Organizational Trust Dimensions as Antecedents of Organizational Commitment

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/kpm.1497
• Author: Pia Heilmann,Hanna Salminen,Mika Vanhala
• Date: 01 January 2016
• Published date: 01 January 2016

■Research Article

Organizational Trust Dimensions as

Antecedents of Organizational

Commitment

Mika Vanhala

1

, Pia Heilmann

1

and Hanna Salminen

2

*

1

Lappeenranta University of Technology, School of Business and Management, Lappeenranta, Finland

2

University of Tampere, School of Management, Tampere, Finland

This study examines different dimensions of organizational trust as antecedents of employees’organizational

commitment. Quantitative survey data from a large forest company (N= 411) and a large ICT company (N= 304) in

Finland were collected. A structural equation modeling was used in order to test the hypotheses. The results from

both samples demonstrated that impersonal trust dimensions were positively related to organizational commitment.

Whereas, interpersonal trust dimensions did not have a significant impact on employees’organizational commitment.

Perceived fairness and capability of the organization’s policies and practices play an important role in terms of rein-

forcing employees’organizational commitment. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

INTRODUCTION

Employees areoften argued to be the most important

asset in organizations’annual reports (Barney and

Wright, 1998). Yet, they are usually the first to be

influenced by cost reduction and downsizing, for

example, in the forms of reduced salaries and

headcounts. One outcome of these actions can be a

mistrust and a creation of a trust gap between em-

ployees and managers(Tyler, 2003),and in the whole

organization (Laschinger et al., 2000). This issue is a

particularly actual at the moment because of the

current economic downturn faced by many Finnish

companies.Without the trust of employees,managers

and the organization as a whole are likely to see

reduced productivity and weakened performance

(Zeffane and Connell, 2003). In other words, it has

been stated that organizational efficiency is possible

when different actors work together effectively in a

climate of positive trust (Zeffane and Connell, 2003)

enhancing effective communication (Shockley-Zalabak

et al., 2000; Blomqvist, 2002), organizational collabo-

ration (Mayer et al., 1995; Tyler,2003) and accumula-

tion of social capital (Tan and Lim, 2009).

As a concept, organizational trust refers to both

trust in individuals and trust in the organization as

a whole (Shockley-Zalabak et al., 2000). However,

the interpersonal trust has dominated the organiza-

tional trust literature, and previous studies have

mainly focused on trust in managers, neglecting

trust between co-workers (Tan and Tan, 2000; Ferres

et al., 2004; Tan and Lim, 2009). Just recently, the

attention has shifted toward trust at the organiza-

tional level (Searle and Dietz, 2012). Thus, there is

increasing interest in the impersonal element of

organizational trust (Bachmann, 2006), known as

institutional (see, e.g. Costigan et al., 1998; McKnight

et al., 1998) or systems (Luhmann, 1979; Büssing,

2002) trust. However, the concept of impersonal

trust and its underpinnings are not yet clear in the

research on organizations. It is used mainly in

sociology and economics, and more on the macro

level. In management literature, the concept of

impersonal trust has only recently emerged in

scientific discussion. As a concept, impersonal trust

refers to the trust employees have in organizations’

structures and processes, as well as in the fairness

of its HRM policies and decision-making processes

(see Costigan et al., 1998; McKnight et al., 1998;

Kramer, 1999; Tan and Tan, 2000; Atkinson and

Butcher, 2003). However, it has been studied very little

in the organizational context, but some studies have

already recognized its impact more or less explicitly

(see Costigan et al., 1998; McKnight et al., 2002;

*Correspondence to: Hanna Salminen, University of Tampere,

School of Management, Kanslerinrinne 1, Tampere FI-33014,

Finland.

E-mail: hanna.maria.salminen@uta.fi

Knowledge and Process Management

Volume 23 Number 1 pp 46–61 (2016)

Published online 2 February 2016 in Wiley Online Library

(www.wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/kpm.1497

Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Atkinson and Butcher, 2003; Shamir and Lapidot,

2003; Vanhala et al., 2011). For example, impersonal

trust has been demonstrated to have an impact on

the innovativeness of organizational units (e.g.

Ellonen et al., 2008; Ahteela et al., 2010).

