A few days back an interesting academic lecture titled "Sparks, Workers and Slugs: On the Relationship between Work Orientation and Trust among Firefighters" was delivered by Professor Michael G. Pratt. Based on a decade of research, his talk was essentially about exploring the relationship between work orientation and trust among firefighters. It was particularly intriguing to know how perceptions of work orientations get formed based on small social cues outside the work domain, and how this perception determines the degree of trust between workers.
Apparently majority of academic research in this field has been on the presence and absence of trust, and not on how trust gets built in an organization context. But for organizations the importance of securing and sustaining perceived trustworthiness in the context of global uprisings against the Wall Street cannot be emphasized enough. It is in this context I wonder if one could go about skillfully managing the image of trustworthiness? If so, how does one distinguish between a truly trustworthy organization and one that is partly or wholly false fronted? What are the consequences of such failed deceptions? On a positive front, is it important for individuals/organizations to communicate their inherent trustworthiness? If so, how does one go about it? Professor Kimberly Elsbach's research seems to untangle some of these issues.
While these questions seem fascinating to me, I guess I need to begin by fundamentally understanding the essence of this elusive concept called "Trustworthiness" and its relatedness to other dimensions of social functioning - "Respectability" and "Liking". Are liking, respectability and trustworthiness synonymous? My understanding so far has been that while "competence" and "personality" are primary drivers of respectability and liking respectively, "character" is the fundamental basis for trustworthiness.
Well, what's in a name? In my limited view, competence and character seem to be more objective in nature than personality. Competence and personality can be developed, while character is more durable in nature. I could be totally on the wrong here. D Byrne's "The Attraction Paradigm" might be starting point to understand if all three indeed go hand-in-hand.
Are trustworthiness, respectability and liking one and the same? Can trustworthiness be skillfully built?It seems that trust, as a social construct in an organizational context, has attracted scholarly research since decades. In the changing nature and context of the organizations in the recent past, I believe that this social construct will attract even more attention both in theory and practice. For example, in an era when organizations cannot rely on internal capabilities alone for sustained competitiveness, the significance of building trust has various connotations. If "complimentary value" and "common values" are key drivers of inter-organizational alliances, then the dynamics of trust may once again take the mind-share of social science research.
Apparently majority of academic research in this field has been on the presence and absence of trust, and not on how trust gets built in an organization context. But for organizations the importance of securing and sustaining perceived trustworthiness in the context of global uprisings against the Wall Street cannot be emphasized enough. It is in this context I wonder if one could go about skillfully managing the image of trustworthiness? If so, how does one distinguish between a truly trustworthy organization and one that is partly or wholly false fronted? What are the consequences of such failed deceptions? On a positive front, is it important for individuals/organizations to communicate their inherent trustworthiness? If so, how does one go about it? Professor Kimberly Elsbach's research seems to untangle some of these issues.
While these questions seem fascinating to me, I guess I need to begin by fundamentally understanding the essence of this elusive concept called "Trustworthiness" and its relatedness to other dimensions of social functioning - "Respectability" and "Liking". Are liking, respectability and trustworthiness synonymous? My understanding so far has been that while "competence" and "personality" are primary drivers of respectability and liking respectively, "character" is the fundamental basis for trustworthiness.
Well, what's in a name? In my limited view, competence and character seem to be more objective in nature than personality. Competence and personality can be developed, while character is more durable in nature. I could be totally on the wrong here. D Byrne's "The Attraction Paradigm" might be starting point to understand if all three indeed go hand-in-hand.