Affectual Trust and Internal Networks

Louise Young
University of Technology, Sydney, Australia
louise.young@uts.edu.au
Abstract

While trust is increasingly recognised as central to the functioning of relationships generally and to
business relationships in particular, there has been very little attention paid to the nature of the
experience of trust – as distinct from its antecedents and outcomes. In addition, trust has remained a
relation-centric construct. This paper presents an affect-based framework for trust consisting of
cognitive and emotional elements. This is used to consider the internal network of an organisation
concerned with service delivery based on in-depth interviews with service providers talking about
their jobs and their employer. The affect-based framework, combined with theories of cognitive
balance, allow us to understand the importance of the trust context, in this case the context that has
led to distancing within this network and to consider the reasons for this distance.

Keywords: networks, trust, service, satisfaction, emotions, affects

Affectual Trust and Internal Networks

Social scientists have long recognised the centrality of trust. The ability to trust enables humans to
interact in close relationships and is essential for psychological health and development (Asch,
1952; Barber 1983; Eriksson, 1959). Trust is also important in business context exchanges such as
buyer-seller relations, employee-employer and other internal relationships (Argyle 1972, Blau 1964,
Kanter 1977). Despite recognition of the centrality of trust in human behaviour, the nature of
‘trust’ remains unclear because as we have argued in earlier work (Young 1993, 1996, 2001, Albaum
and Young 1997, 2000) the focus of study has been on the antecedents and outcomes of trust.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a greater understanding of the nature of trust in the
properties of an internal network. The study focuses on the workers of a large Australian company
and specifically on the configuration and nature of the trust-rich and trust-deficient parts of their
network. Trust and its impact are considered within a framework that considers trust as a varying
affect, that is, as an interacting set of emotions and assessments. Growing distrust and suspicion
are shown to be substantial influencers of some parts of the network with other, more positive
affects dominant in other parts of the network. The paper closes with a discussion of the value of
researching trust and balance in networks and the way managers might build trust.

An Alternative Conceptualisation of Trust

Most often trust has been considered in terms of the conditions that engender it and/or benefits that
arise from it. Typologies of trust differentiate it according to how much there is, what is based on
(e.g. contract, good will, etc. as per Sako 1997) longevity (short term or long term as per Meyerson
et al 1996) or strength (fragility or resilience as per Ring 1996) rather than on its nature. Work
considering the nature of trust is scarce. When trust is considered in the main two varieties are
considered: one is cognitive, calculative and rational; the other is emotional (Huemer 1998, Lewis
and Weingert, 1985; McAllister 1995, Ring 1992 and Williamson 1993).

A calculative view of trust owes its roots to the early experimental psychology work of Deutsch
(1958, 1962) and his colleagues who labelled as ‘trust’ the calculated decision to cooperate. A focus
on the costs, benefits and probability of defection rather than the emotional or intuitive side of trust
has endured. Business literature presents emotional trust as impulsive and non-rational and as
associated with poorer quality decision-making (Williamson 1993). In contrast we argue this kind
of “emotion free” trust is not trust but only an economic calculus of costs and benefits (in line with
Williamson 1993). We assert that trust involves additional emotional attributes that make what we
call ‘trust’ richer and more enduring (in line with Lewicki and Bunker 1996).

There is considerable work citing the centrality of emotions in effective human functioning
(Tomkins 1970). They play important roles in facilitating intuition and psychological and relational
health (Pinker 1997). It follows therefore that emotions will play important roles in business
relationships including those in the workplace and will be connected to or be part of to the trust and
distrust occurring there. A review of social science literature indicates that positive emotions have
been considered as components of trust, as antecedents or outcomes of trust and/or have been used
as synonyms of trust. Trust has been described in terms liking (e.g. Swan et al 1987), admiration
(e.g. Childers & Ruekert 1986), respect (e.g. Jackson 1985), faith (e.g. Zaltman and Moorman
1988), acceptance (e.g. Bonoma 1976) confidence (e.g. Luhmann 1979), and security (e.g. Zand
1978). Though there is little direct discussion of the centrality of emotion in business trust, some
literature moves towards the notion that emotions are important (Bagozzi et al 1999, Glaser 1991).
The variety of emotions used to describe trust also lends credence to there being multiple forms of
emotion-grounded trust. Hence, ‘trust’ is envisaged here as an umbrella term incorporating in its
different manifestations differing forms and combinations of emotions and calculations.

Figure 1 summarizes what we argue is the process of the formation of interpersonal trust. The
figure depicts trust as emerging through the combining of certain emotions and cognitions. This is
denoted by the just-touching points of the two-way arrows (signifying their combination) at the
centre of the trust box.

