1. A Correlational Study of
Trust in an Organization
Undergoing Change
Ed S. Turner III
University of Phoenix
Oral defense of dissertation research
Doctoral Dissertation Committee:
Mentor: Randal S. Allison, PhD
Committee Members:
Allan B. Ament, JD and Elmer Hall, DIBA
1

2. Informed consent to use
Turner’s Oral Defense of Dissertation 2

3. Problem Statement
Organizational leaders fail to understand the effect trusting behaviors
have on the relationship between management and employees in a
changing environment. This includes nonverbal behavior, the
spoken, and written word.
3

4. Support for Problem Statement
• Previously the management and technicians engaged in an exercise entitled Prisoner’s Dilemma, to
ascertain existence of a trust problem within the organization (Ellingsen, Johannesson, Lilja &
Zetterqvist, 2009). The results revealed evidence of blind pursuit of self-interest instead of the
behaviors of cooperation, collaboration, and trust, and left the management staff questioning the
validity of mistrust within the organization.
• The ComTel Company has undergone significant changes in the past eight years with
mergers, downsizings, reorganizations, and restructuring.
• Powerful altering systems and the way workflows without concern for the individuals’
feelings, thoughts, and concerns give the appearance that trust is not present (Chang, 2007).
• Kramer and Cook (2004) “surveyed 55% of 2000 managers in organizations and the managers cited
an experience of one or more having failed promised obligations within the first one or two years of
the employment relationship of their current organization” (p. 328).
• The relationship between management and workers is difficult to maintain, thus further instilling a lack
of trust; the dimensions of trust include reliability, honesty, and fairness as demonstrated by the
leadership toward lower management and technical workers (Kramer & Cook, 2004; Kramer &
Tyler, 1996).
4

5. Purpose Statement
• The purpose of this quantitative correlational research study is
to determine the correlation between the trusting behaviors of
ComTel Senior leaders and the perceptions of trust by
subordinates (Manager/Supervisor and hourly technicians:
male/female) in this Colorado telecommunications company.
5

6. Significance of
Study/Leadership
• Organizational leaders do not recognize the importance of trust. Leaders fall short on the
behaviors that strengthen trust needed to promote extreme leadership in the workgroup
(Kolditz, 2007).
• Covey and Merrill (2006), indicated:
• Only 51% of employees have trust and confidence in senior management; only 36%
believe their leaders act with honesty and integrity; and, over the past 12 months 76%
of employees have observed illegal or unethical conduct on the job – conduct that, if
exposed, would seriously violate the public’s trust (p. 11).
• The field of leadership needs this study on trust because it allows data collection that shows
a correlation between trust, change, effective communication, and leadership style, and the
influence on team effectiveness and productivity (Alvy & Robbins, 2005; Kramer &
Tyler, 1996).
6

7. Significance of Study/Future
Research
• The results of the current research study shows a correlation exists between senior leader's
behaviors of trust and subordinate employees’ perceptions of organizational trust in an
organization undergoing change and are significant to first line management (Manager and
supervisors) and hourly employees.
• Extending the understanding of the relationship between behaviors of leaders and their
influence on organizational trust may provide leaders with new insights regarding
management’s behavior of best practices that include trust training.
• The results of this research may influence leadership thought concerning the benefit of
focusing on trust in organizations undergoing change.
• The results of this research study add to the body of knowledge regarding organizational
trust in organizations undergoing change in a global economy.
• The study may provide insights into leadership and managerial training and development of
priorities in building high performing teams.
7

8. Research Questions
• R1. What is the level of trust within the organization?
• R2. What is the level of organizational trust to the respondent’s
position?
• R3. What is the relationship between perceived levels of
organizational trust and the respondent’s gender?
8

9. Relevant/Important Research
on Trust
• Trust:
• Organizational behavior (Robbins & Judge, 2009)
• Transactions cost in organizations with trust. (Bromiley & Cummings, 1995)
• Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (Kramer & Tyler, 1996)
• Management (Robbins & Coulter, 2003)
• Christian reflections on the leadership challenge (Kouzes & Posner, 2006)
• The speed of trust: The one thing that changes everything (Covey & Merrill, 2006)
• Employees trust managers more than top brass (Zeidner, 2008).
• Change:
• The change leaders’ roadmap (Ackerman-Anderson, 2001)
• Beyond change management: Advanced strategies for today’s transformational
leaders (Anderson & Ackerman-Anderson, 2001)
• The Effective Executive: The Definitive Guide to Getting the Right Things Done.
(Drucker, 2007)
• Leadership:
• Leadership in organizations (Yukl 2006)
• Leadership style during transition in society: Case of Estonia (Alas, Tafel, &
Tuulik, 2007)
9

