信任与组织发展
摘要
信任,因其对于经济与社会发展的重要作用与影响,越来越受到社会学、心理学、经济学、政治学、等各个学科领域学者们的重视。企业组织作为一种主要的经济组织,影响着整个经济和社会的发展进程。因此,信任如何影响企业组织的发展理所当然地成为了社会科学研究者们应该也必须关注和研究的重要问题。
本文应用社会学的理论和定量研究方法,特别是在结合信任理论与组织发展理论构建本研究理论分析框架的基础上,综合运用统计分析方法、博弈论分析方法与数据的电脑模拟等最新的研究方法,从理论分析与实证研究两方面对于信任、组织发展及其相互关系进行了系统而深入的分析,得出了自己具有一定学术价值的研究结论。
随着当代社会科学的发展,信任对于组织发展是否产生影响已经不再是一个问题。问题在于,信任如何影响组织发展。本文以此作为核心,从两个方面进行了探索：一是对于信任本质的探索,以确定信任的合理定义、内涵、维度与影响因素；二是对于组织发展的探索,以确定组织发展的准确定义、内涵、实质和发展规律。最后回到主题：信任影响组织发展。在对信任的分析中,本文主要分为三大步骤：
其一、明确信任的定义、维度与影响因素。首先,本文通过对相关文献的整理与相关理论的分析,给出了自己的信任定义：在社会交往中,施信任人或信任主体,在交往结果存在不确定性和愿意承担风险的情况下,基于友好动机、情感、关系以及理性算计等因素的考虑,而对受信任方或受信任客体产生的资源与权力让渡的态度与行为方式。其次,本文对于组织信任进行了二维度划分,即组织外信任(顾客信任)和组织内信任(员工信任)并分别进行了理论的拓展。再次,本文对于两种组织信任的影响因素做了归纳与总结,建构了两种组织信任的整体结构模型。
其二、证明信任的合理性。本文运用演化博弈论的分析方法,分别对顾客信任和员工信任的影响因素与维度进行了合理性验证,从而确定信任是一种符合理性规则的行为。
其三、信任实证分析。本文运用在新东方教育集团组织进行问卷调查所获得的数据,进行多变量统计分析并建立结构方程统计模型,对顾客信任和员工信任进行了探索性研究与验证性研究,检验研究假设从而得出研究结论。
在组织发展的分析中,本文主要分为两大步骤：
其一、明确组织发展的定义与运行方式。本文通过相关文献的总结与相关理论的分析,给出了本文自己的组织发展定义：即组织不断改变自身结构、规模、发展策略和组织文化以对环境变化作出积极反应并最优化实现组织目标的过程。
其二、确定组织发展的实质与规律。本文借鉴帕森斯社会系统理论和AGIL分析模型,将组织系统划分为组织结构、组织规模、组织策略与组织文化四个子系统。其中组织结构为适应子系统(A),组织规模为目标子系统(G),组织策略为整合子系统(I),组织文化为维持子系统(L)。然后指出,组织发展的实质即为组织各子系统不间断经历A→G→I→L的发展以使整个组织系统螺旋上升的过程。
其三、本文研究了信任对组织发展的影响。通过引进组织研究视角——整体范式的共生激变论视角,我们从宏观和微观两个层面分析了信任对于组织发展的作用机制。在宏观层面上,本文通过演化博弈论,分析了信任影响组织发展的过程和可能的博弈结果,并指出：组织与顾客将向着高信任度的方向发展。在微观层面上,本文通过理论和数据的分析,提出了组织发展的双循环模型并论证了信任对组织发展的具体影响路径。最后得出结论：信任可以部分解释组织发展的现状并部分决定组织发展的方向。
本文的主要观点、特色和可能的创新之处包括：
其一、在理论分析方面。本文理论的创新主要体现在以下三个方面：首先,笔者通过关于信任大量文献的整理和分析,为信任确定了一个合理的定义,并通过该定义诠释了信任的方向、前提与实质。其次,笔者通过关于组织发展大量文献的整理和分析,为组织发展确定了一个合理定义,并通过帕森斯的社会系统理论,提出了一个四维度发展模型,从而以结构功能主义的视角诠释了组织发展的内涵与实质。最后,笔者将信任作为组织发展的重要因素与组织发展模型联系起来,提出了组织发展的双循环模型并论证了信任对组织发展的具体影响路径。
其二、在研究方法方面。本文研究方法的创新主要体现在以下两个方面：首先,本文除了运用社会学实证研究常用的方差分析、相关分析、回归分析等统计分析方法之外,使用了更为复杂的结构方程模型统计分析方法。通过关于信任的两个结构方程模型的构建,具体分析了信任的影响因素与表现路径,验证了相关的研究假设。其次,笔者使用博弈论的方法方法从逻辑上探讨了信任的合理性和组织发展的走向,从而得出了更具有普适性的研究结论。
三、在研究的方法论方面。本文的方法论创新主要体现在文章的结构与论证的思路。首先,笔者为所研究内容信任与组织发展构建了研究模型并建立了相应的理论分析框架。其次,笔者对于信任与组织发展的合理性进行了逻辑分析并以演化博弈论的视角和方法,运用经典的数据电脑模拟方法进行了验证。研究中概念的合理性是其存在的前提,也是其具有研究价值的基础。最后,笔者从实证的角度,借助相关统计方法和调查数据,对前文的理论、逻辑分析和相关假设进行了验证。定量的研究使得之前的理论更具说服力。通过三步,本文完成了理论提出——逻辑验证——数据分析的方法论构建。
本文的研究同样存在较多难点和许多不足之处：
其一、信任概念的操作化与测量。尽管本文对于信任有了明确的定义,但对于信任的测量难题仍没有彻底解决。信任的表现到底是什么；不同表现在多大程度上反映了信任；同时,如何区分并测量信任态度和信任行为?这些问题可能仍是社会学者今后长期要面对的问题。
其二、组织发展纵向数据的获得。尽管本文获得了新东方教育集团组织结构的一些数据,但由于新东方过去并没有相关研究的记载,所以纵向数据很难获得。纵向数据的缺失给历时纵向的对比分析带来了困难。因此,笔者认为,历时纵向的对比分析只能靠逻辑分析和后续跟踪的研究来弥补。
Trust, as a kind of social capital, for its effects on the development of economy, has been the focal point of many scholars from psychology, economics, political science and sociology for a long time. Meanwhile, enterprises, as a main kind of organization of production of a nation, have significant impact on the economy and society. Consequently, the topic how trust affects the development of organizations is a subject social researchers should and have to concern. And the theoretical and practical importance of the issue has gained attention from both scholars and entrepreneurs. This paper, in the application of sociological thinking pattern and methods, combined with the use of statistics and data stimulation, detailed and systematically analyzed trust, organization development and their relationship from both theoretical and empirical perspectives and drew valuable conclusions.
