Building Trust in the Workplace

Building trust in the workplace represents a fundamental cornerstone of effective organizational relationships and performance outcomes. This comprehensive examination of workplace trust explores its multifaceted nature, theoretical foundations, antecedents, and consequences within contemporary organizational contexts. Drawing from extensive research in Industrial-Organizational Psychology, social psychology, and organizational behavior, the article synthesizes current understanding of trust formation, maintenance, and repair in workplace settings. Key findings from Workplace Psychology research indicate that trust operates through cognitive, affective, and behavioral dimensions, influenced by individual differences, leadership behaviors, organizational culture, and structural factors. The article addresses practical applications for building trust through communication strategies, leadership development, organizational design, and policy implementation. Contemporary challenges including remote work, diversity and inclusion, and digital transformation are examined alongside evidence-based interventions for trust enhancement. The synthesis reveals trust as both an outcome of positive workplace relationships and a catalyst for improved performance, collaboration, and organizational resilience in modern work environments.

Introduction

Trust serves as the invisible foundation upon which successful organizations are built, influencing everything from daily interpersonal interactions to strategic decision-making processes. In contemporary workplace environments, characterized by increasing complexity, rapid change, and diverse stakeholder relationships, the ability to establish, maintain, and repair trust has become a critical competency for both individual success and organizational effectiveness (Colquitt, Scott, & LePine, 2007). Industrial-organizational psychology research consistently demonstrates that trust acts as a fundamental mechanism enabling cooperation, reducing transaction costs, and facilitating knowledge sharing within organizations.

The significance of workplace trust extends beyond interpersonal relationships to encompass broader organizational outcomes including employee engagement, innovation, and competitive advantage. Organizations with high levels of trust report superior financial performance, lower turnover rates, and enhanced ability to navigate crises and uncertainty (PwC, 2016). Conversely, trust deficits create substantial organizational costs through increased monitoring, reduced collaboration, and diminished employee commitment.

Recent workplace transformations, including the widespread adoption of remote work, increased emphasis on diversity and inclusion, and accelerated digital transformation, have created new challenges and opportunities for trust building. These changes necessitate updated approaches to understanding and cultivating trust that account for virtual interactions, cultural differences, and technology-mediated relationships. The COVID-19 pandemic further highlighted the critical role of trust in organizational resilience and adaptation.

This article provides a comprehensive examination of workplace trust from an industrial-organizational psychology perspective, synthesizing theoretical foundations with practical applications. The analysis encompasses individual, interpersonal, and organizational levels of trust, offering evidence-based strategies for building and maintaining trust in contemporary work environments.

Theoretical Foundations of Workplace Trust

Defining Trust in Organizational Contexts

Trust in workplace settings represents a multidimensional construct encompassing cognitive, affective, and behavioral components. Mayer, Davis, and Schoorman’s (1995) influential model defines trust as “the willingness of a party to be vulnerable to the actions of another party based on the expectation that the other will perform a particular action important to the trustor, regardless of the ability to monitor or control that other party.” This definition emphasizes the inherent vulnerability and risk involved in trust relationships while highlighting the expectational nature of trust judgments.

The construct of trust operates through three primary dimensions: ability, benevolence, and integrity (Mayer et al., 1995). Ability refers to the trustee’s competence and skills relevant to the specific domain of interaction. Benevolence encompasses the extent to which the trustee cares about the trustor’s interests beyond their own profit motives. Integrity involves adherence to principles and consistency between words and actions. These dimensions interact dynamically to influence overall trust perceptions and subsequent behavioral outcomes.

Cognitive versus Affective Trust

Research distinguishes between cognitive and affective foundations of trust, each following different developmental pathways and serving distinct functions in workplace relationships (McAllister, 1995). Cognitive trust emerges from rational assessment of competence, reliability, and dependability based on observable evidence and past performance. This form of trust develops through professional interactions and task-focused exchanges, emphasizing predictability and consistency in role performance.

Affective trust, in contrast, derives from emotional bonds and genuine care between individuals, characterized by feelings of safety, perceived strength of relationships, and emotional attachment. Affective trust typically develops through personal interactions, shared experiences, and demonstrations of mutual concern that extend beyond immediate work requirements. Both forms of trust contribute uniquely to workplace outcomes, with cognitive trust being particularly important for task performance and affective trust being crucial for collaboration and knowledge sharing.

