Toward the Trusted Public Organization

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to probe the main determinants of organizational trust, as identified in the relevant literature: cognition-based (i.e., rational) trust and affect-based (i.e., relational) trust. This study explores the nature of trust among public employees and identifies important antecedents and moderating conditions based on systematic and rigorous empirical research. Using large data sets from Merit Principles Survey (MPS) and Best Places to Work (BPTW), as well as drawing upon the scholarly works from several disciplines, this study develops an antecedenttrust model and analyzes the different types of antecedents of organizational trust in the public sector at a hierarchical and multilevel ordering structure. The focus of the study is empirically testing the effects of vertical and shared leadership behaviors and work motivation attributes on organizational trust within U.S. federal agencies. In addition, the moderating impact of leadership on the relationship between work motivation and organizational trust is examined. This research finds that some of these predictors and moderators (e.g., vertical and shared leadership behaviors) play significant roles in fostering organizational trust directly and indirectly. Based on a discussion of the main findings, research and practical implications for public management theory and practice are provided.

The Outsiders: Examining the Effects of Political Appointments on Public-Sector Employee Engagement

“…It is reasonable to assume that the members of the non-senior career ranks also experience, to some degree, negative responses to politicization through appointments as their SES colleagues do, suggesting a potential -and under-investigated -explanation for performance declines. Regardless of sector, worker attitudes directly impact both performance and turnover intentions (Meier & Hicklin, 2008;Park, 2012;Selden & Brewer, 2000;Wushe & Senje, 2019;Zhang et al, 2014). Direct examinations of government employee turnover behaviors tend to focus on relationships between attitudes (i.e., job satisfaction or intrinsic motivation) and self-reported intentions to quit (Caillier, 2011;Cho & Lewis, 2012;Cooper et al, 2014).…”

Can employee engagement be attained through psychological detachment and job crafting: the mediating role of spirituality and intrinsic motivation

“…Wrzesniewski and Dutton (2001) proposed the concept of job crafting, wherein they implied that individuals must be initiated from within to rationally craft their work role for the fulfillment of their necessities, preferences and potential. Moreover, job crafting makes individuals feel higher control over job tasks, which probably leads to intrinsic motivation, and this in turn encourages employees to feel more convicted toward their proficiencies and competence (Park, 2012). Job crafting provides opportunity of enjoying meaningfulness at work by sharing same ideas and values with co-workers, building competence in their tasks as well as developing connection with others, and choosing activities that promote positive self-disclosure (Thomas and Tymon, 1994).…”

“…Furthermore, job crafting is also considered as proactive change behavior because it encourages modification of various boundaries (such as physical, emotional, cognitive, relational or temporal) associated with jobs (Boehnlein and Baum, 2020; Rastogi and Chaudhary, 2018). Further, job crafting makes individuals feel higher control over job tasks, which probably leads to intrinsic motivation, and this in turn encourages employees engagement and to feel more convicted toward their proficiencies and competence (Hussein and Amiruddin, 2020; Park, 2012).…”

Public Service Motivation and Trust in Government: An Examination Across the Federal, State, and Local Levels in the United States

“…Scholars have demonstrated how government performance (Yang & Holzer, 2006), citizen's voice (Fitzgerald & Wolak, 2016; Porumbescu, 2017), framing of government communication (Deslatte, 2020), and organizational processes (Van Ryzin, 2007, 2015) may be able to influence trust in government. Of course, administrative actions are not the only factor that influences trust, and the relationship between trust and administrative outcomes is more complex than straightforward (Park, 2012; Van Ryzin, 2007), but research on administrative actions clearly indicates that administrative actions influence trust in government (Berg & Johansson, 2020; Van Ryzin, 2015).…”