This article aims to explore the nature and functioning of trust in work teams. Trust is defined as a multi‐component variable with distinct but related dimensions. These include propensity to trust, perceived trustworthiness, co‐operative and lack of monitoring behaviours. A model was tested relating trust with perceived task performance, team satisfaction, and two dimensions of organisational commitment, i.e. attitudinal and continuance. Survey data from 112 teams(n=395) was collected in three social care institutions in The Netherlands. The results are supportive of a multi‐component structure for trust and of its importance to the functioning of teams and organisations. Work team trust appeared strongly related with team member's attitudes towards the organisation. Trust between team members was positively associated with attitudinal commitment and negatively with continuance commitment. Trust was also positively related with perceived task performance and with team satisfaction. In addition, perceived task performance appeared strongly related to team satisfaction.

No abstract

We provide a comprehensive but critical review of research on applicant reactions to selection procedures published since 2000 (n = 145) Table S1.

Summary This article presents an integrative review of the rapidly growing body of research on trust in work teams. We start by analyzing prominent definitions of trust and their theoretical foundations, followed by different conceptualizations of trust in teams emphasizing its multilevel, dynamic, and emergent nature. We then review the empirical research and its underlying theoretical perspectives concerning the emergence and development of trust in teams. On the basis of this review, we propose an integrated conceptual framework that organizes the field and can advance knowledge of the multilevel nature of trust in teams. Our conclusion is that trust in teams resides at multiple levels of analysis simultaneously, is subject to factors across levels in organizations, and impacts performance and other relevant outcomes both at the individual and team levels. We argue that research should not only differentiate between interpersonal trust between members from collective trust at the team level but also emphasize the interplay within and between these levels by considering cross‐level influences and dynamics. We conclude by proposing 4 major directions for future research and 3 critical methodological recommendations for study designs derived from our review and framework.

We present a targeted review of recent developments and advances in digital selection procedures (DSPs) with particular attention to advances in internet-based techniques. By reviewing the emergence of DSPs in selection research and practice, we highlight five main categories of methods (online applications, online psychometric testing, digital interviews, gamified assessment and social media). We discuss the evidence base for each of these DSP groups, focusing on construct and criterion validity, and applicant reactions to their use in organizations. Based on the findings of our review, we present a critique of the evidence base for DSPs in industrial, work and organizational psychology and set out an agenda for advancing research. We identify pressing gaps in our understanding of DSPs, and ten key questions to be answered. Given that DSPs are likely to depart further from traditional nondigital selection procedures in the future, a theme in this agenda is the need to establish a distinct and specific literature on DSPs, and to do so at a pace that reflects the speed of the underlying technological advancement. In concluding, we, therefore, issue a call to action for selection researchers in work and organizational psychology to commence a new and rigorous multidisciplinary programme of scientific study of DSPs.