Suchergebnisse

Interpersonal trust is central to sustaining team effectiveness. Whilst leaders play the primary role in establishing and developing trust, little research has examined the specific leadership practices which engender trust toward team leaders. This study investigated the relationship between a set of leadership practices (transformational, transactional, and consultative) and members' trust in their leader, in research and development (R&D) teams. Usable questionnaires were completed by 83 team members drawn from 33 R&D project teams. Three factors together predicted 67 per cent of the variance in team members' trust towards leaders, namely: consulting team members when making decisions, communicating a collective vision, and sharing common values with the leader. Trust in the leader was also strongly associated with the leader's effectiveness. The implications of these findings for leadership development, team building and future research are discussed.

AbstractWe argue that a perfect storm of five conditions heightens the risk of harm to society from artificial intelligence: (1) the powerful, invisible nature of AI, (2) low public awareness and AI literacy, (3) rapid scaled deployment of AI, (4) insufficient regulation, and (5) the gap between trustworthy AI principles and practices. To prevent harm, fit-for-purpose regulation and public AI literacy programs have been recommended, but education and government regulation will not be sufficient: AI-deploying organizations need to play a central role in creating and deploying trustworthy AI in line with the principles of trustworthy AI, and taking accountability to mitigate the risks.

We argue that a perfect storm of five conditions heightens the risk of harm to society from artificial intelligence: (1) the powerful, invisible nature of AI, (2) low public awareness and AI literacy, (3) rapid scaled deployment of AI, (4) insufficient regulation, and (5) the gap between trustworthy AI principles and practices. To prevent harm, fit-for-purpose regulation and public AI literacy programs have been recommended, but education and government regulation will not be sufficient: AI-deploying organizations need to play a central role in creating and deploying trustworthy AI in line with the principles of trustworthy AI, and taking accountability to mitigate the risks.

As more and more technologies are infused into service delivery, service providers must continuously renegotiate the ways in which they understand service delivery across increasingly high-tech, low-touch modalities. This exploratory qualitative study examines what health care service providers experience when offering separated services in the empirical context of telehealth. In-depth phenomenographic interviews sourced across multiple hospital and health care sites revealed that service providers experience (1) depersonalization, (2) clinical voyeurism, (3) intangibility negotiation, and (4) a need to manage change around identities and roles. These emergent understandings highlight the individual and qualitatively distinct differences in the ways in which service providers experience service separation in telehealth. Our findings address current service science priorities to leverage technology for service delivery as a way to advance separated service design. Further they provide an understanding-based approach toward building new theories from the service provider's perspective on separation in technology-infused services. Our findings suggest strategies and tactics service providers use to overcome the potential challenges arising from not being physically colocated with their customers during service separation.

AbstractDespite the nonprofit sector's significance in economic contribution, workforce, and social impact, it faces unique innovation hurdles and is not well positioned for sustainability, growth, and prosperity. However, with only a partial, disconnected view from the extant research, we do not understand the relationship between boards and nonprofit innovation for growth. To address this problem, we conducted a systematic literature review drawing on 27 studies published since 2000 to provide a first‐in‐field and comprehensive integration of disparate, mono‐factorial research. We conceptualize a new, multifactorial model that depicts a blend of board composition, relations and practice factors, and organizational and environmental characteristics that influence nonprofit innovation for growth.

Trust is assumed to be important for charitable giving. However, disparate associations have been found, and recent theoretical approaches emphasize motives for giving that do not rely on trust. To resolve this tension, we conducted a systematic review of evidence generated between 1988 and 2020. A meta-analysis of 69 effect sizes from 42 studies sampling 81,604 people in 31 countries confirmed a positive association between trust and giving across diverse measures, r = .22. Meta-regressions showed that organizational ( r = .35) and sectoral trust ( r = .27) were more strongly associated with giving than were generalized ( r = .11) or institutional trust ( r = .14). The relationship was also stronger in non-western (vs Western) countries and in nonrepresentative (vs nationally representative) samples. All evidence was correlational, and few studies measured actual behavior. We discuss implications for theories of trust and for fundraising practice, and highlight critical gaps in evidence.

Recent high-profile scandals suggest the potential for a crisis of trust in charities, which could have negative consequences for the nonprofit sector as a whole. Although widespread, this crisis narrative has not yet been subjected to empirical examination. To assess the extent to which public trust has changed over time, we examined trust in nongovernmental organizations within 31 countries over nine consecutive years using data from the Edelman Trust Barometer ( N = 294,176). Multilevel analysis revealed that, after allowing for differences in absolute levels of trust and trends across countries, there was actually a small increase in global trust in the nonprofit sector. This increase was sharper among men, people aged below 40 years, and people with higher education, income, and media consumption. Overall, we find no evidence of a crisis of trust in nonprofits; scandals within individual organizations have not affected sectoral trust.

High-profile charity scandals have always represented a threat to the nonprofit sector, which relies on public trust and funding to operate. We systematically review 30 years of empirical research on scandals involving nonprofits and present both quantitative and qualitative syntheses of the 71 articles identified. Informed by this review, we generate a conceptual model theorizing the causes and consequences of scandals, as well as how nonprofits can best prevent and respond to organizational transgressions. We then put forward a research agenda that elaborates five key factors that are especially important for understanding nonprofit scandals but remain understudied: (a) integrity versus competence violations, (b) moral licensing, (c) the multilevel nature of organizational transgressions, (d) sectoral causes of scandal, and (e) effective responses. We close the article with recommendations for nonprofit managers about how to conceptualize, prevent, plan for, and respond to transgressions occurring within their organizations, and any resulting scandals.

AbstractThe proliferation of violations within industry sectors (e.g., banking, doping in sport, abuse in religious organizations) highlights how trust violations can thrive in particular sectors. However, scant research examines how macro institutional factors influence micro level trustworthy conduct. To shed light on how sectoral features may influence trust violations in organizations, we adopt a multilevel perspective to investigate the perceived causes of trust violations within the not-for-profit (NFP) sector, a sector that has witnessed a number of high-profile trust breaches. Drawing on interviews with board members and senior executives of NFPs with cross-sectoral experience, we analyze the causes of trust violations to inductively develop a conceptual model of the multilevel factors contributing to trust violations in NFPs. Our model highlights how trust violations have their roots in sectoral-level factors, which trickle-down to influence the ethical infrastructure at the organizational-level, and in turn individual-level factors and violations. We identify how three NFP sectoral features influence trustworthy behavior: corporatization, resource scarcity, and assumed moral integrity. Our findings speak to the importance of looking beyond the organization to understand both the causes and prevention of trust violations and developing the concept of sector-level ethical infrastructure.

There is a double standard in public responses to scandals: Nonprofits are penalized more harshly than commercial organizations for the same transgression (the "moral disillusionment effect"). However, previous research—focused on commercial organizations—has sometimes shown that a positive reputation can insure organizations against the negative effects of scandals. In light of this, we asked whether a second double standard exists when it comes to trust repair: Can nonprofits regain trust and consumer support more quickly than commercial organizations after apologizing? Two experiments ( combined N = 805), considering responses to sexual exploitation and fraud scandals, replicated and extended the moral disillusionment effect. Trust and consumer support were partially restored following an apology (and even a statement acknowledging the scandal without apologizing), but the rate of repair was the same for nonprofits and commercial organizations. Nonprofit managers should therefore implement internal controls to prevent violations and issue public responses when scandals emerge.