261

List of References

Abelson, M. A. (1996): Turnover Cultures and the Turnover Audit, in: Human Resources Management – Perspectives, Context, Functions and Outcomes, Ferris, G.R. and Buckley, M.R. (eds), Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 526-535.

Adler, P. S. (2001): Market, Hierarchy, and Trust: The Knowledge Economy and the Future of Capitalism, Organizational Science, Vol.12, No.2. (March-April), pp. 215-234.

Aghion, P. and Howitt, P. (1998): Endogenous Growth Theory, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

Aharoni, Y. (1966): The Foreign Direct Investment Process of the Firm, Harvard University Press, Boston.

Akerlof, G. A. (1970): The Market for ‘Lemons’: Quality Uncertainty and the Market Me-chanism. Quarterly Journal of Economics (84), August, pp. 488-500.

Albrecht, S. and Travaglione, A. (2003): Trust in public-sector senior management, in: Inter-national Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 14, No. 1, February.

Alchian, A. A. and Demsetz, H. (1972): Production, Information Costs, and Economic Organ-izations, American Economic Review, Vol. 62, No. 5, December, pp. 777-795.

Allen, T. D., Freeman, D. M., Russell, J. E. A., Reizenstein, R. C. and Rentz, J. O., (2001): Survivors’ Reactions to Organizational Downsizing: Does Time Ease the Pain? Jour-nal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 74, pp. 145-164.

ANATEL (2000): PASTE – Perspectivas para Ampliação e Modernização do Setor de Tele-comunicações, http://www.anatel.gov.br/home/default.asp, 24.04.2005.

ANATEL (2003): Postos de Trabalho, Balanço 2003, http://www.anatel.gov.br/home/default.asp, 24.04.2005.

ANATEL (2004): SCD, Internet e Inclusão Digital, Presented by Pimenta, M.A., 1ª FENA-INT, http://www.anatel.gov.br/palestra_fenaintrs2004.pdf, 25.04.2005.

Anderson, E. and Gatignon, H. (2005): Firms and the Creation of New Markets, in: Handbook of New Institutional Economics, Ménard, C. and Shirley, M.M. (eds), Springer, New York etc, pp. 401-431.

Anderson, E. and Weitz, B. A. (1986): Make or Buy Decisions: Vertical Integration and Mar-keting Productivity, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 3-20.

Anderson, L. A. and Derrick, R. F. (1990): Development if the Trust in Physician Scale: A Measure to Assess Interpersonal Trust in Patient-Physician Relationship, Psychologi-cal Reports, Vol. 67, No. 3, part 2, pp. 1091-1100.

Angle, H. and Perry, J. (1983): Organizational Commitment: Individual and Organizational Influence, Work and Occupations, May, pp. 123-146.

262

Aoki, M. (1988): Information, Incentives, and Bargaining in the Japanese Economy. Cam-bridge University Press, New York.

Argandona, A. (2002): Ethical Challenges of the New Economy: An Agenda of Issues, IESE, March, Barcelona.

Argandona, A. (2003): The New Economy: Ethical Issues, Journal of Business Ethics, 44, pp. 3-22.

Aryee, S., Budhwar, P. and Chen, Z. X. (2002): Trust as a mediator of the relationship be-tween organizational justice and work outcomes: test of a social exchange model, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 23, pp. 267-285.

Arrow, K. J. (1962): Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention, in: Nelson, R.R. (ed.), The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity, Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp. 609-626.

Arrow, K. J. (1969): The Organization of Economic Activity: Issues Pertinent to the Choice of Market versus Nonmarket Allocation, in: The Analysis and Evaluation of Public Expenditure: The PPB System. Vol. 1, U.S. Joint Economic Committee, 91st Cong., 1st Sess, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, pp. 59-73.

Arrow, K. J. (1973): Information and Economic Behavior, Stockholm: Federation of Swedish Industries, Sweden.

Arrow, K. J. (1974a): The Limits of Organization, W.W. Norton & Company Inc, New York.

Arrow, K. J. (1974b): Limited Knowledge and Economic Analysis; in: American Economic Review, March, pp. 1-22.

Arrow, K. J. (1975): Gifts and Exchanges, in: Altruism, Morality and Economic Theory, Phelps, E.S. (ed), Russell Sage Foundation, New York., pp. 13-28.

Arrow, K. J. (1979). The Economics of Information, in: Dertouzos, M. L. and Moses, J. (eds) The Computer Age: A Twenty-Year View, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 306-317.

Ashford, S. J., Lee, C. and Bobko, P. (1989): Content, causes, and consequences of job inse-curity: A theory-based measure and substantive test, Academy of Management Jour-nal, Vol. 32, No. 4, pp. 803-829.

Atchison, T. J. (1996): The Employment Relationship: Un-Tied or Re-Tied? in: Human Re-sources Management – Perspectives, Context, Functions and Outcomes, Ferris, G.R. and Buckley, M.R. (eds), Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 366-375.

Aulakh, P. S., Kotabe, M. and Sahay, A. (1996): Trust and Performance in Cross-Border Marketing Partnerships: A Behavioural Approach, Journal of International Business Studies (Special Issue), pp. 1005-1032.

263

Audretsch, D. B. (2003): Specialization or Diversification of Regional Economic Structure: Empirical Findings & Strategic Orientation, Clustermanagement, in: der Struktur-politik - Internationale Erfahrungen und Konsequenzen für NRW 05.12.2003, Micro-Electronic Centrum Duisburg,

http://www.ruhrpakt.de/downloads/veranstaltungsdoku/audretsch_praesentation.pdf, 10.03.2005.

