Too Much of a Good Thing? Negative Effects of High Trust and Individual Autonomy in Self-Managing Teams

By Claus W. Langfred. 2004

789 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Science and Operations Research, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a6f68d77830ab7b109dc4815254cd7a966bc8e4e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Heed, a missing link between trust, monitoring and performance in knowledge intensive teams (2008, background): “A study of Langfred (2004) of self-managed teams even shows that trust can be negatively related to performance.”
Trust in work teams: An integrative review, multilevel model, and future directions (2018, background): “…is the norm to trust each other and not to monitor one another which can be detrimental to team performance team trust (e.g., Jeffries & Reed, 2000; Langfred, 2004), it may be more appropriate to consider whether there are optimal levels of trust in given situations rather than simply aiming for…”
The Downside of Self-Management: A Longitudinal Study of the Effects tf Conflict on Trust, Autonomy, and Task Interdependence in Self-Managing Teams (2007, background): “A lack of trust also implies a need for increased monitoring (Bromiley & Cummings, 1995; Langfred , 2004), which can be easier when team members have less individual autonomy— especially since rules and procedures can substitute for interaction and direction ( It is also likely that trust…”
The Thin Line Between Empowering and Laissez-Faire Leadership: An Expectancy-Match Perspective (2018, background): “Moreover, some studies have shown that empowering leadership may generate resistance responses (Maynard et al., 2007) and task uncertainty (Cordery et al., 2010) and create poorer performance when monitoring is low (Langfred, 2004).”
When good conflict gets better and bad conflict becomes worse: the role of social capital in the conflict–innovation relationship (2009, background): “As such, this study extends prior arguments that high levels 2001) and that the reduced level of monitoring associated with trust can be destructive rather than constructive (Langfred 2004).”
The differential effect of team members' trust on team performance: The mediation role of team cohesion (2010, background): “Langfred (2004, 2007) studied the performance of 111 teams and found that trust does not always lead to positive outcomes and that it could even act as a negative mechanism or have a dysfunctional effect depending on the situation.”
Interpersonal trust within negotiations: : Meta-analytic evidence, critical contingencies, and directions for future research. (2014, background): “Although the vast majority of trust studies assume positive effects, trust scholars have recognized a “dark side” of trust in which one may be exploited by others (e.g., Langfred, 2004).”
Trust in teams: A taxonomy of perceived trustworthiness factors and risk-taking behaviors in face-to-face and virtual teams (2020, background): “In addition, trust increases unilateral effort (e.g. Williams and Karau, 1991) and decreases monitoring behavior (e.g. Costa and Anderson, 2011; Langfred, 2004).”
The moderating impact of internal social exchange processes on the entrepreneurial orientation–performance relationship (2010, background): “suppress exchanges of opposing viewpoints about the best way to implement new products or services—as a means to protect others’ short-term emotional well-being (Langfred, 2004)—such suppression may be less likely if functional managers keep the organization’s mission and goals”
Designing Motivating Jobs: An Expanded Framework for Linking Work Characteristics and Motivation (2008, background): “For example, Langfred (2004) suggested that job autonomy might have performance-debilitating effects in self-managing teams when team members do not monitor each other, indicating that job autonomy is not sufficient on its own to induce an achievement-enhancing orientation.”