The Economic Consequences of Trust and Distrust in Knowledge-Intensive Organizations

Abstract

Studies measuring workplace trust in connection with leadership style and leader responsibility have become more and more important in recent years. Interest in the subject has been rising along with the recent introduction of knowledge management systems (KMSs), which has shown to be one of the most important factors of competitiveness. The aim of this research was to examine to what extent leaders of organizations are concerned about the presence of trust and/ or distrust, as well as about the economic consequences of trust and distrust. It also focused on solutions used in KMSs in knowledge-intensive organizations. Based on a model developed by the authors, the significance of a trust-based culture was examined from the viewpoint of economic consequences. Situations were analyzed in which, despite the existence of all knowledgerelated preferences, managers were not concerned about the economic consequences of trust or distrust. To test the system of relations in the model, a questionnaire survey was conducted in two neighboring European countries with different cultures. It has been found out that in most cases, there is a need for the building and/or use of a KMS at a strategic level. Appropriate tools are also used at an operative level (often spontaneously). However, trust as a general cultural prerequisite is often lacking. Businesses do not seem concerned about the consequences of trust and distrust, as related economic impacts are rarely quantified.

The effect of relationship quality on contract farming: The mediating role of conflict between trading partners in Albania

“…In the literature, farmers' commitment to the trading relationship is positively linked with participating in contract farming. Trust in a trading relationship is an asset that creates benefit (Bencsik et al, 2020;Gorb, 2017;Masuku & Kirsten, 2004;Tarí et al, 2020). On the other hand, trust helps in reducing performance uncertainty and plays a vital role in a relational transaction (Alkhurshan & Rjoub, 2020;Li & Nicholls, 2000).…”

From knowledge to wisdom: will wisdom management replace knowledge management?

“…Nevertheless, KM authors began to focus on understanding the human factors, processes, context and interactions in knowledge creation (Bencsik et al , 2020; Jakubik, 2007, 2011; Nonaka et al , 2008, 2014; Nonaka and Takeuchi, 2011; Nonaka and Toyama, 2002; Serenko, 2013, 2021; Serenko and Bontis, 2017, 2021; Vasconcelos, 2021). Since year 2000, Nonaka et al (2008) demonstrated the importance of practical wisdom ( phronesis ) and wise leadership in KM.…”

“…Regarding topics in KM, he concluded that there “was a noticeable increase in some topics, such as the intellectual core of the KM field; productivity and impact studies; and collaboration patterns”. For example, the economic consequences of trust and distrust in knowledge-intensive organisations (Bencsik et al , 2020), and the importance of human values and human interactions in KM research. Furthermore, Vasconcelos (2021) proposed the wisdom capital concept, which is highly relevant to KM, and presented his two-level model.…”

“…This research topic is future-oriented because it focuses on a potential next phase of KM which has had several development phases since the 1990s. Bencsik et al (2020, pp. 31–32) referred to Jakubik (2007, 2011), who identified five phases of KM, and to Serenko (2013), who defined four generations of KM.…”

Exploring the association between trust and contracting in agribusiness sector: Evidence from Albania

“…Trust is considered as an important factor in cooperation between two or more partners (Fulmer & Gelfand, 2012) including institutional trust (Alkhurshan & Rjoub, 2020;Bencsik et al, 2020;Çera, Meço, et al, 2019;Civelek et al, 2019). It is an essential determinant of a successful buyer-seller relationship (Batt, 2000;Piricz, 2018).…”