Audretsch, D. B. and Thurik, A. R. (2001): What’s New about the New Economy? Sources of Growth in the Managed and Entrepreneurial Economies, working paper, Institute for Development Strategies (IDS), Indiana University Trustees, January.

Axelrod, R. (1984): The evolution of cooperation, Basic Books, New York.

Ayres, R. U. (2005): Economic Growth (and Cheap Oil), Lecture 05, INSEAD, http://www.cge.uevora.pt/aspo2005/abscom/ASPO2005_Ayres.pdf, 15.03.2005.

Bachmann, R. (2003): Trust and Power as Means of Coordinating the Internal Relations of the Organization: a Conceptual Framework, in: The Trust Process in Organizations – Em-pirical Studies of the Determinants and the Process of Trust Development, Noote-boom, B. and Six, F. (eds.), Edward Elgar, Chetenham, UK, pp. 58-74.

Baily, M. N. and Lawrence, R. Z. (2001): Do We Have a New- E-conomy? American Eco-nomic Review, Papers and Proceedings 91, pp. 308-312.

Bailyn, L., Rapoport, R., Kolb, D. and Fletcher, J. (1996): Relinking Work and Family: A Catalyst for Organizational Change, Ford Foundation, New York.

Bainman, S. and Rajan, M. (2002): Incentive issues in Inter-Firm Relationships, Accounting Organizations and Society, 15 (4), pp. 341-372.

Baiman, S. (1982): Agency Research in Managerial Accounting: A Survey, Journal of Ac-counting Literature, Vol.1, Spring, pp. 154-213.

Baker, G., Gibbons, R. and Murphy, K. J. (1993): Subjective Performance Measures in Op-timal Incentives Contracts, working paper No. 4480, September, MIT.

Baker, G., Gibbons, R. and Murphy, K. J. (1999): Relational Contracts and the Theory of the Firm, Unpublished manuscript, MIT.

Barnard, C. (1938): The Functions of the Executive, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

Barney, J. B. and Hansen, M. H. (1994): Trustworthiness as a source of Competitive Advan-tage, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 15, pp. 175-190.

Baron, D. P. (2003): Business and Its Environment, 4th ed, Prentice Hall, New Jersey.

Bell, D. (1976): The coming of the post-industrial society: A venture in social forecasting, (1st ed. 1973), Basic Books, New York.

264

Bellemare, C. and Kröger, S. (2003): On Representative Trust, University of Tilburg, Center Discussion Paper Series No. 2003-47, September.

Beckert, J., Metzner, A. and Roehl, H. (1998): Vertrauenserosion als organisatorische Gefahr und wie ihr zu begegnen ist, in: Organisationsentwicklung 17, pp. 56–66.

Bishop, M., Kay, J. and Mayer, C. (1995): Privatization and Economic Performance, Oxford University Press, NY.

Binmore, K. (2000): Game Theory and the Social Contract Volume 1: Plying Fair, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA etc.

Binmore, K. (2002): Game Theory and the Social Contract, Volume 2: Just Plying, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA etc.

Boulding, K. E. (1966): The Economics of Knowledge and the Knowledge of Economics, American Economic Review, Vol. 56, pp. 1-13.

Bradach, J. L. and Eccles, R. G. (1989/1998): Price, Authority and Trust: from ideal types to plural forms, in: Markets, Hierarchies & Networks – The Coordination of Social Life, Thompson, G.; Frances, J.; Levacic, R. and Mitchell, J. (eds.), Sage, London etc, pp. 277-292.

(Originally published in 1989, Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 15, pp.97-118)

Bralakrishnan, S. and Wernerfelt, B. (1986): Technical Change, Competition and Vertical Integration, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 7, pp. 347-355.

Brickley, J. A., Smith, C. W. and Zimmerman, J. L. (2001): Managerial Economics and Or-ganizational Architecture, 2nd.ed, McGraw-Hill, London.

Bridgewater, S. (2000): Strategic Management in Emerging Markets, in: Tayeb, M. H. (ed.), International Business – Theories, Policies and Practices, Prentice Hall, London, Eng-land, pp. 339-353.

Brockner, J. P. Siegel, P., Tyler, T. and Martin, C. (1997): When trust matters: The moderat-ing affect of outcome favorability, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 42, pp. 558-583.

Brousseau, E. and Quelin, B. (1995): Asset Specificity and Organizational Arrangements: The Case of the New Telecommunications Services Market, Final Version, November, forthcoming in the Industrial & Corporate Change.

Bull, C. (1987): The Existence of Self-Enforcing Implicit Contracts, The Quarterly Journal or Economics, February, pp. 147-160.

Burns, T. and Stalker, G. M. (1961): The Management of Innovation, Tavistock Publications, London.

265

Burton-Jones, A. (1999): Knowledge Capitalism – Business Work, and Learning in the New Economy, Oxford University Press, London.

Business Week (2000): Americans See the New Economy All Around Them, Business Week, 19 May 2000. http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/may2000/nf00519b.htm, 19.07.2004

Butter, F. A. G. and Mosch, R. H. J. (2003): Trade, Trust and transaction costs, Department of Economics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, and Tinbergen Institute, Discussion paper, version 7, October 2003. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=459501, 13.07.2004.

Caceres, M. (2002): Signs Hint at Mild Recovery for Launch Market, Aerospace America, AIAA, September, http://www.aiaa.org/aerospace/Article.cfm?issuetocid=250&ArchiveIssue ID=30, 24.03.05.