As the development of social science, our question is no longer whether trust has effects on organization development but how it affects. This paper took the "how"as the core issue and specifically explored two subjects. One is the exploration of the essence of trust. Through this exploration, we can ascertain the universal definition, connotation, dimension and factors of trust. The other is the exploration of organization development. Through this exploration, we can ascertain the universal definition, connotation, essence and rules of organization development. Finally, the paper goes back to the core issue:the relationship between trust and organization development.
In the analysis of trust, this paper has three main steps. Step one, the confirmation of the concept, dimension and factors of trust. First, the paper gave an universal definition to trust through the analysis of relevant studies and deduction of relevant theories:Trust is the possible or factual demisability of rights or resources of the trusters to trustees on the basis of the judgment of the trustee's motives and the results. Second, the paper gave a two-dimensional classification of trust: outer-trust(customer trust) and inner trust(staff trust) and extended relevant theories. Third, the paper concluded the factors the two types of trust and constructed two integrated models. Step two, the testification of the reasonableness of trust. This paper testified the reasonableness of the factors and the dimensions of trust with the help of Game Theory and concluded that trust is rational and reasonable. Step three, the empirical study of trust. The paper, with the help of relevant statistical methods, analyzed the data from the research of Wuhan new-oriental school and constructed two statistical models of trust and then testified the hypotheses.
In the analysis of organization development, this paper has two main steps. Step one, the confirmation of the concept and demonstrations of organization development. the paper gave an universal definition to organization development through the analysis of relevant studies and deduction of relevant theories:organization development is the process of the transformation of its structure, scale, strategy and culture aiming at better adaption to the environment and optimized achievement of the organization goal Step two, the confirmation of the essence and rules of organization development. This paper, through careful research and digestion of the social system theories of Parsons, T, classified organizations as the adaption system of the whole market. And then divided organization system into subsystems:adaption system(structure), goal system(scale), integration system(strategy) and lasting system(culture). Then, the paper pointed out that the essence of organization development is a consistent A→G→I→L process which will make the organization to be a better one spirally.
Finally, the paper testified the effects of trust on the organization development. Through the introduction of the perspective:coexist-violet-change in a entirety paradigm, we analyzed the mechanism of the impacts of trust on organization in both macroscopic and microscopic view. In macroscopic view, the paper analyzed the process and ramification of organization development through evolutionary game theory and pointed out that the customers and the organizations tend to develop to a high-trust-level direction. In microscopic view, the paper constructed a two-circulation model of organization development and concluded the specific paths of the effects of trust on organization development through the analysis of relevant theories and data and pointed out the specific direction and intensity of the effects of different trust types, demonstrations, factors on different subsystems of the organization.
The innovation points of this paper include:
One, innovation of theory. The innovation points of theory of this paper can be demonstrated in the following three aspects. First, the paper gave an universal definition to trust through the analysis of relevant studies and deduction of relevant theories and explained the direction, prerequisites and essence of trust. Second, the paper gave an universal definition to organization development through the analysis of relevant studies and deduction of relevant theories and,through a four-dimensional model constructed on the basis of social system theories of Parsons, explained the essence of organization development in Structural Functionalism perspective. Finally, the paper combined trust, a crucial factor, and organization development and constructed a two-circulation model of organization development and concluded the specific paths of the effects of trust on organization development.
Two, innovation of methods. The innovation points of methods of this paper can be demonstrated in the following three aspects. First, the paper, beside traditional sociological methods like ANOVA and correlation analysis, used structural equation model(SEM) to study trust. The paper analyzed the factors, demonstrations of trust and testified relevant hypotheses through constructing two structural equation models of trust. Second, the paper logically discussed the reasonableness of trust and the direction of organization development through evolutionary game theory simulation and drew more valuable and universal conclusions.
Three, innovation of methodology. The innovation points of methodology of this paper can be demonstrated mainly in the structure. First, the paper constructed relevant models and theories for trust and organization development because theory is the soul and key point of a paper. Second, the paper testified the reasonableness of trust with the help of classical mathematical simulation and concluded that trust is rational and reasonable because reasonableness is an assumption or requirement of a concept to be studied. Finally, the paper, in empirical study perspective, testified the theories, logical analysis and hypotheses using the data from the research and relevant statistical methods because it will be more convincing if the theories are testified by quantitative analysis. Through the three steps, the paper constructed a three-step methodology pattern:theory construction→llogical justification→quantitative analysis.
The difficult points and possible shortcomings of the paper include:
One, the operationalization and measurement of trust. Although the paper gave an universal and clear definition to trust, the measurement of trust is not completely solved. How much of trust can be specified? what attitudes and behaviors can be indicators of trust? How much do those indicators contribute to trust? And how to distinguish the trust attitudes and trust behaviors may still be the questions we have to face for a long time.
Two, the attainment of longitudinal data of organization development, although the paper attained some current data about the organization development of Wuhan New-oriental School, the history data can be hardly gained because there were no such studies in the past and consequently no such records. The missing of longitudinal data brought huge blocks to the historical comparison and longitudinal analysis. Consequently, we have to use logical analysis and follow up researches to compensate the longitudinal analysis.
All in all, the paper is both an intellectual and critical conclusion of past studies and an audacious attempt and innovation.