10. Relevant/Important Research
on Trust Continued
• Communication:
• Business as un-usual (Pritchett, 2002)
• Communicating at work: Principles and practice for business and the professions
(Adler & Elmhorst, 2005)
• Sending signals: Nonverbal communication can speak volumes (Gentry & Kuhnert,
2007)
• Organizational Learning:
• Researching the trainability of transformational organizational leadership (Parry &
Sinha, 2005)
• Building trust and cooperation through technology adaptation in virtual teams:
Empirical field evidence (Thomas & Bostrom, 2008).
• The fifth discipline fieldbook: Strategies and tools for building a learning organization
(Senge, Kleiner, Roberts, & Smith, 1994)
• The fifth discipline: The art & practice of the learning organization (Senge, 2006).
10

11. Methodology
• The research study uses a quantitative correlational research methodology and a Likert-type
survey instrument to test the answers to the research questions with a .05 level of
significance.
• The Organizational Trust Inventory used in the study measured organizational trust across
three components of belief, which are affective state, cognition, and intended behavior
(Bromiley & Cummings, 1995). The dimensions of trust that leaders demonstrated in the
study are their ability to keep commitments (reliability), negotiate honestly (honesty), and
avoid taking excessive advantage of another (fairness). Research questions one through
three were addressed by all 62-survey questions in the inventory.
• Answers to demographic data were used in responding to the issues of job level and
respondents’ gender within the organization. The investigation helped to determine the
identifiable differences by employees at different levels within the organization (e.g.,
technicians, management, and leadership) and between male and female employees.
• Survey Monkey was the company employed to gather survey from the employees. Survey
Monkey provided the option for the researcher to elect not to view the Internet Protocol (IP)
addresses of the participants. The survey company posted the surveys as a blind study
under the title of Organizational Trust Inventory, with IP addresses and names removed
from the results.
11

12. Population Under Investigation
• The population of the study were employees from a telecommunications company in
Colorado who had worked for this company at least 4 years and were at least 18 years of
age or older.
• The sample consisted of 357 employees who, at the time of the study, met the criteria. The
breakdown of the 357 employees was as follows:
• 281 employees were hourly technicians, 159 males and 122 females
• 71 salaried management staff, 34 males and 37 females
• Five senior leaders, three males and two females
• The ethnicities of the workers were Caucasian, African Americans, Hispanics, Middle
Eastern, Filipino, and Asian.
12

13. Sample Population Used
• Sample population used
• 186 (52%) employees of ComTel responded to the survey
• 92 (49.5%) were males
• 94 (50.5%) were females
• Position break out
• 159 (85.5%) Technician (hourly)
• 81 (43.5%) male technicians
• 78 (41.9%) female technicians
• 27 (14.5%) Management (Salaried)
• 11 (5.9%) male management
• 16 (8.6%) female management
13

14. Analysis
• Data analysis took place in two stages by a professional statistician. The reporting of the
demographic data of the participant’s employee designation, work team and gender
employed descriptive statistics, followed by an analysis of the relationship of the criterion
and predictor variables. The level of significance for all tests will be set at p = 0.05. Findings
significant at the p < 0.10 level will identify possible avenues for future research.
• The numeric data were analyzed using SPSS Version 17, a statistical software program.
Only one senior leader out of the five identified within the organization responded to the
survey. To protect the identity of this individual, the description of his/her position was
changed from leader to management.
• Four participants of the 190 respondents were eliminated because at least five or more of
the answers provided were incomplete. The analysis was performed on the remaining 186
sets of responses.
• Research question one, the perceived the level of trust within the organization, was
analyzed using a one-sample chi-square test.
• Research question two, assessed the level of organizational trust related to the
respondent’s position, was analyzed using a bivariate chi-square test.
• Research question three, which queried the level of organizational trust related to the
respondent’s gender, was analyzed using a bivariate chi-square test.
14

15. Data Generated by Inventory
• It was evident the organization has very low levels of trust. The data analysis was performed
on 186 responses. The research question and its’ specific findings:
• R1. What is the level of trust within the organization?
• Level of trust within the organization [n = 186]
• Low level - 163 (87.6%) employees
• High level - 23 (12.4%) employees
• R2. What is the level of organizational trust to the respondent’s position?
• Level of trust by position (hourly) [n = 159]
• Low level - 140 (88.1%) technicians
• High level - 19 (11.9%) technicians
• Level of trust by position (salaried) [n = 27]
• Low level - 23 (85.2%) management
• High level - 4 (14.8%) management
15