Cáliz, C., Quintanilla, J. and Pin, J. R. (2001): Influencia de La Nueva Economia en La Di-reccion de Personas, Docuento de Investigacion No. 440, Septiembre, IESE.

Calton, J. and Lad, L. (1995): Social Contracting as a trust-building Process of Network Go-vernance, Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 5, pp. 271-295.

Campbell, F., Worrall, L. and Cooper, C. (2000): The Psychological Effects of Downsizing and Privatization. Working Series, No. WP001/00, University of Wolverhampton, UK.

Cannon, J., Achrol, R. and Gundlach, G. (2000): Contracts, Norms and Plural Form Gover-nance, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 28, No. 2, Spring, pp. 180-194.

Cardona, P. and Elola, A. (2003): Trust in Management: The effect of Managerial Trustwor-thy Behavior and Reciprocity, working paper, IESE Business School, Spain.

Carlsson, B. and Taymaz, E. (1994): Flexible Technology and Industrial Structure in the U.S., Small Business Economics, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 193-209.

Cascio, W. F. (2002): The Virtual Organization, in: Cooper, C.L.; Burke, R.J. (eds), The New World of Work – Challenges and Opportunities. Oxford, UK: Blackwell, pp. 203-221.

Casson, M. (1997a): Information and Organization, Oxford University Press, New York.

Casson, M. (1997b): The Economics of Business Culture – Game Theory, Transaction Costs, and Economic Performance, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Castells, M. (1996/2000): The Rise of the Network Society, in: The information age - Econ-omy, society and culture, Vol. 3, Blackwell, Oxford, UK.

266

Celly, K. S., Spekman, R. E. and Kamauff, J. W. (1999): Technological Uncertainty, Buyer Preferences and Supplier Assurances: An Examination of Pacific Rim Purchasing Ar-rangements, Journal of International Business Studies, Second Quarter, Vol.30, No.2, ABI/INFORM Global, pp. 297-316.

Chandler, A. (1962): Strategy and Structure, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

Chiles, T. H. and McMackin, J. F. (1996): Integrating variable risk preference, trust and transaction cost economics, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 21, pp. 72-99.

Christensen, C. (1997): The Innovator’s Dilemma, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

Coase, R. H. (1937): The Nature of the Firm, Economica, New Series, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 386-405.

Coase, R. H. (2002): The New Institutional Economics, in: The Economics of Contracts – Theories and Application, Brousseau, E. and Glachant, J. (eds), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 45-48.

Cobb, C. W. and Douglas, P. H. (1928): A Theory of Production, The American Economic Review, Vol. 18, No. 1, Supplement, Papers and Proceedings of the Fortieth Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association (Mar., 1928), pp. 139-165.

Cohen, W. M. and Klepper, S. (1992): The Tradeoff between Firm Size and Diversity in the Pursuit of Technological Progress, Small Business Economics, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 01-14.

Cohen, S. S., DeLong, B. and Zysman, J. (2000): Tools for Thought: What Is New and Impor-tant About the ‘E-conomy’, BRIE Working Paper No. 138, Berkeley Roundtable on International Economics, Berkeley CA.

Coleman, J. (1984): Introducing Social Structure into Economic Analysis, American Econom-ic Review, Vol. 74, pp. 84-88.

Coleman, J. (1990): Foundations of Social Theory, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA etc.

Commons, J. R. (1932): The Problem of Correlating Law, Economics and Ethics, Wisconsin Law Review, Vol. 8, No. 1.

Cook, K. S. (2000): Trust in Society, Russell Sage Foundation, New York.

Cook, K. S., Rice, E. R. W. and Gerbasi, A. (2002): Commitment and Exchange: The Emer-gence of Trust Networks under Uncertainty, working paper, 20 November.

Cooper, C. L. and Burke, R. J. (2002): The New World of Work – Challenges and Opportuni-ties. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

267

Coopey, J. and Hartley, J. (1991): Reconsidering the Case for Organizational Commitment, Human Resources Management Journal, Vol. 1, No. 3, pp. 18-32.

Coriat, B. and Guennif, S. (1998): Self-interest, Trust and Institutions, in: Lazaric, N. e Lo-renz, E. (eds.), Trust and Economic Learning. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, pp. 48-63.

Cotton, J. L. and Tuttle, J. M. (1986): Employee Turnover: A Meta-Analysis and Review with Implications for Research, The Academy of management Review, Vol. 11, No. 1, Jan-uary, pp. 55-70.

Coutu, D. (1998): Trust in Virtual Teams. Harvard Business Review, May-June, Boston; pp. 20-21.

Cox, J. C. and Deck, C. A. (2002): When are woman more generous than men? Mimeo, Uni-versity of Arizona.

Croson, R. and Buchan, N. (1999): Gender and Culture: International Experimental Evidence from Trust Games, American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings, Vol. 89, pp. 386-391.

Crossman, A. and Lee-Kelley, L. (2004): Trust, Commitment and Team Working: The Para-dox of Virtual Organizations, Vol. 4, Issue 4, October 2004, pp. 375-406.

Cunha, R. C. (2002): Privatization and Outsourcing, in: Cooper, C.L.; Burke, R.J. (eds.): The New World of Work – Challenges and Opportunities, Blackwell, Oxford, UK, pp. 29-46.

Cyert, R. M. and March, J. G. (1992): A Behavioral Theory of the Firm, 2nd ed, Blackwell Publishing, NJ.

