Trusting the “Look and Feel”: Situational Normality, Situational Aesthetics, and the Perceived Trustworthiness of Organizations

Abstract

We conducted two studies examining how the "look and feel" of an organization shapes newcomers' trust in that organization. More specifically, we examined the effects of situational normality-the degree to which the work setting appears customary, with everything in proper order. We then introduced the construct of situational aesthetics-the degree to which the work setting has a pleasing and attractive appearance. A field study of new accountants revealed that situational normality and situational aesthetics had indirect effects on trust through perceived trustworthiness, with trust going on to predict coworker ratings of learning behavior. We then replicated those trustworthiness findings in a laboratory setting. Taken together, our results suggest that newcomer trust formation may be shaped by aspects of the work setting that have been heretofore ignored by trust scholars.3 "A discreet logo at the top of one of the towers is the only outward sign of having reached the European headquarters of one of the world's largest accountancy firms… On entering the building, one encounters a lobby designed so that the head of any newcomer will ineluctably lean backwards to follow a succession of floors rising up to apparent infinity, and in the process dwell-as the cathedral-builders once invited one to do with their vaulted naves-on the respect that must be owed to those responsible for putting up and managing this colossus… Everything…appears elegant and well-maintained. There are none of the cobwebs endemic to the ordinary world. People cross the corridors and elevated walkways with purpose… To feel at home in the office is not to notice the strange silver sculpture in the lobby and to forget how alien the place felt on the first day" (from The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work by Alain de Botton, 2009).Thousands of employees around the world are having their first day today-beginning work in a new organization. As they do, one of the questions foremost on their minds may be, "Can I trust this organization?" (Lind, 2001). Newcomers who develop a sense of trust in their organization may take chances during their work day-experimenting with new skills, asking for additional feedback, and so forth (Mayer, Davis, & Schoorman, 1995). Newcomers who do not may struggle with their focus-monitoring what occurs around them while planning for negative contingencies (Mayer & Gavin, 2005). Understanding newcomer trust is important because first impressions are often surprisingly accurate (Ambady & Rosenthal, 1992) and can have longlasting effects on attitudes and behaviors (Human, Sandstrom, Biesanz, & Dunn, 2013). Negative impressions can also have more immediate consequences, as one estimate suggests that 40% of employees who quit do so within their first six months (Vaccaro, 2014). For these reasons, trust formation remains a vital interest for trust scholars.Unfortunately, scholars' understanding of trust formation remains limited. Most models in the trust literature can be classified as rational/historical models (Kramer, 1999; s...

How certain can we really be that our boss is trustworthy, and does it matter? A metacognitive perspective on employee evaluations of supervisor trustworthiness

“…In reality, the questions were filler items, and the reflection task was a priming task designed to help manipulate certainty (Clarkson et al, 2008). Prior to viewing the hypothetical vignette, participants were asked to imagine themselves in a position of an employee working for a professional service firm that offers accounting, consulting, and advisory services and that Fortune, Glassdoor, and Bloomberg Businessweek ranked this firm to be about average in terms of profitability, market share, employee treatment, corporate social responsibilities, and other managerial practices (adapted from Baer, van Der Werff, et al, 2018). This information was designed to help minimize firm characteristics from unduly affecting participants' evaluations about the supervisor's trustworthiness.…”

Trust motivation: The self-regulatory processes underlying trust decisions

“…Our theory of trust motivation more comprehensively accounts for trusting decisions in general, including those where individuals trust and cooperate when rational models would suggest they should not (Weber & Murnighan, 2008). Indeed, models which suggest that trust is a product of trustworthiness and trust propensity have significant difficulties in accounting for split second trust decisions (Willis & Todorov, 2006) or those which are made without sufficient logical evidence and thus appear to be irrational (e.g., Baer et al, 2018; Pillutla, Malhotra, & Murnighan, 2003). These models also fail to explain how visible behavior that violates trust expectations is overlooked (Robinson, 1996; Tomlinson, 2011) or how trust between untrustworthy individuals leads employees to act in the interests of a work relationship rather than self- or organizational interests (e.g., Aven, 2015).…”

A Trait-State Model of Trust Propensity: Evidence From Two Career Transitions

“…Individual differences in TP were measured using a ten item scale from MacDonald et al (1972). Sample items include “I expect other people to be honest and open.” The scale has demonstrated acceptable reliability in previous research (Baer et al, 2018b). The choice of a different measure of TP for Study 2 was driven by potential face validity issues for items that mention specific aspects of work such as projects or study for respondents who are drawn from a wider range of professions.…”