Search results

A workplace bullying dynamic involving multiple individuals targeting victims can lead to the victim losing emotional bonds or affect-based trust with their colleagues, resulting in employee silence. The literature has largely ignored this negative aspect of social dynamics. This study aims to examine the relationship between workplace bullying and employee silence behaviors and determine whether affect-based trust mediates this relationship and whether climate for conflict management moderates the mediated relationship.

Hypotheses are tested using surveys and scenario-based experiments among faculty members in Indian Universities. There were 597 participants in the survey and 166 in the scenario-based experiment.

Results revealed that workplace bullying correlated positively with silence behaviors, and affect-based trust mediated the bullying-silence relationship. The hypothesized moderated mediation condition was partially supported as moderated the mediating pathway, i.e. indirect effects of workplace bullying on defensive silence and ineffectual silence via affect-based trust were weaker for employees with high climate for conflict management. However, the study failed to support the moderation of climate for conflict management in the relationship between workplace bullying and affect-based trust and workplace bullying and relational silence. The results of this moderated effect of climate for conflict management were similar in both studies.

This study is one of the few attempts to examine employee silence in response to workplace bullying in academia. Additionally, the study revealed a critical area of trust depletion associated with bullying and the importance of employee perceptions of fairness toward their institutions’ dispute resolution processes.

The key objective of this research is to test how two trust dimensions (cognition‐based trust and affect‐based trust) mediate the effects of three personal characteristics (psychological distance, the marketing manager's sales experience, and the marketing manager's relative level of formal education) on the following outcome variables: dysfunctional conflict, functional conflict, and perceived relationship effectiveness.

Drawing on the interaction approach, the paper develops a conceptual framework to better understand the nature of the working relationship between marketing managers and sales managers. In total, it develops and test 13 hypotheses. Partial least squares was used to assess the validity of the measures, and to estimate the structural model. Using a cross‐sectional design, data were collected from 101 marketing managers in Australia.

The hypothesized model has high explanatory power and it was found that both trust dimensions strongly affected all three outcome variables. However, though both forms of trust were positively related to perceived relationship effectiveness, affect‐based trust had the strongest impact on this outcome. The results also confirm that both cognition‐ and affect‐based trust have negative effects on dysfunctional conflict, and strong positive effects on functional conflict. In addition to these new findings, the paper shows that while psychological distance has a strong negative impact on cognition‐based trust, it has no impact on affect‐based trust. Moreover, it was found that when marketing managers had greater levels of sales experience, it increased their affect‐based trust but it had no impact on cognition‐based trust. Finally, the marketing manager's relative level of formal education had no impact on either forms of trust.

This is one of a handful of studies to employ a large‐scale empirical approach to examine the neglected cross‐functional relationship between marketing and sales. Also, it is one of the few studies to examine the effects of cognition‐based trust and affect‐based trust on performance outcomes.

This study examines the relationship of a supervisor's affect‐based trust and cognition‐based trust to a subordinate employee's self‐ratings of enterprising behavior, which includes creativity, risk taking, initiative, motivation, and assertiveness, and to the supervisor's and coworker's ratings of the subordinate's enterprising behavior. The extent to which the power distance and in‐group collectivism cultural variables moderate the relationship between affect‐based trust and enterprising behavior is assessed.

Survey responses of US, Turkish, Polish, and Russian supervisor‐subordinate‐coworker triads were collected in a number of firms. Regression results were employed to test the research hypotheses.

The findings of this study show that the supervisor's cognition‐based trust and affect‐based trust of the employee are associated with that employee's enterprising behavior. Significant two‐way interactions indicate that the relationship between affect‐based trust and enterprising behavior is stronger in the three collectivist countries than in the individualist USA. The moderating effects of power distance, on the other hand, appear to be negligible.

The main implication of this study's results is that human relations theories, which are based on the supervisor's top‐down trust of the subordinate employee, may be more effective in collectivist cultures than in individualist cultures.

Trust is an important facilitator of successful B2B relationships. The purpose of this study is to investigate affect-based antecedents of both interpersonal and interorganizational trust, and their impact on the performance of buyer–supplier relationships. The authors ask two research questions: (1) What are affect-based dimensions of interpersonal and interorganizational trust? (2) How do interpersonal and interorganizational trust influence buyers’ operational performance?

The authors use data from an original survey of 156 buyer–supplier relationships between multinational enterprise subsidiaries and local suppliers in the Thai manufacturing sector to develop a structural model in which the authors test the hypotheses.

