The spatiality of trust: Factors influencing the creation of trust and the role of face-to-face contacts

Nilsson, Magnus; Mattes, Jannika

doi:10.1016/j.emj.2015.01.002

Cited by 86 publications

(77 citation statements)

References 82 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Nilsson and Mattes 2013). Basing their analysis on co--citations of patents, they provide empirical evidence that a social relationship increases the likelihood of knowledge flows with the former location.…”

Section: Local Knowledge Spilloversmentioning

confidence: 99%

Innovation in peripheral regions: Do collaborations compensate for a lack of local knowledge spillovers?

2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is widely accepted that firms in peripheral regions benefit to a lesser extent from local knowledge spillovers than firms located in agglomerations or industrial clusters. This paper investigates the extent to which innovative firms in peripheral regions compensate for the lack of access to local knowledge spillovers by collaborating at other geographical scales.So far the literature predominantly suggests that collaborations complement rather than compensate for local knowledge spillovers. Using data on the collaboration patterns of innovative firms in Sweden, this paper provides evidence that firms with low access to local knowledge spillovers tend to collaborate more. This effect, however, depends on firm size and in-house capabilities. Our findings suggest that firms with strong in-house capabilities do indeed compensate for a lack of local knowledge spillovers with collaborations while firms with weaker in-house capabilities depend more on the regional knowledge infrastructure. AbstractIt is widely accepted that firms in peripheral regions benefit to a lesser extent from local knowledge spillovers than firms located in agglomerations or industrial clusters. This paper investigates the extent to which innovative firms in peripheral regions compensate for the lack of access to local knowledge spillovers by collaborating at other geographical scales. So far the literature predominantly suggests that collaborations complement rather than compensate for local knowledge spillovers. Using data on the collaboration patterns of innovative firms in Sweden, this paper provides evidence that firms with low access to local knowledge spillovers tend to collaborate more. This effect, however, depends on firm size and in--house capabilities. Our findings suggest that firms with strong in--house capabilities do indeed compensate for a lack of local knowledge spillovers with collaborations while firms with weaker in--house capabilities depend more on the regional knowledge infrastructure.

show abstract

Section: Local Knowledge Spilloversmentioning

confidence: 99%

Innovation in peripheral regions: Do collaborations compensate for a lack of local knowledge spillovers?

2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In these types of temporal or initial situations, it is argued that there is a form of trust often referred to as initial trust or swift trust [48,49]. This form of trust is regarded as very fragile, as it lacks a collective history and is based on impersonal antecedents [49]. These antecedents can relate to personality traits, group reputation, institutional factors, and/or situational factors.…”

Section: Theory: Knowledge Learning and Trust Dynamicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This requires at least a certain extent of mutual trust [47]. In these types of temporal or initial situations, it is argued that there is a form of trust often referred to as initial trust or swift trust [48,49]. This form of trust is regarded as very fragile, as it lacks a collective history and is based on impersonal antecedents [49].…”

Section: Theory: Knowledge Learning and Trust Dynamicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Where There Is No History: How to Create Trust and Connection in Learning for Transformation in Water Governance

Vries

Bommel

Blackmore

et al. 2017

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Trust is often seen as an important element in settings of knowledge sharing and the co-creation of knowledge for dealing with transformations in water governance. However, seemingly similar conversations during a co-creation workshop in Uppsala resulted in both trust and distrust, and thereby influenced consequent possibilities for the co-creation of knowledge. Therefore, this article focuses on how trust influences knowledge sharing and how knowledge sharing influences trust. We use a case study approach to analyze the Uppsala co-creation workshop-part of the Climate Change Adaptation and Water Governance (CADWAGO) project-by comparing 25 conversations, making use of theories on swift trust and trust dynamics. We found four different conversation patterns (1) sending; (2) defending; (3) misunderstanding; and (4) connecting. The first three patterns influenced trust negatively and did not lead to knowledge sharing, whereas pattern four showed trust development and co-creation of knowledge. From our comparative analyses, we conclude that trust starts to emerge when there is mutual openness and empathy visible in turn-taking patterns. More specifically, trust emerges when communication styles allow for recognition and exploring underlying needs and wishes, resulting in a more dynamic dialogue, further trust development, and connection between actors. Our list of conversation patterns is provisional but we argue that understanding how different kinds of interactions can lead to trust or distrust is crucial to understanding why and how learning takes place-insights that are essential for fostering learning and transformations in water governance.

show abstract

“…In addition to such cognitive-based forms of trust, trust may also be more emotion-or affect-based (McAllister 1995;Lount Jr. 2010). In both cases, face-to-facemeetings, or bringing people together in formal as well as informal dialogue, are conductive to trust (Nilsson and Mattes 2015). Also conductive to trust in larger social contexts is ensuring that decisions are fair and transparent, sharing resources and working together in temporary groups (Abrams et al 2003; [blinded for review]; Holtz 2013; Korsgaard, Schweiger, and Sapienza 1995).…”

Section: Knowledge Development and Diffusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, although trust is typically seen as a precondition for collaboration, the reverse may also be the case: small or seemingly insignificant collaborations may positively influence trust between partners, and lay the ground for further collaboration and trust-building in the future (Yamagishi et al 2005). NBIB seeks to build and enhance trust among the members of a RIS -more specifically those who are involved in the NBIB process -by allowing them to meet face-to-face in the same space (Nilsson and Mattes 2015). Moreover, it seeks to speed up the trust generation process by introducing simple but powerful micro-practices.…”

Section: Knowledge Development and Diffusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strengthening regional innovation through network-based innovation brokering

Svare

Gausdal

2015

Entrepreneurship & Regional Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The primary objective of this paper is to demonstrate how regional innovation system theory may be translated into manageable micro-level methods with the potential for strengthening the productive dynamics of a regional innovation system. The paper meets this objective by presenting network-based innovation brokering, a practical method designed by using insights from regional innovation system theory and trust theory. Five cases from two Norwegian regional innovation networks show that in addition to knowledge development and diffusion, network-based innovation brokering strengthened collaborative attitude and trust between members of the regional innovation system. Moreover, it served as an arena for entrepreneurial experimentation, resulting in projects combining two modes of innovation; the Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) mode and the Doing, Using and Interaction (DUI) mode. The method, thus, may be viewed as a useful addition to the inventory of methods used to stimulate innovation in RISs. On a more general level, the paper represents a call to the community of innovation researchers and practitioners to give a higher priority to the question of how to better realize the pragmatic potential of RIS-theory.3

show abstract

The spatiality of trust: Factors influencing the creation of trust and the role of face-to-face contacts

Cited by 86 publications

References 82 publications

Innovation in peripheral regions: Do collaborations compensate for a lack of local knowledge spillovers?

Innovation in peripheral regions: Do collaborations compensate for a lack of local knowledge spillovers?

Where There Is No History: How to Create Trust and Connection in Learning for Transformation in Water Governance

Strengthening regional innovation through network-based innovation brokering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About