The Politics of Trust: How trust reconciles autonomy and solidarity in alternative organizations

Abstract

In this paper, we explore the politics of trust in alternative organizations, understood as counter-hegemonic collectives characterized by an equal commitment to individual autonomy and collective solidarity. Although trust is rarely theorized in studies of alternative organizations, it is frequently claimed to be the glue that holds such collectives together. The main purpose of the paper is to substantiate this claim theoretically. Drawing eclectically on Niklas Luhmann and Ernesto Laclau, we argue that trust serves at least two functions in alternative organizations. First, trust serves as an object of identification for people who long for an alternative to the current state of affairs. Such identification rests on the creation of an antagonistic frontier between the organization and its constitutive outside. Here, trust is understood as a way of establishing alternatives by providing space for individual autonomy. We refer to this as the political function of trust. Second, trust serves as a mechanism that renders possible the reconciliation of otherwise irreconcilable interests and identities. Trust fulfils this function by suspending the temporal distance between present and future, thereby creating an extensive ‘moment of undecidability’ in which competing interpretations of what it means to be alternative may coexist. Here, trust is understood as a way of maintaining alternatives by cultivating solidarity between diverse individuals. We refer to this as the depoliticizing function of trust. Combined, these two functions allow people to be ‘different together’, which is often claimed to be the sine qua non of alternative organizing. In conclusion, we hypothesize that both functions of trust may be operative in mainstream organizations as well, although the depoliticizing function is clearly more prevalent.

Feminist social movements and whistleblowing disclosures: Ireland's Women of Honour

“…Adopting a theory development approach well‐established in the field of organization and management studies (Cornelissen et al., 2021; Just and Husted, 2022), a practice of emancipatory theorizing via interpretive re‐signifying is engaged. The aim of this approach is to bring forth “structures of domination and human constraints that are inscribed into our current beliefs”, while developing alternative conceptual framings (ibid: 12; Nyberg, 2021; Janssens & Zanoni, 2021).…”

Logistics of care: Trust-reform and self-managing teams in municipal home care services

“…Trust-reforms in public sector depart from a will to trust professionals and to acknowledge professional skills and competencies and to lessen hierarchical control and bureaucratic procedures (Eide, 2021). As such, trust is inherently relational and denotes how human beings have to trust others when navigating the world under uncertain conditions of which one cannot have control (Husted and Just, 2022). Trust-reforms in public sector may target different levels and involve different types of relationships accordingly: for instance, the relationship between local authorities and the state (as in governance or administrative reforms); the relationship between leaders and employees (as in organisational or management reforms); and/or the relationship between frontline workers and service users (as in reforms aiming at improving services through citizen co-production and co-creation) (Brandsen et al, 2018; Direktoratet for forvaltning og økonomistyring, 2023; Eide et al, 2022).…”

“…According to Proença (2010), the design of self-organising teams aims to "align individual motivation with organizational objectives" (p. 338), as in trust (Eide, 2021). The successful organisation of workers into self-organised teams depends, as a minimum, on the leaders' will to loosen control, as well as on the leaders' will and capacity to collaborate with employees (Bondas, 2018), and where the development of trust is about establishing and maintaining space for individual autonomy (Husted and Just, 2022). The development of trust in self-organised teams may also entail the management of uncertainty and control through agile leadership (Parker, Holesgrove and Pathak, 2015).…”

Intersections Between Fintech Imaginaries and Traditional Banking: A Study of Disciplinary, Implementary, and Parasitic Work in the Danish Financial Sector

“…Organisational studies have drawn out the complementarities between formal organising and transformative agendas in the tech sector (Monteiro and Adler, 2021) (Adler, 2005); and social movements (Husted and Just, 2022) (Hensby et al, 2011, p.812). From these studies, we know that attempts to change the world, whether by 'disruptive innovators' or social activists, involve complex engagements with existing forms of established organised systems, often the very forms these transformative agendas animate themselves in opposition to.…”