Consistent with social exchange theory and social psychology, the empirical analysis shows that affect-based dimensions at the individual level, namely, likeability, similarity and frequent social contact, and at the organizational level, namely, supplier firm willingness to customize and institutionalization of cooperation, are important for establishing trust. In addition, interpersonal trust enhances buyers’ operational performance indirectly via interorganizational trust.

Buying and selling firms may develop organizational trust by developing processes that enhance organizational trust. Individuals with purchasing or sales responsibilities may enhance trust in their personal relationship. However, such interpersonal trust needs to be translated to the organizational level to benefit organizational performance.

The findings contribute to the literature on affect-based antecedents and outcomes of trust. Specifically, the authors offer theory and empirical evidence regarding the contribution of salespersons toward affect-based dimensions of trust and its impact on buyer’s operational performance.

This article examines the differential effects of two types of trust (affect based and cognition based) and two types of feelings (ganqing and jiaoqing) on different knowledge-sharing processes (seeking, transfer, and adoption) among Chinese employees. The influences of these different types of trust and feelings on Chinese employeesʼ propensities to seek, transfer, and adopt explicit and tacit knowledge are also analyzed and discussed. The analysis shows affect-based trust increases knowledge transfer, while cognition-based trust is more important to knowledge seeking and adoption. Affect-based trust alone can facilitate the different processes of sharing explicit knowledge. Effective sharing of tacit knowledge, on the other hand, requires the simul-taneous support from affect-based trust and cognition-based trust. Ganqing and jiaoqing are also important in knowledge transfer and adoption. Either feeling may increase the likelihood to seek, transfer, and adopt explicit knowledge by itself. The influences of both feelings on tacit knowledge seeking, transfer, and adoption hinge on the presence of cognition-based trust.

Research on strategic decision making has over‐emphasized the importance of cognitive conflict because of its potential benefits. Recent research documented that, apart from the benefits, cognitive conflict leads to affective conflict. Taking information processing perspective, the present study seeks to argue that the benefits of cognitive conflict can be stimulated by the cognition‐based trust, while the interplay between cognitive conflict and affective conflict can be influenced by affect‐based trust. The present study therefore aims to demonstrate the divergent roles of the perceived trustworthiness as potential moderators in strategic decision‐making teams.

Using structured survey instrument, multi‐informant data was collected from CEOs and senior executives of 109 US hospitals. After performing confirmatory factor analysis of the measures used, the data was analyzed using hierarchical regression techniques to analyze divergent roles of cognition‐ and affect‐based trust as moderators in the relationship between conflict and decision outcomes.

Results showed that cognition‐based trust is the key to fortify the benefits of cognitive conflict while affect‐based trust is the panacea for the ills of cognitive conflict.

The sample consisted of hospitals in healthcare industry only. Self‐report measures may have some inherent social desirability bias.

This study contributes to both practicing managers as well as to strategic management literature. This study suggests that trust between the executives involved in strategic decision‐making process plays an important role in enhancing decision quality. It is therefore suggested that CEOs and administrators engage the executives who have both cognition‐ and affect‐based trust with each other to have successful decision outcomes.

Though the sample in the present study focuses only on healthcare industry, to the extent strategic decision‐making process is similar in other industries, the findings can be generalizable across other industries.

Interpersonal trust is an important element of Chinese guanxi network. In this chapter, we examine Chinese guanxi network from a trust perspective. We adopt the distinction that trust could be built on either a socio-emotional basis (affect-based trust) or an instrumental basis (cognition-based trust) and use this lens to examine cultural differences in Chinese and Western social networks. Specifically, we will discuss (a) how the two dimensions of trust are related in the Chinese versus American context, and (b) how affect-based trust is associated with different forms of social exchange in Chinese versus American social networks. Because dyadic relationships are embedded within larger social networks, trust between two network actors is also likely to be influenced by the social context that surrounds them. Hence, we also examine how dyadic trust is shaped by higher-level network properties such as density.

This study aims to explore how gender influences the impact of interpersonal trust among subordinates on spontaneous work behaviors such as sharing responsibility and knowledge and engaging in organizational citizenship behavior (OCB). The goal is to understand factors that contribute to the effectiveness of women as supervisors and subordinates in the manufacturing sector.

Data were gathered from 308 subordinates and 71 supervisors working in the manufacturing sector in mainland China using a survey methodology. Descriptive statistics, correlation, confirmatory factor analysis and hierarchical moderated regression were the statistical techniques used.

