What is it that we do when we say to our business partner that we trust them? Or when we hint that we would consider a withdrawal from cooperation a betrayal? Relying on a systemic functional grammar analysis, interorganizational relationships (IORs) are in this study shown to be characterized by a recurring dilemma: the involved partners are expected to be transparent and explicit regarding their intentions while at the same time being open to opportunities that the IOR may present. In the struggle to balance between these opposing demands, trust is used by trustees to promise both explicitness and opportunity. Conversely, trustors of IORs pressure the trustee to continue the cooperation by evoking latent accusations of betrayal. The intended result of these rhetorical strategies is to prolong the IOR until it can be properly evaluated. While this prolongation accrues to the systems of IORs and to participating organizations, the costs for the involved individuals can be considerable. The trustor risks feeling betrayed, and the trustee risks being accused of betrayal for reasons that are beyond his or her control.
BachmannR (2001) Trust, power and control in trans-organizational relations. Organization Studies22(2): 337–365.
2.
BilligM (1988) Methodology and scholarship in understanding ideological explanation. In: AntakiC (ed.) Analysing Everyday Explanation: A Casebook of Methods. London: SAGE.
3.
BilligM (2002) Henri Tajfel’s ‘Cognitive aspects of prejudice’ and the psychology of bigotry. British Journal of Social Psychology41(2): 171–189.
4.
BilligMMacMillanK (2005) Metaphor, idiom and ideology: The search for “no smoking guns” across time. Discourse & Society16(4): 459–480.
5.
BilligMCondorSEdwardsDet al. (1988) Ideological Dilemmas: A Social Psychology of Everyday Thinking. London: SAGE.
6.
BörjesonL (2015) Interorganizational situations – An explorative typology. European Management Journal2015(33): 191–200.
7.
BrunssonN (1980) Företagsekonomi - Avbildning eller språkbildning (Serie Working Papers No. 7). Uppsala: Företagsekonomiska Institutionen, Uppsala Universitet.
8.
ChouliarakiLFaircloughN (1999) Discourse in Late Modernity: Rethinking Critical Discourse Analysis. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
9.
CohenM (2014) Genuine, non-calculative trust with calculative antecedents: Reconsidering Williamson on trust. Journal of Trust Research4(1): 44–56.
10.
Deutsch-SalamonSRobinsonSL (2008) Trust that binds: The impact of collective felt trust on organizational performance. Journal of Applied Psychology93(3): 593–601.
11.
ElangovanARShapiroDI (1998) Betrayal of trust in organizations. Academy of Management Review23(3): 547–566.
12.
FaemsDJanssensMMadhokAVan LooyB (2008) Toward an integrative perspective on alliance governance: Connecting contract design, trust dynamics, and contract application. The Academy of Management Journal51(6): 1053–1078.
13.
GillespieNDietzG (2009) Trust repair after an organization-level failure. Academy of Management Review34(1): 127–145.
14.
GraebnerME (2009) Caveat venditor: Trust asymmetries in acquisitions of entrepreneurial firms. Academy of Management Journal53(3): 435–472.
15.
GuoSLLumineauFLewikiRJ (2016) Revisiting the foundations of organizational distrust. Foundations and Trends® in Management1(1): 1–18.
16.
HallidayMAK (1985) Systemic background. In: BensonJDGreavesWS (eds) Systemic Perspectives on Discourse, Vol. 1. Selected Theoretical Papers from the 9th International Systemic Workshop. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
17.
HallidayMAKHasanR (1976) Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
18.
HallidayMAKMatthiessenC (2004) An Introduction to Functional Grammar (3rd edn). London: Arnold.
19.
HarrisonSYongL (2005) Leadership discourse in action – A textual study of organizational change in a government of Canada department. Journal of Business and Technical Communication19(1): 42–77.
20.
HillCAO’HaraEA (2006) A cognitive theory of trust. Washington University Law Review84(7/4): 1717–1796.
21.
HoltonJ (2007) The coding process and its challenges. In: BryantACharmazK (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Grounded Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 265–289.
22.
JarilloJ (1988) On strategic networks. Strategic Management Journal9(1): 31–41.
KramerRM (2009) Rethinking trust. Harvard Business Review87(6): 68–77.
25.
KroegerF (2012) Trusting organizations: The institutionalization of trust in interorganizational relationships. Organization19(6): 743–763.
26.
LangfredC (2004) Too much of a good thing? Negative effects of high trust and individual autonomy in self-managing teams. Academy of Management Journal47(3): 385–399.
27.
LauDLiuJFuPP (2007) Feeling trusted by business leaders in China: Antecedents and the mediating role of value congruence. Asia Pacific Journal of Management24(3): 321–340.
28.
LazzariniSGMillerGJZengerTR (2008) Dealing with the paradox of embeddedness: The role of contracts and trust in facilitating movement out of committed relationships. Organization Science19(5): 709–728.
29.
LiPP (1998) Towards a geocentric framework of organizational form: A holistic, dynamic and paradoxical approach. Organization Studies19(5): 829–861.
30.
LiPP (2008) Toward a geocentric framework of trust: An application to organizational trust. Management and Organization Review4(3): 413–439.
31.
LiPP (2015) Trust as a leap of hope for transaction value: A two-way street above and beyond trust propensity and expected trustworthiness. In: BornsteinBHTomkinsAJ (eds) Motivating Cooperation and Compliance with Authority. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
32.
MaletzMCNohriaN (2001) Managing in the whitespace. Harvard Business Review79(2): 102–111.
33.
MarshallC (2004) Dating for Innovation: Recognizing and Creating Opportunities in Fluid Environments Through Collaborative Interorganizational Relationships (Doktorsavhandling). Stockholm: Handelshögskolan i Stockholm.
34.
MayerRCDavisJHSchoormanFD (1995) An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review20(3): 709–734.
35.
Molina-MoralesXMartínez-FernándezMTTorlòV (2011) The dark side of trust: The benefits, costs and optimal levels of trust for innovation performance. Long Range Planning44(2): 118–133.
36.
MorganRMHuntSD (1994) The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing58(3): 20–38.
37.
ParmigianiARivera-SantosM (2011) Clearing a path through the forest: A meta-review of interorganizational relationships. Journal of Management37(4): 1108–1136.
38.
ParryWTHackerEA (1991) Aristotelian Logic. Albany: State University of New York Press.
39.
PatzeltHShepherdD (2008) The decision to persist with underperforming alliances: The role of trust and control. Journal of Management Studies45(7): 1217–1243.
40.
PoppoLZhouKZRyuS (2008) Alternative origins to interorganizational trust: An interdependence perspective on the shadow of the past and the shadow of the future. Organization Science19(1): 39–55.
41.
PutnamLLFairhurstGTBanghartS (2016) Contradictions, dialectics, and paradoxes in organizations: A constitutive approach. Academy of Management Annals10(1): 65–171.
42.
Pytlik ZilligLMKimbroughCD (2016) Consensus on conceptualizations and definitions of trust: Are we there yet? In: ShockleyENealTMSPytlik ZilligLMBornsteinBH (eds) Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Trust - Towards Theoretical and Methodological Integration. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
43.
QuineWV (1966) The Ways of Paradox and Other Essays. New York: Random House.
44.
Reich-GraefeR (2011) Deconstructing corporate governance: Director primacy without principle?Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law (16): 465–527.
45.
Reich-GraefeR (2014) Calculative trust: Oxymoron or tautology?Journal of Trust Research4(1): 66–82.
46.
RousseauDMSitkinSBBurtRSCamererC (1998) Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review23(3): 393–404.
47.
SandbergJAlvessonM (2010) Ways of constructing research questions: Gap-spotting or problematization?Organization18(1): 23–44.
48.
SheppardBHShermanDM (1998) The grammars of trust: A model and general implications. Academy of Management Review23(3): 422–437.
49.
SkinnerDDietzGWeibelA (2014) The dark side of trust: When trust becomes a ‘poisoned chalice’.Organization21(2): 206–224.
50.
SmithWKLewisMW (2011) Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review36(2): 381–403.
51.
StevensonHHRobertsMGrousbeckHI (1998) New Business Ventures and The Entrepreneur (5th edn). Boston: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
52.
SztompkaP (1999) Trust: A Sociological Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
53.
TenbrunselAENorthcraftG (2010) In the eye of the beholder: Payoff structures and decision frames in social dilemmas. In: KramerRMTenbrunselAEBazermanMH (eds) Social Decision Making: Social Dilemmas, Social Values, and Ethical Judgments. New York, NY and Hove, UK: Psychology Press, Taylor & Francis, 95–116.
54.
van BelzenJA (2010) Towards Cultural Psychology of Religion: Principles, Approaches, Applications. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
55.
van WijkRJansenJLylesM (2008) Inter- and intra-organizational knowledge transfer: A meta-analytic review and assessment of its antecedents and consequences. Journal of Management Studies45(4): 830–853.
56.
VygotskyLS (1986) Thought and Language (rev. and ed. KozulinA). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
57.
WertschJ (1991) Voices of the Mind: A Sociocultural Approach to Mediated Action. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
58.
WhittleB (2004) Dialetheism, logical consequence and hierarchy. Analysis64(4): 318–326.
59.
WicksACBermanSLJonesTM (1999) The structure of optimal trust: Moral and strategic implications. Academy of Management Review24(1): 99–116.
ZaheerAMcEvilyBPerroneV (1998) Does trust matter? Exploring the effects of interorganizational and interpersonal trust on performance. Organization Science9(2): 141–159.