16. Data Generated by Inventory
Continued
• R3. What is the relationship between perceived levels of organizational trust and the
respondent’s gender?
• Relationship of organizational trust and gender - [n = 186]
• Low level - 78 (84.8%) males
• High level - 14 (15.2%) males
• Low level - 85 (90.4%) females
• High level - 9 (9.6%) females
• Grouping of individuals responding based on gender/position - [n = 186]
• Low level - 69 (85.2%) male technicians
• High level - 12 (14.8%) male technicians
• Low level - 9 (81.8%) male managers
• High level - 2 (18.2%) male managers
• Low level - 71 (90.0%) female technicians
• High level - 7 (9.0 %) female technicians
• Low Level - 14 (87.5%) female managers
• High level - 2 (12.5%) female managers
16

17. Conclusion of Data
• The results indicated 87.6% of all employees stating there was low trust and only 12.4%
employees stating there was high trust.
• The test was not significant (p = .68) in that it showed very low organization trust existed
with technicians at 88.1% and management at 85.2%. Technicians reported 11.9% believed
there were high levels of organizational trust, and management reported 14.8% believed
there were high levels of organizational trust.
• The percentage of staff responding there was low organizational trust was 88.1% for
technicians and 85.2% for management. The percentage of staff responding there was high
organizational trust was 11.9% for technicians, and 14.8% for management. Leaders’
behaviors of honesty, reliability, and fairness are not apparent with both technicians and
management staff surveyed.
• The test was not significant (p = .24) in that it showed very low organizational trust existed
with both males at 84.8% and females at 90.4%. The responses indicating high
organizational trust were 15.2% male to 9.6% female. Male technicians reported low
organizational trust at 85.2% and male management reported low organizational trust at
81.8%. The female technicians reported low organizational trust at 91% and female
management reported low trust at 87.5%.
• The Pearson product-moment correlations for the entire sample for nine selected variables
in determining organizational trust were not significant in that they demonstrated low
organizational trust (r=.04 to r = .10) for position, and low trust (r = -.01 to r = .03) for gender.
The responses provided to the questions regarding the leadership’s reliability, honesty, and
fairness indicated that organizational trust is seriously lacking in ComTel.
17

18. Limitations
• First, the study was limited to subjects who agreed to participate voluntarily and
anonymously. The response rate of 52% was excellent for the division. The cross-section of
male and female employees was good at 50.5% males to 49.5% females. The response
rate of technicians was excellent with 159 responses to 27 responses from management,
which included one senior leader.
• Second, self-reporting on a questionnaire or inventory is subjective rather than objective.
Respondents may underestimate their level of resistance or ignorance and thus produce a
response bias.
• Third, the use of a questionnaire or inventory to collect data regarding leadership
competencies may not fully capture the hidden characteristics of competencies like values,
self-image, traits, and motives more difficult to identify.
• Fourth, the sample selection may not produce a quantity of participants that is significant.
The sample size of 186 responses out of 357 was significant to draw conclusions about the
level of organizational trust in the organization. The responses give a clear indication about
the level of organizational trust and will serve as a starting point for future research on trust.
• Fifth, the use of a questionnaire does not allow an assessment of the impact of cause and
effect on the organization. The hope of the research would be in providing clearer
delineation of the causes and effects of trust that exist within an organization undergoing
change.
• Sixth, this organization is not an Union shop.
• Lastly, the final limitation of the study was the effect that the economic climate may have
impacted the results from the study.
18

19. Delimitations
• The findings of the research study may be beneficial to the division; however, the study will
only assess the level of trust within this organization and not the parent company.
• It was determined this study would only confirm and further explain the findings of the
Prisoner’s Dilemma previously run within the division with numerical data. Leadership did
not desire to have an explanation or responses to open-ended questions as to the nature of
the level of trust or why individuals felt a certain way.
• Divisions of the organization that include racial overtones, social interactions, and age, or
personality groups were not generated.
• Determining the level of the participants’ training, skills, life experiences, work experiences,
or other extenuating factors are difficult to determine and were not solicited.
• The results of the study may be used as a standard in assisting other organizations to
identify the need for organizational trust.
19

20. Recommendations
• Leadership must regain trust lost by increasing personal credibility and behaving in a way
that inspires trust.
• Leaders need to behave as a coach/mentor to work more collaboratively with the employees
and teams.
• Leaders need to develop the ability to explain organizational change and show why it is
necessary for the future of the company and clearly indicate about what is taking place and
what people will be affected.
• Leadership should convene meetings, send regular e-mails, and update everyone regarding
what is going on within the organization.
• Leadership should acknowledge employees’ feelings and care enough about them to
recognize that everyone is facing difficulties and uncertainty.
• Leadership should understand and recognize the power of effective communication.
• Training needs to be directed at how to be a leader, how to change an organization, and
how to provide the leadership with appropriate skills that inspire trust.
• Leadership needs to share knowledge and information not only to enhance learning, but
also to improve communication and reduce anxiety within the workforce.
20

