IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v14y2024i2p21582440241251930.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role of the Informal Institution: How Does It Shape the Trust Relationship Between Government and Social Organizations in China?

Author

Listed:
  • Yuanyuan Xu
  • Cheng Fu
  • Wen Tu
  • Fujun Zhou

Abstract

This paper analyses the influences of informal institutions on interorganizational trust. Based on a case study, it identifies five impact paths of informal institutions operating between government and social organizations in China: internal referencing, direct entrustment, office visits, favor provision, and key figure decision-making. Most of these function to maintain relationships and facilitate affection. Trust in these informal institutions is particularistic, exclusive, limited in transferability, discrete, and information based. Accordingly, this paper shows that while informal institutions can foster simple cooperation between a particular government and social organization, they can also strengthen the power imbalance between these two subjects and undermine basic public values.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuanyuan Xu & Cheng Fu & Wen Tu & Fujun Zhou, 2024. "The Role of the Informal Institution: How Does It Shape the Trust Relationship Between Government and Social Organizations in China?," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(2), pages 21582440241, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:14:y:2024:i:2:p:21582440241251930
    DOI: 10.1177/21582440241251930
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440241251930
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/21582440241251930?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Malhotra, Deepak & Lumineau, Fabrice, 2011. "Trust and collaboration in the aftermath of conflict: the effects of contract structure," MPRA Paper 38358, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Sim B. Sitkin & Nancy L. Roth, 1993. "Explaining the Limited Effectiveness of Legalistic “Remedies” for Trust/Distrust," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(3), pages 367-392, August.
    3. Mark R. Dibben, 2000. "Exploring Interpersonal Trust in the Entrepreneurial Venture," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-0-230-50952-8.
    4. Weingast, Barry R & Marshall, William J, 1988. "The Industrial Organization of Congress; or, Why Legislatures, Like Firms, Are Not Organized as Markets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 96(1), pages 132-163, February.
    5. Estrin, Saul & Prevezer, Martha, 2011. "The role of informal institutions in corporate governance: Brazil, Russia, India, and China compared," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 33552, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. G. Hodgson, 2007. "What Are Institutions?," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, issue 8.
    7. John Child & Guido Möllering, 2003. "Contextual Confidence and Active Trust Development in the Chinese Business Environment," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(1), pages 69-80, February.
    8. Tsai, Lily L., 2007. "Solidary Groups, Informal Accountability, and Local Public Goods Provision in Rural China," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 101(2), pages 355-372, May.
    9. Williamson, Oliver E, 1993. "Calculativeness, Trust, and Economic Organization," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 36(1), pages 453-486, April.
    10. Luo, Jar-Der, 2005. "Particularistic Trust and General Trust: A Network Analysis in Chinese Organizations[1]," Management and Organization Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(3), pages 437-458, November.
    11. Sheila M. Puffer & Daniel J. McCarthy & Max Boisot, 2010. "Entrepreneurship in Russia and China: The Impact of Formal Institutional Voids," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 34(3), pages 441-467, May.
    12. Jar-Der Luo, 2005. "Particularistic Trust and General Trust: A Network Analysis in Chinese Organizations," Management and Organization Review, International Association of Chinese Management Research, vol. 1(3), pages 437-458, November.
    13. Akbar Zaheer & Bill McEvily & Vincenzo Perrone, 1998. "Does Trust Matter? Exploring the Effects of Interorganizational and Interpersonal Trust on Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(2), pages 141-159, April.
    14. Bill McEvily & Vincenzo Perrone & Akbar Zaheer, 2003. "Trust as an Organizing Principle," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(1), pages 91-103, February.
    15. March, James G. & Olsen, Johan P., 1983. "The New Institutionalism: Organizational Factors in Political Life," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 78(3), pages 734-749, December.
    16. Johannes Lindner & Berthold Rittberger, 2003. "The Creation, Interpretation and Contestation of Institutions — Revisiting Historical Institutionalism," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(3), pages 445-473, June.
    17. Akbar Zaheer & N. Venkatraman, 1995. "Relational governance as an interorganizational strategy: An empirical test of the role of trust in economic exchange," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(5), pages 373-392.
    18. Ranjay Gulati & Jack A. Nickerson, 2008. "Interorganizational Trust, Governance Choice, and Exchange Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(5), pages 688-708, October.
