IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ororsc/v14y2003i4p422-439.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Free to Be Trusted? Organizational Constraints on Trust in Boundary Spanners

Author

Listed:
  • Vincenzo Perrone

    (The Institute of Organization and MIS, Bocconi University, and SDA, School of Management, via F. Bocconi n. 8, 20136 Milan, Italy)

  • Akbar Zaheer

    (Strategic Management and Organization Department, Carlson School of Management, 3-365, University of Minnesota, 321 19th Avenue South, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455)

  • Bill McEvily

    (Graduate School of Industrial Administration, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213-3890)

Abstract

We present a view of trust in boundary spanners as explained by the extent of role autonomy, a multidimensional concept that reflects the discretion that agents have in interpreting and enacting their roles. We argue that, in a buyer-supplier context, purchasing managers will be trusted to a greater extent by supplier representatives when they are free from constraints that limit their ability to interpret their boundary-spanning roles. We conceptualize and measure three key components of role autonomy: Functional influence, tenure, and clan culture. Taken together, these components of role autonomy shape and define the purchasing manager's willingness and capacity to make and uphold commitments to supplier representatives. Role autonomy permits purchasing managers to engage in discretionary behaviors that allow supplier representatives to learn about their underlying motives and intentions. We test hypotheses linking the components of role autonomy to trust on a sample of 119 buyer-supplier relationships. We use a dyadic research design that combines data from purchasing managers and supplier representatives. The results suggest that granting purchasing managers greater autonomy enhances supplier representative trust in purchasing managers. By drawing attention to role autonomy as a feature of organizations that influences trust we highlight the importance of organizational context in contributing to a deeper understanding of trust.

Suggested Citation

  • Vincenzo Perrone & Akbar Zaheer & Bill McEvily, 2003. "Free to Be Trusted? Organizational Constraints on Trust in Boundary Spanners," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(4), pages 422-439, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:14:y:2003:i:4:p:422-439
    DOI: 10.1287/orsc.14.4.422.17487
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.14.4.422.17487
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/orsc.14.4.422.17487?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Akbar Zaheer & Bill McEvily & Vincenzo Perrone, 1998. "Does Trust Matter? Exploring the Effects of Interorganizational and Interpersonal Trust on Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(2), pages 141-159, April.
    2. Asanuma, Banri, 1989. "Manufacturer-supplier relationships in Japan and the concept of relation-specific skill," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 3(1), pages 1-30, March.
    3. Berg Joyce & Dickhaut John & McCabe Kevin, 1995. "Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 122-142, July.
    4. Paul S. Adler & Barbara Goldoftas & David I. Levine, 1999. "Flexibility Versus Efficiency? A Case Study of Model Changeovers in the Toyota Production System," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(1), pages 43-68, February.
    5. Erin Anderson & Barton Weitz, 1989. "Determinants of Continuity in Conventional Industrial Channel Dyads," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 8(4), pages 310-323.
    6. Jackson, Susan E. & Schuler, Randall S., 1985. "A meta-analysis and conceptual critique of research on role ambiguity and role conflict in work settings," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 16-78, August.
    7. Currall, Steven C. & Judge, Timothy A., 1995. "Measuring Trust between Organizational Boundary Role Persons," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 151-170, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bart S. Vanneste & Onesun Steve Yoo, 2020. "Performance of trust-based governance," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 9(1), pages 1-28, December.
    2. Bill McEvily, 2011. "Reorganizing the Boundaries of Trust: From Discrete Alternatives to Hybrid Forms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1266-1276, October.
    3. Ranjay Gulati & Maxim Sytch, 2008. "Does familiarity breed trust? Revisiting the antecedents of trust," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(2-3), pages 165-190.
    4. Yuan, Yang & Feng, Bo & Lai, Fujun & Collins, Brian J., 2018. "The role of trust, commitment, and learning orientation on logistic service effectiveness," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 37-50.
    5. Inkpen, Andrew C. & Currall, Steven C., 1998. "The nature, antecedents, and consequences of joint venture trust," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 4(1), pages 1-20, July.
    6. Jeffrey H. Dyer & Wujin Chu, 2003. "The Role of Trustworthiness in Reducing Transaction Costs and Improving Performance: Empirical Evidence from the United States, Japan, and Korea," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(1), pages 57-68, February.
    7. Cuili Qian & Donal Crilly & Ke Wang & Zheng Wang, 2021. "Why Do Banks Favor Employee-Friendly Firms? A Stakeholder-Screening Perspective," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 605-624, May.
    8. Huo, Baofeng & Liu, Ruolei & Tian, Min, 2022. "The bright side of dependence asymmetry: Mitigating power use and facilitating relational ties," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 251(C).
    9. Oliver Schilke & Karen S. Cook, 2015. "Sources of alliance partner trustworthiness: Integrating calculative and relational perspectives," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(2), pages 276-297, February.
    10. Mukherji, Ananda & Francis, John D., 2008. "Mutual adaptation in buyer-supplier relationships," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 154-161, February.
    11. Shérazade Gatfaoui, 2005. "Quelles Conceptions 1 De La Confiance Au Cours De La Relation Bancaire (Client/Banque) ? : Une Approche Par Les Etudes De Cas Retrospectives," Post-Print hal-01539947, HAL.
    12. Mudambi, Ram & Swift, Tim, 2009. "Professional guilds, tension and knowledge management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 736-745, June.
    13. Michael Pirson & Deepak Malhotra, 2011. "Foundations of Organizational Trust: What Matters to Different Stakeholders?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 1087-1104, August.
    14. Roland Helm & Martin Kloyer & Christin Aust, 2018. "R&D Collaboration Between Firms: Hard And Soft Antecedents Of Supplier Knowledge Sharing," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 24(01), pages 1-42, December.
    15. Liu, Yi & Li, Yuan & Zhang, Leinan, 2010. "Control mechanisms across a buyer-supplier relationship quality matrix," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 3-12, January.
    16. Branzei, Oana & Vertinsky, Ilan & Camp II, Ronald D., 2007. "Culture-contingent signs of trust in emergent relationships," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 104(1), pages 61-82, September.
    17. Bi, Qingqing & Boh, Wai Fong & Christopoulos, Georgios, 2021. "Trust, fast and slow: A comparison study of the trust behaviors of entrepreneurs and non-entrepreneurs," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 36(6).
    18. Vijayasarathy, Leo R., 2010. "Supply integration: An investigation of its multi-dimensionality and relational antecedents," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(2), pages 489-505, April.
    19. Yang, Jie & Yu, Guangsheng & Liu, Mingyu & Xie, Hongming & Liu, Haiwei, 2018. "Disentangling the impact of cost transparency on cooperation efficiency in exchange partnerships," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 197(C), pages 27-34.
    20. Huang, Yimin & Wilkinson, Ian F., 2014. "A case study of the development of trust in a business relation: Implications for a dynamic theory of trust," jbm - Journal of Business Market Management, Free University Berlin, Marketing Department, vol. 7(1), pages 254-279.

    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:inm:ororsc:v:14:y:2003:i:4:p:422-439. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.