21. Recommendations Continued
• Training for leaders that empowers the workforce and fosters trust.
• Training for all employees on how to build teams and measure effectiveness and efficiency.
• Leadership and management need to explore learning and training opportunities within the
community and make them available to their employees.
• Future research in organizational trust should include a qualitative aspect (e.g., a mixed-
method design) in organizations undergoing change and may reveal additional corollary
factors of organizational trust.
• Future research should employ a survey instrument that seeks additional data that requires
leadership to respond to their perceptions in working also with the corporate hierarchy.
• Future research should be directed at what responders’ reflections were at the time of the
survey, and how the economy and business climate may have influenced their responses.
• Future research should also explore how the multiple change initiatives have influenced
employees, by the use of a survey that includes the change initiatives and employee’s
reflections on change.
21

22. References
1. Ackerman-Anderson, L. S. (2001). The change leaders’ roadmap. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
2. Adler, R. B. & Elmhorst, J. M. (2005). Communicating at work: Principles and practice for
business and the professions (8th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
3. Alas, R., Tafel, K., & Tuulik, K. (2007, January). Leadership style during transition in
society: Case of Estonia. Problems & Perspectives in Management, 5(1), 50-60. Retrieved
December 10, 2008, from Business Source Complete database.
4. Alvy, H. & Robbins, P. (2005). Growing into leadership. Educational Leadership, 62(8), 50-
54. Retrieved June 5, 2005, from EBSCOhost database.
5. Anderson, D. & Ackerman-Anderson, L. (2001). Beyond change management: Advanced
strategies for today’s transformational leaders (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass/Pfeiffer.
6. Bromiley, P. & Cummings, L. L. (1995). Transactions cost in organizations with trust.
Research on negotiations in organizations, 5, 219-247.
7. Chang, H. (2007). Interpersonal communication at a turning point. Journal of Asian Pacific
Communication, 17(2), 199-223.
22

23. References Continued
8. Covey, S. M. R., & Merrill, R. R. (2006). The speed of trust: The one thing that changes
everything. New York, NY: Free Press.
9. Drucker, P. F. (2007). The effective executive: The definitive guide to getting the right
things done. Burlington, MA. Elsevier Ltd.
10. Ellingsen, T., Johannesson, M., Lilja, J., & Zetterqvist, H. (2009). Trust and Truth.
Economic Journal, 119(534), 252-276. doi:10.1111/j.1468 0297.2008.02212.x.
10. Gentry, W., & Kuhnert, K. (2007, November). Sending signals: Nonverbal communication
can speak volumes. Leadership in Action, 27(5), 3-7. Retrieved March 2, 2009, from
Business Source Complete database.
11. Kolditz, T. A. (2007). In extremis leadership: Leading as if your life depended on it. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
12. Kouzes, J. M. & Posner, B. Z. (2006). Christian reflections on the leadership challenge.
San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
23

24. References Continued
13. Kramer, R. M. & Cook, K. S. (2004). Trust and distrust in organizations: Dilemmas and
approaches. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
14. Kramer, R. M., & Tyler, T. R. (1996). Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and
research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing Inc.
15. Parry, K. W., & Sinha, P. N. (2005). Researching the trainability of transformational
organizational leadership. Human Resource Development International, 8(2), 165-183.
16. Pritchett, P. (2002). Business as un-usual. Dallas, TX: Pritchett & Associates Printing.
17. Robbins, S. P., & Coulter, M. (2003). Management (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
18. Robbins, S. P. & Judge, T. A. (2009). Organizational behavior (13th ed.). Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
19. Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art & practice of the learning organization.
New York, NY: Currency-Doubleday.
24

25. References Continued
20. Senge, P. M., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R. B., & Smith, B. J. (1994). The fifth
discipline fieldbook: Strategies and tools for building a learning organization. New York,
NY: Currency-Doubleday.
21. Thomas, D., & Bostrom, R. (2008). Building trust and cooperation through technology
adaptation in virtual teams: Empirical field evidence. Information Systems Management,
5(1), 45-56.
20. Yukl, G. (2006). Leadership in organizations (6th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-
Hall.
21. Zeidner, R. (2008). Employees trust managers more than top brass. Human Resources
Magazine, 53(10), 10.
25

26. Questions?
26