Dalton, D. R. and Todor, W. D. (1982): Turnover: A Lucrative Hard Dollar Phenomenon, The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 7, No. 2, April, pp. 212-218.

Dantas, M. (2002): A Lógica do Capital-Informacao, 2nd ed. Contraponto, Rio de Janeiro.

Dasgupta, P. (2000): Trust as a Commodity, in: Gambetta, Diego (ed.) Trust: Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations, electronic edition, Department of Sociology, Univer-sity of Oxford, chapter 4, pp. 49-72, http://www.sociology.ox.ac.uk/papers/ das-gupta49-72.doc,15.01.2005.

Day, G. S. and Kimberly, J. R. (1995): How Firms Adapt to Evolving Markets, in Bowman, E. and Kogut, B. (eds.), Redesigning the Firm, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 218-242.

Dekker, D., Krackhardt, D. and Frances, P. H. (2002): Dynamic Effects of Trust and Cogni-tive Social Structures on Information Transfer Relationships, working paper, January, http://www.ers.erim.eur.nl, 17.02.2005.

268

Demsetz, H. (1995): The Economics of the Business Firm – Seven critical commentaries, Cambridge University Press, New York.

Detecom (2004): Vom Wissen zu Können – Merkmale dynamikrobuster Höchstleistung – Eine empirische Untersuchung auf systemtheoretischer Basis, Detecom & Diebold Consultants, September.

Deutsch, M. (1958): Trust and suspicion, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 2, pp. 265-79.

Deutsch, M. (1962): Cooperation and trust: some theoretical notes, Nebraska symposium on motivation, pp. 275-319.

DIESP (2001): Política Econômica e Conjuntura, No. 87, Nov/Dec.

Dirks, K. T. and Ferrin, D. L. (2001): The Role of Trust in Organizational Settings, Organiza-tion Science, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 450-467.

Dirks, K. T. and Ferrin, D. L. (2002): Trust in Leadership: Meta-analytic findings and impli-cations for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 87, No. 4, pp. 611-628.

Dodgson, M. (1993): Learning, Trust and Technological Change, Human Relations, Vol. 46, No. 2, pp. 77-95.

Dosi, G. (1982), Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories: A Suggested In-terpretation of the Determinants and Directions of Technical Change, Research Policy, Vol. 11, pp. 147-162.

Dosi, G. (1988): The Nature of the Innovative Process, in: Technical Change and Economic Theory, G. Dosi (ed.), Printer, London, pp. 221-238.

Duncan, R. B. (1972): Characteristics of Organizational Environments and Perceived Envi-ronmental Uncertainty, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 17, pp. 313-327.

Dunn, J. (2000): Trust and Political Agency, in: Gambetta, D. (ed.) Trust: Making and Break-ing Cooperative Relations, electronic edition, Department of Sociology, University of Oxford, chapter 5, pp. 73-93,

http://www.sociology.ox.ac.uk/papers/dunn73-93.doc, 15.01.2005.

Dyer, J. H. (1997): Effective Interfirm Collaboration: How Firms Minimize Transaction Costs and Maximize Transaction Value, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 18, No. 7, pp. 535-556.

Eiteman, D. K., Stonehill, A. I. and Moffet, M. H. (2001): Multinational Business Finance, 5th ed., Addison Wesley, Boston.

Exame (2004): Edição Especial – Retrospectiva, Editora Abril, Dezembro.

269

Farrell, M. A. (2003): The Effects of Downsizing on Market Orientation: The Mediating Roles of Trust and Commitment, Journal of Strategic Marketing, Vol. 11, No. 1, March 2003, pp. 55-74.

Fehr, E., Fischbacher, U., von Rosenbladt, B., Schupp, J. and Wagner, G. G. (2003): A Na-tionwide Laboratory - Examining Trust and Trustworthiness by integrating behavioral experiments into representative surveys, Institute for Empirical Research in Econom-ics, Working paper 141, University of Zurich.

Ferrell, O. C., Fraedrich, J. and Ferrell, L. (2001): Business Ethics - Ethical Decision Making and Cases, 4th ed., Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston etc.

Foss, N. J. (2001): Coase vs. Hayek: Economic Organization in the Knowledge Economy, working paper, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy, Copenhagen Busi-ness School, 21 August. hppt://www.cbs.dk/staff/njf.html, 10.05.2004.

Fransman, M. (2002): Telecoms in the Internet Age – From Boom to Bust to…? Oxford Uni-versity Press, New York.

Frank, R. H. (1990): A Theory of Moral Sentiments, in J.J. Mansbridge, ed., Beyond Self-Interest, pp. 71-96, University of Chicago Press, Chicago etc.

Freeman, C. (1988): Preface Part II, in: Technical Change and Economic Theory, Dosi, G., Freeman, C. Nelson, R., Silverberg, G. and Soete, L. (eds.), Pinter, London, pp. 09-12.

Frey, B. S. and Jegen, R. (2001): Motivation Crowding Theory, Journal of Economic Surveys, 15(5), pp. 589-611.

Furubotn, E. G. and Richter, R. (1991): The New Institutional Economics: An Assessment, in: Furubotn, E.G. and Richter R. (ed.), The New Institutional Economics - A Collection of Articles from the Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, J.C.B. Mohr, Paul Siebeck, Tübingen.

Furubotn, E. G. and Richter, R. (2001): Institutions and Economic Theory – The Contribu-tions of the New Institutional Economics, The University of Michigan Press, US.

Fukuyama, F. (1995): Trust - The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity, Har-mondsworth, Middlesex, Penguin Books.

