Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine the effects of damage incurred by the trustor as a result of a trust violation and the impact of different levels of post-violation trust repair behaviours by the trustee on the subsequent erosion of trust.

Data were collected from 232 middle to senior level managers using a two-part scenario-based experimental design to test the impact of damage incurred (avoided) and post-violation repair behaviour. Respondents’ levels of trust were measured pre- and post-violation as well as forgiving and a range of demographic variables.

Results showed that trust eroded independent of the level of damage that may have been caused. Further, post-violation trust repair behaviour by the trustee led to a significantly lower erosion of trust as compared to not engaging in such behaviours. Furthermore, erosion of trust was minimized, when the trustee engaged in increasing levels of trust repair behaviour. Results also showed that trustors who were relatively more forgiving were less likely to lose trust in the trustee after a violation.

In this study we focused on two key factors influencing the erosion of trust. Further factors need to be identified and empirically tested in order to get a more holistic view on how trust erodes. The results serve as one step towards building an integrated model of trust erosion.

For practicing managers, the results imply that the actual incurrence or avoidance of damages from a trust violation appears to be peripheral – trustors are more concerned about the violation as a principle and a harbinger of similar future incidents. Further, quickly engaging in trust repair behaviours, such as offering an a good explanation, a heartfelt apology, and appropriate remedy, helps minimize the erosion of trust.

This paper addresses an under-investigated facet of trust research in organizations – erosion of trust – which is especially crucial in light of the growing awareness that most organizational relationships actually start off with high levels of trust rather than low trust. Thus, this study offers insights into maintaining (as opposed to building) trust.

Managing trust recovery in case of violation of halal products should be seen in light of the severity of violation as perceived by the consumer. This study aims to investigate how the severity of violation on halal directly impact negative consumer behavior (avoidance, boycott and revenge), and its moderating effect on the relationship between trust recovery and avoidance, boycott and revenge.

In total, 212 questionnaires were distributed amongst customers who were aware and/or had experienced the violation of a halal product in Klang Valley, Malaysia – each of whom were selected using convenience sampling methods. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and structural equation modelling techniques, were partial least squares (PLS) software was used to measure the direct and indirect relationships between the variables.

The results of this investigation showed that trust recovery and negative consumer behavior are negatively related; severity is positively related to avoidance, boycott and revenge; and severity moderates the relationship between trust recovery and avoidance.

Empirically, it was found that severity and trust recovery are a significant component that influence negative consumption behavior. This study has significant implications alongside research implications despite some limitations.

In a severe violation case, a company needs to ensure that the strategy to fix the problem is genuine and trustworthy, as consumer trust on the recovery action by company is significance to influence customer avoidance in consuming the company’s product.

The uniqueness of this study exists in the fact that it is the first known one to concentrate on halal violation and examine the moderating effect of severity of halal violation on the relationship between trust recovery and negative consumer behaviors (avoidance, boycott and revenge).

This research aims to separate the effect of a promise from an apology, examine interactional justice as a theoretical mechanism explaining the relationship between these accounts and post‐violation trust, examine how message content compares to the gesture of sending a message, and test offense severity as a moderator.

This study employed the Trust Game.

Results indicated significant apology × promise and apology × promise × offense severity interactions on interactional justice, and interactional justice fully mediated the relationship between promises and post‐violation trust.

Although this study was completed using a laboratory game with anonymous partners, results suggest that interactional justice provides a means for relationships to quickly get back on track after a violation. Specifically, promises provide “forward‐looking” information (trustworthy intent) and interpersonal sensitivity (demonstration of courtesy and concern) that enable interactional justice to affect subsequent trust.

These findings attest to the efficacy of clear accounts to foster interactional justice; in particular, apologies lead to higher interactional justice for less serious offenses. Furthermore, accounts that are “forward‐looking” lead to higher post‐violation trust via interactional justice perceptions.

Recent empirical studies suggest that apologies are associated with higher post‐violation trust, but, unlike this article, have not explicated this process or its boundary conditions.

The aim of this paper is to study the critical role of trust in electronic commerce extensively in the context of establishing initial trust between trading partners. Ongoing trust between partners can quickly be eroded through security or other trust violations. This paper examines whether customers are willing to transact with an eCommerce vendor in light of security and trust violations.

The paper draws upon research in professional trust relationships and adapts it to the e-commerce context to create a process view of trust violation and repair. Using a design science framework, this paper employs agent-based modeling as the simulation technique to study the implications of security and trust violations on the willingness of customers to continue transacting with the vendor. The simulations are conducted for a variety of trust violations and reconciliation actions.

While some of the results are predictable, the key finding for managers is that moderate reconciliation tactics are effective for all cases but the most severe trust violations, where trust is irrevocably broken. This has clear financial implications, particularly in cases where vendors may operate with small margins in competitive markets.

Given the increasing push toward mobile and Internet-based commerce, and the large range of possible trust violations and security incidents in online purchases, coupled with increasing competition among vendors, it becomes imperative for vendors to provide effective tactics to repair customer trust violations when they arise.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the effects of the trustor's responsibility‐attributions for a trust violation and the trustee's frequency of prior violations on the subsequent erosion of trust in the relationship.

Data were collected from 120 middle‐senior level managers using a two‐part scenario‐based experimental design to test the impact of attributions and frequency of violations. Respondents' levels of trust and distrust were measured pre‐ and post‐violation as well as forgiving and a range of demographic variables.

