2004
DOI: 10.1142/s0218495804000178
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Trust Environments and Entrepreneurial Behavior – Exploratory Evidence From Estonia, Germany and Russia

Abstract: This paper explores the role of different trust environments in West and East Europe on the behavior of entrepreneurs. In a stable institutional environment (e.g., Germany, core regions in Russia) personal trust mainly plays a complementary role for entrepreneurial behavior, while in more fragile environments (e.g., peripheral regions in Russia) it can substitute for institutional deficiencies. The exploratory empirical data analyzed in this study comprise three countries (Estonia, Germany and Russia), and the… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
31
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
31
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, quite extensive research has examined how different institutional structures, ranging from regulative arrangement over normative beliefs to taken-for-granted assumptions embedded in national cultures, associate with different networking traditions and practices and with different modes of inter-firm collaboration (Welter et al, 2005;Vasudeva et al, 2013a;Ács et al, 2014). These studies commonly invoke mechanisms such as generalized trust, norms of reciprocity, and legally prompted governance mechanisms, to explain national differences in firms' networking.…”
Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, quite extensive research has examined how different institutional structures, ranging from regulative arrangement over normative beliefs to taken-for-granted assumptions embedded in national cultures, associate with different networking traditions and practices and with different modes of inter-firm collaboration (Welter et al, 2005;Vasudeva et al, 2013a;Ács et al, 2014). These studies commonly invoke mechanisms such as generalized trust, norms of reciprocity, and legally prompted governance mechanisms, to explain national differences in firms' networking.…”
Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These multiple institutional sources of trust to support cooperative behavior in inter-firm relationships are evidenced in several empirical studies. The stability and consistency in a country's institutional frameworks provided by legal norms, and industry standards for technology and market conduct are associated with higher levels of trust and closer inter-firm collaboration (Welter et al, 2005). Particularly strong institutionalized practices encourage cooperative behavior among Japanese firms (Hagen and Choe, 1998).…”
Section: Institutional Support Moderating Benefit Of Networking For Imentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We also excluded articles where the Russian market was only one out of several markets examined (e.g. Johnson et al, 2000;Welter et al, 2004 Table 1 summarizes the methodological approaches used in the studies reviewed, the research topics addressed in the studies, and the main findings of the studies.…”
Section: Methodology Of This Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…With rapidly changing regulatory regimes, environmental uncertainty rises (Welter et al 2004;Eriksson and Sharma 2002). As a result, in the context of cooperative relationships, the number of opportunities to behave unfairly towards one's counterpart in the partner firm without being detected grows so that it becomes harder for boundary-spanning agents to anticipate their business partners' behavior (Lee 1998;Sako and Helper 1998).…”
Section: In This Regard the Index Of Business Freedom A Sub-index Omentioning
confidence: 99%