    19. Bo Bernhard Nielsen & Sabina Nielsen, 2009. "Learning and Innovation in International Strategic Alliances: An Empirical Test of the Role of Trust and Tacitness," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(6), pages 1031-1056, September.
    20. Hall, Peter A. & Taylor, Rosemary C. R., 1996. "Political science and the three new institutionalisms," MPIfG Discussion Paper 96/6, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    21. Vincenzo Perrone & Akbar Zaheer & Bill McEvily, 2003. "Free to Be Trusted? Organizational Constraints on Trust in Boundary Spanners," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(4), pages 422-439, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ranjay Gulati & Maxim Sytch, 2008. "Does familiarity breed trust? Revisiting the antecedents of trust," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(2-3), pages 165-190.
    2. Fang, F., 2019. "When performance shortfall arises, contract or trust? A multi-method study of the impact of contractual and relational governances on performance in public – private partnerships," Other publications TiSEM 473840ee-6945-4a93-9326-5, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    3. Liwen Wang, 2023. "The interplay of contracts and trust: untangling between- and within-dyad effects," Post-Print hal-03944358, HAL.
    4. Oliver Schilke & Karen S. Cook, 2015. "Sources of alliance partner trustworthiness: Integrating calculative and relational perspectives," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(2), pages 276-297, February.
    5. Sebastian Forkmann & Jonathan Webb & Stephan C. Henneberg & Lisa K. Scheer, 2022. "Boundary spanner corruption: a potential dark side of multi-level trust in marketing relationships," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 50(5), pages 889-914, September.
    6. Bill McEvily & Akbar Zaheer & Darcy K. Fudge Kamal, 2017. "Mutual and Exclusive: Dyadic Sources of Trust in Interorganizational Exchange," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(1), pages 74-92, February.
    7. Bidault, Francis & de la Torre, José R. & Zanakis, Stelios H. & Ring, Peter Smith, 2018. "Willingness to rely on trust in global business collaborations: Context vs. demography," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 373-391.
    8. Martyna Janowicz‐Panjaitan & Rekha Krishnan, 2009. "Measures for Dealing with Competence and Integrity Violations of Interorganizational Trust at the Corporate and Operating Levels of Organizational Hierarchy," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 245-268, March.
    9. Lumineau, Fabrice & Jin, Jason Lu & Sheng, Shibin & Zhou, Kevin Zheng, 2022. "Asset specificity asymmetry and supplier opportunism in buyer–supplier exchanges," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 85-100.
    10. Han, Shaojie & Su, Jingqin & Lyu, Yibo & Liu, Qing, 2022. "How do business incubators govern incubation relationships with different new ventures?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    11. Thorgren, Sara & Wincent, Joakim & Eriksson, Jessica, 2011. "Too small or too large to trust your partners in multipartner alliances? The role of effort in initiating generalized exchanges," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 99-112, March.
    12. Teck Ming Tan & Saila Saraniemi, 2023. "Trust in blockchain-enabled exchanges: Future directions in blockchain marketing," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 51(4), pages 914-939, July.
    13. Skokic, Vlatka & Coh, Marko, 2017. "How do executive search firms increase interest in career opportunities? The role of past interactions," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 505-513.
    14. Lui, Steven S. & Ngo, Hang-yue & Hon, Alice H.Y., 2006. "Coercive strategy in interfirm cooperation: Mediating roles of interpersonal and interorganizational trust," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(4), pages 466-474, April.
    15. Boris Bauke & Thorsten Semrau & Zheng Han, 2016. "Relational trust and new ventures’ performance: the moderating impact of national-level institutional weakness," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 1007-1024, December.
    16. Weber, Clarissa E. & Maurer, Indre, 2023. "Knowledge acquisition from host-country partners: The interplay of trust and legal safeguards," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 58(2).
    17. McCarter, Matthew W. & Wade-Benzoni, Kimberly A. & Kamal, Darcy K. Fudge & Bang, H. Min & Hyde, Steven J. & Maredia, Reshma, 2020. "Models of intragroup conflict in management: A literature review," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 925-946.
    18. Laura Poppo & Kevin Zheng Zhou & Julie J. Li, 2016. "When can you trust “trust”? Calculative trust, relational trust, and supplier performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 724-741, April.
    19. Stephanie Eckerd & Sean Handley & Fabrice Lumineau, 2022. "Trust violations in buyer–supplier relationships: Spillovers and the contingent role of governance structures," Journal of Supply Chain Management, Institute for Supply Management, vol. 58(3), pages 47-70, July.
    20. Ranjay Gulati & Jack A. Nickerson, 2008. "Interorganizational Trust, Governance Choice, and Exchange Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(5), pages 688-708, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:14:y:2024:i:2:p:21582440241251930. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.