Results showed that trust eroded (and distrust increased) more when trustors perceived the trustees as not wanting to fulfill the trust‐expectations than when they could not do so. Further, trustors were willing to tolerate a maximum of two violations before trust in the relationship eroded significantly. The results also showed that trustors who were relatively more forgiving were less likely to lose trust in the trustee after a violation, as were younger and less experienced individuals.

Although scenario‐based experiments assess the cognitive states of the respondents rather than actual behaviors, they serve as a valuable first step. By highlighting the two‐step sequence that may underlie the trust erosion process and emphasizing the importance of using an attributional perspective, the paper invites future research on a range of factors such as patterns of violation, degrees of damage, etc. Collectively, they ought to lead to an integrated model of trust erosion.

For practicing managers, the results underscore the importance of maintaining trust by constantly meeting expectations. While they may be forgiven for one‐time mistakes in maintaining trust, they cannot be repeated without severely damaging the trust in the relationship. Also, employees need to be convinced that the erring manager or colleague has done his/her very best to prevent the violation.

This paper addresses an under‐investigated facet of trust research in organizations – erosion of trust – which is especially crucial in light of the growing awareness that most organizational relationships actually start off with high levels of trust rather than low trust. Thus, this study offers insights into maintaining (as opposed to building) trust.

This study seeks to explain a buyer's response to a seller's violation of trust. Four negative responses (decline in trust, negative emotions, negative word‐of‐mouth (WOM) and reduction in repurchase intentions) and four explanatory variables (magnitude of violation, integrity versus capability‐based cause of failure, perceived likelihood of repeated violations and stage of trust prior to the violation) were identified. The study develops and tests hypotheses regarding the possible influence of the explanatory variables on each of the four negative responses.

An experiment was conducted in which business professionals were given one of 16 scenarios, varied by levels of the four explanatory variables, describing a violation of trust in a business‐to‐business service situation. Respondents were asked questions regarding their probable response. Four‐way ANCOVA was used to analyze the results.

The study finds that stage of trust and perceived likelihood of repeated violation had significant main effects on decline in trust, negative WOM and repurchase intentions. Integrity‐based attribution influenced decline in trust, but magnitude of violation had no main effects. Three significant interactions were found.

Findings show the importance of first impressions and reputation. Care should be taken to assure customers that violations will not be repeated. A major limitation was that scenarios cannot induce the same intensity of thought and emotion that real situations do.

Despite extensive literature in service failure and recovery, this is perhaps the first study to rigorously examine and seek to explain a buyer's response to a seller's violation of trust.

The importance of trust in student–university relations is relevant not only for the quality of the educational process and the satisfaction with studying achieved by students, but also for the importance of positive evaluation of HEIs to others. Therefore, the aim of this study is to identify the stages and mechanisms that build trust in student–university relations, the causes of trust violation and trust repair practices.

Public university students from Poland (16) and Germany (12) took part in the study based on semi-structured interviews. The research procedure followed an inductive approach. In addition, the critical events technique was used to identify trust violation and trust repair practices.

The study identifies the stages of the HEIs trust building process and the mechanisms upon which it is built. It attempts to catalogue trust violations, distinguishing three groups of “perpetrators” and categories of their differentiation in terms of their impact on trust. The study indicates ad hoc, informal methods of trust repair applied at HEIs and their conditions.

This study provides useful guidance for managers on how to build and maintain trust in HEIs.

The issue of trust building in HEIs is relatively new and therefore has not been sufficiently recognised to date. This study is the first to the author's knowledge to comprehensively address the problem of trust building, pointing out the mechanisms on which the formation of trust in HEIs is based. This study provides a novel contribution to the limited literature on trust violation and trust repair in HEIs.

This study examines the trust-repair practices after organizational change.

Previous research on this topic is limited, so an abductive qualitative research approach was adopted. The data were collected from key informants through focus group discussions and interviews.

Beyond previous research findings, this study identified that employee trust can be repaired after benevolence-based trust violations by enforcing ethical behavior and fostering managers' emotional intelligence and after competence-based violations by fostering the sense-making process and by involving third parties in trust recovery. In addition, transparent information sharing and strong management actions predict positive trust outcomes in a change context.

This paper makes three key contributions to the literature on organizational trust by (1) identifying trust violations after organizational change, (2) proposing a process model on trust repair and (3) extending understanding of trust repair practices by revealing new elements.

This study provides practical information from a real work context and can improve managers' understanding of active trust-repair practices.

This paper outlines active trust-repair practices in an organizational change context and expands the current theory by presenting novel insights into organizational trust repair. In addition, this paper contributes to the trust-repair literature by proposing promising avenues for future trust repair research.

The purpose of this paper is to apply insights from social role theory to trust repair, highlighting the underexplored implications of gender. Trust repair may be more difficult following violations that are incongruent with the transgressor’s gender role.

This paper reviews research on trust repair, particularly Kim et al.’s (2004, 2006) discovery that apologizing with internal attributions is best for ability-related violations and denying responsibility is best for integrity-related violations. Propositions about trust repair are grounded in attribution and social role theory.

Trust violations may incur a bigger backlash when they are incongruent with gender roles, particularly for individuals in gender-incongruent professions and cultures with low gender egalitarianism. Men may find ability-related violations more difficult to repair. Women may find repairing benevolence and integrity-related violations more difficult. When apologies are offered, attributions that are consistent with gender roles (internal attributions for men, external attributions for women) may be most effective.

Gender can be a relevant factor in trust repair. Policies and training addressing conflict should consider how these differences manifest.

Gender role differences have largely been overlooked in trust repair. By integrating social role theory and exploring benevolence-based violations, this paper offers a more complete understanding of trust repair.

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.