IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/maorev/v9y2013i02p319-343_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

In Whom Collectivists Trust: The Role of (in) Voluntary Social Obligations in Japan

Author

Listed:
  • Branzei, Oana
  • Camp, Ronald D.
  • Vertinsky, Ilan

Abstract

This study contributes to an emic understanding of how different types of social obligations may help or hinder the formation of initial organizational trust within collectivist cultures. We extend prior social categorization insights by challenging the expectation that in-group favouritism automatically facilitates higher levels of initial trust among collectivists. We theorize and test the asymmetric effects of two different types of social obligations toward members of distinct social categories (kinship and friendship in-groups) on the formation of initial organizational trust. Using a quasi-experimental research design in a collectivist culture (Japan), we hypothesize and show that in ambivalent situations, voluntary social obligations toward members of friendship in-groups encourage early trust in trustees' organizations; however, involuntary social obligations toward members of kinship in-groups discourage early trust development toward the organization these trustees represent. The effects of (in)voluntary social obligations on initial organizational trust are contingent on how collectivists perceive each encounter: voluntary social obligations are more conducive to trust-building at lower levels of perceived opportunity; involuntary social obligations have stronger effects on initial organizational trust at higher levels of perceived risk.

Suggested Citation

  • Branzei, Oana & Camp, Ronald D. & Vertinsky, Ilan, 2013. "In Whom Collectivists Trust: The Role of (in) Voluntary Social Obligations in Japan," Management and Organization Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 319-343, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:maorev:v:9:y:2013:i:02:p:319-343_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1740877600003296/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:maorev:v:9:y:2013:i:02:p:319-343_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/mor .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.