Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

TRUST (Dirks e Ferris, 2001) (Situational strength: We use the concept of…

- - - - We will focus only on trust as a psychological state, such as a belief or attitude, toward another known individual, as opposed to trust as a dispositional construct (e.g., Rotter 1967) or among groups or firms (e.g., Wicks et al. 1999, Das and Teng 1998). And, we will focus on the effects of trust on workplace-relevant attitudes and behaviors of individuals as studied by microorganizational behavior researchers,
- - - - 10 studies examined the idea that individuals transmit more information, and/or information with higher fidelity, to a superior or work partner when they trust that individual. Of these, six studies found a significant effect of trust on various operationalizations of information sharing (Boss 1978, Mellinger 1959, O’Reilly 1978, O’Reilly and Roberts 1974, Smith and Barclay 1997, Zand 1972). But, four studies did not find a significant effect (De Dreu et al. 1998, Dirks 1999, Kimmel et al. 1980, Roberts and O’Reilly 1974).
- - - - First, trust affects how one assesses the future behavior of another party with whom one is interdependent (or whom may take action that af- fects oneself).
      - Second, trust also affects how one interprets the past (or present) actions of the other party, and the motives underlying the actions.
      - Both propositions rest on the premise that trust does not act in a direct causal role or elicit particular outcomes itself. Instead, trust moderates the effect of primary determinants (causal factors) on outcomes by affecting how one assesses the future behavior or interprets the past actions of another party. By impacting the assessment of the other party’s future or prior actions, trust reduces some of the concomitant uncertainty and ambiguity.
    - - Trust, instead of directly causing risk-taking behaviors, may influence the extent to which a motivation for engaging in risk-taking behaviors is likely to lead to risk-taking behaviors.
        
        In our examples, trust functions not by causing the individual to engage in the behavior, but as a moderating construct that influences the strength of the relationship between the behavioral cue and the individual’s behavior.