Building on the discussions of Argyle (1991) and De Rivera (1984) emotions and hence forms of
trust are differentiated according to whether they function to allow the building, sustaining and/or
enjoying of relationships. Examples of emotions that are of each type and have been reported as
similar to or components of trust are shown in each group (based on De Rivera’s Structural Theory
[1984]). As the figure indicates, these different types of emotions interact and/or combine with
each other – depicted by three arrows leading from them to a circle. This is in line with authors
who argue that emotions can be inevitably linked, as are delight and happiness, or contingently
linked, as are anger and shame (Smedslund, 1988). Emotions can be compounded (Millenson, 1967)
yet can at the same time retain their separate identity (Appley 1990). (See Young [2001] for
further discussion of emotional factors of trust.)

2
 External Factors: Norms,
Relationship environmental uncertainty, social
Sustaining Emotions:, structures, cultural predisposition
Affection, Gratitude, to trust,
Security, Confidence, Internal factors: predisposition
Acceptance to trust, personality
.

Relationship Building Relationship enjoying

Emotions: Interest, emotions Appreciation,
Admiration, Respect and Contentment, Satisfaction,
Liking

Trust Perception of others: i.e.

Cognition/Calcula-tion motivation and competence in
of: costs, benefits, value recipient of trust
and risk,

Contextualisation i.e. Benefits of trust: Transaction

embedding of present response
into focal environment: relationship
dynamics (process of trust-building),
history and relative levels of power
and trust
cost reduction, Relationship co-
ordination, development and
enjoyment, Job satisfaction, etc.

Figure 1: The Nature of Trust

Figure 1 also depicts what we argue are the cognitive elements of trust including the calculation of
costs, benefits, and risks associated with particular situations (Bagozzi et al 1999), the way that
others who are recipients of trust are perceived (Young and Wilkinson 1989) - with competence and
motivation being the perceptions most central to the development of trust (Butler 1991, Heider
1958, Lewis and Weigert 1985) - and assessment of the state of the focal relationship (Wilkinson
and Young 1994). These perceptions combine to form an overall assessment of a relationship –
depicted by three arrows from each type of assessment leading to a circle.

As Figure 1 indicates, emotions influence assessments of risk and/or vice versa. If consistent, the
emotions of trust and the assessments of relational risk combine to form affectual trust, i.e. trust
that contains both emotion and cognition. If inconsistent, discomfort with emotions being
experienced relative to the situation will generate a different mix of emotions and/or reassessment of
the relational situation will occur (in line with the cognitive balance theories of Heider 1958 and
others). The two-way arrows leading from the centre of the trust box back to the circles denoting
the combination of emotions and calculations indicate this.

3
The process of trust generation is evolutionary. As Figure 1 indicates, affectual trust results in
certain benefits (or costs) for a relationship and those participating in it. These in turn change the
nature and context of the relationship by changing the value placed on it, the expectations of those
involved and the conditions surrounding the relationship. Changed relational conditions in turn
create changed opportunities for trust (Young and Wilkinson 1997). Assessments of risk and the
recipient of trust may change because the relationship context (i.e. that which is assessed) has
changed and/or the emotions may change because stimuli that will engender emotions has changed,
as may have the source of trust. As the relationship context (i.e. history and surrounding
conditions) becomes richer, more complex trust-generating emotions experienced are likely to
develop. In early stages trust can evolve from being an amalgam of simple, exploratory emotions
enabling the decisions to take low-level risks. Simple forms of trust enable people to approach each
other and gain the experience necessary for stronger emotions, more sophisticated assessment and
higher risk choices (DeRivera 1984, Young 2001). Early stage emotions include the relationship
building emotions of interest and admiration with the likely associated cognitions concerned with
determining of level of competence, nature of motivation and congruence of goals (Heider 1958,
Young 2001). As the cycle continues, emotions of the relationship sustaining and enjoying types
may become more important. Alternatively, early disappointments may lead to decrease in
relationship building emotions of trust and movement to a cycle of indifference or distrust.

Balance in systems of relationships

Theories of cognitive balance are useful to further analyse the evolutionary state that we argue is
trust – particularly in a network context. Theories of balance posit that certain conditions minimise
or eliminate stresses. Heider’s balance theory (1958) argues that psychological and social
equilibrium is manifested in certain combinations of affect and/or cognition. The simplest social
balance is between two actors with one of two connections between them: the feeling or sense of
belonging1 that one entity has about the other and reciprocal connection. Balance theory argues that
both connections must be positive or both negative for the relationship to be balanced. Experiments
in psychology have tended to support this (eg. Willis 1963).

