Collaborating in the Absence of Trust? What Collaborative Governance Theory and Practice Can Learn From the Literatures of Conflict Resolution, Psychology, and Law

Abstract

Trust is often touted as both an element of success and an outcome of interest in collaboration research, usually without defining the term or acknowledging the possibility of collaborating when trust is diminished or absent. This article broadens our theoretical understanding of the concept of trust, and the ability to collaborate in the absence of trust, by looking at it through the lenses of conflict resolution, psychology, and law. The disciplines examined in this article emphasize diverse approaches to examining trust on the interpersonal, interorganizational, and regime levels. While agreeing that trust is an asset, these disciplines also offer practical strategies for collaborating when trust is diminished or absent. Drawing on the theory and literature of conflict resolution, psychology, and law, we offer the following definition of collaborative trust: Collaborative trust is an individual perception that is the product of one’s assessments, experiences, and dispositions, in which one believes, and is willing to act on, the words, actions, and decisions of others. This can include a reliance on principles, rules, norms, and decision-making procedures that articulate collective expectations.

The evolution of interorganizational trust in cross‐sector collaborations: Two comparative cases from China

“…It should be noted that this model depicts the trajectory of trust for sustainable collaborations, along which individual situations might vary. Some have argued that collaboration could continue even when trust is absent or undermined (Getha‐Taylor, Grayer, Kempf, & O'Leary, ). This is the situation in the ND case, where both sides continued the collaboration when they no longer trusted each other.…”

Effects of different kinds of trust and leadership on outputs of collaborative processes: the case of personal social services in Israel

“…However, we found trust had no effect on the other outputs, going against the literature. Some suggest that in certain cases, collaborative efforts may persist in the absence of trust (Cabral and Krane, 2018;Getha-Taylor et al, 2019), while others note the changing nature of trust in these processes (Chen, 2010;Tu and Xu, 2020). Developing a theoretical perspective that includes diverse kinds of trust as both a precondition to collaboration and a resource being developed in collaboration could create a more nuanced understanding of the role of trust.…”

How do charity regulators build public trust?

“…Charities rely on public trust for legitimacy and resources to fulfil their missions (Bryce, 2016; Hind, 2011). Trust, defined as ‘a belief in the reliability, truth or ability of something or someone’ (Hyndman & McKillop, 2018, p. 7), can operate at individual, group and system levels (Getha‐Taylor, Grayer, Kempf, & O'Leary, 2019). A relationship of trust implies that individuals and groups are willing to ‘accept uncertainty while maintaining positive expectations of others’ (Getha‐Taylor et al., 2019, p. 57).…”

“…Trust, defined as ‘a belief in the reliability, truth or ability of something or someone’ (Hyndman & McKillop, 2018, p. 7), can operate at individual, group and system levels (Getha‐Taylor, Grayer, Kempf, & O'Leary, 2019). A relationship of trust implies that individuals and groups are willing to ‘accept uncertainty while maintaining positive expectations of others’ (Getha‐Taylor et al., 2019, p. 57). However, uncertainty about the future behaviour of others creates vulnerability: hence, vulnerability and positive expectations are the two key characteristics of trust (Klijn, Edelenbos, & Steijn, 2010).…”