Social Exchange Theory and Trust

Social exchange theory provides a fundamental framework for understanding trust development in workplace relationships (Blau, 1964). According to this perspective, trust emerges through reciprocal exchanges of benefits, information, and support that create positive relationship cycles. Initial positive exchanges generate expectations for future reciprocity, leading to increased willingness to engage in vulnerable behaviors that further strengthen trust bonds.

The theory emphasizes the role of perceived fairness, reciprocity, and long-term orientation in trust formation. When individuals perceive that exchange relationships are equitable and mutually beneficial, trust levels increase, leading to expanded willingness to share resources, information, and support. Conversely, perceived inequity or exploitation undermines trust and reduces future cooperation likelihood.

Individual Differences in Trust Propensity

Personality Factors and Trust

Individual differences in personality significantly influence both the propensity to trust others and the likelihood of being perceived as trustworthy. The Big Five personality dimensions demonstrate consistent relationships with trust-related behaviors and perceptions (Colquitt et al., 2007). Agreeableness shows the strongest positive correlation with trust propensity, reflecting tendencies toward cooperation, empathy, and positive assumptions about others’ intentions.

Conscientiousness relates to trustworthiness perceptions through demonstrated reliability, consistency, and follow-through on commitments. Individuals high in conscientiousness are more likely to be trusted by others due to their predictable and dependable behavior patterns. Openness to experience influences trust through willingness to engage with diverse perspectives and adaptability in changing circumstances.

Neuroticism demonstrates negative relationships with both trust propensity and trustworthiness perceptions. High neuroticism is associated with increased suspicion, anxiety about others’ motives, and inconsistent emotional responses that may undermine others’ confidence. Extraversion shows complex relationships with trust, facilitating trust building through enhanced social interaction while potentially creating concerns about discretion and confidentiality.

Cultural Influences on Trust Formation

Cultural background significantly shapes trust formation processes, expectations, and behavioral expressions in workplace settings (Ferrin & Gillespie, 2010). Hofstede’s cultural dimensions framework provides insight into cross-cultural variations in trust development. High power distance cultures may emphasize hierarchical trust relationships and formal authority, while low power distance cultures prioritize peer-to-peer trust and egalitarian relationships.

Individualistic cultures typically emphasize competence-based trust and task-focused relationships, while collectivistic cultures prioritize relationship-based trust and group harmony. Uncertainty avoidance influences preferences for formal trust mechanisms versus informal relationship building. Long-term orientation affects patience for trust development and emphasis on sustained relationship investment.

These cultural differences have practical implications for multinational organizations and diverse teams, requiring culturally sensitive approaches to trust building that acknowledge varying expectations, communication styles, and relationship development patterns.

Individual Trust Propensity

Beyond personality factors, individuals vary in their general propensity to trust others, representing a stable individual difference that influences trust formation across relationships and contexts (Mayer & Davis, 1999). High trust propensity individuals demonstrate greater willingness to assume positive intentions, take interpersonal risks, and engage in vulnerable behaviors with new colleagues.

Trust propensity appears to develop through early life experiences, including family relationships, educational environments, and formative social interactions. While relatively stable, trust propensity can be influenced by significant organizational experiences, training interventions, and leadership development programs that address underlying assumptions and risk tolerance.

Leadership and Trust Building

Transformational Leadership and Trust

Transformational leadership behaviors demonstrate strong positive relationships with follower trust through multiple mechanisms (Dirks & Ferrin, 2002). Idealized influence creates trust through leader integrity, ethical behavior, and consistent alignment between espoused values and actions. Followers develop trust when leaders demonstrate moral courage, make personal sacrifices for collective benefit, and maintain consistent principles across situations.

Inspirational motivation builds trust by creating shared vision and meaning that transcends individual self-interest. When leaders articulate compelling futures and demonstrate genuine commitment to collective goals, followers develop confidence in leader benevolence and long-term orientation. Intellectual stimulation contributes to trust through respect for follower capabilities and willingness to challenge assumptions constructively.

Individualized consideration enhances trust through personalized attention, development support, and recognition of unique contributions. Leaders who invest time in understanding individual needs and providing tailored support demonstrate benevolence and competence simultaneously, strengthening multiple trust dimensions.