本文应用社会学的理论和定量研究方法,特别是在结合信任理论与组织发展理论构建本研究理论分析框架的基础上,综合运用统计分析方法、博弈论分析方法与数据的电脑模拟等最新的研究方法,从理论分析与实证研究两方面对于信任、组织发展及其相互关系进行了系统而深入的分析,得出了自己具有一定学术价值的研究结论。
随着当代社会科学的发展,信任对于组织发展是否产生影响已经不再是一个问题。问题在于,信任如何影响组织发展。本文以此作为核心,从两个方面进行了探索：一是对于信任本质的探索,以确定信任的合理定义、内涵、维度与影响因素；二是对于组织发展的探索,以确定组织发展的准确定义、内涵、实质和发展规律。最后回到主题：信任影响组织发展。在对信任的分析中,本文主要分为三大步骤：
其一、明确信任的定义、维度与影响因素。首先,本文通过对相关文献的整理与相关理论的分析,给出了自己的信任定义：在社会交往中,施信任人或信任主体,在交往结果存在不确定性和愿意承担风险的情况下,基于友好动机、情感、关系以及理性算计等因素的考虑,而对受信任方或受信任客体产生的资源与权力让渡的态度与行为方式。其次,本文对于组织信任进行了二维度划分,即组织外信任(顾客信任)和组织内信任(员工信任)并分别进行了理论的拓展。再次,本文对于两种组织信任的影响因素做了归纳与总结,建构了两种组织信任的整体结构模型。
其二、证明信任的合理性。本文运用演化博弈论的分析方法,分别对顾客信任和员工信任的影响因素与维度进行了合理性验证,从而确定信任是一种符合理性规则的行为。
其三、信任实证分析。本文运用在新东方教育集团组织进行问卷调查所获得的数据,进行多变量统计分析并建立结构方程统计模型,对顾客信任和员工信任进行了探索性研究与验证性研究,检验研究假设从而得出研究结论。
在组织发展的分析中,本文主要分为两大步骤：
其一、明确组织发展的定义与运行方式。本文通过相关文献的总结与相关理论的分析,给出了本文自己的组织发展定义：即组织不断改变自身结构、规模、发展策略和组织文化以对环境变化作出积极反应并最优化实现组织目标的过程。
其二、确定组织发展的实质与规律。本文借鉴帕森斯社会系统理论和AGIL分析模型,将组织系统划分为组织结构、组织规模、组织策略与组织文化四个子系统。其中组织结构为适应子系统(A),组织规模为目标子系统(G),组织策略为整合子系统(I),组织文化为维持子系统(L)。然后指出,组织发展的实质即为组织各子系统不间断经历A→G→I→L的发展以使整个组织系统螺旋上升的过程。
其三、本文研究了信任对组织发展的影响。通过引进组织研究视角——整体范式的共生激变论视角,我们从宏观和微观两个层面分析了信任对于组织发展的作用机制。在宏观层面上,本文通过演化博弈论,分析了信任影响组织发展的过程和可能的博弈结果,并指出：组织与顾客将向着高信任度的方向发展。在微观层面上,本文通过理论和数据的分析,提出了组织发展的双循环模型并论证了信任对组织发展的具体影响路径。最后得出结论：信任可以部分解释组织发展的现状并部分决定组织发展的方向。
本文的主要观点、特色和可能的创新之处包括：
其一、在理论分析方面。本文理论的创新主要体现在以下三个方面：首先,笔者通过关于信任大量文献的整理和分析,为信任确定了一个合理的定义,并通过该定义诠释了信任的方向、前提与实质。其次,笔者通过关于组织发展大量文献的整理和分析,为组织发展确定了一个合理定义,并通过帕森斯的社会系统理论,提出了一个四维度发展模型,从而以结构功能主义的视角诠释了组织发展的内涵与实质。最后,笔者将信任作为组织发展的重要因素与组织发展模型联系起来,提出了组织发展的双循环模型并论证了信任对组织发展的具体影响路径。
其二、在研究方法方面。本文研究方法的创新主要体现在以下两个方面：首先,本文除了运用社会学实证研究常用的方差分析、相关分析、回归分析等统计分析方法之外,使用了更为复杂的结构方程模型统计分析方法。通过关于信任的两个结构方程模型的构建,具体分析了信任的影响因素与表现路径,验证了相关的研究假设。其次,笔者使用博弈论的方法方法从逻辑上探讨了信任的合理性和组织发展的走向,从而得出了更具有普适性的研究结论。
三、在研究的方法论方面。本文的方法论创新主要体现在文章的结构与论证的思路。首先,笔者为所研究内容信任与组织发展构建了研究模型并建立了相应的理论分析框架。其次,笔者对于信任与组织发展的合理性进行了逻辑分析并以演化博弈论的视角和方法,运用经典的数据电脑模拟方法进行了验证。研究中概念的合理性是其存在的前提,也是其具有研究价值的基础。最后,笔者从实证的角度,借助相关统计方法和调查数据,对前文的理论、逻辑分析和相关假设进行了验证。定量的研究使得之前的理论更具说服力。通过三步,本文完成了理论提出——逻辑验证——数据分析的方法论构建。
本文的研究同样存在较多难点和许多不足之处：
其一、信任概念的操作化与测量。尽管本文对于信任有了明确的定义,但对于信任的测量难题仍没有彻底解决。信任的表现到底是什么；不同表现在多大程度上反映了信任；同时,如何区分并测量信任态度和信任行为?这些问题可能仍是社会学者今后长期要面对的问题。
其二、组织发展纵向数据的获得。尽管本文获得了新东方教育集团组织结构的一些数据,但由于新东方过去并没有相关研究的记载,所以纵向数据很难获得。纵向数据的缺失给历时纵向的对比分析带来了困难。因此,笔者认为,历时纵向的对比分析只能靠逻辑分析和后续跟踪的研究来弥补。
Trust, as a kind of social capital, for its effects on the development of economy, has been the focal point of many scholars from psychology, economics, political science and sociology for a long time. Meanwhile, enterprises, as a main kind of organization of production of a nation, have significant impact on the economy and society. Consequently, the topic how trust affects the development of organizations is a subject social researchers should and have to concern. And the theoretical and practical importance of the issue has gained attention from both scholars and entrepreneurs. This paper, in the application of sociological thinking pattern and methods, combined with the use of statistics and data stimulation, detailed and systematically analyzed trust, organization development and their relationship from both theoretical and empirical perspectives and drew valuable conclusions.
As the development of social science, our question is no longer whether trust has effects on organization development but how it affects. This paper took the "how"as the core issue and specifically explored two subjects. One is the exploration of the essence of trust. Through this exploration, we can ascertain the universal definition, connotation, dimension and factors of trust. The other is the exploration of organization development. Through this exploration, we can ascertain the universal definition, connotation, essence and rules of organization development. Finally, the paper goes back to the core issue:the relationship between trust and organization development.