Fukuyama, F. (2000): The Great Disruption, Free Press, New York.

Galbraith, J. K. (1956): American Capitalism: The Concept of Countervailing Power, revised edition, Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA.

Gallagher, D. G. (2002): Contingent Work Contracts: Practice and Theory, in: Cooper, C. L.; Burke, R. J. (eds.): The New World of Work – Challenges and Opportunities. Oxford, UK: Blackwell, pp. 115-136.

270

Gallup Institute (2004): The Best Way to Recognize Employees, December, by Tom Rath, in: http://gmj.gallup.com/content/default.asp?ci=13888, 15.10.05.

Gambetta, D. (1993): The Sicilian Mafia – The Business of Private Protection, Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MA etc.

Gambetta, D. (2000): Can We Trust Trust?, in: Gambetta, D. (ed.) Trust: Making and Break-ing Cooperative Relations, electronic edition, Department of Sociology, University of Oxford, chapter 13, pp. 213-237, http://www.sociology.ox.ac.uk/papers/ gambetta213-237.doc, 15.01.2005.

Garcia, S. R. (2004): Privatização e Emprego no Setor de Telecomunicações: Novas Oportu-nidades ou Degradação do Trabalho? - O Caso do Rio Grande do Sul - Brasil, Revista Eletronica de Geografía y Ciencias Sociales, Universidad de Barcelona, Vol. VIII, No.170 (12), August, pp. 741-798.

Gazeta Mercantil (2003): Panorama Setorial - O Futuro das Telecomunicações, Vol.1, De-cember.

Ghoshal, S. and Moran, P. (1996): Bad for Practice: A Critique of the Transaction Cost Theory, The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 21, No. 1, January, pp. 13-47.

Gillespie, N. (2003): Measuring Trust in Working Relationships: the Behavioral Trust Inven-tory, Paper presented at the Academy of Management meeting, Seattle, August.

Gibbons, R. (2000): Trust in Social Structures: Hobbes and Coase Meet Repeated Games, in: Trust in Society, Cook, K. (ed.), Russell Sage Foundation, New York.

Gibbons, R. (2001): Relational Contracts and the Theory of the Firm, working paper, MIT Sloan School and NBER, June 2001.

Godefroy, D. and Pénard, T. (2002): Interconnection agreements in telecommunications net-works: from Strategic Behaviors to Property Rights, in: The Economics of Contracts, Brousseau, E. and Glachant, J. (eds.), Cambridge University Press, UK, pp. 358-372.

Gordon, G. G. (1991): Industry Determinants of Organizational Culture, The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 16, No. 2 (April), pp. 396-415.

Grandori, A. (1997): Governance Structures, Coordination Mechanisms and Cognitive Mod-els, Journal of Management and Governance, Vol. 1, pp. 29-42.

Granovetter, M. (1985): Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embedded-ness, American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 91, pp. 481-510.

Guest, D. (1992): Employee Commitment and Control, in: Hartley, J. F. and Stephenson, G. M. (eds), Employment Relations, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 111-135.

271

Guest, D. (1997): Human Resources Management in the United Kingdom, in: Towers, B., The Handbook of Human Resources Management, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford, UK, pp. 07-25.

Hadfield, G. K. (2005): The Many Legal Institutions that Support Contractual Commitments, in: Handbook of New Institutional Economics, Ménard, C. and Shirley, M.M. (eds), Springer, New York etc, pp. 175-204.

Hamel, G. (1991): Competition for Competence and Interpartner Learning within Interorgani-zational Strategic Alliances, Strategic Management Journal, Summer Special Issue, Vol. 12, pp. 83-103.

Hansmann, H. (1996): The Ownership of Enterprise, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

Hardin, R. (1971): Collective Action as an Agreeable n-Prisoner’s Dilemma, Behavioral Science, Vol. 16, pp. 472-481.

Hardin, R. (1998): Trust in Government, in: Trust and Governance, Braithwaite, V. and Levi, M. (eds.), Vol. 1 in the Series of Trust, Russell Sage Foundation, New York, pp. 09-27.

Hardin, R. (2002): Trust and Trustworthiness, Russell Sage Foundation, New York.

Hardin, R. (2003): Gaming Trust, in: Trust and Reciprocity, Ostrom, E. and Walker, J. (eds.), Russell Sage Foundation, New York.

Harrigan, K. R. (1985a): Strategic Flexibility: A Management Guide for Changing Times, D.C. Heath and Co., Lexington, MA.

Harrigan, K. R. (1985b): Vertical Integration and Corporate Strategy, Academy of Manage-ment Journal, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 397-425.

Harrigan, K. R. (1986): Matching Vertical Integration Strategies to Competitive Conditions, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 7, No. 6, pp. 535-555.

Hayek, F. A. (1989/1998), Spontaneous (‘grown’) order and organized (‘made’) order, in: Markets, Hierarchies & Networks – The Coordination of Social Life, Thompson, G.; Frances, J.; Levacic, R. and Mitchell, J. (eds.), Sage, London etc, pp. 293-301.

(Originally published in 1989, Centre for Research into Communist Economies, Lon-don, pp. 101-123)

Heertje, A. (1983): Can we explain technical change? in: The Trouble With Technology: Ex-plorations in the Process of Technological Change, edited by Lamberton and et al.(eds.), St. Martin’s Press, New York.

Heide, J. and John, G. (1988): The Role of Dependence Balancing in Safeguarding Transac-tion-Specific Assets in Conventional Channels, Journal of Marketing, January, Vol. 52, pp. 20-35.

