Collaborating in the Absence of Trust? What Collaborative Governance Theory and Practice Can Learn From the Literatures of Conflict Resolution, Psychology, and Law

• DOI: 10.1177/0275074018773089
• Author: Rosemary O’Leary,Heather Getha-Taylor,Robin J. Kempf,Misty J. Grayer
• Date: 01 January 2019
• Published date: 01 January 2019
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074018773089

American Review of Public Administration

2019, Vol. 49(1) 51 –64

© The Author(s) 2018

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0275074018773089

journals.sagepub.com/home/arp

Article

Contemporary governance illustrates a paradigm shift

regarding the ways in which individuals and organizations

work together to produce public value. No longer is working

within traditional organizational structures and systems suf-

ficient for solving complex transboundary challenges, “the

most vexing of public problems” (Agranoff, 2003). Reliance

on hierarchy, command-and-control, and “silo” problem-

solving often does not fit the challenge of addressing societal

priorities that cross boundaries and jurisdictions (Agranoff &

McGuire, 2001; Bingham & O’Leary, 2006; Goldsmith &

Kettl, 2009; Kamarck, 2003; O’Leary & Bingham, 2009).

These contemporary governance arrangements require new

approaches to problem solving, namely, boundary-spanning

leadership and collaboration (Linden, 2010; Salamon, 2002).

We define collaboration as “[w]orking across boundaries and

in multi-organizational arrangements to solve problems that

cannot be solved—or easily solved—by single organizations

or jurisdictions. Collaboration can include the public.”

(O’Leary, Gerard, & Bingham, 2006, building on Agranoff

& McGuire, 2004, p. 1).

Effectiveness in these contexts, it is said, rests not on tradi-

tional authority structures and systems, but on the foundations

of relationships and trust (Bardach, 1998; Bryson, Crosby, &

Stone, 2006; Gazley, 2008). Trust is repeatedly asserted to be

a foundational element for collaborative effectiveness (Ansell

& Gash, 2008; Bryson et al., 2006; Bryson, Crosby, & Stone,

2015; Provan & Kenis, 2008; Thomson & Perry, 2006). The

concept of trust in this context, however, can be vague and ill-

defined with little specificity or explanation. The assumption

of the necessity of trust and the lack of specificity surrounding

this concept complicates the discussion of how best to assess,

build, and enhance trust among partners, and to otherwise suc-

cessfully collaborate.

Despite an unclear understanding of the concept of trust,

it is often suggested that the job of public managers is to

develop it. Managers are required to build relationships and

integrate incentives (or disincentives) for participation in

collaborative arrangements in the absence of—or as a com-

plement to—hierarchy and command-and-control structures

773089ARPXXX10.1177/0275074018773089The American Review of Public AdministrationGetha-Taylor et al.

research-article2018

1The University of Kansas, Lawrence, USA

2Kennesaw State University, Kennesaw, GA, USA

3John Jay College of Criminal Justice, The City University of New York,

New York City, USA

Corresponding Author:

Rosemary O’Leary, The University of Kansas, 4060 Wescoe Hall,

Lawrence, KS 66045, USA.

Email: oleary@ku.edu

Collaborating in the Absence of Trust?

What Collaborative Governance Theory and

Practice Can Learn From the Literatures of

Conflict Resolution, Psychology, and Law

Heather Getha-Taylor1, Misty J. Grayer2, Robin J. Kempf3,

and Rosemary O’Leary1*

Abstract

Trust is often touted as both an element of success and an outcome of interest in collaboration research, usually without

defining the term or acknowledging the possibility of collaborating when trust is diminished or absent. This article broadens

our theoretical understanding of the concept of trust, and the ability to collaborate in the absence of trust, by looking at

it through the lenses of conflict resolution, psychology, and law. The disciplines examined in this article emphasize diverse

approaches to examining trust on the interpersonal, interorganizational, and regime levels. While agreeing that trust is an

asset, these disciplines also offer practical strategies for collaborating when trust is diminished or absent. Drawing on the

theory and literature of conflict resolution, psychology, and law, we offer the following definition of collaborative trust:

Collaborative trust is an individual perception that is the product of one’s assessments, experiences, and dispositions, in which one

believes, and is willing to act on, the words, actions, and decisions of others. This can include a reliance on principles, rules, norms, and

decision-making procedures that articulate collective expectations.

Keywords

collaborative governance, trust