Authentic Leadership and Trustworthiness

Authentic leadership theory emphasizes self-awareness, relational transparency, balanced processing, and moral perspective as foundations for trustworthy leadership (Avolio & Gardner, 2005). Self-aware leaders demonstrate understanding of their strengths, limitations, and impact on others, creating predictability that supports cognitive trust development.

Relational transparency involves open communication, honest self-disclosure, and genuine presentation of authentic self rather than false personas. This transparency builds trust by reducing uncertainty about leader motivations and intentions while demonstrating vulnerability that encourages reciprocal openness.

Balanced processing refers to objective analysis of relevant information before decision-making, including willingness to seek contrary viewpoints and acknowledge mistakes. Leaders who demonstrate intellectual humility and evidence-based decision-making enhance perceptions of competence and integrity.

Trust Repair and Recovery

Trust violations in leadership relationships require specific intervention strategies that address the underlying causes and restore confidence in future interactions (Kim, Ferrin, Cooper, & Dirks, 2004). Effective trust repair typically involves acknowledgment of responsibility, genuine apology, corrective action, and sustained effort to demonstrate renewed trustworthiness.

The severity and nature of trust violations influence appropriate repair strategies. Competence-based violations may require demonstration of improved skills, additional training, or structural changes to prevent recurrence. Integrity-based violations typically require more extensive repair efforts including values clarification, behavioral change, and long-term consistency demonstration.

Research indicates that trust repair is generally more difficult than initial trust building, requiring sustained effort and multiple positive interactions to overcome negative expectations. However, successfully repaired trust relationships can sometimes become stronger than original relationships due to increased understanding and commitment to relationship maintenance.

Organizational Factors Influencing Trust

Organizational Culture and Trust Climate

Organizational culture significantly influences trust development through shared values, norms, and behavioral expectations that either support or undermine trust-building activities (Schoorman, Mayer, & Davis, 2007). High-trust cultures emphasize transparency, accountability, and mutual respect while providing psychological safety for risk-taking and vulnerability.

Cultural artifacts such as policies, procedures, and reward systems communicate organizational priorities regarding trust. Organizations that invest in trust-building activities, measure trust outcomes, and hold leaders accountable for trust development create supportive cultural contexts. Conversely, cultures emphasizing competition over collaboration, short-term results over relationship building, or punishment over learning may inadvertently undermine trust development.

Trust climate represents the collective perception of trust levels within organizational units or departments. Positive trust climates facilitate knowledge sharing, innovation, and collaborative problem-solving while reducing defensive behaviors and political maneuvering. Climate assessments can identify trust strengths and development opportunities within specific organizational contexts.

Structural Factors and Trust Systems

Organizational structure influences trust development through reporting relationships, communication patterns, and decision-making processes (Costa, Fulmer, & Anderson, 2018). Hierarchical structures may create trust challenges through power differentials and limited direct interaction between levels. Flat structures can facilitate trust through increased accessibility and peer relationships but may create ambiguity about accountability and decision authority.

Matrix structures present unique trust challenges requiring individuals to manage relationships with multiple supervisors and stakeholders with potentially competing priorities. Success in matrix environments depends heavily on trust relationships that enable effective navigation of complex reporting structures and competing demands.

Network structures and virtual organizations require trust mechanisms that can operate effectively across organizational boundaries and with limited face-to-face interaction. These contexts emphasize the importance of reputation systems, formal agreements, and technology-mediated trust building.

Human Resource Practices and Trust

Human resource management practices significantly influence organizational trust through recruitment, selection, performance management, and development activities (Whitener, 2001). Recruitment practices that emphasize cultural fit and values alignment help ensure new hires possess characteristics conducive to trust building and organizational integration.

Selection processes that assess trustworthiness indicators, including integrity, reliability, and interpersonal skills, contribute to overall organizational trust levels. Behavioral interviewing techniques and reference checks can identify candidates likely to build positive relationships and contribute to trust climate.

Performance management systems that emphasize collaboration, knowledge sharing, and relationship building reinforce trust-supporting behaviors. Recognition and reward systems that acknowledge trust-building contributions communicate organizational priorities and encourage continued investment in relationship development.

