Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-03T17:41:18.522Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

12 - Antecedents of supervisor trust in collectivist cultures: evidence from Turkey and China

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

By
S. Arzu Wasti  and
Hwee Hoon Tan
Edited by
Mark N. K. Saunders ,
Denise Skinner ,
Graham Dietz ,
Nicole Gillespie  and
Roy J. Lewicki
S. Arzu Wasti
Affiliation:
Sabanci University
Hwee Hoon Tan
Affiliation:
Singapore Management University
Mark N. K. Saunders
Affiliation:
University of Surrey
Denise Skinner
Affiliation:
Coventry University
Graham Dietz
Affiliation:
University of Durham
Nicole Gillespie
Affiliation:
University of Queensland
Roy J. Lewicki
Affiliation:
Ohio State University
Get access

Summary

Summary

The premise of much research on dyadic trust building within organizations has been framed around the relationship as it emerges in the work context. Such models, including the seminal Mayer et al. (1995) model of dyadic trust, have been applied to contexts outside North America without a careful understanding of the distribution of social practices and everyday situations in such contexts. This chapter examines culture-specific workways as a starting point for understanding subordinates' trust in their supervisors in collectivist cultures. Workways refer to the pattern of workplace beliefs, mental models and practices about what is true, good and efficient within the domain of work. Drawing from interviews with sixty organizational respondents from two countries, Turkey and China, we propose that the multiplexity of work relations needs to be taken into account as both personal and professional life domains are important for understanding supervisor–subordinate trust in collectivist cultures.

Introduction

Dyadic trust, and in particular, trust between supervisors and their subordinates has been well documented and studied (e.g. Lewicki et al., 2006). However, this body of work is limited largely to the North American context (e.g. from the meta-analysis of Dirks and Ferrin (2002)).

