The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Nurturing interpersonal trust in knowledge-sharing networks
Abstract
Executive Overview In many organizations, informal networks are the primary means by which employees find information, solve complex problems, and learn how to do their work. Two forms of interpersonal trust—trust in a person's competence and in a person's benevolence—enable effective knowledge creation and sharing in these networks. Yet, though conceptually appealing, trust is an elusive concept that is often difficult for managers to influence. We conducted interviews in 20 organizations to identify ways in which interpersonal trust in a knowledge-sharing context develops. Based on this work, we summarize behaviors (e.g., discretion, consistency, collaboration) and practices (e.g., building shared vision, ensuring transparency in decision-making, holding people accountable for trust) for managers interested in promoting trust (and thereby knowledge creation and sharing) within their own organizations.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“Trust acts as a facilitator and promotes interpersonal relationships prompting people to seek and give help leading to a more collaborative culture (Russ et al., 1998;Abrams et al., 2003;Middel, Boer & Fisscher, 2006).”
From Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culture (2010) · cites this paper as Abrams et al., 2003
In the citing paper
“In a trusting environment, individuals are more willing to take a risk by sharing information and co-operating with their team members (Mayer, Davis & Schoorman, 1995) thereby creating a sense of collaboration (Russ et al., 1998;Abrams et al., 2003;Hattori & Lapidus, 2004).”
From Antecedents of Team Creativity: An Examination of Team Emotional Intelligence, Team Trust and Collaborative Culture (2010) · cites this paper as Abrams et al., 2003
Citations
Cites
Granovetter, M. S. (1973) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/225469 · Cited by 40,491
Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital
Coleman, J. S. (2000) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-7506-7222-1.50005-2 · Cited by 21,751
The psychology of interpersonal relations
Heider, F. (1958) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2089062 · Cited by 17,189
Exchange and Power in Social Life.
Bierstedt, R., & Blau, P. M. (1965) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2091154 · Cited by 13,625
Working knowledge: how organizations manage what they know
(1998) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.35-5167 · Cited by 10,800
Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (1991) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2.1.40 · Cited by 8,742
SOCIAL CAPITAL AND VALUE CREATION: THE ROLE OF INTRAFIRM NETWORKS.
Tsai, W., & Ghoshal, S. (1998) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/257085 · Cited by 6,035
Whitener, E. M., Brodt, S. E., Korsgaard, M. A., & Werner, J. M. (1998) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1998.926624 · Cited by 4,971
Tosi, H. L. (1991) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1991.4278976 · Cited by 4,147
Communities of Practice: The Organizational Frontier
Wenger, É., & Snyder, W. M. (2006) · Knowledge management and organizational learning · doi:10.1093/oso/9780199291793.003.0017 · Cited by 3,337
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Knowledge sharing: A review and directions for future research
Wang, S., & Noe, R. A. (2009) · Human Resource Management Review · doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2009.10.001 · Cited by 3,304
Hsu, M., Ju, T., Yen, C., & Chang, C. (2006) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.09.003 · Cited by 1,521
Zhao, D., & Rosson, M. B. (2009) · International ACM SIGGROUP Conference on Supporting Group Work (GROUP) · doi:10.1145/1531674.1531710 · Cited by 870
Trust in leadership: A multi-level review and integration
Burke, C. S., Sims, D. E., Lazzara, E. H., & Salas, E. (2007) · The Leadership Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.09.006 · Cited by 980
Chen, C., & Hung, S. (2010) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2010.03.001 · Cited by 625
Metadata
- Authors
- Abrams, L. C., Cross, R., Lesser, E., & Levin, D. Z.
- ORCID
- Levin, Daniel Z.
- Venue
- Academy of Management Perspectives
- Publisher
- Academy of Management
- Published
- 2003-11
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 64-77
- ISSN
- 1558-9080 (ISSN-L)
- 1943-4529
- OpenAlex
- W2140409087
- Cited by
- 697
- References
- 28
- Citations by year
- 2026: 20 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 45 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 33 · 2017: 41 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 62 · 2014: 49 · 2013: 40 · 2012: 40
- FWCI
- 64.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Academy of Management Perspectives (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Knowledge Management and Sharing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Innovation and Knowledge Management
- Keywords
- interpersonal trust, knowledge sharing networks, informal networks, competence trust, knowledge production, trust building, organizational management practices, transparency in decision-making, shared vision, accountability, collaboration, discretion, consistency
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
