoretical contribution. This nexus is a conceptual linkage of the two theoretical frameworks in which Ubuntu’s ethical-relational values map onto the socio-cognitive components of the Trust Theory. Ubuntu embodies a leadership ethic characterized by reciprocity, mutual belonging, and collaboration, which fosters trust. The Trust Theory, combined with the socio-cognitive model, calibrates trust and links it to ethical leadership by utilizing the concept of Ubuntu in an African context. This was illustrated by how some participants have been shown to emphasize ethics in relation to trust. Ultimately, the integrated framework allowed the researchers to conclude that the values inherent in Ubuntu enhance trust, thereby forming the trust-Ubuntu nexus and making a significant conceptual contribution.