Type
Chapter
Information
Organizational Trust
A Cultural Perspective
 , pp. 311 - 335
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aycan, Z. 2001. ‘Human resource management in Turkey: Current issues and future challenges’. International Journal of Manpower, 22(3), 252–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2005. ‘The interplay between cultural and institutional/structural contingencies in human resource management practices’. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16, 1083–119.CrossRef
Branzei, O., Vertinsky, I. and Camp II, R. D. 2007. ‘Culture-contingent signs of trust in emergent relationships’. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 104, 61–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, Z. X., Tsui, A. S. and Farh, J. L. 2002. ‘Loyalty to supervisor vs. organizational commitment: relationships to employee performance in China’. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75, 339–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheng, B. S., Chou, L. F., Wu, T. Y., Huang, M. P. and Farh, J. L. 2004. ‘Paternalistic leadership and subordinate responses: establishing a leadership model in Chinese organizations’. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 7, 89–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheng, B. S., Jiang, D. Y. and Riley, H. J. 2003. ‘Organizational commitment, supervisory commitment, and employee outcomes in Chinese context: proximal hypothesis or global hypothesis?’ Journal of Organizational Behavior, 2, 313–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Child, J. and Möllering, G. 2003. ‘Contextual confidence and active trust development in the Chinese business environment’. Organization Science, 14, 69–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chua, R., Morris, M. and Ingram, P. 2005. The Social Structure of Affect- and Cognition-based Trust in Chinese and American Managerial Networks. Working Paper. Columbia Business School.Google Scholar
Dietz, G. and Hartog, D. 2006. ‘Measuring trust inside organizations’. Personnel Review, 35(5), 557–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dirks, K. T. and Ferrin, D. L. 2002. ‘Trust in leadership: meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice’. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 611–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Doney, P. M., Cannon, J. P. and Mullen, M. R. 1998. ‘Understanding the influence of national culture on the development of trust’. Academy of Management Review, 23, 601–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farh, J. L. and Cheng, B. S. 2000. ‘A cultural analysis of paternalistic leadership in Chinese organizations’. In Li, J. T., Tsui, A. S. and Weldon, E. (eds.) Management and Organizations in the Chinese Context. London: Macmillan, 85–127.Google Scholar
Fiske, A. P. 1992. ‘The four elementary forms of sociality: framework for a unified theory of social relations’. Psychological Review, 99,689–723.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gillespie, N. A. and Mann, L. 2004. ‘Transformational leadership and shared values: the building blocks of trust’. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 19(6), 588–607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, E. T. 1976. Beyond Culture. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Hampden-Turner, C. and Trompenaars, F. 1993. The Seven Cultures of Capitalism. New York: Currency/Double Day.Google Scholar
Hofstede, G. 1994. ‘Management scientists are human’. Management Science, 40, 4–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofstede, G. 2001. Culture's Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organizations across Nations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W. and Gupta, P. (eds.) 2004. Culture, Leadership, and Organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Javidan, M., House, R. J., Dorfman, P. W., Hanges, P. J. and Luque, M. S. 2006. ‘Conceptualizing and measuring cultures and their consequences: a comparative review of GLOBE's and Hofstede's approaches’. Journal of International Business Studies, 37, 897–914.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kağıtçıbaşı, Ç. 1997. ‘Individualism and collectivism’. In Berry, J. W., Segall, M. H. and Kağıtçıbaşı, Ç. (eds.) Handbook of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 2nd edn. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, vol. III, 2–49.Google Scholar
Katigbak, M. S., Church, A. T., Guanzon-Lapena, M. A., Carlota, A. J. and del Pilar, G. H. 2002. ‘Are indigenous personality dimensions culture specific? Phillipine inventories and the five-factor model’. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 89–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korsgaard, M. A., Brodt, S. E. and Whitener, E. M. 2002. ‘Trust in the face of conflict: the role of managerial trustworthy behavior and organizational context’. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 312–19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kramer, R. M. 1996. ‘Divergent realities and convergent disappointments in the hierarchic relation: trust and the intuitive auditor at work’. In Kramer, R. M. and Tyler, T. R. (eds.) Trust in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 216–145.Google Scholar
Leung, K. and Bond, M. H. 2004. ‘Social axioms: a model for social beliefs in multicultural perspective’. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 119–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewicki, R. and Bunker, B. 1996. ‘Developing and maintaining trust in work relationships’. In Kramer, R. M. and Tyler, T. R. (eds.) Trust in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 114–39.Google Scholar
Lewicki, R. J., McAllister, D. J. and Bies, R. J. 1998. ‘Trust and distrust: new relationships and realities’. Academy of Management Review, 23, 438–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewicki, R. J., Tomlinson, E. C. and Gillespie, N. 2006. ‘Models of interpersonal trust development: theoretical approaches, empirical evidence, and future directions’. Journal of Management, 32(6), 991–1022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H. and Schoorman, F. D. 1995. ‘An integrative model of organizational trust’. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAllister, D. J. 1995. ‘Affect-based and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations’. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 24–59.Google Scholar
Meyer, K. E. 2006. ‘Asian management research needs more self-confidence’. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 23, 119–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mizrachi, N., Drori, I. and Anspach, R. R. 2007. ‘Repertoires of trust: the practice of trust in a multinational organization amid political conflict’. American Sociological Review, 72, 143–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, M. W., Podolny, J. M. and Ariel, S. 2000. ‘Missing relations: incorporating relational constructs into models of culture’. In Earley, P. C. and Singh, H. (eds.) Innovations in International and Cross-cultural Management. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 52–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Park, S. H. and Luo, Y. 2001. ‘Guanxi and organizational dynamics: organizational networking in Chinese firms’. Strategic Management Journal, 22(5), 455–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rousseau, D. M. and Fried, Y. 2001. ‘Location, location, location: contextualizing organizational research’. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanchez-Burks, J. 2005. ‘Protestant relational ideology: the cognitive underpinnings and organizational implications of an American anomaly’. Research in Organizational Behavior, 26, 265–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanchez-Burks, J. and Lee, F. 2007. ‘Cultural psychology of workways’. In Shinobu, S. and Cohen, D. (eds.) Handbook of Cross Cultural Psychology. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Saunders, M. N. K. and Thornhill, A. 2004. ‘Trust and mistrust in organizations: an exploration using an organisational justice framework’. European Journal of Work and Organisational Psychology, 13(2), 229–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schoorman, F. D., Mayer, R. C. and Davis, J. H. 1996. ‘Empowerment in veterinary clinics: the role of trust in delegation’. Paper presented at the 11th Annual Meeting of Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology.
2007. ‘An integrative model of organizational trust: past, present, and future’. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 344–54.CrossRef
Sheppard, B. H. and Sherman, D. M. 1998. ‘The grammars of trust: a model and general implications’. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 422–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tan, H. H. and Chee, D. 2005. ‘Understanding interpersonal trust in a Confucian-influenced society: an exploratory study’. International Journal of Cross-cultural Management, 5, 197–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Triandis, H. C. 1995. Individualism and Collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Wasti, S. A., Tan, H. H., Brower, H. H. and Önder, C. 2007. ‘Cross-cultural measurement of supervisor trustworthiness: an assessment of measurement invariance across three cultures’. Leadership Quarterly, 18, 477–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitener, E. M., Brodt, S. E., Korsgaard, M. A. and Werner, J. M. 1998. ‘Managers as initiators of trust: an exchange relationship framework for understanding managerial trustworthy behavior’. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 513–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zand, D. E. 1972. ‘Trust and managerial problem solving’. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(2), 229–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×