Hostname: page-component-669899f699-g7b4s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-26T06:36:34.315Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mutual trust and employee performance of virtual and face-to-face dyads in multilatina organisations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 November 2024

Juan Pablo Román-Calderón Open the ORCID record for Juan Pablo Román-Calderón [Opens in a new window]  and
Mariano Gentilin
Juan Pablo Román-Calderón*
Affiliation:
International Business Department, Universidad Eafit, Medellín, Colombia
Mariano Gentilin
Affiliation:
Department Organizations and Management, Universidad EAFIT, Medellín, Colombia
*
Corresponding author: Juan Pablo Román-Calderón; Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Firms are calling their employees back to the office because of concerns about employee productivity, collaboration, and trust. Thus, knowledge about the psychosocial aspects of virtual work environments is now more essential than ever. This study compared the relationships between mutual cognitive trust and employee performance in virtual and face-to-face leader–member dyads. Numerous studies have adopted a unidirectional approach to leader–member trust, exhibiting difficulties related to common method bias. The validity of previous research results comparing trust in face-to-face and virtual leader–member dyads can also be questioned because of other methodological drawbacks. We examined mutual trust and employee performance using different raters. We utilised the multigroup exploratory approach to simultaneously analyse face-to-face and virtual dyads formed by 180 leaders and 561 employees working at a multilatina company. Our results reveal the existence of differences between virtual and face-to-face leader–member dyads vis-à-vis mutual cognitive trust and employee performance relationship.

Keywords

mutual trustleader–employee dyadsvirtualface-to-facemultigroupHRM
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Management & Organization , Volume 31 , Issue 1 , January 2025 , pp. 286 - 297
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press in association with Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Asad, M., Dastgeer, G., Uz Zaman, N., Khalid, Z., Brohi, M. A., & Bibi, A. (2021). The role of authentic leadership in shaping performance feedback reactions: The mediating role of trust in leader. South Asian Journal of Human Resources Management, 9(1), 33–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauer, T. N., & Green, S. G. (1996). Development of leader–member exchange: A longitudinal test. Academy of Management Journal, 39(6), 1538–1567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ben Sedrine, S., Bouderbala, A., & Nasraoui, H. (2020). Leadership style effect on virtual team efficiency: Trust, operational cohesion and media richness roles. Journal of Management Development. ahead-of-p(ahead-of-print).Google Scholar
Brahm, T., & Kunze, F. (2012). The role of trust climate in virtual teams. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 27(6), 595–614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breuer, C., Hüffmeier, J., & Hertel, G. (2016). Does trust matter more in virtual teams? A meta-analysis of trust and team effectiveness considering virtuality and documentation as moderators. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(8), 1151–1177.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brower, H. H., Schoorman, F. D., & Tan, H. H. (2000). A model of relational leadership: The integration of trust and leader–member exchange. The Leadership Quarterly, 11(2), 227–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cascio, W. F. (2000). Managing a virtual workplace. Academy of Management Perspectives, 14(3), 81–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 9(2), 233–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cramton, C. D. (2001). The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration. Organization Science, 12(3), 346–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dansereau, F., Graen, G., & Haga, W. J. (1975). A vertical dyad linkage approach to leadership within formal organizations: A longitudinal investigation of the role making process. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13(1), 46–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deutsch, M. (1958). Trust and suspicion. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2(4), 265–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
di Domenico, P. (2023). Why CEOs Want Employees Back in the Office. Executive News & Insights. https://www.shrm.org/executive-network/insights/ceos-want-employees-back-office.Google Scholar
Duchon, D., Green, S. G., & Taber, T. D. (1986). Vertical dyad linkage. A longitudinal assessment of antecedents, measures, and consequences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 56–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellington, J. K., & Wilson, M. A. (2017). The performance appraisal Milieu: A multilevel analysis of context effects in performance ratings. Journal of Business and Psychology, 32(1), 87–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, R., & Karl, J. A. (2019). A primer to (cross-cultural) multi-group invariance testing possibilities in R. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, .CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Friedman, H. H., & Amoo, T. (1999). Rating the rating scales. Journal of Marketing Management, 9(3), 114–123.Google Scholar
Gambetta, D. (1988). Can we trust trust? In Gambetta, D. (Ed.), Trust: Making and breaking cooperative relations (pp. 213–237). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Geiser, C. (2013). Data analysis with Mplus. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Goh, S., & Wasko, M. (2012). The effects of leader-member exchange on member performance in virtual world teams. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 13(10), 861–885.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years: Applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective. The Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, P. S., Greenberg, R. H., & Antonucci, Y. L. (2007). Creating and sustaining trust in virtual teams. Business Horizons, 50(4), 325–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hacker, J., Johnson, M., Saunders, C., & Thayer, A. (2019). Trust in virtual teams: A multidisciplinary review and integration. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R., & Black, W. C. (2008). Análisis Multivariante. Madrid: Pearson Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Handy, C. (1995). Trust and the virtual organization. Harvard Business Review, 73(3), .Google Scholar
Heffernan, E., Weinstein, B. E., & Ferguson, M. A. (2020). Application of Rasch analysis to the evaluation of the measurement properties of the hearing handicap inventory for the elderly. Ear and Hearing, 41(5), 1125–1134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoyt, C. L., & Blascovich, J. (2003). Transformational and transactional leadership in virtual and physical environments. Small Group Research, 34(6), 678–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1999). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Organization Science, 10(6), 791–815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, T.-Y., Liu, Z., & Diefendorff, J. M. (2015). Leader–member exchange and job performance: The effects of taking charge and organizational tenure. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(2), 216–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, T.-Y., Wang, J., & Chen, J. (2018). Mutual trust between leader and subordinate and employee outcomes. Journal of Business Ethics, 149(4), 945–958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kramer, R., & Tyler, T. (1996). Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research. SAGE Publications, Inc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Legood, A., van der Werff, L., Lee, A., & Den Hartog, D. (2021). A meta-analysis of the role of trust in the leadership-performance relationship. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 30(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, C. P. (2018). To control and build trust: How managers use organizational controls and trust-building activities to motivate subordinate cooperation. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 70, 69–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marsh, H. W., Morin, A. J. S., Parker, P. D., & Kaur, G. (2014). Exploratory structural equation modeling: An integration of the best features of exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 10(1), 85–110.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martin, R., Guillaume, Y., Thomas, G., Lee, A., & Epitropaki, O. (2016). Leader–Member Exchange (LMX) and performance: A meta-analytic review. Personnel Psychology, 69(1), 67–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. The Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAllister, D. J. (1995). Affect- and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. The Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 24–59.Google Scholar
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2017). Mplus user’s guide (Eighth ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
Newman, S. A., Ford, R. C., & Marshall, G. W. (2019). Virtual team leader communication: Employee perception and organizational reality. International Journal of Business Communication, 57(4), 452–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osman, M. N. H., & Nahar, H. S. (2015). Understanding and assessing governance agents’ relationships: The contribution of leader-member exchange theory. Procedia Economics and Finance., 31, 746–758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powell, W. W. (1990). Neither market nor hierarchy: Network forms of organization. In Staw, B. M. & Cummings, L. L. (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, 12, 295–336. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Scandura, T. A., & Pellegrini, E. K. (2008). Trust and leader-member exchange: A closer look at relational vulnerability. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 15, 101–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaffer, B. S., & Riordan, C. M. (2003). A review of cross-cultural methodologies for organizational research: A best-practices approach. Organizational Research Methods, 6(2), 169–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Serva, M. A., Fuller, M. A., & Mayer, R. C. (2005). The reciprocal nature of trust: A longitudinal study of interacting teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(6), 625–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spector, P. E. (2019). Do not cross me: optimizing the use of cross-sectional designs. Journal of Business and Psychology, 34(2), 125–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stollberger, J., Las Heras, M., Rofcanin, Y., & Bosch, M. J. (2019). Serving followers and family? A trickle-down model of how servant leadership shapes employee work performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 112, 158–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
The Economist. (2021). Love them or hate them, virtual meetings are here to stay. The Economist. https://www-economist-com.ezproxy.eafit.edu.co/international/2021/04/10/love-them-or-hate-them-virtual-meetings-are-here-to-stay.Google Scholar
Thrasher, G., Dickson, M., Biermeier-Hanson, B., & Najor-Durack, A. (2020). Social identity theory and leader–member exchange: Individual, dyadic and situational factors affecting the relationship between leader–member exchange and job performance. Organization Management Journal, 17(3), 133–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timming, A. R. (2009). Trust in cross-national labour relations: A case study of an Anglo-Dutch European works council. European Sociological Review, 25(4), 505–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turesky, E. F., Smith, C. D., & Turesky, T. K. (2020). A call to action for virtual team leaders: Practitioner perspectives on trust, conflict and the need for organizational support. Organization Management Journal, 17(4/5), 185–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, J., & Wong, W. K. P. (2008). Comparing traditional and virtual group forms: Identity, communication and trust in naturally occurring project teams. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19(1), 41–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiesenfeld, B. M., Raghuram, S., & Garud, R. (2001). Organizational identification among virtual workers: The role of need for affiliation and perceived work-based social support. Journal of Management, 27(2), 213–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, J., & Mossholder, K. W. (2010). Examining the effects of trust in leaders: A bases-and-foci approach. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(1), 50–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar