“…Several forms of trust (trust in the organization, in the leader, and in the team colleagues) are related to individual performance and extra‐role behavior (Colquitt, Scott, & LePine, 2007; De Jong, Dirks, & Gillespie, 2016), team processes, and team performance (Bormann, Poethke, Cohrs, & Rowold, 2018; Breuer, Hüffmeier, & Hertel, 2016; Fulmer & Gelfand, 2012). Trust is a team state that is established by individual perceptions and expectations about collective sense‐making and shared experience (Breuer et al, 2016; De Jong & Dirks, 2012; De Jong & Elfring, 2010; Fulmer & Dirks, 2018). According to this theoretical basis, team trust can be defined … as the shared willingness of the team members to be vulnerable to the actions of the other team members based on the shared expectation that the other team members will perform particular actions that are important to the team, irrespective of the ability to monitor or control the other team members.…”
Summary
For modern organizations, shared leadership becomes increasingly important. Knowledge on shared leadership may be limited, as past research often relies on cross‐sectional data or student samples, and most studies neglect the multilevel nature of shared leadership. Our research model includes transformational leadership, trust, and organizational support as predictors of shared leadership. Furthermore, we analyze the influence of shared leadership on team performance and team creativity. In total, 160 teams with 697 employees participated in our field study. Data collection took place at three time points. To test our hypotheses, we used multilevel modeling with a Bayesian estimator. We found relationships of transformational leadership and trust with shared leadership at the team level and of transformational leadership, trust, and organizational support with shared leadership at the individual level. Furthermore, shared leadership fully mediated the effect of the three input factors on team performance and team creativity. This study contributes to the understanding of the antecedents and outcomes of shared leadership. Furthermore, the dynamic development of team processes based on an input–mediator–output model is explored. On the basis of the results, organizations can increase shared leadership behavior by focusing on transformational leadership and trust building.
“…Several forms of trust (trust in the organization, in the leader, and in the team colleagues) are related to individual performance and extra‐role behavior (Colquitt, Scott, & LePine, 2007; De Jong, Dirks, & Gillespie, 2016), team processes, and team performance (Bormann, Poethke, Cohrs, & Rowold, 2018; Breuer, Hüffmeier, & Hertel, 2016; Fulmer & Gelfand, 2012). Trust is a team state that is established by individual perceptions and expectations about collective sense‐making and shared experience (Breuer et al, 2016; De Jong & Dirks, 2012; De Jong & Elfring, 2010; Fulmer & Dirks, 2018). According to this theoretical basis, team trust can be defined … as the shared willingness of the team members to be vulnerable to the actions of the other team members based on the shared expectation that the other team members will perform particular actions that are important to the team, irrespective of the ability to monitor or control the other team members.…”
Summary
For modern organizations, shared leadership becomes increasingly important. Knowledge on shared leadership may be limited, as past research often relies on cross‐sectional data or student samples, and most studies neglect the multilevel nature of shared leadership. Our research model includes transformational leadership, trust, and organizational support as predictors of shared leadership. Furthermore, we analyze the influence of shared leadership on team performance and team creativity. In total, 160 teams with 697 employees participated in our field study. Data collection took place at three time points. To test our hypotheses, we used multilevel modeling with a Bayesian estimator. We found relationships of transformational leadership and trust with shared leadership at the team level and of transformational leadership, trust, and organizational support with shared leadership at the individual level. Furthermore, shared leadership fully mediated the effect of the three input factors on team performance and team creativity. This study contributes to the understanding of the antecedents and outcomes of shared leadership. Furthermore, the dynamic development of team processes based on an input–mediator–output model is explored. On the basis of the results, organizations can increase shared leadership behavior by focusing on transformational leadership and trust building.
“…Trust is critical for interorganizational relationships (Gulati, 1995;McEvily & Zaheer, 2005;Nielsen, 2011;Poppo & Zenger, 2002;Robson, Katsikeas, & Bello, 2008) and particularly relevant in the light of interpartner competition (Krishnan, Martin, & Noorderhaven, 2006). While we see trust as a phenomenon fundamentally rooted in the individual level, we acknowledge its multi-level nature (Fulmer & Dirks, 2018) as it diffuses within the social context of groups and organisations and can take the form of interorganizational trust (Vanneste, 2016;Zaheer, McEvily, & Perrone, 1998). Interorganizational trust has been argued to reduce concerns about partner opportunism, foster cooperation, and facilitate knowledge sharing (Das & Teng, 1998;Dirks & Ferrin, 2001;Nielsen & Nielsen, 2009).…”
Trust has been acknowledged as an important aspect of interorganizational relationships. Yet, limited attention has been paid to the importance of trust in the light of coopetitive interactions, i.e. simultaneously cooperating and competing. Research on trust has started to acknowledge that more trust may not always be better, and that trust and distrust are separate and distinct phenomena. Whilst coopetition research has mentioned the important role of trust, the potential role of distrust is even less acknowledged, although it may be particularly relevant due to the tensions, risks, and uncertainties involved. The purpose of this paper is to identify limitations and gaps in the extant literature on trust in coopetition, bring promising research opportunities into light, and create an agenda for future research focused on the roles of both trust and distrust in coopetition. By means of a systematic literature review, we find that the importance of trust in different phases of coopetition has been acknowledged by prior research, yet deeper explanations of how, when, and why different aspects of trust and distrust matter to coopetition are missing. A normative view on trust prevails and the potential fruitfulness of distrust is neglected. Based on these limitations, an agenda including six promising research avenues is constructed.
“…Dirks and Ferrin 2001;Dirks and Skarlicki 2004); more precisely subordinates' trust in their superiors (Burke et al 2007), while there are fewer studies of horizontal relationships involving trust among peers (Burke et al 2007;Tan and Lim 2009). In an editorial, Fulmer and Dirks (2018) contend that the previous isolation of trust research at a single level of analysis, ignoring processes and influences from other organizational levels, creates gaps in our understanding of trust. Following on that, we argue that an integration of trust research across multiple levels in organizations is sorely needed (Fulmer and Gelfand 2012), including the study of trust in both vertical and horizontal relationships, which are seldom investigated in combination (Nyhan 2000;Cho and Park 2011).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Studies examining trust in either vertical or horizontal relationships tend to ignore the fact that trust does not occur in a vacuum between subordinates and superiors or among peers (see e.g. Fulmer and Dirks 2018). Rather, trust in vertical relationships may influence horizontal relationships and vice versa (Cho and Park 2011).…”
The purpose of this paper is to enhance our understanding of intra-organizational trust in public organizations by studying interpersonal trust in both vertical and horizontal relationships from a bidirectional perspective. Previous research has focused on trust at a single level of analysis, ignoring influences from other organizational levels, which has led to gaps in our understanding of trust. In addition, few studies take a bidirectional perspective where a trustor is simultaneously a trustee and vice versa. Through a case study, we contributed to filling this gap by studying the antecedents of trustability, benevolence and integrity.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
