Repairing and Enhancing Trust: Approaches to Reducing Organizational Trust Deficits
Abstract
Organizational scholars have long touted the myriad benefits of trust for organizational functioning and performance. Recent surveys, however, document pervasive deficits in such trust. This article addresses the important topic of reducing these deficits. Our attack on this problem is two pronged. First, we examine approaches to repairing damaged trust within organizational settings. Specifically, we assess the state of organizational theory and knowledge regarding effective approaches to trust repair after internal or external events have weakened or damaged trust in an organization. We define what is meant by trust repair, review the most common ways that trust is broken, and then explore the three major approaches that have received the most attention in trust‐repair research. We then address the question of how trust, once repaired, can be enhanced and made more durable and stable. Specifically, we examine theory and evidence regarding the antecedent conditions that support the development and maintenance of what we term presumptive trust among organizational members. We conclude the article with some recommendations of fruitful directions for future research.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Trust theorists argue that expectations of the other party's behaviour are informed by more than perceptions of the leader's past behaviour and that heuristic processes play a key role in trust formation.
“However, trust theorists argue that these expectations are informed by more than perceptions of the leader's past behaviour and that heuristic processes play a key role in trust formation (Baer et al., 2018; Kramer & Lewicki, 2010).”
From A meta-analysis of the role of trust in the leadership- performance relationship (2021) · cites this paper as Kramer & Lewicki, 2010
Cites
An integrative model of organizational trust
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258792 · Cited by 10,736 · see citing works
Affect and Cognition Based Trust as Foundations for Interpersonal Cooperation in Organizations
McAllister, D. J. (1995) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/256727 · Cited by 7,346 · see citing works
Universal dimensions of social cognition: warmth and competence
Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Glick, P. (2007) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.005 · Cited by 4,567 · see citing works
Lewis, J. D., & Weigert, A. (1985) · Social Forces · doi:10.2307/2578601 · Cited by 4,163 · see citing works
Oxytocin increases trust in humans
Kosfeld, M., Heinrichs, M., Zak, P. J., Fischbacher, U., & Fehr, E. (2005) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature03701 · Cited by 3,690 · see citing works
Deutsch, M. (1958) · Journal of Conflict Resolution · doi:10.1177/002200275800200401 · Cited by 2,077 · see citing works
Swift Trust and Temporary Groups
Meyerson, D., Weick, K. E., & Kramer, R. M. (1996) · Trust in Organizations: Frontiers of Theory and Research · doi:10.4135/9781452243610.n9 · Cited by 1,887 · see citing works
Self-citationTanis, M., & Postmes, T. (2005) · European Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/ejsp.256 · Cited by 431 · see citing works
Group-Based Trust in Strangers: The Role of Stereotypes and Expectations
Foddy, M., Platow, M. J., & Yamagishi, T. (2009) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02312.x · Cited by 298 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Lewicki, R. J., & Brinsfield, C. (2017) · Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032516-113147 · Cited by 202 · see citing works
Self-citationA meta-analysis of the role of trust in the leadership- performance relationship
Legood, A., van der Werff, L., Lee, A., & Den Hartog, D. (2021) · European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.1080/1359432x.2020.1819241 · Cited by 193 · see citing works
The social context of trust: The role of status
Lount, R. B., & Pettit, N. C. (2012) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.07.005 · Cited by 163 · see citing works
How Can It Be Made Right Again? A Review of Trust Repair Research
Sharma, K., Schoorman, F. D., & Ballinger, G. A. (2023) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/01492063221089897 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
Kim, T., & Song, H. (2021) · Telematics and Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.tele.2021.101595 · Cited by 101 · see citing works
Esterwood, C., & Jr, L. P. R. (2023) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2023.107658 · Cited by 98 · see citing works
Do You Still Trust Me? Human-Robot Trust Repair Strategies
Esterwood, C., & Robert, L. P. (2021) · 2021 30th IEEE International Conference on Robot & Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN) · doi:10.1109/ro-man50785.2021.9515365 · Cited by 75 · see citing works
The effects of police performance on agency trustworthiness and citizen participation
Porumbescu, G. A., Neshkova, M. I., & Huntoon, M. (2019) · Public Management Review · doi:10.1080/14719037.2018.1473473 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Having the Right Attitude: How Attitude Impacts Trust Repair in Human—Robot Interaction
Esterwood, C., & Robert, L. P. (2022) · 2022 17th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) · doi:10.1109/hri53351.2022.9889535 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
- Authors
- Kramer, R. M., & Lewicki, R. J.
- Affiliations
- The Ohio State University (US)
- Venue
- Academy of Management Annals
- Publisher
- Academy of Management
- Published
- 2010-01
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 245-277
- ISSN
- 1941-6067 (ISSN-L)
- 1941-6520
- OpenAlex
- W2083782094
- Cited by
- 398
- References
- 9
- Citations by year
- 2026: 26 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 32 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 20
- FWCI
- 36.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Academy of Management Annals (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Customer Service Quality and Loyalty
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Capital and Networks
- Keywords
- organizational trust, trust repair, trust deficit, trust erosion, antecedents of trust
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
