Optimal trust? Uncertainty as a determinant and limit to trust in inter‐firm alliances
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Purpose This study seeks to investigate a nonlinear relationship between the uncertainty associated with an economic exchange and trust. Design/methodology/approach This study uses data from 191 respondents representing middle and senior management in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industry in the USA and Canada to achieve the research purpose. Respondents completed a questionnaire designed to assess their firm's attitude towards their counterpart. A select number of executives were also interviewed. Measures were developed to assess inter‐firm trust, relational intensity and uncertainty. Findings The study showed that a certain amount of uncertainty is necessary for trust to emerge. Beyond some threshold, however, increases in uncertainty led to a reduction in trust. This midrange proposition suggests that there may be an optimal level of trust. Research limitations/implications First, the findings show that a focus on the structural aspects of exchange can yield additional understandings of trust. Current research has tended to focus overwhelmingly on relational determinants of trust. Second, the nonlinear relationship between uncertainty and trust should spur additional research on the conditions that lead to trust failure. Finally, the findings may provide a starting point for reconciling two opposing explanations of the governance of economic exchange, namely social exchange and transaction cost theory. The study had some limitations. First, the research used cross‐sectional data and took a snapshot measure of trust. Second, single informants were relied on as the main data source. However, steps were taken to reduce the harmful effects of relying on single informants to collect the data. Practical implications The study demonstrated that the structure of an exchange could be a limit to the creation of trust. This implies that actors should focus on both behaviors and the nature of the exchange itself to understand when trust is likely to emerge, and the conditions under which trust may fail. The study also suggests that actors should approach trust as one of strategic thinking. There are costs to creating trust and, unless it is determined that trust is important (reasonable levels of uncertainty), actors should not invest in trust creation. At the same time, beyond a certain level of uncertainty, it will be prudent to think of other control measures to reduce opportunism in an exchange relationship. Originality/value This study has shown that the structure of an exchange, specifically uncertainty, provides a useful conceptual link to trust. The present research bridged some of the gaps in the understanding of inter‐organizational trust by proposing and empirically testing a midrange hypothesis linking uncertainty and trust. The study also increases understanding of the structural limits to trust. This study may be one of the first to test this midrange hypothesis. The study may also provide groundwork for linking two opposing theories on the governance of exchange. Findings from this research should prove useful to management researchers and practitioners.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle