Construct · 4 names · 4 citations
Different names. Different fields. One construct. One map.
● jangle · one construct, many model names Nearest construct by meaningtrustcompare the meaningsEvery construct on the map is compared with every other by the meaning of its definitions, and the closest one is surfaced here. The nearest construct to swift trust is trust.
Hold this as a prompt, not a verdict. Two constructs sitting close in meaning is a reason to read them side by side and decide for yourself whether they are one idea under two names. It is not proof that they are. Compare the meanings in the Collider.
Spokes are the names and the models that coined them; dashed arcs are borrowings. Tap a field for its definition, unit, and measures.
Drag to watch the word get claimed. Each name appears at the publication date of the earliest source cited for it. Tap a year to see which.
Swift trust as first described for temporary teams that assemble around a task, work intensely, and disband before members can build a shared past. Meyerson, Weick, and Kramer's 1996 chapter Swift trust and temporary groups, in Kramer and Tyler's Trust in Organizations, argued that such groups act as if trust is present from the start by importing it from the roles people occupy, professional categories, and shared expectations, rather than earning it through repeated dealings. Members treat each other as trustworthy so the work can proceed, then verify through action. This foundational account names the construct that the later labels below all measure: the same quick, presumptive trust seen in film crews, cockpit teams, and disaster response, described here in words rather than tied to one scale or setting.[1]
The same fast-forming trust reframed as initial trust: the surprisingly high trust two strangers can extend at the outset of a new organizational relationship, before either has evidence about the other. McKnight, Cummings, and Chervany's 1998 Initial trust formation in new organizational relationships in the Academy of Management Review built a model where this trust comes from a person's general disposition to trust, from trust in the surrounding institution and its safeguards, and from quick mental shortcuts such as sorting a new partner into a trusted category or role. It targets the identical phenomenon as the temporary-groups account, but recasts it as an individual belief formed at time zero and traces its cognitive sources, rather than describing it as a property of the short-lived group.[2]
Swift trust carried into teams that work across distance and time zones with no face-to-face contact, communicating only through text. Jarvenpaa and Leidner's 1999 Communication and trust in global virtual teams in Organization Science tracked student teams spread across continents and found that early, frequent, task-focused messages and prompt replies let some teams reach high trust almost at once, while that trust faded quickly when responsiveness dropped. This is the same construct as the temporary-groups and initial-trust accounts, applied to online collaboration and tied to observable message behavior, which shifts the emphasis from imported roles or personal disposition toward the communication patterns that let quick trust take hold and then hold or break.[3]
Swift trust in swift-starting action teams: crews of specialists, such as surgical, military, aviation, and firefighting teams, that come together with little or no warm-up and must perform under real risk. Wildman, Shuffler, Lazzara, Fiore, Burke, Salas, and Garven's 2012 Trust development in swift starting action teams in Group & Organization Management laid out a multilevel framework in which this early trust rests on cues taken from roles, reputations, and visible competence before any working history exists, then adjusts as the team acts together. It studies the same construct as the accounts above but in settings where mistakes are costly, so it sorts the fast trust into its imported starting sources and the ongoing evidence that confirms or corrects it.[4]
Next
See how swift trust sits against neighbouring constructs in the Collider, or export every reference on this page in one click.
Open in ColliderExport BibTeXReport this collisionCited on this page?
If your work is cited behind one of these entries, you know better than we do whether we captured the meaning right. Confirm it, suggest an edit, or dispute it, and your name goes on the entry as an author who has checked it, linked to your ORCID.
Claim your construct