In the analysis of trust, this paper has three main steps. Step one, the confirmation of the concept, dimension and factors of trust. First, the paper gave an universal definition to trust through the analysis of relevant studies and deduction of relevant theories:Trust is the possible or factual demisability of rights or resources of the trusters to trustees on the basis of the judgment of the trustee's motives and the results. Second, the paper gave a two-dimensional classification of trust: outer-trust(customer trust) and inner trust(staff trust) and extended relevant theories. Third, the paper concluded the factors the two types of trust and constructed two integrated models. Step two, the testification of the reasonableness of trust. This paper testified the reasonableness of the factors and the dimensions of trust with the help of Game Theory and concluded that trust is rational and reasonable. Step three, the empirical study of trust. The paper, with the help of relevant statistical methods, analyzed the data from the research of Wuhan new-oriental school and constructed two statistical models of trust and then testified the hypotheses.
In the analysis of organization development, this paper has two main steps. Step one, the confirmation of the concept and demonstrations of organization development. the paper gave an universal definition to organization development through the analysis of relevant studies and deduction of relevant theories:organization development is the process of the transformation of its structure, scale, strategy and culture aiming at better adaption to the environment and optimized achievement of the organization goal Step two, the confirmation of the essence and rules of organization development. This paper, through careful research and digestion of the social system theories of Parsons, T, classified organizations as the adaption system of the whole market. And then divided organization system into subsystems:adaption system(structure), goal system(scale), integration system(strategy) and lasting system(culture). Then, the paper pointed out that the essence of organization development is a consistent A→G→I→L process which will make the organization to be a better one spirally.
Finally, the paper testified the effects of trust on the organization development. Through the introduction of the perspective:coexist-violet-change in a entirety paradigm, we analyzed the mechanism of the impacts of trust on organization in both macroscopic and microscopic view. In macroscopic view, the paper analyzed the process and ramification of organization development through evolutionary game theory and pointed out that the customers and the organizations tend to develop to a high-trust-level direction. In microscopic view, the paper constructed a two-circulation model of organization development and concluded the specific paths of the effects of trust on organization development through the analysis of relevant theories and data and pointed out the specific direction and intensity of the effects of different trust types, demonstrations, factors on different subsystems of the organization.
The innovation points of this paper include:
One, innovation of theory. The innovation points of theory of this paper can be demonstrated in the following three aspects. First, the paper gave an universal definition to trust through the analysis of relevant studies and deduction of relevant theories and explained the direction, prerequisites and essence of trust. Second, the paper gave an universal definition to organization development through the analysis of relevant studies and deduction of relevant theories and,through a four-dimensional model constructed on the basis of social system theories of Parsons, explained the essence of organization development in Structural Functionalism perspective. Finally, the paper combined trust, a crucial factor, and organization development and constructed a two-circulation model of organization development and concluded the specific paths of the effects of trust on organization development.
Two, innovation of methods. The innovation points of methods of this paper can be demonstrated in the following three aspects. First, the paper, beside traditional sociological methods like ANOVA and correlation analysis, used structural equation model(SEM) to study trust. The paper analyzed the factors, demonstrations of trust and testified relevant hypotheses through constructing two structural equation models of trust. Second, the paper logically discussed the reasonableness of trust and the direction of organization development through evolutionary game theory simulation and drew more valuable and universal conclusions.
Three, innovation of methodology. The innovation points of methodology of this paper can be demonstrated mainly in the structure. First, the paper constructed relevant models and theories for trust and organization development because theory is the soul and key point of a paper. Second, the paper testified the reasonableness of trust with the help of classical mathematical simulation and concluded that trust is rational and reasonable because reasonableness is an assumption or requirement of a concept to be studied. Finally, the paper, in empirical study perspective, testified the theories, logical analysis and hypotheses using the data from the research and relevant statistical methods because it will be more convincing if the theories are testified by quantitative analysis. Through the three steps, the paper constructed a three-step methodology pattern:theory construction→llogical justification→quantitative analysis.
The difficult points and possible shortcomings of the paper include:
One, the operationalization and measurement of trust. Although the paper gave an universal and clear definition to trust, the measurement of trust is not completely solved. How much of trust can be specified? what attitudes and behaviors can be indicators of trust? How much do those indicators contribute to trust? And how to distinguish the trust attitudes and trust behaviors may still be the questions we have to face for a long time.
Two, the attainment of longitudinal data of organization development, although the paper attained some current data about the organization development of Wuhan New-oriental School, the history data can be hardly gained because there were no such studies in the past and consequently no such records. The missing of longitudinal data brought huge blocks to the historical comparison and longitudinal analysis. Consequently, we have to use logical analysis and follow up researches to compensate the longitudinal analysis.
All in all, the paper is both an intellectual and critical conclusion of past studies and an audacious attempt and innovation.
引文
[1]郑也夫,信任论.中国广播电视出版社,2006.
[2](德)西美尔,货币哲学(The Philosophy of Money). Routledge,2004.
[3]牟斌译,伯.巴,信任：信任的逻辑与局限.福建人民出版社,1989.
[4](美)马克·沃伦,吴辉译,民主与信任,华夏出版社2004.
[5](波兰)什托姆普卡著,程胜利译,信任:一种社会学理论.中华书局,2005.
[6)朗西斯·福山,彭志华译,信任-社会美德与创造经济繁荣.海南出版社,1999.
[7](美)罗伯特D.帕特南著,王列赖海榕译,使民主运转起来.江西人民出版社,2001.
[8]张维迎,信息,信任与法律.三联书店,2006.
[9]周明德,企业成长中的凝聚力研究.2009.
[10](美)福山,李婉蓉译,信任—社会道德与繁荣的创造.远方出版社,1998.
[11](美)加里·贝克尔,《人类行为的经济分析》,上海三联书店,2008.
[12]张立达,论经济学与社会学的范式比较及整合.浙江学刊,2008(1).
[13]徐琴,理性选择与社会信任：迈向经济学和社会学的新综合.南京大学学报(哲学·人文科学·社会科学),2009.46(2).
[14]阿克塞罗德著,合作的进化.上海人民出版社,2007.
[15]陈亚玉,东南亚华人家族企业组织发展研究.2005.
[16](英)休谟,道德原则研究.商务印书馆,2001.
[17]王钢＆李强,论信任社会学的产生与发展. 《决策与信息》2010年第1期,2010.
[18]薛天山,当下信任困境之成因分析.社会2004年第6期,2004.
[19]闫健,当代西方信任研究若干热点问题综述. 《当代世界与社会主义》 (双月刊)2006年第4期,2006.