This study contributes to trust literature in three

different ways. First, organizational trust is studied

by focusing on both interpersonal (trust in co-

workers and inmanagers) and impersonal trust (trust

in systems). Second,different dimensions of interper-

sonal and impersonaltrust are studied as antecedents

of organizational commitment. Although there is

already studies (see, e.g. Dirks and Ferrin, 2001;

Aryee et al., 2002; Büssing, 2002; Bijlsma and

Koopman, 2003; Zeffane and Connell, 2003) which

have revealed trust to be a significant determinant

of organizational commitment, there is a lack of em-

pirical evidenceon the relationship between different

dimensions of organizational trust and organiza-

tional commitment. This is important, because it

gives indications, how trust-related interventions

aiming to increase the organizational commitment

of employees should be directed. Third, building em-

ployees’trust in the employer can be seen a goal for

all kinds of organizations (Zhang et al., 2008). But,

trust matters, especially in knowledge-intensive

organizations, like ICT companies, because the

willingness of knowledge-workers to share know-

ledge is dependent on how fair andtrustworthy they

perceive their organization (Blomqvist, 2002; Tyler,

2003; Tzortzaki and Mihiotis, 2014). Therefore, the

significance of organizational trust dimensions for

employees’organizational commitment is studied

and compared in two large companies representing

different industrial sectors, namely ICT and forest

industry.

Hence, in order to address this research gap,

the objective of this study is to examine the role of

both interpersonal and impersonal trust in employees’

commitment to their employer organization. More

specifically, we examine which dimensions of organi-

zational trust are linked to employees’organizational

commitment. We address this objective by present-

ing hypotheses, which will be tested by using

structural equation modeling among samples from

a large forest (N= 411) and ICT company (N= 304)

in Finland.

Next, the theoretical framework of this study is

discussed followed by methodology. After that,

the empirical results are presented. The article

concludes with discussion, implications for practice

and suggestions for future research.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Trust within the organization

The concept of trust can be understood and defined

in different ways. First, a distinction can be made

between trust as a behavioral intention and trust as

an internal action (Colquitt et al., 2007, 909). Second,

some writers have used trust as a synonymous with

trustworthiness, while others have seen trust as part

of personality that develops in childhood (Colquitt

et al., 2007). There exists also opposite views about,

whether employees can simultaneously demon-

strate trust and distrust to a single subject (Saunders

et al., 2014). In this study, we rely on the definition

presented by Rousseau et al. (1998, 395) which states

that trust is “a psychological state comprising the inten-

tion to accept vulnerability based upon positive expecta-

tions of the intentions or behavior of another”. These

positive expectations are based on perceptions about

the other party and its trustworthiness, whereas the

intention to accept vulnerability is a risk-taking act.

The trusting party relies on the trusted party to do

something on their behalf, for example without con-

stant monitoring (see, e.g. Dietz and Den Hartog,

2006). According to Rousseau et al. (1998), there

are two conditions that must exist for trust to

arise: risk and interdependence. Risk is the proba-

bility of loss perceived by the trusting party. The

connection between trust and risk comes from a re-

ciprocal relationship in that risk creates the

opportunity for trust that can subsequently lead to

risk taking. Another necessary condition, interdepen-

dence, implies that one party’s interests cannot be

fulfilled without reliance on the other party

(Rousseau et al., 1998).

In organizational context, objects of trust can be

organization, groups or individuals (Korsgaard

et al. 2008, 89). In other words, a person can target

his or her trust in particular people (i.e. personal

trust) or in organized systems (i.e. impersonal trust)

(Maguire and Phillips, 2008). This study under-

stands organizational trust broadly covering both

interpersonal (Mayer et al., 1995; Costigan et al.,

1998; Mayer and Davis, 1999) and impersonal trust

(McCauley and Kuhnert, 1992; McKnight et al.,

1998; McKnight et al., 2002).

Interpersonal trust is treated as an issue of lateral

trust, that is, an employee’s trust in other employees

and vertical trust, in other words, the trust in imme-

diate supervisors (McCauley and Kuhnert, 1992).

However, most trust studies have investigated the

vertical trust, neglecting the lateral trust between

co-workers (Tan and Lim, 2009). Interpersonal trust

may be based on the competence,benevolence or

reliability of the other party. The competence-based

form of trust refers to trust in another party’s skills,

abilities and characteristics: people trust those who

they believe can solve problems and deliver desired

outcomes (Mayer et al., 1995; Whitener et al., 1998)

The benevolence-based form of trust refers to an

assumption that the trusted personwants to do good,

that is, to act benevolently without succumbing to

egocentric or opportunistic behavior. Trust in another

party reflects an expectation that the other party has

good intentions and demonstrates concern for the

Organizational Trust Dimensions as Antecedents of Organizational Commitment 47

Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Know. Process Mgmt. 23,46–61 (2016)

DOI: 10.1002/kpm