Managing t rust in public organisations Concepts and contradictions

1. Managing trust in public organisationsConceptsandcontradictions Researcher: Peter OomselsPromotor: Prof. Dr. Geert Bouckaert

2. Thispresentation Trust research and public administration Objectives of our research Dimensionsandlogics of ‘administrational trust’ Integration: a consolidatedconceptual matrix Discussingcontradictions: towards a theoretical model Conclusion: lessonsfor trust research Contact

3. 1. Trust research and public administration • Surge in trust literature in the 1990’s and 2000’s. • But largely decoupled and dispersed: a “conceptual morass” • Political science, economics, sociology, psychology • Trust and public administration • Central topic in Public Administration reform discourse • But not a central topic in Public Administration research

4. 1. Trust research and public administration • Research in some journals • Mainly citizen trust in administration • Trust between organisations sometimes considered as a variable in some research on governance and coordination.

5. 2. Objectives of our research • Specific focus on “administrational” trust: trust of administrations • Research question: How can trust play a role for public management? • How can we describe, map and assess administrational trust? • How does administrational trust interact with structures and processes of governance? • How can we manage administrational trust?

6. 2. Objectives of our research This paper • Specific focus on “administrational” trust: trust of administrations • Research question: How can trust play a role for public management? • How can we describe, map and assess administrational trust? • How does administrational trust interact with structures and processes of governance? • How can we manage administrational trust?

7. 3. Dimensionsandlogics of administrationaltrust • Trust often operationalised as • Expectation of trustworthiness: assessment of performance • Willingness to be vulnerable to other’s actions: passive trust attitude • Cooperative behaviour: active trust behaviour • But rarely used in combination in research: • Administrational trust: • A ‘social fact’ characterised by organisational behaviour in a transaction, inspired by a willingness to accept vulnerability based upon positive expectations of an actor in the face of risk and uncertainty

8. 3. Dimensionsandlogics of administrational trust • Three perspectives on the essential logic of trust (Rousseau et al, 1998) • Calculus-based: Trust is a rationalchoice (f.i. Hardin 2002) • Relation-based: Trust goesbeyondrationality (f.i. Brathwaiteand Levi 1998; Luhmann 1979, 1988) • Institution-based: “depersonalised” (f.i. Bachmann2011, Luhmann 1979, Cook 2005)

9. 4. Integration: a consolidatedconceptual matrix

10. 5. Discussingcontradictions: towardsa theoretical model Logic of consequences or appropriateness? Transformative but not deterministic: time + institutions The eye of the beholder? Performance, trustworthiness and trust Results or processes? Problems of causality  Different implications for research and management of trust

11. 6. Conclusion: lessonsfor trust research • Theoretical framework: • Multidimensional and transformative framework • starting from action-centered institutionalist perspective • as starting point of analysis of administrational trust • to provide practically relevant insights for using trust as an instrument for public sector governance • and overcome contradictions that appear in reform discourse. • Research approach: Multi-method approach in order to examine causal mechanisms • Quantitativemapping: findrelationships • Qualitative cases: examinecausality

12. 7. Contact Peter OomselsPeter.oomsels@soc.kuleuven.bePublic Management InstituteKU LeuvenFundedby: Steunpunt Bestuurlijke Organisatie Vlaanderen