[20]王晓峰,温州农村民间自由借贷中的信任研究——一项基于贷方的调查.2007.
[21]涂小霞,酒店在线预订信任影响因素研究与应用.2009.
[22]刘长青,供应链企业间库存发货策略与信任评价研究.2008.
[23]江红,对等网络中的信任感知和可信协同商务洽谈关键技术研究.2007.
[24]于龙君,制药企业药品研发外包中的信任研究.2009.
[25]杜瑾珺,P2P电子商务信任模型研究.2006.
[26]王焕府,P2P电子商务中信任机制的研究.2007.
[27]郑悦林,C2C在线交易系统的标准信誉模型研究.2008.
[28]王颖,渠道关系治理研究——基于关系契约与信任的整合分析.2007.
[29]杨震,网络拍卖信誉反馈系统的优化研究.2009.
[30]王欣欣,基于FCMs的供应链内企业间信任机制仿真研究.2008.
[31]曹文颖,两层移动Agent电子商务网络TSP问题研究.2008.
[32]艾盾,电子商务利润链问题研究.2007.
[33]陈蓓蕾,基于网络和信任理论的消费者在线口碑传播实证研究.2008.
[34]韩璐,“信任”：穷人的一种生计策略——以宁夏盐池县青山乡常山子村为研究社区.2006.
[35]初浩楠,中国文化环境下企业人际信任及其对知识共享的影响研究.2008.
[36]奴尔加依娜提,B2C环境下大学生网站信任的影响因素及对购买意向的影响.2008.
[37]庞川,B-to-C环境下影响消费者网络信任因素的研究.2003.
[38]洪进,基于网络视角的虚拟R&D组织形态及其治理机制研究.2005.
[39]洪名勇,农地习俗元制度及其实施机制研究.2007.
[40]钱鸣,C2C电子商务中顾客信任影响因素的实证研究.2007.
[41]何卫华,顾客重复购买意向的影响因素实证研究.2008.
[42]李克民,网络组织成员间凝聚力与网络组织运行效率关系研究.2009.
[43]费孝通,乡土中国.
[44]黄炎平,转型期的政府信任研究.2007.
[45]乔振华,村庄的社会信任研究——以乔尚庄为例.2007.
[46]陈美荣,我国C2C模式下第三方支付问题研究.2008.
[47]蔡聪明,基于推荐信任的C2C个性化信任机制.2009.
[48]冯承鑫,公民助警意识缺乏的原因及对策分析.2006.
[49]杨志蓉,团队快速信任、互动行为与团队创造力研究.2006.
[50]陈然方,信任扩展与家族企业成长：理论和实证研究.2006.
[51]谢凤华,顾客信任影响因素、维度和结果的研究——基于电视机购买的理论与经验研究.2005.
[52]ROBERT · D · C, SELIM · S · T, JASON · J · B, A Multi-Dimensional Study ofTrust in Organization. Journal ofManagerial Tissue,1998(1b):303·317.
[53]赵西萍,团队能力、组织内信任与团队绩效的关系研究.科学学与科学技术管理,2008.29(3).
[54]Mayer · RC, An Integration Model of organization Trust. Academy of Management Review,1995.20. (3).
[55]Elangovan · R · A, Betray of trust in organization. Academy of Management review,1998,23, (3).
[56]马可一,民营企业高管团队信任模式演变与绩效机制研究.2005.
[57]徐碧祥,员工信任对其知识整合与共享意愿的作用机制研究.2007.
[58]许道然,组织发展.“国立”空中大学(中国台湾),1999.
[59]王翔,人力资源管理实践、领导行为与组织内信任的关系研究.科技管理研究,2009(9).
[60]曾贱吉,变革型领导对企业员工组织内信任影响的实证研究.商业经济与管理,2010(2).
[61]曾贱吉,企业员工组织内信任对工作态度影响的实证研究.技术经济与管理研究,2010(3).
[62]教军章,公共行政组织发展意义的理性视角.上海行政学员学报,2007.8(5).
[63]李柏洲,企业发展动力研究.2003.
[64]郑淑芬,探讨公部门中组织变革认知、员工信任、压力管理策略与工作态度关系之研究.2009.
[65]姚德明,终身学习与组织学习和组织发展的关系研究.2005.
[66]陶厚永,组织发展研究的回顾与展望.生产力研究,2008(17).
[67]苏传春,竞争力是企业成败的核心——对企业发展五层次的竞争力思考.管理观察,2010(26).
[68]朱其忠,企业发展过程中的分形与混沌现象.生产力研究,2009(11).
[69]聂伟,公司企业家精神推动大企业再成长的作用机制研究.2006.
[70]翟雪焕,论企业文化在企业发展中的作用.商场现代化,2008(35).
[71]唐国华,企业文化建设对企业发展影响的实证检验——以电器行业上市公司为例.生产力究,2009(17).
[72]吉登斯,李猛,李康译,社会的构成,三联书店,1997.
[73]scott,黄洋等译,《组织理论：理性、自然和开放系统》华夏出版社,2001.
[74]亚当·斯密,国民财富的性质和原因的研究(上卷)(中译本).北京.商务印书馆,1972年版.
[75]马克思,资本论.人民出版社,1976.
[76]马歇尔,经济学原理.商务印书馆,1997.
[77]李正彪,企业成长的社会关系网络研究.2005.
[78]劳铖强,企业家行为与现代企业成长研究.2008.
[79]张焕勇,企业家能力与企业成长关系研究.2007.
[80]刘超,智力资本对企业成长影响机制研究——以中国软件企业为例.2009.
[81]孙立平,断裂-20世纪90年代以来的中国社会.社会科学文献出版社,2003.
[82]宋林飞,西方社会学理论.南京大学出版社,1997.
[83]乔纳森·H·特纳(著),张茂元(译),社会学理论的结构.华夏出版社,2006.
[84]谢识予,经济博弈论(第二版)].复旦大学出版社,2002.
[85](美)吉本斯,博弈论基础,中国社会学出版社,1999.
[86]Jorgen. W. Weibull, Evolutionary Game Theory. Massachusetts Institute of Technology,1996.
[87]张维迎,博弈论与信息经济学,上海人民出版社,2004.
[88]周雪光,方法·思想·社会科学研究,读书,2001.
[89]W.R.斯科特李国武译,对组织社会学50年来发展的反思,国外社会科学,2006.
