Beyond shared perceptions of trust and monitoring in teams: Implications of asymmetry and dissensus.

Jong, Bart A. De; Dirks, Kurt T.

doi:10.1037/a0026483

Cited by 165 publications

(150 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

145

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Unlike the direct and referent-shift consensus models, a dispersion model focuses on differences in the amount of consensus between units, rather than differences in the mean levels between units. In the context of trust, some prior studies have shown that team members do not always agree on their levels of trust as evidenced by statistics that indicate the degree of agreement (Colquitt, LePine, Zapata, & Wild, 2011;De Jong & Dirks, 2011;Gillespie, 2005). In the present research where consensus in trust in leaders concerns the similarity and differences in team members' individual levels of trust in leaders, the dispersion model is most appropriate.…”

Section: Collective Constructs and Consensusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Getting on the Same Page: How Leaders Build Trust Consensus in Teams and Its Consequences

Fulmer

2015

AMPROC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Existing organizational research has demonstrated that team members' trust in leaders is positively related to a team's bottom-line outcomes. However, little is known about how collective trust in leaders develops among team members. To address this gap, the present study examines the effects of multiple emergent processes on the extent to which team members exhibit consensus in trust in their leader. In particular, it was proposed that the most important factors for the emergence, and the degree of consensus, of collective trust in leaders should have the same referent target as the collective construct (i.e., the leader) and concern behaviors that involve interactions between the leader and team members. Thus, the leader behavior and interactions variables of showing concern, leading by example, and monitoring were expected to exert stronger influence on the consensus in trust in leaders than leader attributes (ability and integrity) and team factors (open communication and demographic diversity). Further, the degree of consensus in trust in leaders was predicted to have both an independent and interaction effect with the mean level of trust in leaders in influencing team performance and voice behavior. Three waves of survey data were collected from teams with new leadership in a large academic military institution. Data from 719 team members from 105 teams were used to test these predictions by analyzing consensus concurrently and changes in consensus over time.The results generally supported the relative importance of leader showing concern and leading by example on the degree of consensus in trust in leaders in the concurrent model. For changes in consensus, leading by example was particularly important. In addition, while consensus was not independently related to the team performance and voice behaviors, it interacted with the mean level in influencing the outcomes in both the concurrent and change models. Taken together, the findings suggest that some leader behaviors are important for the development of collective trust or consensus in trust in leaders, and further suggest that consensus can act as a boundary condition for the effect of the mean level of trust in leaders on team outcomes. By focusing on the consensus in trust in leaders, this research begins to shed light on how consensus in trust develops among team members with respect to their leader and has implications for understanding trust, leadership, and emergence.

show abstract

Section: Collective Constructs and Consensusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Getting on the Same Page: How Leaders Build Trust Consensus in Teams and Its Consequences

Fulmer

2015

AMPROC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the one hand, the monitoring literature has framed transparency and trust as alternative and incompatible mechanisms of control (De Jong & Dirks, 2012;Luhmann, 1979;Piccoli & Ives, 2003). On the other hand, it is rather hard to imagine a well-performing environment either of total transparency devoid of trust, or of total trust devoid of transparency (Webber, 2008).…”

Section: Investigating the Culture Of Transparency And The Role Of Trustmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making Transparency Transparent: The Evolution of Observation in Management Theory

Bernstein¹

2017

ANNALS

176

144

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Observation is key to management scholarship and practice. Yet a holistic view of its role in management has been elusive, in part due to shifting terminology. The current popularity of the term "transparency" provides the occasion for a thorough review, which finds (a) a shift in the object of observation from organizational outcomes to the detailed individual activities within them; (b) a shift from people observing the technology to technology observing people; and (c) a split in the field, with managers viewing observation almost entirely from the observer's perspective, leaving the perspective of the observed to the realm of scholarly methodology courses and philosophical debates on privacy. I suggest how the literature on transparency and related literatures might be improved with research designed in light of these trends.KEYWORDS: transparency, privacy, performance, organizations, management theory ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: I thank Julie Battilana, Ethan Burris, Tim Earle, Amy Edmondson, John Elder, Elizabeth Hansen, Rosabeth Moss Kanter, Joshua Margolis, Tsedal Neeley, Nitin Nohria, Shefali Patil, Kathy Qu, Ryan Raffaelli, Lakshmi Ramarajan, and Bradley Staats for feedback on prior versions of this work; Jim Detert, Sim Sitkin, and two anonymous reviewers for insightful and developmental feedback; and the Harvard Business School for financial support.Please cite as: Bernstein, E. S. Making transparency transparent: The evolution of observation in management theory. Academy of Management Annals, 11(1): 217-266. 2We are increasingly observed and observing at work. Fifty years ago, a typical manager might have tracked production, revenue, and expenses against budget and periodically observed workers during in-person audits (e.g., Dalton, 1959). Today, advances in technology, from smart cameras to wearable tracking devices, make possible a kind of real-time "SuperVision" (Gilliom & Monahan, 2012) far beyond any level of observability envisioned 50 years ago or when Frederick Taylor (1911) originally promoted managerial oversight through scientific management.Public attention is captured by extreme examples of observation at work, like handheld computers (Amazon) or wearable bands (Tesco) tracking and optimizing employees' every move (Head, 2014;Kantor & Streitfeld, 2015;Rawlinson, 2013), embedded sensors in large fleets of company-owned trucks (e.g., UPS) recording hundreds of measurements to capture every action of the truck and its driver to unearth and enforce time-saving tactics (Goldstein, 2014;Levy, 2015), cameras at Las Vegas casino Harrah's tracking the smiles of card dealers and wait staff as a proxy for customer service quality (Peck, 2013), point-of-sale systems scraping every transaction for signs of employee fraud (Pierce, Snow, & McAfee, 2015), and RFID (radiofrequency identification)-enabled workspaces automatically capturing factory worker progress (Ranganathan, 2015), how long employees spend at their desks (Zillman, 2016), and even who does and does not use hand-soap and hand-sanitizer dispensers ...

show abstract

“…Team members would also have more responsibility for the tasks they need to complete. They would also obtain more support from one another (De Jong & Dirks, 2012). Not only would job performance be increased but also employees' creativity would also be enhanced (Zhang & Zhou, 2014).…”

Section: Practical Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Job Resources as a Mediator Between Management Trust Climate and Employees’ Well-Being: A Cross-Sectional Multilevel Approach

Chin¹,

Idris²

2017

AAMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Beyond shared perceptions of trust and monitoring in teams: Implications of asymmetry and dissensus.

Cited by 165 publications

References 67 publications

Getting on the Same Page: How Leaders Build Trust Consensus in Teams and Its Consequences

Getting on the Same Page: How Leaders Build Trust Consensus in Teams and Its Consequences

Making Transparency Transparent: The Evolution of Observation in Management Theory

Job Resources as a Mediator Between Management Trust Climate and Employees’ Well-Being: A Cross-Sectional Multilevel Approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About