Search results

Purpose – This chapter explores the determinants of trust, a manifestation of the relational dimension of social capital, between interaction partners in multinational corporations at interpersonal and inter-unit levels of analysis.

Methodology – The study is based on two quantitative data sets from the Finnish subsidiaries of foreign MNCs, one at the individual level and another at the unit level (n= 265/102).

Findings – Our results indicate that the drivers of trust exhibit similar patterns across both levels of analysis, but are stronger at the interpersonal level. Trust was significantly and positively related to the length of the relationship between the two individuals or units, and to the frequency of the communication between them whereas it was found to be unrelated with cultural distance.

Limitations – The key limitations of the study were as follows. First, the samples at both levels were relatively small, a factor that may partly explain why some of the statistical relationships were relatively weak. Second, the study was carried out in one location only, and our findings need to be corroborated in other cultural settings. Third, we only examined the level of trust from one side of the relationship, as a dyadic analysis was not possible with the present data.

Practical implications – For practicing managers, the main message from our research is that communication frequency and the length of the relationship matter for the relational social capital that exists within MNCs – both at the interpersonal and unit levels.

This volume is the outcome of the 33rd European International Business Academy (EIBA) conference held at the Faculty of Political Science of the University of Catania (Italy). This conference brought together more than 300 scholars from around the world to discuss theoretical and empirical issues in international business (IB), as well as their consequences and challenges to IB scholars and policy-makers. Organized around 10 thematic tracks, the conference is the annual forum for discussing major research issues in the IB realm. This volume is a collection of the best papers, which, selected through a blind refereeing process for presentation at the conference, make significant contributions by providing fresh new perspectives on a variety of relevant topics.

This chapter explores the adoption and implementation of a conflict management system (CMS) in a hospital setting. In particular, it uncovers the different motivations and challenges associated with a CMS across various stakeholders within the organization.

The chapter is based on qualitative research conducted in a large American hospital that adopted and implemented a CMS over the course of 15 months. The author conducted extensive interviews with stakeholders across the organization, including top management, union leaders, middle managers, clinicians, and frontline staff. Findings are also based on an array of observations, including stakeholder meetings and conflict management sessions.

The case study demonstrates the centrality of underexplored, generalizable, and industry-specific pressures that may lead organizations to reconsider their use of traditional dispute resolution practices and to institute a CMS. It also highlights the inherent organizational ambivalence toward the design and adoption, initiation and implementation, and routine use of a CMS and it documents the different types of outcomes delivered to various stakeholders.

The chapter provides a nuanced portrait of the antecedents to and consequences of the transformation of conflict management within one organization. It contributes to the existing body of research exploring the 30-year rise of alternative dispute resolution and CMSs in a growing proportion of firms in the United States. The use of an in-depth case-study method to examine this CMS experience offers a number of important insights, particularly regarding different stakeholder motivations and outcomes.

The purpose of this research was to understand the sensemaking processes people use to determine their responses to organizational change initiatives as they unfold overtime. Based on a longitudinal comparative case study of five business units in a $900-million manufacturing organization in the United States, it shows that people continuously assess how the initiatives will enhance or diminish their individual and organizational identities using four kinds of trust: trust in the organization, trust in leadership, trust in the process, and trust in outcomes. The complex dynamics among these “four trusts” and their influence on responses to change are described. A four trusts model is proposed to help change leaders formulate specific trust-building strategies to increase the probability of success of organizational change initiatives. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

When a firm implements certain HR practices, different employees attribute different motives and intentions to the firm with regard to those HR practices. Research on HR attributions has made progress toward understanding the relationship between HR practices and employee outcomes from a process perspective. However, this research is still fragmented and lacks a systematic typology of the different types of HR attributions and a compelling organizing research framework. Furthermore, a number of research gaps and opportunities have emerged regarding the nomological net of employee HR attributions. To address the gaps and capitalize on the opportunities, the authors propose an overarching theory-driven multi-level framework that guides the choice of the antecedents and outcomes of employee HR attributions and explains their relationships along with both mediating and moderating mechanisms. Drawing on signaling theory embedded in the proposed framework, the authors identify and categorize various antecedents of employee HR attributions to explain their relationships. The authors also use several additional theories such as social exchange and the job demands–resources model included in their review to identify and categorize various outcomes of employee HR attributions across levels of analysis (i.e., individual, collective [team/group/unit], organization) and explain their relationships. In addition, the proposed framework explains how individual-level employee HR attributions emerge at the collective level and influence collective processes and outcomes. The authors end their review by pinpointing future research needs and discussing related future research directions.