[90]周雪光,组织社会学十讲,社会科学文献出版社,2003.
[91]周雪光,西方社会学关于中国组织与制度变迁研究状况述评.社会学研究,1999.
[92]乐国安,韩振华,信任的心理学研究与展望,西南大学学报,2009.
[93]Deutseh M. Trust and suspicion[J]. The Journal of conflict resolution,1958, 2:265-279
[94]朱利安·B·罗特,一个测量人际信任的新量表,信任的里程碑,2007
[95]Benham, Alexandra and Lee Benham. The Cost of Exchange:An Approach to Measuring Transaction Costs. The Ronlad Coase Insititute and Washington University,1998
[96]威廉姆森：资本主义经济制度——论企业签约与市场签约.商务印书馆,2002
[97]埃格特森：新制度经济学.商务印书馆,1996
[98]张五常：经济组织与交易成本.经济解释,2000
[99]Guido Mollering,信任的本质：从乔治·齐美尔到期望、解释和悬架(suspension)的理论,信任的里程碑,2007
[100]安妮特·拜尔,信任和反信任,信任的里程碑,2007
[101]胡宜朝,雷明,信任的研究方法综述,山西财经大学学报,2005.
[102]梁巧转, 唐亮, 孙慧, 组织研究方法的回顾与评述,http://doc.mbalib.com/view/b6e31261a30f129388fc306ad3e2f61c.html
[103]王方瑞、陈劲、周子范,组织理论的整合趋势研究——基于对比方法的组织理论分析,中国地质大学学报(社会科学版),2005.
[104]麦瑞尔姆,《质化方法在教育研究中的应用：个案研究的拓展》,于泽元译,重庆大学出版社,2008.
[105]吴毅,《小镇喧嚣》,三联出版社,2004.
[106]吴毅,《村治变迁中的权威与变迁》,中国社会科学出版社,2002.
[107]孔飞力,《叫魂》,陈兼、刘昶译,上海：三联书店,1999.
[108]于建嵘,《岳村政治》,北京：商务印书馆,2001.
[109]应星,《大河移民上访的故事》,北京：三联书店,2001
[110]Soete, T., Technological Diffusion and the Rate of Technical Change. The Economic Journal,1984.
[111]Deutsch, M., Cooperation and Trust:Some Theoretical Notes. Nebraska University Press,1962.
[112]Jeffrey Pfeffer, new direcetion for Organization Theoy:problem and prospects,new york:oxfored university press,1997,264pp
[113]Barnard, C. I(1968), The functions of the executive. Cambrige, MA:Narvar university press.
[114]Miller, danny, Toward a new contingency approach:the search organizational gestalts Danny Miller Journal of Management Studies,18.1981.
[115]Dow gregory K, configurational and coactivational view of organizational stucture, Academy of Managemental analysis. The academy of managemental review,jan 1988,13,1.
[116]Meyer, alan D,Anne S & Hinings C R(1993), cofigurationnal Approaches to organizational analysis, academy of management journal,1993, vol,38. no,6.1175-1195
[117]Amy mcmillan-capshart.2005. A configurational famework for diversity. socialization and culture. Personal review; 2005;34,488-511.
[118]Arrow. K. GiftandExchangesinE · S · Phelps(ed), Altruism, Morality and Economic Theory[M]. NewYork:RusselSage Foundation,1975.
[119]Lewicki, R · J ·& Mc Allister, D · J · and Bies, R· J · Trust and Dis. trust:New Relation ships and Realities[J]. Academy ofMan. Agement Review,1998.
[120]Williamson,0 · Caculativeness, trust, andeconomi corganization [J]. Journal of Lawand Economics,1993, (36)2.
[121]5Kramer, R·M·Trust and Distrustin Organizations:Emersing Perspectives, Enduring Questions[J]. Annum Reviews of pay cology,1999, (50).
[122]Rousseau S B, Sitkin S B, Burt R S, Camerer C. Not so different after all:a cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review,1998,23(3):394-404
[123]Tan H H, Tan C S F. Toward the differentiation of trust in supervisor and trust in organization. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 2000,126(2):241-260
[124]Mayer R C, Davis J H, Schoorman F D. An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review,1995,20 (3):709-734
[125]WongY T, WongC S, Ngo H Y. Loyalty to supervisor and trust in supervisor of workers in Chinese joint ventures:a test of two competing models. International Journal of Human Resource Management,2002,13(6):883-900.
[126]Jarh J L, Tsui A S, Xin K, Cheng B S. The influence of relational demography and guanxi:the Chinese case. Organization Science,1998,4
[127]Ngo H Y, Wong C S. Antecedents and outcomes of employees'trust in Chinese joint ventures. Asia Pacific Journal of Management,2003,20: 481-499
[128]Spector M D, Jones G E. Trust in the workplace:factors affecting trust formation between team members. The Journal of Social Psychology, 2004,144(3):311-321
[129]Kornai, Janos,2003, Honesty and trust in the light of the post-socialist transition, in Voprosy Economiki, Vol.9.
[130]James, C. Cox,2004, How to identify trust and reciprocity, in Games and Economic Behavior, Vol.46, PP.260-281.
[131]Raiser, Martin; Rousso, Alan & Steves, Franklin,2003, Trust in transition: Cress—country and firm evidence, in European Bank for Reconstruction and merit Working Paper, No.82.
[132]Glaeser, E.; Laibson, David I.; Scheinkman, J. A.& Christine, L. Sourer, 2002, Measuring trust, in Quarterfy Journal of Economics, Vol.115, No.3, PP. 811-846.
[2](德)西美尔,货币哲学(The Philosophy of Money). Routledge,2004.
[3]牟斌译,伯.巴,信任：信任的逻辑与局限.福建人民出版社,1989.
[4](美)马克·沃伦,吴辉译,民主与信任,华夏出版社2004.
[5](波兰)什托姆普卡著,程胜利译,信任:一种社会学理论.中华书局,2005.
[6)朗西斯·福山,彭志华译,信任-社会美德与创造经济繁荣.海南出版社,1999.
[7](美)罗伯特D.帕特南著,王列赖海榕译,使民主运转起来.江西人民出版社,2001.
[8]张维迎,信息,信任与法律.三联书店,2006.
[9]周明德,企业成长中的凝聚力研究.2009.
[10](美)福山,李婉蓉译,信任—社会道德与繁荣的创造.远方出版社,1998.
