Development of Cognitive and Affective Trust in Teams

Webber, Sheila Simsarian

doi:10.1177/1046496408323569

Cited by 175 publications

(182 citation statements)

References 44 publications

(74 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

163

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These results have been supported at both the individual (e.g., (Costa 2003)) and team (e.g., (De Jong and Elfring 2010;Palanski et al 2011)) levels. Moreover, prior performance has been shown to have an influence on trust (Walther 1992;McAllister 1995;Webber 2008), supporting a bi-directional relationship between trust and performance.…”

Section: Trust and Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Affect-based trust captures the emotional ties between the trustor and the trustee. This two-component model of trust has received strong empirical support (e.g., (Webber 2008;Wilson et al 2006)) and has become very influential in the field of trust research. Moreover, a recent review by McEvily and Tortoriello (2011) of the measurement of trust identified that the McAllister (1995) scale is one of the most replicated trust measures, further supporting our use of this conceptualization and measurement.…”

Section: What Is Trust?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on prior research (McAllister 1995;Webber 2008;Kuo and Yu 2009) we anticipate that cognition-based trust will be the first to develop as team members base it on task relevant information exchanged. As team members work together and cognition-based trust continues to grow, affect-based trust will emerge based on the established cognition-based trust, and the exchange of relational information.…”

Section: Trust Development In a Virtual Environment-a Proposed Model mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Assessing Trust and Effectiveness in Virtual Teams: Latent Growth Curve and Latent Change Score Models

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Trust plays a central role in the effectiveness of work groups and teams. This is the case for both face-to-face and virtual teams. Yet little is known about the development of trust in virtual teams. We examined cognitive and affective trust and their relationship to team effectiveness as reflected through satisfaction with one's team and task performance. Latent growth curve analysis reveals both trust types start at a significant level with individual differences in that initial level. Cognitive trust follows a linear growth pattern while affective trust is overall non-linear, but becomes linear once established. Latent change score models are utilized to examine change in trust and also its relationship with satisfaction with the team and team performance. In examining only change in trust and its relationship to satisfaction there appears to be a straightforward influence of trust on satisfaction and satisfaction on trust. However, when incorporated into a bivariate coupling latent change model the dynamics of the relationship are revealed. A similar pattern holds for trust and task performance; however, in the bivariate coupling change model a more parsimonious representation is preferred.

show abstract

Section: Trust and Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: What Is Trust?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Trust Development In a Virtual Environment-a Proposed Model mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessing Trust and Effectiveness in Virtual Teams: Latent Growth Curve and Latent Change Score Models

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Reciprocal trust between teams has been demonstrated as a longitudinal process where team trust is continually revised based on up to date trustworthiness perceptions following interaction between the teams (Serva, Fuller, & Mayer, 2005). Further empirical evidence from team research also suggests that trust tends to increase over time (Wilson, Straus, & McEvily, 2006), grows more complex and multidimensional as relationships develop (Webber, 2008), and that early trusting beliefs have a significant impact on beliefs two months later (Crisp & Jarvenpaa, 2013). In general, team level results are in line with the proposition that the mechanism through which trust develops is positive exposure to the other party.…”

Section: Newcomer Trust Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Getting to Know You

Werff

Buckley

2016

Journal of Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite recent theoretical advances, the pattern of trust development between coworkers has yet to receive focused longitudinal attention. Furthermore, current theory suggests that employees attend to an array of independent trust cues in any given situation but fails to identify which cues are important when. In a four-wave longitudinal field study, we demonstrate how new coworker intentions to engage in trust behaviors (reliance and disclosure) evolve during employee socialization and examine the trust cues that prime decisions to trust. We present a latent growth model of trust development that reveals, for the first time, that reliance and disclosure intentions in early work relationships develop in a positive, nonlinear pattern over time. Furthermore, the study indicates that propensity to trust has a statistically significant effect on the initial status of intention to rely on and disclose information to coworkers but not on changes in trust behavior over time. The multiwave design permits comprehensive assessment of the change in impact of different trust cues over time and demonstrates that the importance of certain cues varies depending primarily on the type of trust in question and potentially changes as a relationship matures. We discuss the theoretical implications and directions for future research.

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). As with another pair of seeming opposites-collaboration and control (Sundaramurthy & Lewis, 2003: 404, Figure 3)-it would seem that an organization, whether at the peer, team, or organizational level, must promote both transparency and trust (De Jong & Elfring, 2010;Loughry & Tosi, 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

Development of Cognitive and Affective Trust in Teams

Cited by 175 publications

References 44 publications

Assessing Trust and Effectiveness in Virtual Teams: Latent Growth Curve and Latent Change Score Models

Assessing Trust and Effectiveness in Virtual Teams: Latent Growth Curve and Latent Change Score Models

Getting to Know You

Making Transparency Transparent: The Evolution of Observation in Management Theory

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About