Heider’s theory of balance is further concerned with the mix of links contained in relations between
interconnected entities. A number of factors contribute to the formation of positive linkages
between entities in relationships. including proximity, more frequent contact, familiarity, similarity
of beliefs and goals, predisposition towards certain sentiments and perception of potential benefits
(Heider 1958). However a similar mix of factors can lead to the formation of negative linkages. For
example, familiarity and similarity of goals may lead to unhappiness when one party is not present
and ultimately can lead to dislike if the party continues to be absent. Similarly, goals may be alike
but congruently interdependent, i.e. the satisfaction of one party’s goals precludes the satisfaction
of the other’s (Deutsch 1949), and this can lead to negative links.

Alternatives to balance are imbalance, where there is stress to change, and vacuous balance, where
there is absence of balance (this is distinct from imbalance) (Heider 1958, 202). Vacuous balance is

1
Heider (1958) argues there are two basic types of connections that need to be considered in this context: sentiment
links and perceived connectedness, or as he calls it, “unit bonding”.

4
associated with absence of trust (this is ambivalence or not trusting as distinct from distrusting) and
absence of unit formation (this is based on separation rather than disinclination or difference).

Balance can be used to consider relationships with three or more entities. According to Heider
(1958) conditions for balance and imbalance in a three entity system2 are
• balance = all three relations are positive or two are negative and one is positive.3
• imbalance = two relations are positive and one is negative
• ambiguous = three negative relationships or three entities where a link is missing. Ambiguous
systems may be under stress to change or ambiguity may be a means of achieving balance.

Case Methodology

The case focuses on attitudes of the employees within a large Australian company most directly
involved with customer service provision.41 The organisation’s management are concerned with
what they perceive as a lack of trust in them by their employees. It is their belief that this may be
the cause of a resistance to ongoing changes in service protocols and that this in turn could lead to a
decline in service standards. They believe certain aspects of the internal network of the organisation
impede Management’s efforts to build trust and reform the processes of the network.

Fifteen semi-structured, face-to-face interviews of 30-90 minutes with employees and one interview
with a senior manager were undertaken. These have been augmented with secondary information
from the organisation, union and media that address relations within this organisation. To maximise
the heterogeneity of employees interviewed, they have been selected so that different lengths of
employment, differing levels of job performance (according to management-based indicators) and
people in different service-provision settings are represented. Upon completion of 15 interviews, it
was decided that this number was sufficient for analysis as views expressed were fairly uniform and
no new themes emerged after the first eight interviews (this is in line with the recommendations of
Patton 1990 for determining sample size).

An indirect/disguised interviewing approach has been used to avoid the over-reporting of trust
and/or the placing of trust into an unduly prominent position. Interviewers were briefed to avoid
using the word ‘trust’ or “distrust” in questioning. Instead the instrument guided discussion
towards workplace atmosphere, including relations with colleagues, superiors and the organisation
generally and encouraged interviewees to speculate on the causes and evolution of this atmosphere.

For effective triangulation, two interviewers carried out interviews with the employees – managed
by the author. Content analysis of completed interviews was conducted by another research
assistant with detailed analysis of her work being undertaken by the author. Findings emerging have
been analysed on a case-by-case basis for convergence and divergence with the theoretical frame,
with the other interviews and secondary information. This approach reduces the biases of a
particular researcher being introduced into the interviews and results and conforms to
2
Heider (1958) alludes to larger systems but only examines three party systems in detail.
3
The reasons for the positive negative combinations are explained in detail in Heider (1958, pg 202-212)
4
At this time the sponsoring organisation prefers not to be identified, so circumstances and data have been somewhat
disguised to respect their wishes and to further protect the privacy of employees participating.

5
recommendations for source, interviewer and analytical triangulation in qualitative research (e.g. Yin
1994).5

The Affects of the Employees and Their Drivers

Overall, there are few indications of trust. Informants used the word ‘trust’ infrequently with some
never mentioning it and no one mentioning it more that a few times. Other emotions associated with
trust in empirical studies (Young 1996) were also infrequently mentioned, e.g. confidence,
appreciation and respect. The absence of trust or presence of distrust and suspicion is more often
commented on, with two-thirds of informants doing so. When positive emotions are mentioned,
relationship-enjoying emotions of trust rather then relationship sustaining or building that are
indicated to be present. However they are associated with the service providers’ jobs rather than
actors within the organization. Virtually all of those interviewed reported themselves to be enjoying
their jobs and most of these indicated they derive considerable satisfaction from working and expect
to continue to do so. As one informant said:
“I actually enjoy going to work every day. I do. A lot of us really love our jobs.”

Both positive and negative assessments of Management were made, though negative assessments
were in the majority. Most of the negative assessments related to the collective Management’s
motivation. Positive motivation was more likely to be associated with specific managers. One
informant related as a significant event a story of the demonstration of positive motivation of a
supervisor. She was very homesick but was scheduled to work a number of days over the
Christmas period. With some trepidation she approached her supervisor and asked that the shift be
modified so she could go home for Christmas.
I said “Please is there anything you can do? Can I swap any of these days?" And she
let me … I really appreciated that. … (T)hey do not have to do that. And that was
something that really meant a lot. Because she had no need to do that for me.”

This one action by a supervisor, both because of the perception of altruistic motivation that was
demonstrated and as it was beyond what was required, assisted in building trust (McAllister 1995).

Situational factors and Management’s poor motivation were coupled in a number of informants’
minds. High levels of uncertainty about job requirements and risk associated with job future (in line
with Meyerson, et al, 1996, Mayer, et al, 1995, Ring and Van der Ven 1992) were mentioned by a
number of respondents as significant situational factors and Management’s perceived lack of
responsiveness and sympathy to these issues were seen as evidence of Management’s lack of
positive motivation. Lack of employer competence was also mentioned (in line with Lewis and
Weigert 1985, Luhmann 1979), particularly with respect to poor management practices by the
employer organisation. About a third of those interviewed indicated their reasons for negative
feelings towards management were based on the way the organisation and specifically HRM
practices are organised and/or the resulting uncaring treatment to which they were subjected.

5
Triangulation is a common validation tool used in qualitative research. Multiple interviewers, sources of data being
analysed separately and multiple analysts working independently with subsequent checks for convergence are all ways
in which triangulation is used.

6
Another third had both negative feelings and reported uncaring treatment but did not directly make a
link between them.

Proximity analysis (looking at what is what is discussed before, after and in conjunction with focal
statements) and causal analysis (looking at informant attributions of causation) were used to further
explore the situational factors that contributed to the emotional and cognitive responses to
Management in employees. Four factors emerged: unequal power, the presence of barriers to
relationship formation, the distant nature of the workplace culture and poorly regarded institutional
norms of this organisation as drivers of the perceived distrust of Management. All of these are
indicated to contribute a vicious rather than virtuous process of relationship development. It is
beyond the scope of this paper to discuss these at length (instead see Young and Daniel 2003).

Evolution and Balance of Trust

Balance theory tells us that symmetric relationships are likely to continue (Heider 1958).
Symmetry of trust could take a number of forms including mutual trusting and/or attribution of
trustworthiness to those who see you as trustworthy (Rotter 1971). Both perceived and actual
symmetry exist in this network but is negative. Informants, who reported Management as
disinterested in them, reported themselves as disinterested in aspects of their jobs and/or
disinterested in what Management thought of them. Those who saw Management as distrustful and
suspicious were likely to report themselves as suspicious of Management. Management reported
considerable suspicion of employees' motivation and competence with the one interview with a
senior manager reporting this as the general view.

Each of the above factors is likely to make some contribution to the generally suspicious
atmosphere that in turn influences both ongoing emotional responses to and assessment of the
situation. In this case, the negative outcomes of the relationship seem to create the conditions for
further negative emotions and assessment and to ensure that Management is viewed with increasing
rather than decreasing suspicion (as discussed by Wilkinson and Young 1994). This dysfunctional
process appears to be occurring in both Employees and Management. The interviews indicate that
most employees commenced their careers with positive emotions and cognitions towards
Management. Early interest and admiration by employees did not result in desired relationship
benefits –management responsiveness and good work conditions– as have been discussed.
Therefore these emotions failed to develop further in most informants, interest was replaced by
disinterest and uncaring and/or by suspicion. For a few informants emotions have evolved to more
actively negative emotions such as disappointment, dislike and resentment (De Rivera 1984). A
fairly typical story from an informant is of being very admiring of the organisation and its
management when joining. During her early years on the job as she perceived a continued lack of
interest by the organisation in her input and efforts, her admiration was replaced by disinterest,
more recently resentment has become prominent.

A number of factors appear to be working together to inhibit the development of trust in

Management in this workplace setting. In line with the results reported here, previous work has
emphasized the importance of personalised relationships (Wilkinson and Young 1994), perceptions

7
of competence and positive motivation (Heider 1958, Young and Wilkinson 1989) the trust
perceived to be emulating from the other party (Rotter 1971), and acceptable levels of risk and
uncertainty (Warne and Holland 1999) as sources of trust. All are indicated to play inverse roles in
the development of distrust in this network.

Figure two summarises the reported affects in the form of an employee’s internal network. Not all
relationships included in the figure have been discussed in detail here (see instead Young and Daniel
2003). The network that Management perceives to exist for workers is of smaller scope (as
indicated by the darker grey ellipse) than is that described by the employees interviewed (as
indicated by the combined ellipses). In addition workers make the distinction between their
work/delivery of service and the customer and between individual managers and the organisation’s
Management as a whole, where Management does not (as indicated by the striped ellipses).

The management versus worker views of the network are also qualitatively different. The portion
of the network envisaged by management contains distrust/dislike relations (as indicated by the
minuses) and positive relations that for the purposes of Management work adversely – in this case
unit bonding of union and workers so they can work against Management interests. The network as
perceived by the workers includes more positive aspects and indicated by the pluses. Liking of the
job and trust in direct supervisors are included here.

8
 Organisation and its Not differentiated by
- Management,
Union management
differentiated but not
linked by workers
0-workers -
+ Mngmnt +-mngmnt
- Workers (0=ambivalent)
Focal worker Direct supervising
+ managers
0 workers/
+ mngmnt +
+ workers
- mngmnt
+ Customer
+
Colleague
workers +
Job, including
effective service
delivery

+ workers
- mngmnt

Figure 2: The internal network of employees

The network relations perceived by Management and employees are different but both are balanced.
In the both views of the network dyads are symmetric (not depicted in Figure 2 but discussed
previously). In the Management view all triads are balanced as the three components are either all
positively linked or are linked via two negative and a positive link. Where there might have been
potential imbalance as would occur in the triad Worker-Job-Customer this is avoided by not
perceiving customers and jobs as separate entities - as occurs in the mind of employee - and hence
no triad exists.

When the network is viewed from the employee’s perspective there are relationships of different
valance (e.g. Management perceives workers to have a negative relation to their job but workers
report a positive relation) but the triads are balanced. Sometimes the nature of the triad balance is
different. The colleague-worker-job triad is three positive links in the mind of workers and two
negatives and a positive according to Management reports. Another way imbalance is avoided is by
ambiguity, i.e. the absence of links. For example there is distancing in the minds of employees
between Management and direct supervisors and hence no link between them. The positive link that
one might expect between them would place a Management-Supervisor-Worker triad into imbalance
(two positives and a negative link).

While this network can be seen as “balanced,” this does not mean there is unlikely to be further
evolution. As discussed by Young and Johnston (1998) networks are likely to change if individual

9
relationships within them change, then placing the triads of which they are part under stress. As
other “connected relations” (here we mean by this the other two relationships in the triad) diminish
in strength and/or positiveness, balance theory would hypothesize that the third relation is likely to
diminish as well. Figure 2 indicates via dashed lines the relationships that employees report to be
changing – these include relations with customers and colleagues. The still-positive but changing
relations may explain the indications that for some the positive connection with their job is also
diminishing. Two informants report this. As one informant said when questioned about what the
organisation should be doing better:
I thought there would be more support from the company and more making it an
environment conducive to a Customer Services role, that is more productive and
supportive of what lengths we go to – to satisfy customers

This respondent went on to comment that this lack of perceived support is gradually leading to less
commitment by employees. The lack of support and hence lack of Management commitment was
perceived by several informants to have the potential to diminish their job performance. One
informant who claimed it had already done so supported her argument by saying that when after
finishing work but while still present at the workplace:
….(C)ustomers are coming up to you and asking you questions. You tend to tune off.
And as they come to you – you say, “Oh, ask that person over there.” You do pass
the buck.

The comment was then made that this would have been less likely to happen in the past.

It is our belief that the situational factors and the way they are linked, as depicted in Figure 2, have
led to a cycle of escalating distrust. One anomaly in the cycle of distrust is the positive emotions
associated with the job. Present are relationship-enjoying emotions but these are associated with a
relationship to the job and to good quality relations with co-workers and are not translating into
positive emotions with respect to the other parts of the organisation. However when the objects of
trust and distrust are mapped into a network form and analysed using balance theory the reasons for
this become plain. The critical “link” in the network pattern depicted is a missing one. Negative
experiences with management appear to be largely unconnected in informants’ minds to feelings
about their job, hence the latter remain positive – for the time being.

Implications and Future Research

This case illustrates the effectiveness of considering trust as an affect and balance theory as a means
of analysing connected, affectual relations. Emerging from the analysis is both an understanding of
the relationships and insight into ways in which network problems might be addressed. Using
balance theory highlights the need to address the building of trust of both parties as they are both
mired in distrust of the other and this is mutually reinforcing.

