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 Risk Ability Risk-taking in Outcomes Benevolence Trust Relationship Integrity Trustor’s Propensity Mayer, Davis & Schoorman, 1995, Academy of Management Review

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 of 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? Low trust stores High trust stores Sales Employee Turnover Profits Davis, Schoorman, Mayer & Tan, 2000, Strategic Management Journal

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 9 month time lag 3.3 Experienced new appraisal 3.2 system 3.1 Did not 3 experience new appraisal system 2.9 2.8 2.7 2.6 INEXPERIENCED EXPERIENCED Mayer & Davis, 1999, Journal of Applied Psychology

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 • (T2 trust – T1 trust ) corr w/ (T2 influence – T1 influence ), or correlation of changes over time

Correlations Between Changes In Trust & Changes In Power/Influence Trust Referent .71*** Expert .68*** Each is correlation between D trust over 5 Reward .41*** months & D influence Legitimate .11 variable over that period Coercive .02 Praise .61*** Shows trust .36*** Support .70*** Mayer, Bobko, Davis & Gavin, 2011, Journal of Trust Research

Partial out variance shared with ABI 3 rd 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** 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 officer>

• 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 – 1 st 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, & organizational levels • Data supports application at group & organizational 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