Trust in institutions

The foundation is understanding what each institution actually does and in what situations it makes sense to turn to it. Many people hold strong opinions about institutions but have no concrete picture of how they work. They know that healthcare is overloaded or that bureaucracy is slow, but do not know precisely where they would go in a specific situation. This leads either to overestimation — expecting the system to handle everything — or to complete rejection. Neither helps.

It is important to gain direct experience. To handle ordinary things through official channels, to communicate with the healthcare system, to deal with situations requiring institutional cooperation when the stakes are still relatively low. Only concrete experience gives a realistic picture of what works, what does not and how to use the system. A person develops a feel for what form of communication to choose, what documents are needed, how long things take and when it makes sense to follow up.

Working with information also plays a major role. This means knowing where information comes from, how current it is and what context it carries. Not relying solely on individual cases or powerful stories, but orienting yourself by verified sources and official information. In an environment where distorted or incomplete messages spread quickly, this ability is essential. The point is not to trust every announcement, but to be able to distinguish between what is binding information and what is merely opinion or impression.

Setting realistic expectations matters too. Institutions have their role, but they cannot solve everything immediately or without error. Resilience does not arise from blind trust, but from knowing what to expect from the system and where its limits are. In practice this means combining your own preparedness with the ability to use available structures: knowing where to turn in the case of a health problem, how to proceed with administrative matters or where to find information in a crisis. At the same time, counting on the fact that not everything will be accessible immediately and being able to handle a basic situation even without immediate help.

In crises, this dimension becomes very concrete. A person needs to quickly assess which information to trust, how to proceed and where to find help. Those who have experience with institutions and a realistic relationship with them orient themselves faster, avoid unnecessary mistakes and can better use what the system offers. Those lacking experience, or whose relationship is built only on frustration or idealisation, find the situation harder to navigate.

Building this dimension therefore means developing orientation, experience and the ability to use the system — not blind trust or automatic rejection. The goal is for institutions not to be something foreign, but one layer of the environment that you know how to work with.