From the perspective of building worker trust, a starting point might be better information
provision to employees about what is happening in the organisation and better communication with
them. This has been shown to significantly enhance trust in other service-providing settings
(Podadkoff et al 1996). If this is combined with Management demonstrating trustworthiness –

10
probably via initiatives showing positive motivation (as it is more quickly demonstrated than is
competence and may be the greater problem) – and better information provision means that
Employees can assess this motivation more effectively (Krammer et al 1993). Initiatives focussing
on empowerment of employees could also be effective in developing trust (Krammer et al 1993).
The still-present job enjoyment and commitment could serve as an important part of the platform
upon which empowerment could be built. The job enjoyment still present indicates that employees
are likely to welcome the greater accountability empowerment would engender - if it is accompanied
by greater participation and the clear message that contributions are valued (Dobbs 1996).

Initiatives focussing on the building of mutual trust are also needed. Of central importance is to
develop greater personalisation between the employees and Management. At the organisational
level a greater opportunity for and appreciation of employees’ contribution should assist in this.
At a more individual level initiatives that allow specific supervisors to develop relationships with
and demonstrate positive motivation towards specific employees will be critical. In addition
exploration of ways to develop positive and clear associations in the minds of employees between
relationships with more personalised supervisors and distant management (i.e. seeing liked
immediate supervisors as representing more distant managers) is likely to be necessary. This might
be particularly effective in overturning the long-term suspicion in some that may not respond to
initiatives that are seen as purely organisationally driven.

Critical to this process is to balance the building of trust. Trust is based in part on how trusted one
believes oneself to be. Therefore remedies need to include programs to make employees
trustworthier in Management’s eyes. Within this framework, activity aimed at changing the
perceptions of job-related risk (for example fear of losing the job for speaking out, being demoted,
not being valued, etc.) should be undertaken. Uncertainty makes more difficult the creation of trust
yet paradoxically requires that there be more trust present to compensate for its presence (Daley
1991).

Critical to this organisation is provision of high quality service. This analysis has highlighted that
the relationship between Management and Employee trust and effective service delivery can be
complex – as evidenced by apparently contradictory relationship between job satisfaction and
organisational distrust. Further work needs to consider the factors that most impact on service
quality delivered and the more precise role of trust in this dynamic with further in-depth interviews
to be undertaken if needed. In the longer term these issues might be explored in a large-scale survey
of service-providing employees. While this could be beneficial within large companies so as to
create focussed profiles of trust, there is also a need to compare industries to enable exploration of
any situational factors that contribute to trust. We would also like to extend this work to a cross-
cultural context. It is argued that societal characteristics impact on individual’s trust – its nature,
propensity and role (Fukayama 1995).

Future research needs also to be concerned with whether high levels of concern with trust are
warranted. There is still very little evidence as to whether trust increases network productivity,
competitiveness or profitability. There are indications that it may play a more limited role than
psychologists would have us believe. It has been argued that often only very low levels of trust are
present in many interdependent relationships and yet some of these relationships function
reasonably well (Stannack 1999). Trust has been argued to be sometimes counter-productive

11
(Hakansson and Snehota 2002?); a study in Germany showed too much workplace trust increased
the resistance to change (Kern 1999). Here, there are indications that job enjoyment and satisfaction
do not depend on trust. This may mean that quality provision of service is likely whether
Management is trusted or not. Indeed the challenges that these service providers’ jobs present,
perhaps the same challenges that cause disputes and distrust, may be the very thing that makes the
job interesting and satisfying. And job enjoyment and/or satisfaction rather than trust may be what
drives service delivery.

This is a case study of a single internal network’s trust relations. However we believe that these
findings can be generalised in several ways. This work has illustrated the effectiveness of analysing
networks with a model that uses emotional cues to indicate the presence or absence of trust as well
as highlighting the issues that are associated with affiliated emotions and cognitions. This could be
applied in other settings where trust is missing. However, it is our belief that this approach would
be even more useful in settings where there are reasonable levels of trust as this approach allows the
subtleties of trust to be considered. Young (2001) argues that trust containing different emotions
emerges from different stimuli and that different forms of trust are likely to play different roles in
relationships. An understanding of this might enable “trust engineering”.

Such a conceptual structure also can have real value as a comparative framework in cross-cultural
research (see Dawson et al 1997 for an example of this applied to B2B market relationships). The
centrality of emotions to humans could make more credible comparisons of trust accross different
cultures. Using the more traditional approach of using only the environmental and cognitive
antecedents of trust is likely to result in significant methodological problems. However further
work will be needed as to universality and interpretability of emotional expressions and extent to
which they combine with cognitions to form affective trust.