272

Heide, J. B. and Miner, A. J. (1992): The Shadow of the Future: Effects of Anticipated Inte-raction and Frequency of Contract on Buyer-Seller Cooperation, Academy of Man-agement Journal, Vol. 35, No. 2, pp. 265-291.

Heide, J. B. and John, G. (1990): Alliances in Industrial Purchasing: The determinants of joint action in buyer-supplier relationships, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 27, Febru-ary, pp. 24-36.

Hirshleifer, J. and Riley, J. (1992): The Analytics of Uncertainty and Information, Cambridge University Press, New York.

Hom, P. W., Katerberg, R. and Hulin, C. L. (1979): Comparative Examination of Three Ap-proaches to the Prediction of Turnover, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 68, No. 3, June, pp. 280-290.

Höhmann, H., Kautonen, T., Lageman, B. and Welter, F. (2002): Enterpreneurial Strategies and Trust: a Position Paper, in: Entrepreneurial Strategies and Trust, Höhmann, H. and Welter, F.(eds.), Forschungsstelle Osteuropa Bremen, Arbeitspapiere und Materielen, No. 37, June, pp. 04-10.

Howells, J. (2005): The Management of Innovation and Technology, Sage Publications, Lon-don, etc.

Hrebiniak, L. G. and Snow, C. C. (1980): Industry Differences in Environmental Uncertainty and Organizational Characteristics Related to Uncertainty, The Academy of Manage-ment Journal, Vol. 23, No. 4. (December), pp. 750-759.

Huppert, W. and Wolff, B. (2002): Principal-Agent Problems in Irrigation – Inviting Rent-seeking and Corruption, Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture, Vol. 41, No. 1/2, pp. 99-118.

IBGE (2004): Contas Nacionais, in http://www.ibge.gov.br/, 25.03.2005.

ILO and OECD (1997): Globalisation, Labour Flexibility and Insecurity: The Era of Market Regulation, Standing, G., European Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 3, pp. 1-20.

ILO (1998): Structural and Regulatory Changes and Globalization in Postal and Telecommu-nications Services: The Human Resources Dimension, Geneva.

ILO (2001): World Employment Report 2001: Life at Work in the Information Economy. International Labour Office, Geneva.

ILO (2002): Reunión Tripartita sobre Empleo, Empleabilidad e Igualdad de Oportunidades en los Servicios de Correos y Telecomunicaciones, Genebra.

Jackson, S. E. and Schuler, R. S. (1996): Human Resources Planning, in: Human Resources Management – Perspectives, Context, Functions and Outcomes, Ferris, G. R. and Buckley, M. R. (eds), Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 155-179.

273

Jarvenpaa, S. L., Knoll, K. and Leidner, D. E. (1998): Is anybody out there? Antecedents of trust in global virtual teams, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 29-64.

Jeffries, F. L. and Reed, R. (2000): Trust and Relational Contracting, The Academy of Man-agement Review, Vol. 25, No. 4, October, pp. 873-882.

John, G. and Weitz, B. A. (1988): Forward Integration into Distribution: An Empirical Test of Transaction Cost Analysis, Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 337-355.

Jorgenson, D. W. (2001): Information Technology and the U.S. Economy, American Eco-nomic Review, Vol. 91, pp. 1-32.

Kaplan, R. S. and Norton, D. P. (1996): The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.

Keefer, P. and Knack, S. (2005): Social Capital, Social Norms and the New Institutional Eco-nomics, in Handbook of New Institutional Economics, Ménard, C. and Shirley, M.M. (eds), Springer, New York etc, pp. 701-726.

Kiel Institute of World Economics (2004): New Economy Project – Key Issues, http://www.unikiel.de/ifw/projects/neweco.htm, 15.11.2005.

Knight, F. H. (1921/1965): Risk, Uncertainty and Profit, Harper & Row, New York.

Kochan, T. A., Smith, M., Wells, J. C. and Rebitzer, J. B. (1994): Human Resources Strate-gies and Contingent Workers: The Case of Safety and Health in the Petrochemical In-dustry, Human Resource Management, Vol. 33, pp. 57-77.

Koopmans, T.(1957): Three Essays on the State of Economic Science, McGraw-Hill, New York.

Kotabe, M. and Swan, K. S. (1995): The Role of Strategic Alliances in High-Technology New Product Development, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 16, No. 8, pp. 621-636.

Kreps, D. M. (1990): Corporate Culture and Economic Theory, in: Perspectives on Positive Political Economy, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge.

Kramer, R. and Tyler, T. (1996): Trust in Organizations, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Kunda, G. (1992): Engineering Culture – Control and Commitment in a High-Tech Corpora-tion, Temple University Press, Philadelphia.

Langlois, R. N. and Robertson, P. L. (1995): Firms, Markets and Economic Change: A Dy-namic Theory of Business Institutions, Rutledge, London.

274

Lajili, K. and Mahoney, J. T. (2005): Revisiting Agency and Transaction Costs Theory Pre-dictions on Vertical Financial Ownership and Contracting: Electronic Integration as an Organizational Form Choice, http://www.business.uiuc.edu/Working_Papers/05-0106.pdf, 13.06.05.

Lane, C. and Bachmann, R. (1998): Trust Within and Between Organizations – Conceptual Issues and Empirical Applications, Oxford University Press, UK.

Langfred, C. W. (2004): Too Much of a Good Thing? Negative Effects of High Trust and Individual Autonomy in Self-Managing Teams, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 47, No. 3, June, pp. 385-399.

