Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Das Aufheben von Ungewissheit als Kern des Vertrauens: Just do it?


Author Info

  • Möllering, Guido
Registered author(s):


    Trust is considered to be a precondition for individual action, cooperative relationships and societal order. In the social sciences, researchers have tried to explain trust by identifying the 'good reasons' for trust that provide the basis for trusting. This paper argues that although trust has to refer to reason, routine and reflexivity, it has to go beyond 'good reasons'. The suspension of uncertainty should be seen as the essence of trust which gives trust its original meaning. Hence, we need to understand how actors achieve the 'as if' or the 'just do it' in trust which enables them to interact with others, have relationships and be part of society - especially under the notoriously complex, dynamic and also precarious conditions that they face today. The paper discusses research on management in China to illustrate the underlying issues empirically. -- Vertrauen gilt als Voraussetzung für individuelles Handeln, kooperative Beziehungen und gesellschaftliche Ordnung. In den Sozialwissenschaften haben Forscher Vertrauen zu erklären versucht, indem sie vor allem nach den 'guten Gründen' gesucht haben, auf deren Grundlage Vertrauen geschenkt wird. In diesem Beitrag wird hingegen argumentiert, dass Vertrauen zwar auf Vernunft, Routinen und Reflexivität rekurriert, begriffskonstitutiv aber stets über 'gute Gründe' hinausgeht, und dass das Aufheben von Ungewissheit den eigentlichen Kern des Vertrauens ausmacht. So gilt es zu verstehen, wie Akteure im Vertrauen zu einem 'Als Ob' oder 'Just do it' kommen, welches sie handlungs-, beziehungs- und gesellschaftsfähig macht - und zwar gerade heute angesichts der vielfach attestierten komplexen, dynamischen, aber auch prekären Lebensverhältnisse. Zur empirischen Veranschaulichung der Problematik bezieht sich der Beitrag auf Studien zum Management in China.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    Paper provided by Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies in its series MPIfG Working Paper with number 06/5.

    as in new window
    Date of creation: 2006
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:zbw:mpifgw:065

    Contact details of provider:
    Postal: Paulstr. 3, 50676 Köln
    Phone: + 49 (0) 221-2767-0
    Web page:
    More information through EDIRC

    Related research



    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Markus C. Becker, 2004. "Organizational routines: a review of the literature," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(4), pages 643-678, August.
    2. Harvey James, 2002. "The Trust Paradox: A Survey of Economic Inquiries Into the Nature of Trust and Trustworthiness," Microeconomics 0202001, EconWPA.
    3. James Jr., Harvey S., 2002. "The trust paradox: a survey of economic inquiries into the nature of trust and trustworthiness," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 291-307, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)



    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.


    Access and download statistics


    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:mpifgw:065. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics).

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.