Entrepreneurial orientation (EO) plays an important role in explaining firm performance. In this study, we investigate the relation between EO and performance at the strategic business unit (SBU) level and examine the influence of decision-making mode and social capital of the focal business unit manager. Adopting the attention-based view (ABV) as our main theoretical perspective, we examine the impact of decision-making mode (i.e., participative vs. autocratic) on the EO–performance relation. In addition, we investigate the extent to which strong network ties with actors at lower, similar, and higher hierarchical positions, respectively, enable SBU managers to effectively engage in participative decision-making processes when leveraging EO. Our findings based on 119 SBUs of one large international company provide nuanced insights into how local conditions interact to shape EO’s influence on performance.

This chapter reviews research on multi-level organizational justice. The first half of the chapter provides the historical context for this issue, discusses organizational-level antecedents to individual-level justice perceptions (i.e., culture and organizational structure), and then focuses on the study of justice climate. A summary model depicts the justice climate findings to date and gives recommendations for future research. The second half of the chapter discusses the process of justice climate emergence. Pulling from classical bottom-up and top-down climate emergence models as well as contemporary justice theory, it outlines a theoretical model whereby individual differences and environmental characteristics interact to influence justice judgments. Through a process of information sharing, shared and unique experiences, and interactions among group members, a justice climate emerges. The chapter concludes by presenting ideas about how such a process might be empirically modeled.

Purpose – Trust and justice are generally considered distinct but closely related constructs. Individual perceptions of procedural justice and trustworthiness have been shown to reciprocally influence one another, each independently promoting trust (Colquitt & Mueller, 2007). We consider instances where these may instead diverge: how intentional efforts to build trust may unintentionally erode justice, and how the use of fair procedures may reduce trust.

Approach – We argue that the anomalous divergences between trust and justice are evident only when simultaneously considering judgments at two levels: the interpersonal level (i.e., within dyads inside the team) and the team level (i.e., shared perceptions of all team members).

Implications for research and practice – The unintended effects described in this chapter describe a “dark side” to a number of taken-for-granted practices in organizational life (favor-paying, punishment processes, and approaches to redress). We expect that this chapter should promote new research using the team context to bridge the trust and justice literatures, and provoke a careful reconsideration among practitioners of these approaches.

Originality – We propose three previously overlooked disjunctures between trust and justice. First, we show how procedurally unfair approaches to allocating favors may be beneficial in building dyadic trust between team members. Next, we describe how fair (open and transparent) group processes for punishing perpetrators may erode trust by skewing group members’ perceptions of the prevalence of trust violations. Finally, we describe how the most effective forms of redress at the interpersonal level may provoke perceptions of injustice at the team level.

Purpose – This chapter highlights that we do not know why justice climate is related to various unit outcomes and proposes a number of mechanisms.

Design/methodology/approach – This chapter draws on the extant literature on justice climate, organizational climate, and a number of theories to link justice climate to unit outcomes.

Findings – We have little understanding of the mechanisms linking justice climate to unit outcomes and it is important to consider various mechanisms.

Research limitations/implications – The primary limitation of this chapter is that although we present several ideas for future research, we do not provide any new empirical findings. The primary implications have to do with specifying the theoretical mechanisms responsible for the effects of justice climate on unit outcomes.

Originality/value – The novel aspect of this chapter is that it questions why justice climate is related to several disparate outcomes and tries to take a theoretical approach to uncover the mechanisms.

Theories of trust imply that team trust develops and grows over time, yet relatively few researchers have taken on the challenge of studying team trust in longitudinal research designs. The purpose of this chapter is to provide a concise summary of the existing literature on team trust over time, and to offer a conceptual model of team-level trust development over time to aid future research on this topic.

We draw from the Input–Mediator–Output–Input (IMOI) framework, as well as previous multilevel models of organizational trust development, and published findings from longitudinal team trust studies.

Taking a temporal perspective, we consider how team-level mediators and outcomes can both predict and be predicted by team trust trajectories and feedback loops over time, as well as how those relationships with team trust might change based on the existence of other moderating variables including trust violation and repair.

Future longitudinal team research may use the model as a starting point for investigating the antecedents, as well as the team processes and dynamic emergent states, that can effectively predict trajectories of team trust across various stages of teamwork.

Based on our review of extant literature, we provide several recommendations for training and organizational intervention including the importance of management’s consideration of team-level trust in providing feedback, enhancing cohesion, and mitigating conflict.

We provide insight into the development of team trust trajectories and offer a framework to help guide future longitudinal team trust research.