[11](美)加里·贝克尔,《人类行为的经济分析》,上海三联书店,2008.
[12]张立达,论经济学与社会学的范式比较及整合.浙江学刊,2008(1).
[13]徐琴,理性选择与社会信任：迈向经济学和社会学的新综合.南京大学学报(哲学·人文科学·社会科学),2009.46(2).
[14]阿克塞罗德著,合作的进化.上海人民出版社,2007.
[15]陈亚玉,东南亚华人家族企业组织发展研究.2005.
[16](英)休谟,道德原则研究.商务印书馆,2001.
[17]王钢＆李强,论信任社会学的产生与发展. 《决策与信息》2010年第1期,2010.
[18]薛天山,当下信任困境之成因分析.社会2004年第6期,2004.
[19]闫健,当代西方信任研究若干热点问题综述. 《当代世界与社会主义》 (双月刊)2006年第4期,2006.
[20]王晓峰,温州农村民间自由借贷中的信任研究——一项基于贷方的调查.2007.
[21]涂小霞,酒店在线预订信任影响因素研究与应用.2009.
[22]刘长青,供应链企业间库存发货策略与信任评价研究.2008.
[23]江红,对等网络中的信任感知和可信协同商务洽谈关键技术研究.2007.
[24]于龙君,制药企业药品研发外包中的信任研究.2009.
[25]杜瑾珺,P2P电子商务信任模型研究.2006.
[26]王焕府,P2P电子商务中信任机制的研究.2007.
[27]郑悦林,C2C在线交易系统的标准信誉模型研究.2008.
[28]王颖,渠道关系治理研究——基于关系契约与信任的整合分析.2007.
[29]杨震,网络拍卖信誉反馈系统的优化研究.2009.
[30]王欣欣,基于FCMs的供应链内企业间信任机制仿真研究.2008.
[31]曹文颖,两层移动Agent电子商务网络TSP问题研究.2008.
[32]艾盾,电子商务利润链问题研究.2007.
[33]陈蓓蕾,基于网络和信任理论的消费者在线口碑传播实证研究.2008.
[34]韩璐,“信任”：穷人的一种生计策略——以宁夏盐池县青山乡常山子村为研究社区.2006.
[35]初浩楠,中国文化环境下企业人际信任及其对知识共享的影响研究.2008.
[36]奴尔加依娜提,B2C环境下大学生网站信任的影响因素及对购买意向的影响.2008.
[37]庞川,B-to-C环境下影响消费者网络信任因素的研究.2003.
[38]洪进,基于网络视角的虚拟R&D组织形态及其治理机制研究.2005.
[39]洪名勇,农地习俗元制度及其实施机制研究.2007.
[40]钱鸣,C2C电子商务中顾客信任影响因素的实证研究.2007.
[41]何卫华,顾客重复购买意向的影响因素实证研究.2008.
[42]李克民,网络组织成员间凝聚力与网络组织运行效率关系研究.2009.
[43]费孝通,乡土中国.
[44]黄炎平,转型期的政府信任研究.2007.
[45]乔振华,村庄的社会信任研究——以乔尚庄为例.2007.
[46]陈美荣,我国C2C模式下第三方支付问题研究.2008.
[47]蔡聪明,基于推荐信任的C2C个性化信任机制.2009.
[48]冯承鑫,公民助警意识缺乏的原因及对策分析.2006.
[49]杨志蓉,团队快速信任、互动行为与团队创造力研究.2006.
[50]陈然方,信任扩展与家族企业成长：理论和实证研究.2006.
[51]谢凤华,顾客信任影响因素、维度和结果的研究——基于电视机购买的理论与经验研究.2005.
[52]ROBERT · D · C, SELIM · S · T, JASON · J · B, A Multi-Dimensional Study ofTrust in Organization. Journal ofManagerial Tissue,1998(1b):303·317.
[53]赵西萍,团队能力、组织内信任与团队绩效的关系研究.科学学与科学技术管理,2008.29(3).
[54]Mayer · RC, An Integration Model of organization Trust. Academy of Management Review,1995.20. (3).
[55]Elangovan · R · A, Betray of trust in organization. Academy of Management review,1998,23, (3).
[56]马可一,民营企业高管团队信任模式演变与绩效机制研究.2005.
[57]徐碧祥,员工信任对其知识整合与共享意愿的作用机制研究.2007.
[58]许道然,组织发展.“国立”空中大学(中国台湾),1999.
[59]王翔,人力资源管理实践、领导行为与组织内信任的关系研究.科技管理研究,2009(9).
[60]曾贱吉,变革型领导对企业员工组织内信任影响的实证研究.商业经济与管理,2010(2).
[61]曾贱吉,企业员工组织内信任对工作态度影响的实证研究.技术经济与管理研究,2010(3).
[62]教军章,公共行政组织发展意义的理性视角.上海行政学员学报,2007.8(5).
[63]李柏洲,企业发展动力研究.2003.
[64]郑淑芬,探讨公部门中组织变革认知、员工信任、压力管理策略与工作态度关系之研究.2009.
[65]姚德明,终身学习与组织学习和组织发展的关系研究.2005.
[66]陶厚永,组织发展研究的回顾与展望.生产力研究,2008(17).
[67]苏传春,竞争力是企业成败的核心——对企业发展五层次的竞争力思考.管理观察,2010(26).
[68]朱其忠,企业发展过程中的分形与混沌现象.生产力研究,2009(11).
[69]聂伟,公司企业家精神推动大企业再成长的作用机制研究.2006.
[70]翟雪焕,论企业文化在企业发展中的作用.商场现代化,2008(35).
[71]唐国华,企业文化建设对企业发展影响的实证检验——以电器行业上市公司为例.生产力究,2009(17).
[72]吉登斯,李猛,李康译,社会的构成,三联书店,1997.
[73]scott,黄洋等译,《组织理论：理性、自然和开放系统》华夏出版社,2001.
[74]亚当·斯密,国民财富的性质和原因的研究(上卷)(中译本).北京.商务印书馆,1972年版.
[75]马克思,资本论.人民出版社,1976.
[76]马歇尔,经济学原理.商务印书馆,1997.
[77]李正彪,企业成长的社会关系网络研究.2005.
[78]劳铖强,企业家行为与现代企业成长研究.2008.
[79]张焕勇,企业家能力与企业成长关系研究.2007.
[80]刘超,智力资本对企业成长影响机制研究——以中国软件企业为例.2009.
