Trust and Governance: Untangling A Tangled Web
There is much debate and diversity of results in the literature on the relationships between formal governance and trust. Drawing on concepts such as substitution, complementarity and crowding out, scholars have variously argued for (and found evidence consistent with) both positive and negative rel...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Academy of Management review 2009-01, Vol.34 (1), p.11-31 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 31 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 11 |
container_title | The Academy of Management review |
container_volume | 34 |
creator | Puranam, Phanish Vanneste, Bart S |
description | There is much debate and diversity of results in the literature on the relationships between formal governance and trust. Drawing on concepts such as substitution, complementarity and crowding out, scholars have variously argued for (and found evidence consistent with) both positive and negative relationships between trust and governance complexity. Using a simple but general formalization, we state the conditions under which one might expect a negative or a positive relationship between pre-existing trust and governance complexity, and whether crowding out or complementarity arguments are necessary for such outcomes. Our analysis provides a platform for simple but rigorous analysis of other possible relationships between trust and governance, and also suggests that the debate about the relationship between governance and trust could be fruitfully redirected through greater attention to the analytical structure of the arguments. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT] |
doi_str_mv | 10.5465/amr.2009.35713271 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_37058066</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>37058066</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c491t-17c71a9d7f86ba85de2b077e2b9a3f659d4cccdc36af4dff087bc6634942be243</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkDtPwzAQgC0EEqXwA9giBrYEvx2zVRUtSJVYWjFajh9VqsQpdoLEv8dVYeGGuxu-O919ANwjWDHK2ZPuY4UhlBVhAhEs0AWYIUlgSWooLsEMEk5KQTG7BjcpHWAOAdkMVNs4pbHQwRbr4cvFoINxz8UujDrsuzbsi0WxPbXOFh-uuQVXXnfJ3f3WOditXrbL13Lzvn5bLjaloRKNJRJGIC2t8DVvdM2sww0UImepiedMWmqMsYZw7an1HtaiMZwTKiluHKZkDh7Pe49x-JxcGlXfJuO6Tgc3TEmRfHwN88QcPPwDD8OUv-iSwghKhmshM4TOkIlDStF5dYxtr-O3QlCd9KmsT530qT995AedxGG_</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>210952879</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Trust and Governance: Untangling A Tangled Web</title><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Puranam, Phanish ; Vanneste, Bart S</creator><creatorcontrib>Puranam, Phanish ; Vanneste, Bart S</creatorcontrib><description>There is much debate and diversity of results in the literature on the relationships between formal governance and trust. Drawing on concepts such as substitution, complementarity and crowding out, scholars have variously argued for (and found evidence consistent with) both positive and negative relationships between trust and governance complexity. Using a simple but general formalization, we state the conditions under which one might expect a negative or a positive relationship between pre-existing trust and governance complexity, and whether crowding out or complementarity arguments are necessary for such outcomes. Our analysis provides a platform for simple but rigorous analysis of other possible relationships between trust and governance, and also suggests that the debate about the relationship between governance and trust could be fruitfully redirected through greater attention to the analytical structure of the arguments. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]</description><identifier>ISSN: 0363-7425</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1930-3807</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.5465/amr.2009.35713271</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Briarcliff Manor: Academy of Management</publisher><subject>Business management ; Business networks ; Business organization ; Business studies ; Corporate governance ; Management theory ; Mathematical models ; Statistical analysis ; Studies ; Trust</subject><ispartof>The Academy of Management review, 2009-01, Vol.34 (1), p.11-31</ispartof><rights>Copyright Academy of Management Jan 2009</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c491t-17c71a9d7f86ba85de2b077e2b9a3f659d4cccdc36af4dff087bc6634942be243</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c491t-17c71a9d7f86ba85de2b077e2b9a3f659d4cccdc36af4dff087bc6634942be243</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,27907,27908</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Puranam, Phanish</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vanneste, Bart S</creatorcontrib><title>Trust and Governance: Untangling A Tangled Web</title><title>The Academy of Management review</title><description>There is much debate and diversity of results in the literature on the relationships between formal governance and trust. Drawing on concepts such as substitution, complementarity and crowding out, scholars have variously argued for (and found evidence consistent with) both positive and negative relationships between trust and governance complexity. Using a simple but general formalization, we state the conditions under which one might expect a negative or a positive relationship between pre-existing trust and governance complexity, and whether crowding out or complementarity arguments are necessary for such outcomes. Our analysis provides a platform for simple but rigorous analysis of other possible relationships between trust and governance, and also suggests that the debate about the relationship between governance and trust could be fruitfully redirected through greater attention to the analytical structure of the arguments. