The Contextual Antecedents of Organizational Trust: A Multidimensional Cross-level Analysis

Abstract

In this article we seek to explore the contextual antecedents of organizational trust. In light of the complex links between organizational contexts and organizational behaviours, we focus on the effects of the three most critical contextual antecedents, i.e., leadership role, structural rule, and cultural norm at the organizational level, on organizational trust directly, and their behavioural outcomes at the individual level indirectly, using organizational trust as a cross-level mediator. The empirical results, based on a hierarchical linear model with a sample of 444 employees from 82 firms in China, lent support for our multidimensional cross-level model of context-trustbehaviour link. We extend the research on organizational trust by treating it as a cross-level phenomenon and by specifying its core contextual antecedents and behavioural consequences.

Hypocritical Behavior and Organization Size: A Game-theory Approach

“…Trust is a multifaceted concept with different proposed definitions (Velez, 2000); however, it generally expresses the confidence one has in another to act in a moral and fair manner (Nyhan, 2000). Trust and its dimensions in an organization have been studied from different perspectives, leading to a concept defined as "organizational trust" (Kramer and Lewicki, 2010;Li et al, 2012). It refers to the individual positive perceptions people have about the content and behavior of members of the organization (Shockley-Zalabak et al, 2000).…”

The role of leadership behaviors for enhancing organizational effectiveness in the Chinese public sector

“…One main reason for this result might be the fact that servant leadership can foster trust and commitment only to the extent to which supervisors are empowered to accommodate the formal and informal opinions received from their subordinates. However, a high degree of formalization in a bureaucracy could lessen the positive impacts of servant leadership on organizational outcomes (Li, Bai, & Xi, 2012). Future research might analyze the impact of leadership in the context of the literature pertaining to 'formalization' (Bozeman & Scott, 1996) and 'red tape' (Brewer & Walker, 2010;Pandey & Scott, 2002) in order to examine how much commitment and trust are affected by 'codified, excessive or dysfunctional rules' (Miao et al, 2013, p. 87).…”

A tentative typology of context for trust research and beyond

“…Also, the contextual elements (e.g. the legal, political and social contexts) in Cell 2 are most likely to provide the conditions to delineate two types of trust based upon formal institutions, such as institutional or legal rule and institutional or professional role (which are distinct from the type of trust based upon the informal institution of ethical or moral norm, Li, 2008;Li, Bai, & Xi, 2012), because such types of trust tend to emerge from the contextual types that are 'explicit' in the domain of game rule and also 'objective' in the domain of sense-giving.…”