Larson, A. (1992): Network Dyads in Entrepreneurial Settings: a Study of Governance of Exchange Relationships, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 37, pp. 76-106.

Lautsch, B. A. (1999): Boundary Labor Markets: A Grounded Theory of Contingent Work, working paper, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada.

LaViest, T. A., Nickerson, K. J. and Bowie, J. V. (2000): Attitudes About Racism, Medical Mistrust, and Satisfaction with Care Among African American and Write Cardiac Pa-tients, Medical Care Research and Review, Vol. 75, Supplement 1, pp. 146-161.

Lazzarini, S. G., Miller, G. J. and Zenger, T. R. (2004): Moving Out of Commitment Rela-tionships: The Role of Contracts and Trust, working paper, Washington University, June 2004.

Lazear, E. P. and Rosen, S. (1981): “Rank-Order Tournaments as Optimum Labour Con-tracts”, Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Vol. 5, Fall, pp. 841-864.

Lazear, E. P. (1998): Personnel Economics for Managers, Wiley, New York, NY.

Legge, K. (1995): Human Resources Management – Rhetorics and Realities, Macmillan Press, London.

Leigh, A. (2005): Trust, Inequality and Ethnic Heterogeneity, Social Policy Evaluation, Anal-ysis and Research Centre Research School of Social Sciences Australian National University, working paper.

Levy, B. and Spiller, P. T. (1994): The Institutional Foundations of Regulatory Commitment: A Competitive Analysis of Telecommunications Regulation, Journal of Law, Econom-ics, and Organization, Vol.10, No. 2, Fall, pp. 201-246, in: Williamson, O. E. and Masten, S.E. (1995): The Economics of Transaction Costs, An Elgar Critical Writings Reader, Cheltenham, UK.

Levy, D. (1985): The Transaction Costs Approach to Vertical Integration: An Empirical Ex-amination, Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol.67, August, pp. 438-445.

275

Levy, M. (1998): A State of Trust, in Trust and Governance, Braithwaite, V. and Levi, M. (eds.), Russell Sage Foundation, New York, pp. 77-101.

Lewis, S. and Taylor, K. (1996): Evaluating the Impact of Employer Family Friendly Poli-cies: A Case Study, in: Lewis, S. and Lewis, J. (eds) The Work Family Challenge, Sage, London.

Lewis, S. and Dyer, J. (2002): Towards a Culture for Work-Life Integration? in: Cooper, C. L.; Burke, R. J. (eds.): The New World of Work – Challenges and Opportunities, Blackwell, Oxford, UK, pp. 302-316.

Lorenz, E. H. (2000): Neither Friends nor Strangers: Informal Networks of Subcontracting in French Industry, in: Gambetta, Diego (ed.) Trust: Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations, Electronic edition, Department of Sociology, University of Oxford, chapter 6, pp. 194-210. http://www.sociology.ox.ac.uk/papers/lorenz194-210.doc, 14.05.2004.

Luhmann, N. (1979): Trust and Power, Wiley, New York.

Luhmann, N. (1980): Trust: A Mechanism for the Reduction of Social Complexity, in: Luh-man, N., Trust and Power, Wiley, New York.

Luhmann, N. (1989): Vertauen: Ein Mechanismus der Reduktion sozialer Komplexität, (3. Auflage ed.), Enke, Stuttgart.

Luhmann, N. (1994): Der Wirtschaft der Gesellschaft, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main.

Luhmann, N. (2000): Familiarity, Confidence, Trust: Problems and Alternatives, in Gambetta, D. (ed.) Trust: Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations, electronic edition, De-partment of Sociology, University of Oxford, chapter 6, pp. 94-107, http://www.sociology.ox.ac.uk/papers/luhmann94-107.doc, 15.01.2005.

Macauley, S. (1963): Non-Contractual Relations in Business: a primarily study, American Sociology Review, Vol. 28, pp. 55-67.

MacGee, G. W. and Ford, R. C. (1987): Two (or more?) Dimensions of Organizational Com-mitment: re-examination of the effective and continuance commitment scales, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 72, pp. 638-641.

Macneil, I. (1978): Contracts: Adjustment of Long-Term Economic Relations under Classical, Neo-Classical and Relational Contract Law, Northwestern Law Review, Vol. 72, pp. 854-906.

Machlup, F. (1962): The production and distribution of knowledge in the United States, Prin-ceton University Press, Princeton, NJ.

Machlup, F. and Mansfield, U. (1983): The Study of Information - Interdisciplinary Messag-es, Wiley, New York.

276

MacMillan, I. C., Hambrick, C. and Pennings, J. M. (1986): Uncertainty Reduction and the Threat of Supplier Relation: Two Views of the Backward Integration Decision, Orga-nizational Studies, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 263-277.

Ménard, C. (2005): A New Institutional Approach to Organization, in: Handbook of New Institutional Economics, Ménard, C. and Shirley, M.M. (eds), Springer, New York etc, pp. 281-318.

Mayer, R. C. and Davis, S. F. (1995): An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust, Acade-my of Management Review, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 709-734.

Meyer, J. P. and Allen, N. J. (1997): Commitment in the Workplace: Theory, Research and Application, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Mayo, E. (1945): The Social Problem of an Industrial Civilization, Graduate School of Busi-ness Administration, Division of Research, Harvard University, Boston.

McKinlay, D. (1998): Relational Contracting, working paper, November,

http://www.mdl.co.nz/library/lib_partner_contract.htm, 03.05.2005.

Miles, R. E. and Snow, C. C. (1978): Organizational Strategy, Structure and Process, McGraw-Hill, New York.