Results indicate that both affect- and cognition-based trust among subordinates positively impact responsibility- and knowledge-sharing behaviors, OCB-individual (OCB-I) and OCB-organization (OCB-O). For female subordinates, the gender of the supervisor alters the relationship between both forms of trust and responsibility-sharing behavior and OCB-O, but not knowledge-sharing behavior and OCB-I. Cognition-based trust plays a dominant role for male subordinates, while affect-based trust is more relevant to female subordinates. Finally, while the gender of the supervisor moderates the impact of both affect- and cognition-based trust, it is significant for female subordinates only.

This study is not without limitations. First, the authors had access to a limited sample of female supervisors and female subordinates, which is not uncommon in the manufacturing sector that is mostly composed of male employees. Second, the cross-sectional nature of the study does not allow the capture of the impact of change in trust over time. However, it is believed that the multi-source design, the novelty of the study’s findings and their implications to interpersonal trust theory and supervisory practice compensate for the limitations. For starters, this study endorses the crucial role of interpersonal trust among employees in predicting important organizational behaviors. It corroborates the conceptual distinction between affect- and cognition-based trust and empirically validates the concepts of affect- and cognition-based trust, RSB, KSB and OCB in China. It uses multi-source data and measures behavioral outcomes of workers as observed by their immediate supervisors. These contributions speak to the empirical viability of our theoretical framework that may be useful to those contemplating cross-cultural research.

The study started with the question, does gender matter. The answer is that it does and that it has implications for human resource management. The gender of both supervisors and subordinates affect the way interpersonal trust among workers elicit desirable organizational behaviors such as sharing responsibilities, sharing knowledge and other forms of citizenship behavior. Female supervisors need to build trust among their female employees before they can expect effective organizational behavior. The story is different for male supervisors and male employees. This has implications in the way male and female supervisors are trained. It also has implications for work group formation and composition. What the study does not know is whether these findings are limited to the manufacturing sector or unique to China. It is recommended that a cross-cultural comparative research be undertaken to address those questions.

In light of the study’s findings, it is proposed that supervisory training and development programs should take into consideration that female supervisors encounter more challenges in eliciting favorable behaviors on the part of female subordinates in a work environment that is male-dominated.

The unique value contribution of the study pertains to the role of gender – the gender of the supervisor and the gender of the subordinate in shaping organizational behavior. Specifically, the authors show that the supervisor’s gender influences the relationship between affect-based trust and RSB, KSB and OCB-O and the relationship between cognition-based trust and OCB-O. Their point is that these relationships are significant only for female supervisors. In addition, they show that gender similarity between the supervisor and the supervised matters, only when both are female. These findings limit the role of interpersonal trust in eliciting favorable organizational behavior across the board and question the portability of interpersonal trust theory across industries and cultures.

This study aims to explore the impact of affect‐based and cognition‐based trust of co‐workers on the willingness of professionals to share and use tacit knowledge.

The relationships were examined through data provided by a sample of 202 professionals and managers in world headquarters of an international organization.

The levels of both types of trust influence the extent to which staff members are willing to share and use tacit knowledge. Affect‐based trust has a significantly greater effect on the willingness to share tacit knowledge, while cognition‐based trust plays a greater role in willingness to use tacit knowledge.

The data are cross‐sectional and were also collected in one organization. Future studies should consider longitudinal designs across multiple organizations. Alternatively, archival information could be used to measure actual tacit knowledge sharing and use among co‐workers.

The results indicate that both distinct types of trust are involved in decisions affecting transfer and use of tacit knowledge. This suggests that knowledge management efforts may need to include a finer grained view of the nature of the social networks impacting the knowledge transfer and management process.

Previous studies have not examined the differential effects of both affect‐based and cognition‐based trust on employee willingness to share and use tacit knowledge.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the assumptions concerning how the processes that foster trust are influenced by contractual control and managers’ propensity to trust. More specifically, the paper investigates the extent to which distinct types of trust (i.e. cognition- and affect-based trust) are differentially and interactively associated with contractual control and the propensity to trust.

The authors collected survey data on 260 architect–contractor project-based relationships in China.

The results of this paper show that contractual control and a project manager’s propensity to trust are positively related to the managers’ trust in their partners. However, the interaction of the propensity to trust and contractual control has a negative effect on cognition-based trust. Cognition-based trust, in turn, is linked to the unique and interactive relationships between contractual control, the propensity to trust and affect-based trust.

While this paper adds to the literature on trust and control, future research is needed to fully understand the differences in interpersonal trust across alliances and countries.

These findings provide important implications for firms hoping to facilitate active trust development processes.

More is now known about the trust in inter-organizational settings at the individual level.