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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Academy of Management review 2009-01, Vol.34 (1), p.11-31
Hauptverfasser: Puranam, Phanish, Vanneste, Bart S
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 &amp; 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