Abstract
In this Commentary, I review the progress made by trust scholars toward institutionalising trust research and practice, and also where progress has lagged. I compare the institutionalisation of the trust field to institutionalisation in the leadership, and negotiation & conflict management, fields. I consider factors such as the scale and scope of existing research, recognised relevance to practice, dedicated journals, practitioner and researcher books, established pedagogies, integration of trust into organizational interventions, executive development programmes, and postgraduate and undergraduate business curricula, dedicated Chairs and conferences, established conceptualisations and measures of trust, etc. I conclude that while we have made admirable progress in studying trust as a scientific construct, we have made insufficient progress in applying trust research to practice and teaching, and trust has not yet gained the recognition it needs and deserves in our universities, businesses, governments, and NGOs. I conclude with the hope that academic research on trust continues with the same vigour it has to date, but also that some trust researchers will shift more of their time, effort and resources to trust-related research translations and practice.
Acknowledgements
I thank Madelene Poon Chok Yen for valuable research assistance with this commentary.
Notes on contributor
Don Ferrin is Professor of Organisational Behaviour and Human Resources in the Lee Kong Chian School of Business, Singapore Management University. He holds a Ph.D. from the Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota. Don's research focuses entirely on trust, including determinants and consequences of interpersonal trust, trust in leadership, trust development processes, trust in the context of networks, trust violations and repair, effects of culture on trust, trust in the context of negotiation, trust in e-commerce, and group- and organization-level trust development and repair.