12
Reference List

Albaum G. and Young, L. (1997) “Trust and Direct Selling: Some Preliminary Findings”, Invited
paper presented at the World Marketing Congress of the Academy of Marketing Science, Kuala
Lumpur, June 14-17.

Albaum, G. and Young, L. (2000) “Cross Cultural Perspectives on Trust and Direct Selling”, paper
presented at European Institute for Retailing Conference, Sintra, Portugal, July.

Appley, Mortimer H., (199 “Motivation, Equilibration, and Stress”, Nebraska Symposium on
Motivation: 12-53.

Argyle, M. (1972) The Social Psychology of Work. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin
Books.

Argyle, M. (1991) Cooperation: The Basis of Sociability. London: Routledge.

Asch, S. (1952) Social Psychology. New York: Prentice-Hall.

Bagozzi, R.P., Gopinath, M., and Nyer, P.U. (1999) “The Role of Emotions in Marketing,” Journal
of the Academy of Marketing Science. 27: 184-206.

Barber, B. (1983) The Logic and Limits of Trust. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University
Press.

Blau, P.M. (1964) Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Bonoma, T.W, (1976) "Conflict, Cooperation and Trust in Three Power Systems", Behavioural
Science. 21: 499-514.

Butler, J.K. Jr, (1991) “Toward Understanding and Measuring Conditions of Trust: Evolution of a
Conditions of Trust Inventory”. Journal of Management. 17: 643-63.

Childers, T.L. and Ruekert, R.W. (1986) "Toward a Model of Cooperative Sentiments and their
Antecedents in Channels of Distribution". Working Paper, School of Management, University of
Minnesota.

Daley, D.M. (1991) “Management Practices and the Uninvolved Manager: The Effect of
Supervisory Attitudes on Perception of Organisation Trust and Change Orientation.” Public
Personnel Management, 20 1: 101-13.

Davis, T. and Landa. M.J. (1999) “The trust deficit”. The Canadian Manager, Spring: 10-11.

Dawson, B. Young, L. and Wilkinson, I. (1997) “Conceptual and Methodological Issues in Back
Translation for Questionnaire Design” Proceedings, 6th Symposium on Cross Cultural Studies,
Hawaii Dec 10-13th.

DeRivera, J (1984) "Development and the Full Range of Emotional Experience", in Malatesta, C.Z.
and Izard C.E. (eds) Emotion in Adult Development, Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

Deutsch, M. (1958) "Trust and Suspicion", Journal of Conflict Resolution. 2: 265-79.

Deutsch, M. (1962) "Cooperation and Trust: Some Theoretical Notes", in Jones, M.R. (ed.)
Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

13
Deutsch, M. and Krauss, R.M. (1960) "The Effect of Threat on Interpersonal Bargaining", Journal
of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 61: 181-9.

Erikson, E.H. (1959) "Identity and the Life Cycle". Psychological Issues., 1: 1-171.

Fukuyama, Francis, (1995) Trust: The social virtues and the creation of prosperity, London, Hamish
Hamilton.

Glaser, S. (1991) “A Note on Corporate Culture.” Management Decisions, 29 2: 6-8

Hakansson and Snehota (2002) “The Burdens of Relationships” in Understanding Business

Markets (David Ford, ed.) Third Edition.

Heider, F., (1958) The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations, New York: Wiley.

Huemer, L. (1998) .Trust in Business Relationships: Economic Logic or Social Interaction?

Sweden, Borea Bokforlag.

Jackson, .B. (1985) Winning and Keeping Industrial Customers. Lexington MA: Lexington Books.

Kanter, R.M. (1977) Men and Women of the Corporation, New York, Basic Books.

Kern, H. (1999) “Trust and Innovation,” in Trust Within and Between Organisations”. Lane, C. and
Bachmann, R. (eds) Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kipnis, D. (1976) The Powerholders. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Krammer, R.M. M.B. Brewer and B.A. Hanna, (1996) “Collective trust and collective action: The
decision to trust as a social decision”, in Kramer R.M. and T.R. Tyler (eds.) Trust in organizations:
Frontiers of theory and research. London: Sage.

Lewis, J. D. and Weigert, A.(1985) "Trust as a Social Reality", Social Forces. 63: 967-85.

Lewicki, R.J. and Bunker, B.B., (1996) “Developing and Maintaining Trust in Work Relationships”,
in Kramer, R.M. and Tyler T.R. (eds), Trust in Organizations. London: Sage.

Luhmann, N. (1979) Trust and Power, Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.

Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.C. and Schoorman, F.D. (1995) “An Integrative Model of Organizational
Trust”, Academy of Management Review. 20: 709-34.

McAllister, D.J. (1995) “Affect- and Cognition-Based Trust as Foundations for Interpersonal
Cooperation in Organisations. Academy of Management Journal. 28: 24-59.

Meyerson, D., Weick, K.E. and Kramer, R.M. (1996) “Swift Trust and Temporary Groups”, in
Kramer R.M and Tyler, T.R. (eds) Trust in Organizations.. London: Sage.

Mirvis P.H. and D.L. Kanter (1996) “Beyond Demography: A Psycholgraphic Profile of the
Workforce,” in G.R. Ferris and M.R. Buckley (eds) Human Resources Management, Perspectives,
Context, Functions and Outcomes, Third Edition, Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall, 499-515.

Patton, M. Q. (1990) Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods, USA, Sage Publications.

Pilisuk, M. and Skolnick. P. (1968) "Inducing Trust: A Test of the Osgood Proposal", Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology..8: 121-33.

14
Pinker, S. (1997) How the MInd Works.

Ring, P.S. (1992) “Structuring Cooperative Relationships Between Organizations”, Strategic

Management Journal. 13, 483-98.

Ring, P.S. and Van de Ven, A. (1996) “Fragile and Resilient Trust and Their Roles in Economic
Exchange”, Business and Society. 35:148-75.

Rotter, J.B., (1971) “Generalised Expectancies for Interpersonal Trust". American Psychologist, 26:
.443-51.

Sako, M. (1997) “Does trust improve business performance”, in Lane, C. and Backman, R. (eds),
Trust within and between organizations. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1997

Shamir, B. (1980) “Between Service and Servility: Role Conflict in Subordinate Service Roles”. Human
Relations., 33: 741-56.

Smedslund, Jan, (1988) Psycho-Logic, Berlin, Springer-Verlag.

Swan, J.E., Trawick, I.F. and Silva, D.W. (1985) "How Industrial Salespeople Gain Customer
Trust", Industrial Marketing Management. 14: 203-11.

Tomkins, S. (1970) “Affect as the Primary Motivational System”, in Arnold, M.B. (ed.) Feelings
and Emotions. New York: Academic Press,101-10.

Warne, D. and Holland, C.P. (1999) “Exploring Trust in Flexile Working Using a New Model”. BT
Technology Journal. 1:111-19

D. Welch, L. Welch I. Wilkinson and L. Young (1996) “Network analysis of a new export grouping
scheme: the role of economic and non-economic relations,” International Journal of Research in
Marketing. 13 5, 229-43,

Wilkinson, I.F. & Young L.C. (1994) "Business Dancing: An alternative paradigm for Relationship
Marketing," Asia - Australia Marketing Journal. 2: 26-41.

Willis, R. (1963) Two Dimensions of Conformity-Nonconformity, Sociometry, 26, 499-513.

Williamson, O.E. (1993) “Calculativeness, trust, and economic organization”, Journal of Law and
Economics.36: 453-86.

Yin, R.K.. Case Study Research. Design and Methods, 2nd. edition. Newbury Park, CA: Sage
Publications. 1994

Young, L.C. (1993) “Towards a Typology of Trust" paper presented at 9th IMP Conference in
Bath, UK, September,

Young, L.C. (1996) “Are our measures of trust trustworthy?” paper presented at Australia and
New Zealand Marketing Educators Conference, Auckland,.

Young, L.C (2001) “Evolving Trust In Business Relations: An Emotion-Based View”. UTS School
of Marketing Working Paper Series No. 2001-1

15
Young, L.C. and Daniel, K. (2003) Affectual Trust in the Workplace, International Journal of
Human Relationship Management, forthcoming.

Young, L.C. and Johnston W. (1998) Dynamic Networks: Towards a theory of balance in relations
and networks, paper presented at IMP Conference, Lyon.

Young, L.C. and Wilkinson I.F. (1988) "The role of Trust and Cooperation in Marketing Channels:
A Preliminary Study". European Journal of Marketing. 23: 109-22.

Young, L.C. and Wilkinson I.F. (1997) “The Space Between: Towards a Typology of Interfirm
Relations Business, Journal of Business to Business Marketing, 4 (2), , 53-97

Zaltman, G. & Moorman, C. (1988) "The Importance of Personal Trust in the Use of Research",
Journal of Advertising Research, 16-24.

Zand, D.E.(1978) "Trust and Managerial Problem Solving", in Leland P. Bradford (ed) Group
Development, Second Edition, La Jolla, California, University Associates.

16