Theoretical Framework


Definitions of Trust and Distrust

There are many definitions of trust arising from different disciplinary perspectives. When synthesizing these definitions, Rosseau, Sitkin, Burt and Camerer (1998) found that scholars fundamentally agree that trust is a "psychological state comprising the intention to accept vulnerability based upon positive expectations of the intentions or behavior of another" (p. 395). Trust involves risk, or the probability of loss, and interdependence, or reliance on others.

Distrust can be defined in opposite terms, i.e., as negative expectations of the intentions or behavior of another (Lewicki, McAllister, & Bies, 1998; Sztompka, 1999). It involves a lack of risk and no dependence on others. Trust and distrust can exist simultaneously in individuals (Lewicki et al., 1998). They can be conceptualized as a continuum with high trust to high distrust as endpoints, that is, a continuum from high trust to low trust to low distrust to high distrust.

Evolution of Trust and Distrust

Feelings of trust and distrust can change over time (Jones & George, 1998; McKnight, Cummings, & Chervany, 1998). These changes occur as a result of observation of and reflection on behavior (Whitener, Bridt, Korsgaard, & Werner, 1998). That is, trust and distrust are not behaviors, but psychological conditions that influence an individual's behavior.

An individual's behavior influences others' behaviors, both of which may be assessed by the individual (Figure 2). This assessment is often based on prior experiences, knowledge of the context in which the behaviors occurred, and personal beliefs. The results of the assessment influence perceptions of trust and distrust, and future assessments (through the modification or re-enforcement of prior experiences, knowledge of the context and beliefs). Thus, trust and distrust shape one's own behavior and others' behavior, whose assessment in turn shapes trust and distrust.

click to expand
Figure 2: The Evolutionary Nature of Trust and Distrust

Two Types of Trust and Distrust: Cognitive and Affective

Two types of trust, cognitive and affective, have been identified as important in organizations (McAllister, 1995; Rocco et al., 2001). Cognitive trust focuses on judgments of competence and reliability. Can a co-worker complete a task? Will the results be of sufficient quality? Will the task be completed on time? These are issues that comprise cognitive trust and distrust. The more strongly one believes the answers to these types of questions are affirmative, the stronger one's cognitive trust. The more strongly one believes the answers to these types of questions are negative, the stronger one's cognitive distrust.

Affective trust focuses on interpersonal bonds among individuals and institutions, including perceptions of colleagues' motivation, intentions, ethics and citizenship. Affective trust typically emerges from repeated interactions among individuals, and experiences of reciprocated interpersonal care and concern (Rosseau et al., 1998). It is also referred to as emotional trust (Rocco et al., 2001) and relational trust (Rosseau et al., 1998). It can be "the grease that turns the wheel" (Sonnenwald, 1996).

Interaction Among Cognitive and Affective Trust and Distrust

Cognitive trust and distrust may exist in conjunction with affective trust and distrust (Table 1). High cognitive and affective trust typically yields tightly coupled collaboration in which tasks and ideas are openly shared and frequently shared. Scientists talk of friendship and of liking each other when affective and cognitive trust is high. Risk and vulnerability caused by collaboration is perceived as low.

Table 1: Relationships Among Cognitive and Interpersonal Trust and Distrust

Cognitive

Trust

Distrust

Affective

Trust

Tightly-coupled collaboration

Frequent collaboration

Friendship

Low risk

Limited collaboration

Limited, non-critical task responsibility

Controls to monitor and support efforts

Friendship

Distrust

Competitive collaboration

Controls to monitor and constrain activities

"Keep friends close and enemies closer" Professional relationship

No collaboration

No friendship

Limited interaction

High risk

In comparison, high affective distrust and high cognitive distrust can be sufficient to dissuade individuals from collaborating at all. No friendship exists or develops, and individuals may proactively limit their interaction with others they cognitively and affectively distrust. Collaboration and interaction is perceived as a high risk and as having a high degree of vulnerability.

A trust-distrust match between cognitive and affective trust can yield problematic situations that require explicit management. Feelings of high cognitive distrust and high affective trust may serve to limit collaboration. Primarily non-critical or unimportant tasks will be given to individuals who are cognitively distrusted. However, friendship as a result of affective trust may exist (or emerge). Controls to monitor task complete and efforts to support task completion may be used. For example, mentoring and training may be employed to help a friend who is not cognitively trusted.

Feelings of high cognitive trust and high affective distrust can result in competitive collaboration. Controls to monitor and constrain task or work activities emerge to manage the affective distrust. The saying, "keep your friends close and your enemies closer," appears applicable in these types of situations. Professional relationships may exist (or emerge), but friendship and the perception that the collaboration or interaction is fun do not.




L., Iivonen M. Trust in Knowledge Management Systems in Organizations2004
WarDriving: Drive, Detect, Defend, A Guide to Wireless Security
ISBN: N/A
EAN: 2147483647
Year: 2004
Pages: 143

flylib.com © 2008-2017.
If you may any questions please contact us: flylib@qtcs.net