Understanding Trust: Challenges and Opportunities Roger C. Mayer, - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Understanding Trust: Challenges and Opportunities

Roger C. Mayer, PhD

Professor, Dept. of Management, Innovation & Entrepreneurship

LAS WRM 7 October 2015

• What is trust & what causes it?
• > 20 yrs of research in a nutshell
• Most published in premiere

management & psychology journals

– (acceptance < 8%)

• Dominant approach in management, also

used in wide variety of other fields

– Citations: SSCI 4,624; Google Scholar 17,252

Methods I use

• Clear theory-building
• Longitudinal/cross-sectional field studies
• Survey methodology
• Laboratory experiments
• Current projects include:
• $1.28M 3-year AFOSR global study of trust
• $1.5M 3-year AFOSR religion, culture, & trust

Trust is Elemental in Relationships

• Difficult to capture its essence-has been

equated with:

– Cooperation – Predictability – Qualities of trustee

• Relationship with risk
• To study scientifically, need:

– Definition (ask people what trust means to them…) – Model – Measures of constructs

The Development of Trust

Trust Benevolence Ability Integrity Risk Outcomes Risk-taking in Relationship

Mayer, Davis & Schoorman, 1995, Academy of Management Review

Trustor’s Propensity

Definitions from previous examples:

• Ability: skills & competencies in the domain
• Benevolence: wants to “do good” for trustor
• Integrity: follows values that trustor finds acceptable
• Above 3 are factors of trustworthiness
• These are perceptions of the trustee, they are not trust
• Highlights difference between trust (w/i a relationship)

and risk-taking based on qualities of inanimate object

– This is NOT do you ‘trust’ your car? Computer? – Despite this, model is being used extensively in human/automation trust studies

• Trust is:
• Willingness to be vulnerable to trustee when trustee

cannot be monitored or controlled

• In study of veterinary doctors (SIOP 1996),

developed survey measures of:

– Trust (willingness to be vulnerable) – Ability – Benevolence – Integrity – Propensity to trust others (based on Rotter’s 1967 25-item measure)

• Found that vets delegated riskier tasks to

employees they trusted more (beyond effects

• f ABI)

Does employee trust in management matter?

• If members trust the leader, the organization

will perform better (Argyris, 1964)

• Studied entire restaurant chain

– Nine operating units – N=371, 61.8% of total workforce – Measured trust in General Manager of facility – Measures of effectiveness over next 9 months – Median split on Trust in GM

Does Trust Affect Organizational Performance?

Davis, Schoorman, Mayer & Tan, 2000, Strategic Management Journal

Low trust stores High trust stores

Sales Employee Turnover Profits

Can Trust Levels Really be Improved?

• Study of small privately owned Midwestern firm in

plastics industry

• Focus groups identified ineffective performance appraisal

system

• 166 to 194 production employees & supervisors
• 3 waves of surveys over 14 months

– Trust in top management – Trustworthiness factors – Perceived accuracy of appraisal – Outcome instrumentality

Changes in Trust for Top Management

2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3 3.1 3.2 3.3 INEXPERIENCED EXPERIENCED

9 month time lag

Mayer & Davis, 1999, Journal of Applied Psychology Experienced new appraisal system Did not experience new appraisal system

Management Training in Use of Power & Influence Tactics

• More effective influence attempts  higher trust in manager?
• Baseline measures of perceived use by managers of each of 8

power bases/influence tactics

• 2 months training around empowerment & influence tactics
• 5 month lag before wave 2 measurement
• (T2trust – T1trust) corr w/ (T2influence – T1influence), or

correlation of changes over time

Trust Referent .71*** Expert .68*** Reward .41*** Legitimate .11 Coercive .02 Praise .61*** Shows trust .36*** Support .70***

Correlations Between Changes In Trust & Changes In Power/Influence

Mayer, Bobko, Davis & Gavin, 2011, Journal of Trust Research

Each is correlation between D trust over 5 months & D influence variable over that period

3rd order Trust partial Referent .71*** .14 Expert .68*** .15 Reward .41***

• .10

Legitimate .11

• .27**

Coercive .02

• .20*

Praise .61*** .08 Shows trust .36*** .10 Support .70*** .24**

Partial out variance shared with ABI

Mayer, Bobko, Davis & Gavin, 2011, Journal of Trust Research

• Current work with Air Force Research Lab (AFRL)

researchers: what are reasons people with different levels of power trust a focal AF officer

• 400 AF Captains in leadership training got 360 degree

evaluations, including trust & trustworthiness

– ABI vary in importance depending on power differentials in relationship – All appear to matter equally in a peer relationship – When supervisor evaluates subordinate, ability appears to be more important – When subordinate evaluates supervisor, benevolence appears to be more important

Recap:

• Trust defined as WTBV captures essence, is

measurable

• Trust affects organizational performance
• Trust levels can be intentionally affected,

managed

• Balance of power between parties changes

relative impact of ABI on trust

• Using power & influence more effectively

builds trust

Increasing Presence & Role of Computers, Robots, Automated Systems…

• To wit: 3 concurrent movies on TV:

– 2001: A Space Odyssey; I, Robot; movie called ‘Trust’

• Brings up many diverse trust-related concerns
• Receive discrepant info from 2 sources- computer

and human

• Forced to make an important decision under stressful

conditions

• Which source affects person’s decision?

Convoy Leader

<Map & a talking head of intelligence

• fficer>

• Under stress, >.75 did not heed human input

• USAF is very interested in better

understanding why people trust people & automated systems

– Will people use sophisticated technology to its capacity?

• “Ironman” & his clunky but capable robot
• I Robot & actor Will Smith

• US Army

– Committed to 10-yr change in culture

• Internal trust is important piece
• A key factor for intelligence community:

– Who can we trust? – How do we garner trust of others?

Canadian forces fight Afghan war inch by inch

An Afghan officer, left, serves in a Canadian operation targeting a Taliban bomb-supply compound in Kandahar.

Candace Rondeaux, November 02, 2008, The Washington Post

• Observed global differences in how trust is

affected by ABI

• US seems very focused on Ability

– MBA students & Enron’s Andrew Fastow

• Middle Eastern countries appear focused on

Benevolence

– 1st Gulf War <pic of General Schwarzkopf>

• 3 yr $1.28M study, 20 countries

– Informed Consent 知情同意

• How is trust affected by culture & religion?

– 3-yr study $1.5M AFOSR, PIs Cohen & Brewer at Arizona State University – Effect of “costly signaling” on trust – Triangulating trust measurement with brain activity

• Colquitt, Scott, & LePine (2007) Journal of

Applied Psychology

– Meta-analysis showed ABIP all significant & independent predictors of trust in other people

• Theory & model were designed to be

applicable at individual, group, &

• rganizational levels
• Data supports application at group &
• rganizational levels as well

– (no meta-analyses…yet…)

• What are the limits of model’s applicability?
• Using data collected on why people trust their

government, Kulzy found data fit nicely with ABI (forthcoming chapter)

• Currently engaged with Michigan State

researchers measuring people’s trust in government, & ABI as its bases