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]</description><subject>Business management</subject><subject>Business networks</subject><subject>Business organization</subject><subject>Business studies</subject><subject>Corporate governance</subject><subject>Management theory</subject><subject>Mathematical models</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Trust</subject><issn>0363-7425</issn><issn>1930-3807</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpdkDtPwzAQgC0EEqXwA9giBrYEvx2zVRUtSJVYWjFajh9VqsQpdoLEv8dVYeGGuxu-O919ANwjWDHK2ZPuY4UhlBVhAhEs0AWYIUlgSWooLsEMEk5KQTG7BjcpHWAOAdkMVNs4pbHQwRbr4cvFoINxz8UujDrsuzbsi0WxPbXOFh-uuQVXXnfJ3f3WOditXrbL13Lzvn5bLjaloRKNJRJGIC2t8DVvdM2sww0UImepiedMWmqMsYZw7an1HtaiMZwTKiluHKZkDh7Pe49x-JxcGlXfJuO6Tgc3TEmRfHwN88QcPPwDD8OUv-iSwghKhmshM4TOkIlDStF5dYxtr-O3QlCd9KmsT530qT995AedxGG_</recordid><startdate>20090101</startdate><enddate>20090101</enddate><creator>Puranam, Phanish</creator><creator>Vanneste, Bart S</creator><general>Academy of Management</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K9.</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20090101</creationdate><title>Trust and Governance: Untangling A Tangled Web</title><author>Puranam, Phanish ; Vanneste, Bart S</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c491t-17c71a9d7f86ba85de2b077e2b9a3f659d4cccdc36af4dff087bc6634942be243</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Business management</topic><topic>Business networks</topic><topic>Business organization</topic><topic>Business studies</topic><topic>Corporate governance</topic><topic>Management theory</topic><topic>Mathematical models</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Trust</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Puranam, Phanish</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vanneste, Bart S</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><jtitle>The Academy of Management review</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Puranam, Phanish</au><au>Vanneste, Bart S</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Trust and Governance: Untangling A Tangled Web</atitle><jtitle>The Academy of Management review</jtitle><date>2009-01-01</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>34</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>11</spage><epage>31</epage><pages>11-31</pages><issn>0363-7425</issn><eissn>1930-3807</eissn><abstract>There is much debate and diversity of results in the literature on the relationships between formal governance and trust. Drawing on concepts such as substitution, complementarity and crowding out, scholars have variously argued for (and found evidence consistent with) both positive and negative relationships between trust and governance complexity. Using a simple but general formalization, we state the conditions under which one might expect a negative or a positive relationship between pre-existing trust and governance complexity, and whether crowding out or complementarity arguments are necessary for such outcomes. Our analysis provides a platform for simple but rigorous analysis of other possible relationships between trust and governance, and also suggests that the debate about the relationship between governance and trust could be fruitfully redirected through greater attention to the analytical structure of the arguments. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]</abstract><cop>Briarcliff Manor</cop><pub>Academy of Management</pub><doi>10.5465/amr.2009.35713271</doi><tpages>21</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0363-7425 |
ispartof | The Academy of Management review, 2009-01, Vol.34 (1), p.11-31 |
issn | 0363-7425 1930-3807 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_37058066 |
source | EBSCOhost Business Source Complete; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Business management Business networks Business organization Business studies Corporate governance Management theory Mathematical models Statistical analysis Studies Trust |
title | Trust and Governance: Untangling A Tangled Web |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T07%3A07%3A58IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Trust%20and%20Governance:%20Untangling%20A%20Tangled%20Web&rft.jtitle=The%20Academy%20of%20Management%20review&rft.au=Puranam,%20Phanish&rft.date=2009-01-01&rft.volume=34&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=11&rft.epage=31&rft.pages=11-31&rft.issn=0363-7425&rft.eissn=1930-3807&rft_id=info:doi/10.5465/amr.2009.35713271&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E37058066%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=210952879&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |