“跨界者”管理者的弱势参与/回避和信任/不信任呈螺旋式上升

IF 1.9 Q3 MANAGEMENT Journal of Trust Research Pub Date : 2019-07-03 DOI:10.1080/21515581.2019.1653767
Reuven Shapira
{"title":"“跨界者”管理者的弱势参与/回避和信任/不信任呈螺旋式上升","authors":"Reuven Shapira","doi":"10.1080/21515581.2019.1653767","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Earlier ascending/descending trust spirals have been explained by the job discretion allowed to employees by managers; few have studied such spirals as this has required a bi-directional longitudinal framework. Such a framework has used ethnographies of managers who ‘jumped’ from other organisations and suffered gaps of knowledge that curbed their psychological safety. Gap-exposing vulnerable involvement in locals’ deliberations would have been required for mutual trust building. These managers were mostly detached or autocratic and generated descending trust spirals which barred locals’ knowledge-sharing. In their ignorance they used immoral subterfuge, furthered distrust, shaped low-trust cultures, and mismanaged. However, detached/autocratic ‘jumpers’ often managed mediocrely by ‘riding’ on the successes of trusted vulnerably involved mid-levelers. Only a few ‘jumpers’ generated ascending mutual trust spirals by vulnerable involvement, learned from and with locals, and succeeded by shaping high-trust innovation-prone cultures. Contextual factors helped explain choices of practicing/avoiding vulnerable involvement and generating ascending/ descending trust spirals. Further study of these choices and these factors is suggested.","PeriodicalId":44602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trust Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21515581.2019.1653767","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘Jumper’ managers’ vulnerable involvement/avoidance and trust/distrust spirals\",\"authors\":\"Reuven Shapira\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/21515581.2019.1653767\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Earlier ascending/descending trust spirals have been explained by the job discretion allowed to employees by managers; few have studied such spirals as this has required a bi-directional longitudinal framework. Such a framework has used ethnographies of managers who ‘jumped’ from other organisations and suffered gaps of knowledge that curbed their psychological safety. Gap-exposing vulnerable involvement in locals’ deliberations would have been required for mutual trust building. These managers were mostly detached or autocratic and generated descending trust spirals which barred locals’ knowledge-sharing. In their ignorance they used immoral subterfuge, furthered distrust, shaped low-trust cultures, and mismanaged. However, detached/autocratic ‘jumpers’ often managed mediocrely by ‘riding’ on the successes of trusted vulnerably involved mid-levelers. Only a few ‘jumpers’ generated ascending mutual trust spirals by vulnerable involvement, learned from and with locals, and succeeded by shaping high-trust innovation-prone cultures. Contextual factors helped explain choices of practicing/avoiding vulnerable involvement and generating ascending/ descending trust spirals. Further study of these choices and these factors is suggested.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44602,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Trust Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21515581.2019.1653767\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Trust Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2019.1653767\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Trust Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2019.1653767","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

早期的上升/下降信任螺旋可以用管理者允许员工的工作自由裁量权来解释;很少有人研究这样的螺旋,因为这需要一个双向纵向框架。这样的框架使用了从其他组织“跳”过来的管理者的人种志,他们遭受了知识空白,这限制了他们的心理安全。为了建立互信,需要在当地人的审议中暴露漏洞。这些管理者大多是超然的或专制的,产生了不断下降的信任螺旋,阻碍了当地人的知识分享。在他们的无知中,他们使用了不道德的诡计,加深了不信任,形成了低信任的文化,管理不善。然而,超然/专制的“跳楼者”往往依靠信任的、脆弱的中层管理者的成功来管理得平庸。只有少数“跳跃者”通过脆弱的参与,向当地人学习并与当地人合作,形成了不断上升的相互信任螺旋,并通过塑造高度信任的创新文化取得了成功。情境因素有助于解释实践/避免脆弱介入的选择和产生上升/下降的信任螺旋。建议进一步研究这些选择和这些因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
‘Jumper’ managers’ vulnerable involvement/avoidance and trust/distrust spirals
ABSTRACT Earlier ascending/descending trust spirals have been explained by the job discretion allowed to employees by managers; few have studied such spirals as this has required a bi-directional longitudinal framework. Such a framework has used ethnographies of managers who ‘jumped’ from other organisations and suffered gaps of knowledge that curbed their psychological safety. Gap-exposing vulnerable involvement in locals’ deliberations would have been required for mutual trust building. These managers were mostly detached or autocratic and generated descending trust spirals which barred locals’ knowledge-sharing. In their ignorance they used immoral subterfuge, furthered distrust, shaped low-trust cultures, and mismanaged. However, detached/autocratic ‘jumpers’ often managed mediocrely by ‘riding’ on the successes of trusted vulnerably involved mid-levelers. Only a few ‘jumpers’ generated ascending mutual trust spirals by vulnerable involvement, learned from and with locals, and succeeded by shaping high-trust innovation-prone cultures. Contextual factors helped explain choices of practicing/avoiding vulnerable involvement and generating ascending/ descending trust spirals. Further study of these choices and these factors is suggested.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
42.90%
发文量
9
期刊介绍: As an inter-disciplinary and cross-cultural journal dedicated to advancing a cross-level, context-rich, process-oriented, and practice-relevant journal, JTR provides a focal point for an open dialogue and debate between diverse researchers, thus enhancing the understanding of trust in general and trust-related management in particular, especially in its organizational and social context in the broadest sense. Through both theoretical development and empirical investigation, JTR seeks to open the "black-box" of trust in various contexts.
期刊最新文献
Social trust during the pandemic: Longitudinal evidence from three waves of the Swiss household panel study Integrating focal vulnerability into trust research Capturing the conversation of trust research On the intricate relationship between data and theory, and the potential gain afforded by capturing very low levels of media trust: Commentary on Mangold (2024) Is security still the chiefest enemy? The challenges and contradictions in European confidence- and security-building in the Cold War
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1