Professional development programs that include trust-building skills, emotional intelligence, and communication training enhance individual capabilities for creating and maintaining trust relationships. Leadership development programs specifically addressing trust building can create organizational competency in this critical area.

Communication Strategies for Building Trust

Transparent Communication Practices

Transparent communication serves as a fundamental mechanism for building and maintaining workplace trust through information sharing, open dialogue, and honest feedback (Men, 2014). Organizations that practice transparent communication create environments where employees receive timely, accurate, and complete information about decisions, changes, and organizational performance.

Effective transparency involves proactive communication rather than reactive responses to questions or concerns. Leaders who regularly share information about organizational direction, challenges, and decision-making processes demonstrate respect for employee intelligence and stakeholder interests. This approach builds cognitive trust through predictability and integrity while supporting affective trust through demonstrated care and inclusion.

However, transparency must be balanced with appropriate boundaries regarding confidential information, privacy concerns, and strategic considerations. Effective transparent communication involves clear guidelines about what information can be shared, with whom, and under what circumstances, ensuring consistency and fairness in information access.

Active Listening and Empathetic Response

Active listening skills contribute significantly to trust building through demonstration of respect, understanding, and genuine interest in others’ perspectives (Rogers & Farson, 1957). Leaders and colleagues who practice active listening create psychological safety that encourages open communication and vulnerability sharing.

Empathetic responses that acknowledge emotions, validate concerns, and demonstrate understanding build affective trust through perceived benevolence and care. Even when agreement is not possible, empathetic acknowledgment of others’ viewpoints and feelings contributes to relationship quality and trust maintenance.

Effective listening involves both verbal and nonverbal communication skills, including appropriate eye contact, body language, and verbal responses that demonstrate attention and engagement. In virtual environments, active listening requires adapted techniques that account for technology limitations and reduced nonverbal cue availability.

Feedback and Recognition Systems

Constructive feedback systems that emphasize development and improvement rather than criticism and punishment contribute to trust building through demonstrated investment in individual success (Whitener, 2001). Effective feedback focuses on specific behaviors and outcomes while providing guidance for improvement and recognition of strengths.

Recognition systems that acknowledge both individual contributions and collaborative achievements reinforce trust-supporting behaviors while demonstrating organizational values. Public recognition of trust-building behaviors communicates their importance and encourages others to engage in similar activities.

Peer feedback and 360-degree feedback systems can enhance trust by providing multiple perspectives and reducing dependence on single relationship dynamics. However, these systems require careful implementation to ensure psychological safety and prevent defensive responses that could undermine trust development.

Technology and Virtual Trust Building

Digital Communication and Trust

The increasing prevalence of digital communication in workplace settings creates both opportunities and challenges for trust building (Jarvenpaa & Leidner, 1999). Email, instant messaging, and video conferencing lack many nonverbal cues that facilitate face-to-face trust development, requiring adapted strategies for building confidence and connection.

Effective digital communication for trust building emphasizes clarity, responsiveness, and consistency in message delivery and tone. Regular communication patterns help establish predictability and reliability, supporting cognitive trust development. Prompt responses to messages and requests demonstrate respect and commitment to relationship maintenance.

Video conferencing technology provides richer communication than text-based methods, enabling some nonverbal communication and more personal connection. However, technical difficulties, screen fatigue, and reduced spontaneous interaction opportunities may limit relationship development compared to in-person interactions.

Remote Work and Trust Challenges

Remote work arrangements require specific trust-building strategies that account for reduced supervision, limited informal interaction, and potential feelings of isolation or disconnection (Golden, 2006). Managers must balance providing autonomy and flexibility with maintaining connection and accountability.

Effective remote work trust building involves clear expectation setting, regular check-ins, and outcome-focused performance evaluation rather than activity monitoring. Trust-based management approaches that emphasize results and goal achievement while providing support and resources demonstrate confidence in employee capabilities and commitment.

Virtual team building activities, online social interactions, and structured relationship-building opportunities can help compensate for reduced informal interaction in remote work environments. However, these activities require intentional planning and facilitation to be effective in building meaningful connections.

Digital Trust and Security

Cybersecurity concerns and data privacy issues create new dimensions of trust in digital workplace environments (Choi, 2006). Employees must trust organizational systems to protect their personal information while organizations must trust employees to follow security protocols and handle sensitive information appropriately.

Digital trust building involves transparent communication about security measures, clear policies regarding data use and privacy, and training programs that help employees understand their roles in maintaining security. Security breaches or privacy violations can significantly undermine trust, requiring careful incident response and communication strategies.

Blockchain technology, digital identity verification, and other emerging technologies offer new possibilities for creating trust in digital transactions and communications. However, these technologies also require understanding and acceptance by users to be effective in supporting trust relationships.

Measuring and Assessing Workplace Trust

Trust Assessment Instruments

Reliable measurement of workplace trust requires validated instruments that capture the multidimensional nature of trust relationships (Gillespie, 2003). The Organizational Trust Inventory (OTI) measures trust in supervisors, coworkers, and organization as separate constructs, providing comprehensive assessment of trust relationships at multiple levels.

The Trust Scale developed by Rotter (1967) assesses general trust propensity as an individual difference variable, while the Mayer and Davis (1999) trust scale measures specific trust relationships through ability, benevolence, and integrity dimensions. These instruments enable both research and practical assessment of trust levels and development needs.

Behavioral trust measures complement survey assessments by examining actual trust-related behaviors such as delegation, information sharing, and collaboration patterns. Behavioral indicators provide objective evidence of trust levels that may be less subject to social desirability bias than self-report measures.

360-Degree Trust Feedback

Multi-source feedback systems that include trust assessments provide comprehensive perspective on individual trustworthiness and trust-building effectiveness (Ferrin, Bligh, & Kohles, 2007). 360-degree trust feedback includes evaluations from supervisors, peers, subordinates, and internal customers to create complete trust profiles.

Effective 360-degree trust feedback focuses on specific behaviors and situations rather than general personality assessments, providing actionable information for development planning. Feedback should address both strengths and development opportunities while maintaining confidentiality and psychological safety for participants.

Trust-focused 360 feedback can identify patterns in trust relationships, highlight cultural or contextual factors influencing trust, and provide baseline measurements for development interventions. However, implementation requires careful attention to organizational readiness and support systems for feedback recipients.

Trust Climate Surveys

Organizational trust climate surveys assess collective perceptions of trust levels within departments, business units, or entire organizations (Costa et al., 2018). These surveys typically examine trust in leadership, trust among coworkers, and trust in organizational systems and processes.

Trust climate data can identify organizational strengths and improvement opportunities while providing benchmarks for progress monitoring. Effective climate surveys include questions about trust antecedents, current trust levels, and outcomes associated with trust relationships.

Regular trust climate assessment enables organizations to track progress on trust-building initiatives while identifying emerging issues that may require attention. Survey results should be communicated transparently and used to develop targeted interventions for trust enhancement.

Trust Building Interventions and Programs

Leadership Development for Trust

Leadership development programs focused on trust building combine knowledge, skill development, and behavioral practice to enhance leaders’ trust-building capabilities (Burke et al., 2007). Effective programs address both technical competencies and interpersonal skills required for trust development.

Trust-focused leadership development typically includes modules on communication skills, emotional intelligence, ethical decision-making, and conflict resolution. Participants learn to recognize trust-building opportunities, assess trust levels in their relationships, and implement specific strategies for trust enhancement.

Experiential learning components such as role-playing, case studies, and peer coaching provide opportunities to practice trust-building skills in safe environments before applying them in workplace situations. Follow-up coaching and mentoring support sustained behavior change and skill development.

Team Trust Building Activities

Team-based trust building interventions focus on improving trust relationships within work groups through structured activities and facilitated discussions (Webber, 2008). These interventions typically combine trust assessment, goal setting, and skill development with opportunities for team members to practice new behaviors.

Effective team trust building activities include trust falls, problem-solving challenges, and structured sharing exercises that create controlled vulnerability and positive interaction experiences. However, activities must be carefully designed to ensure psychological safety and voluntary participation.

Team trust interventions should address both task-focused trust development and relationship-building components. Activities that combine work-related challenges with personal sharing opportunities can build both cognitive and affective trust simultaneously.

Organizational Trust Initiatives

System-wide trust building initiatives require comprehensive approaches that address culture, structure, processes, and individual capabilities simultaneously (Schoorman et al., 2007). These initiatives typically involve multiple interventions coordinated over extended time periods to create sustainable change.

Organizational trust initiatives often begin with trust climate assessment and stakeholder feedback to identify specific trust challenges and opportunities. Leadership commitment and visible support are essential for successful implementation of organization-wide trust building efforts.

Effective organizational trust initiatives include policy review and revision, communication system improvements, leadership development, employee training, and recognition system alignment. Progress monitoring and adjustment based on feedback ensure initiatives remain relevant and effective over time.

Contemporary Challenges and Future Directions

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Trust Building

Increasing workplace diversity creates both opportunities and challenges for trust building, requiring approaches that acknowledge cultural differences while building inclusive relationships (Nishii, 2013). Traditional trust-building approaches may not be equally effective across different cultural backgrounds, requiring culturally responsive strategies.

Inclusive trust building involves understanding how cultural background influences trust formation, communication preferences, and relationship expectations. Organizations must develop cultural competency in trust building while ensuring that all employees have equal opportunities to build trust relationships.

Bias and discrimination can significantly undermine trust development, particularly for individuals from underrepresented groups who may face additional barriers to trust building. Addressing systemic barriers and creating inclusive environments requires intentional effort and ongoing attention to equity in trust-building opportunities.

Artificial Intelligence and Algorithmic Trust

The increasing use of artificial intelligence and automated decision-making systems in workplace settings creates new forms of trust relationships between humans and technology (Glikson & Woolley, 2020). Employees must develop trust in AI systems while organizations must maintain human oversight and accountability.

Algorithmic trust involves understanding how automated systems make decisions, confidence in system reliability and accuracy, and belief that systems are designed and implemented fairly. Transparency in AI system operation and clear human oversight mechanisms support algorithmic trust development.

The integration of AI in workplace decision-making requires new frameworks for trust that account for human-technology collaboration while maintaining human agency and accountability. Trust in AI systems may influence overall organizational trust climate and employee relationships.

Sustainability and Environmental Trust

Growing emphasis on environmental sustainability and corporate social responsibility creates new dimensions of organizational trust related to environmental stewardship and social impact (Delmas & Burbano, 2011). Employees increasingly expect organizations to demonstrate authentic commitment to sustainability rather than superficial “greenwashing.”

Environmental trust involves confidence in organizational environmental policies, consistency between stated commitments and actual practices, and transparency in environmental impact reporting. Employees who perceive organizational environmental hypocrisy may experience reduced trust in leadership and organizational integrity.

Building environmental trust requires genuine commitment to sustainable practices, transparent communication about environmental impact, and employee involvement in sustainability initiatives. Organizations that successfully build environmental trust may experience enhanced employee engagement and attraction of environmentally conscious talent.

Conclusion

Building trust in the workplace represents a fundamental challenge and opportunity for contemporary organizations seeking to enhance performance, employee engagement, and competitive advantage. The research synthesis presented in this article demonstrates that trust operates as a complex, multifaceted construct influenced by individual differences, leadership behaviors, organizational factors, and environmental contexts. Understanding these multiple influences provides the foundation for developing comprehensive approaches to trust building that address both individual relationships and organizational systems.

The evidence clearly indicates that trust serves as both an outcome of positive workplace relationships and a catalyst for enhanced performance, collaboration, and organizational resilience. Organizations that successfully build and maintain high levels of trust demonstrate superior financial performance, reduced turnover, enhanced innovation capability, and improved ability to navigate crises and uncertainty. These outcomes underscore the strategic importance of trust as an organizational capability rather than merely a desirable relationship characteristic.

Contemporary workplace challenges including remote work, digital transformation, increasing diversity, and environmental sustainability create new complexities for trust building while also providing opportunities for innovation in trust development approaches. Organizations that successfully adapt their trust-building strategies to address these emerging challenges will likely gain competitive advantages in talent attraction, retention, and performance. The integration of technology-mediated trust building, culturally responsive approaches, and sustainability-focused trust development represents important frontiers for both research and practice.

Future research and practice in workplace trust building should focus on developing more sophisticated understanding of trust dynamics in virtual environments, cross-cultural contexts, and human-AI collaboration. The development of new measurement approaches, intervention strategies, and organizational systems that support trust building in these emerging contexts will be essential for organizational success in increasingly complex and dynamic business environments. The continued evolution of trust research and practice will undoubtedly contribute to more effective, inclusive, and sustainable workplace relationships that benefit individuals, organizations, and society as a whole.

References

1. Avolio, B. J., & Gardner, W. L. (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 315-338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.03.001
2. Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. John Wiley & Sons.
3. Burke, C. S., Sims, D. E., Lazzara, E. H., & Salas, E. (2007). Trust in leadership: A multi-level review and integration. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(6), 606-632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.09.006
4. Choi, S. (2006). A study of trust in electronic commerce from the perspective of customers in Korea. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 5(3), 247-254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2005.10.005
5. Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity: A meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 909-927. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.909
6. Costa, A. C., Fulmer, C. A., & Anderson, N. R. (2018). Trust in work teams: An integrative review, multilevel model, and future directions. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39(2), 169-184. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2213
7. Delmas, M. A., & Burbano, V. C. (2011). The drivers of greenwashing. California Management Review, 54(1), 64-87. https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2011.54.1.64
8. Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 611-628. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.611
9. Ferrin, D. L., Bligh, M. C., & Kohles, J. C. (2007). Can I trust you to trust me? A theory of trust, monitoring, and cooperation in interpersonal and intergroup relationships. Group & Organization Management, 32(4), 465-499. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601106293960
10. Ferrin, D. L., & Gillespie, N. (2010). Trust differences across national-societal cultures: Much to do, or much ado about nothing? In M. N. K. Saunders, D. Skinner, G. Dietz, N. Gillespie, & R. J. Lewicki (Eds.), Organizational trust: A cultural perspective (pp. 42-86). Cambridge University Press.
11. Gillespie, N. A. (2003). Measuring trust in working relationships: The behavioral trust inventory. Academy of Management Best Conference Paper, A1-A7.
12. Glikson, E., & Woolley, A. W. (2020). Human trust in artificial intelligence: Review of empirical research. Academy of Management Annals, 14(2), 627-660. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2018.0057
13. Golden, T. D. (2006). The role of relationships in understanding telecommuter satisfaction. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(3), 319-340. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.369
14. Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1999). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organization Science, 10(6), 791-815. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.10.6.791
15. Kim, P. H., Ferrin, D. L., Cooper, C. D., & Dirks, K. T. (2004). Removing the shadow of suspicion: The effects of apology versus denial for repairing competence-versus integrity-based trust violations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(1), 104-118. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.1.104
16. Mayer, R. C., & Davis, J. H. (1999). The effect of the performance appraisal system on trust for management: A field quasi-experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(1), 123-136. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.84.1.123
17. Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709-734. https://doi.org/10.2307/258792
18. McAllister, D. J. (1995). Affect-and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 24-59. https://doi.org/10.2307/256727
19. Men, L. R. (2014). Strategic internal communication: Transformational leadership, communication channels, and employee satisfaction. Management Communication Quarterly, 28(2), 264-284. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318914524536
20. Nishii, L. H. (2013). The benefits of climate for inclusion for gender-diverse groups. Academy of Management Journal, 56(6), 1754-1774. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.0823
21. PwC. (2016). 19th Annual Global CEO Survey: Redefining business success in a changing world. PricewaterhouseCoopers. https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/ceo-survey/2016/landing-page/pwc-19th-annual-global-ceo-survey.pdf
22. Rogers, C. R., & Farson, R. E. (1957). Active listening. University of Chicago Industrial Relations Center.
23. Rotter, J. B. (1967). A new scale for the measurement of interpersonal trust. Journal of Personality, 35(4), 651-665. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1967.tb01454.x
24. Schoorman, F. D., Mayer, R. C., & Davis, J. H. (2007). An integrative model of organizational trust: Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 344-354. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.24348410
25. Webber, S. S. (2008). Development of cognitive and affective trust in teams: A longitudinal study. Small Group Research, 39(6), 746-769. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496408323569
26. Whitener, E. M. (2001). Do “high commitment” human resource practices affect employee commitment? A cross-level analysis using hierarchical linear modeling. Journal of Management, 27(5), 515-535. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920630102700502