Why Time Investment Shapes Trust in Business

In a recent LinkedIn post, Jason Feifer discusses how the time people invest in their work and relationships can shape whether others give them attention in return. His post reflects on GoDaddy CEO Aman Bhutani’s decision not to read work he believes his team did not take time to write, then extends that principle to sales, ideas and gifts.

“If the person couldn’t take the time to write it, then I definitely shouldn’t take the time to read it,”

Feifer attributes that remark to Bhutani, as quoted by Business Insider. He calls it “a powerful filter” and argues that the principle reaches beyond AI-generated work: people are more likely to value an exchange when they can see that someone invested effort in it.

Effort as a signal of respect

According to Feifer, time functions as a visible sign of consideration. A recipient may not know every step behind a piece of work or an offer, but a tailored message or carefully developed idea can signal that the sender considered the other person’s needs. In Feifer’s view, that signal can influence whether the recipient chooses to engage.

“If you want someone to invest time in you, you must clearly invest time in them first.”

Feifer applies the idea to sales outreach. He contrasts generic pitches, which he says can be ignored, with personalized ones that show the sender has taken time to understand the recipient. The point is not simply that a longer message is better; his post emphasizes visible attention to the person receiving it.

The principle beyond workplace writing

Feifer also connects effort to how people respond to thoughts and gifts. As he notes, people may take an idea more seriously when they know its author invested time in developing it. A gift can carry more meaning when the giver has put thought into making or finding it. In both examples, the effort adds context to the exchange.

Reciprocity has limits

Feifer’s closing argument frames attention as an exchange: people often expect some reciprocity when they spend time on others. That observation offers a useful lens for managers and communicators considering how their work reaches colleagues or customers. It also leaves room for judgment: effort alone does not guarantee that a message is relevant or that a response is owed.

“Time is a visible currency, and people want equal exchanges.”

In the post, Feifer uses Bhutani’s reported approach to AI-written work as a starting point for a broader claim about trust and attention. His central argument is that investing time in an audience can make a request for their time more credible—whether the exchange involves a pitch, an idea or a personal gesture.