Repairing Trust with Individuals vs. Groups

This study incorporates insights from research on group decision-making and trust repair to investigate the differences that arise when alleged transgressors attempt to regain the trust of groups as compared to individuals. Results indicate that repairing trust is generally more difficult with group...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: KIM, Peter H., COOPER, Cecily D., DIRKS, Kurt T., FERRIN, Donald L.
Format: text
Language:English
Published: Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University 2012
Subjects:
Online Access:https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/3231
https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/lkcsb_research/article/4230/viewcontent/Repairing_trust_with_individuals_afv.pdf
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Singapore Management University
Language: English
id sg-smu-ink.lkcsb_research-4230
record_format dspace
spelling sg-smu-ink.lkcsb_research-42302018-08-21T08:10:25Z Repairing Trust with Individuals vs. Groups KIM, Peter H. COOPER, Cecily D. DIRKS, Kurt T. FERRIN, Donald L. This study incorporates insights from research on group decision-making and trust repair to investigate the differences that arise when alleged transgressors attempt to regain the trust of groups as compared to individuals. Results indicate that repairing trust is generally more difficult with groups than individuals, and both groups and individuals were less trusting when trustees denied culpability (rather than apologized) for a competence-based violation or apologized (rather than denied culpability) for an integrity-based violation. However, the interaction of violation-type and violation-response also ultimately affected the relative difficulty of repairing trust with groups vs. individuals, with the greater harshness of groups dissipating when the transgressors’ responses were effectively matched with the type of violation. Persuasive argumentation rather than normative pressure, furthermore, mediated these differences. Thus, the sequencing of individual vs. group assessments mattered, such that subsequent group assessments affected initial individual assessments but not the reverse. 2012-01-01T08:00:00Z text application/pdf https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/3231 info:doi/10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.08.004 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/lkcsb_research/article/4230/viewcontent/Repairing_trust_with_individuals_afv.pdf http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Research Collection Lee Kong Chian School Of Business eng Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University Trust Trust repair Competence Integrity Apology Denial Group Organizational Behavior and Theory
institution Singapore Management University
building SMU Libraries
continent Asia
country Singapore
Singapore
content_provider SMU Libraries
collection InK@SMU
language English
topic Trust
Trust repair
Competence
Integrity
Apology
Denial
Group
Organizational Behavior and Theory
spellingShingle Trust
Trust repair
Competence
Integrity
Apology
Denial
Group
Organizational Behavior and Theory
KIM, Peter H.
COOPER, Cecily D.
DIRKS, Kurt T.
FERRIN, Donald L.
Repairing Trust with Individuals vs. Groups
description This study incorporates insights from research on group decision-making and trust repair to investigate the differences that arise when alleged transgressors attempt to regain the trust of groups as compared to individuals. Results indicate that repairing trust is generally more difficult with groups than individuals, and both groups and individuals were less trusting when trustees denied culpability (rather than apologized) for a competence-based violation or apologized (rather than denied culpability) for an integrity-based violation. However, the interaction of violation-type and violation-response also ultimately affected the relative difficulty of repairing trust with groups vs. individuals, with the greater harshness of groups dissipating when the transgressors’ responses were effectively matched with the type of violation. Persuasive argumentation rather than normative pressure, furthermore, mediated these differences. Thus, the sequencing of individual vs. group assessments mattered, such that subsequent group assessments affected initial individual assessments but not the reverse.
format text
author KIM, Peter H.
COOPER, Cecily D.
DIRKS, Kurt T.
FERRIN, Donald L.
author_facet KIM, Peter H.
COOPER, Cecily D.
DIRKS, Kurt T.
FERRIN, Donald L.
author_sort KIM, Peter H.
title Repairing Trust with Individuals vs. Groups
title_short Repairing Trust with Individuals vs. Groups
title_full Repairing Trust with Individuals vs. Groups
title_fullStr Repairing Trust with Individuals vs. Groups
title_full_unstemmed Repairing Trust with Individuals vs. Groups
title_sort repairing trust with individuals vs. groups
publisher Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
publishDate 2012
url https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/3231
https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/lkcsb_research/article/4230/viewcontent/Repairing_trust_with_individuals_afv.pdf
_version_ 1770571330786164736