[81]孙立平,断裂-20世纪90年代以来的中国社会.社会科学文献出版社,2003.
[82]宋林飞,西方社会学理论.南京大学出版社,1997.
[83]乔纳森·H·特纳(著),张茂元(译),社会学理论的结构.华夏出版社,2006.
[84]谢识予,经济博弈论(第二版)].复旦大学出版社,2002.
[85](美)吉本斯,博弈论基础,中国社会学出版社,1999.
[86]Jorgen. W. Weibull, Evolutionary Game Theory. Massachusetts Institute of Technology,1996.
[87]张维迎,博弈论与信息经济学,上海人民出版社,2004.
[88]周雪光,方法·思想·社会科学研究,读书,2001.
[89]W.R.斯科特李国武译,对组织社会学50年来发展的反思,国外社会科学,2006.
[90]周雪光,组织社会学十讲,社会科学文献出版社,2003.
[91]周雪光,西方社会学关于中国组织与制度变迁研究状况述评.社会学研究,1999.
[92]乐国安,韩振华,信任的心理学研究与展望,西南大学学报,2009.
[93]Deutseh M. Trust and suspicion[J]. The Journal of conflict resolution,1958, 2:265-279
[94]朱利安·B·罗特,一个测量人际信任的新量表,信任的里程碑,2007
[95]Benham, Alexandra and Lee Benham. The Cost of Exchange:An Approach to Measuring Transaction Costs. The Ronlad Coase Insititute and Washington University,1998
[96]威廉姆森：资本主义经济制度——论企业签约与市场签约.商务印书馆,2002
[97]埃格特森：新制度经济学.商务印书馆,1996
[98]张五常：经济组织与交易成本.经济解释,2000
[99]Guido Mollering,信任的本质：从乔治·齐美尔到期望、解释和悬架(suspension)的理论,信任的里程碑,2007
[100]安妮特·拜尔,信任和反信任,信任的里程碑,2007
[101]胡宜朝,雷明,信任的研究方法综述,山西财经大学学报,2005.
[102]梁巧转, 唐亮, 孙慧, 组织研究方法的回顾与评述,http://doc.mbalib.com/view/b6e31261a30f129388fc306ad3e2f61c.html
[103]王方瑞、陈劲、周子范,组织理论的整合趋势研究——基于对比方法的组织理论分析,中国地质大学学报(社会科学版),2005.
[104]麦瑞尔姆,《质化方法在教育研究中的应用：个案研究的拓展》,于泽元译,重庆大学出版社,2008.
[105]吴毅,《小镇喧嚣》,三联出版社,2004.
[106]吴毅,《村治变迁中的权威与变迁》,中国社会科学出版社,2002.
[107]孔飞力,《叫魂》,陈兼、刘昶译,上海：三联书店,1999.
[108]于建嵘,《岳村政治》,北京：商务印书馆,2001.
[109]应星,《大河移民上访的故事》,北京：三联书店,2001
[110]Soete, T., Technological Diffusion and the Rate of Technical Change. The Economic Journal,1984.
[111]Deutsch, M., Cooperation and Trust:Some Theoretical Notes. Nebraska University Press,1962.
[112]Jeffrey Pfeffer, new direcetion for Organization Theoy:problem and prospects,new york:oxfored university press,1997,264pp
[113]Barnard, C. I(1968), The functions of the executive. Cambrige, MA:Narvar university press.
[114]Miller, danny, Toward a new contingency approach:the search organizational gestalts Danny Miller Journal of Management Studies,18.1981.
[115]Dow gregory K, configurational and coactivational view of organizational stucture, Academy of Managemental analysis. The academy of managemental review,jan 1988,13,1.
[116]Meyer, alan D,Anne S & Hinings C R(1993), cofigurationnal Approaches to organizational analysis, academy of management journal,1993, vol,38. no,6.1175-1195
[117]Amy mcmillan-capshart.2005. A configurational famework for diversity. socialization and culture. Personal review; 2005;34,488-511.
[118]Arrow. K. GiftandExchangesinE · S · Phelps(ed), Altruism, Morality and Economic Theory[M]. NewYork:RusselSage Foundation,1975.
[119]Lewicki, R · J ·& Mc Allister, D · J · and Bies, R· J · Trust and Dis. trust:New Relation ships and Realities[J]. Academy ofMan. Agement Review,1998.
[120]Williamson,0 · Caculativeness, trust, andeconomi corganization [J]. Journal of Lawand Economics,1993, (36)2.
[121]5Kramer, R·M·Trust and Distrustin Organizations:Emersing Perspectives, Enduring Questions[J]. Annum Reviews of pay cology,1999, (50).
[122]Rousseau S B, Sitkin S B, Burt R S, Camerer C. Not so different after all:a cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review,1998,23(3):394-404
[123]Tan H H, Tan C S F. Toward the differentiation of trust in supervisor and trust in organization. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 2000,126(2):241-260
[124]Mayer R C, Davis J H, Schoorman F D. An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review,1995,20 (3):709-734
[125]WongY T, WongC S, Ngo H Y. Loyalty to supervisor and trust in supervisor of workers in Chinese joint ventures:a test of two competing models. International Journal of Human Resource Management,2002,13(6):883-900.
[126]Jarh J L, Tsui A S, Xin K, Cheng B S. The influence of relational demography and guanxi:the Chinese case. Organization Science,1998,4
[127]Ngo H Y, Wong C S. Antecedents and outcomes of employees'trust in Chinese joint ventures. Asia Pacific Journal of Management,2003,20: 481-499
[128]Spector M D, Jones G E. Trust in the workplace:factors affecting trust formation between team members. The Journal of Social Psychology, 2004,144(3):311-321
[129]Kornai, Janos,2003, Honesty and trust in the light of the post-socialist transition, in Voprosy Economiki, Vol.9.
[130]James, C. Cox,2004, How to identify trust and reciprocity, in Games and Economic Behavior, Vol.46, PP.260-281.
[131]Raiser, Martin; Rousso, Alan & Steves, Franklin,2003, Trust in transition: Cress—country and firm evidence, in European Bank for Reconstruction and merit Working Paper, No.82.
[132]Glaeser, E.; Laibson, David I.; Scheinkman, J. A.& Christine, L. Sourer, 2002, Measuring trust, in Quarterfy Journal of Economics, Vol.115, No.3, PP. 811-846.