Milgrom, P. and Roberts, J. (1992): Economics, Organization and Management, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, NJ.

Miller, K. (1992): A Framework for Integrated Risk Management in International Business, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 2, pp. 311-330.

Milliken, F. J. (1987): Three Types of Perceived Uncertainty About the Environment: State, Effect and Response Uncertainty, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 133-143.

Mokyr, J. (1989): The Lever of Riches: Technology Creativity and Economic Progress, Ox-ford University Press, New York, N.Y.

Morgan, R. M. and Hunt, S. D. (1994): The Commitment-Trust Theory of Relationship Mar-keting, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58, pp. 20-38.

Morishima, M. and Feuille, P. (2000): Effects of the Use of Contingent Workers on Regular Status Workers: A Japanese-US comparison, paper presented at the 12th World Con-gress of the International Industrial Relations Research Association, May 2000, Tokyo, Japan.

Newstrom, J. W. and Davis, K. (1997): Organizational Behavior – Human Behaviour at Work, 10th ed., McGraw-Hill, Boston, MA.

Nishiguchi, T. (1994): Strategic Industrial Sourcing, Oxford University Press, New York.

277

Nelson, R. R. and Winter, S. G. (1982a): An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Har-vard University Press, Cambridge MA.

Nelson, R. R. and Winter, S. G. (1982b): The Schumpeterian Tradeoff Revisited, American Economic Review, Vol. 72, No. 1, pp. 114-132.

Nohria, N. and Eccles, R. (1992): Networks and Organizations, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.

Nooteboom, B. (1996): Trust, Opportunism and Governance: A Process of Control Model, Organization Studies, Vol. 17, No. 6, pp. 985-1010.

Nooteboom, B. (2002): Trust: forms, foundations, functions, failures and figures, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.

North, D. C. (1989): Institutional Change, and Economic History, Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Vol. 145, pp. 238-245.

North, D. C. (1990): Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance, Cam-bridge University Press, Cambridge.

North, D. C. (1991): Institutions, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 5, No. 1, Winter, pp. 97-112.

North, D. C. (1993): Institutions and Economic Performance, in: Maki, U., Gustafsson, B. and Knudsen, C., (1996): Rationality, Institutions and Economic Methodology, 2nd ed., Routledge, London, etc.

North, D. C. (1994): Economic Performance through Time, American Economic Review, Vol. 84, No. 3, pp. 359-368.

North, D. C. (2005): Institutions and the Performance of Economies Over Time, in: Ménard, C. and Shirley, M.M. (eds), Handbook of New Institutional Economics, Springer, New York etc, pp. 21-30.

Nooteboom, B. (1996): Trust, Opportunism and Governance: A Process of Control Model, Organization Studies, Vol. 17, No. 6, pp. 985-1010.

OECD (2001): The New Economy: Beyond the Hype – Final Report on the OECD Growth Project, Meeting of the OECD Council at Ministerial Level 2001, France.

Osterloh, M. and Frey, B. S. (2000): Motivation, Knowledge Transfer, and Organizational Forms, Organization Science, Vol. 11, No. 5, September-October, pp. 538-550.

Ostrom, E. (1990): Governing Commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Ostrom, E. (1998): A Behavioral Approach to the Rational Choice Theory of Collective Ac-tion, American Political Science Review, Vol. 92, pp. 1-22.

278

Ostrom, E. (2000): Collective Action and the Evolution of Social Norms, Journal of Econom-ic Perspectives, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 137-158.

Ostrom, E. (2005): Doing Institutional Analysis: Digging Deeper than Market and Hierar-chies, in: Handbook of New Institutional Economics, Ménard, C. and Shirley, M.M. (eds), Springer, New York etc, pp. 819-849.

Ouchi, W. G. (1979): A Conceptual Framework for the Designing of Organizational Control Mechanisms, Management Science, Vol. 25, pp. 833-848.

Ouchi, W. G. (1980/1998): Markets Bureaucracies and Clans, in: Markets, Hierarchies & Networks – The Coordination of Social Life, Thompson, G. et all. (eds) Sage, London etc, pp. 246-255.

(Originally published in 1980, Administrative Science Quarterly Vol. 25, pp. 129-141)

Ouchi, W. G. (1984): The M-Form Society, Avon Books, New York

Pearce, J. L. (1993): Toward an Organizational Behavior of Contract Laborers: Their Psycho-logical Involvement and Effects on Employee Coworkers, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 36, pp. 1082-1096.

Perry, E. L., Davis-Blake, A. and Kulik, C. T. (1994): Explaining Gender-Based Selection Decisions: A Synthesis of Contextual and Cognitive Approaches, The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 19, No. 4, October, pp. 786-820.

Pfeffer, J. (1994): Competitive Advantage through People, California Management Review, Winter, pp. 09-28.

Picot, A. and Reichwald, R. (1987): Bürokommunikation. Leitsätze für den Anwender, 3rd ed., CW- Publikaionen, Hallbergmoos, Germany.

Pierce, J. L. and Dunham, R. B. (1987): Organizational Commitment: Pre-Employment Pro-pensity and Initial Work Experiences, Journal of Management, Spring, pp. 163-178.

Pillai, R. C., Schriesheim, C. and Williams, E. (1991): Fairness perceptions and trust as me-diators for transformational and transactional leadership: A two-study sample, Journal of Management, Vol. 25, pp. 897-933.

Pindyck, R. S. and Rubinfeld, D. L. (2005): Microeconomics, 6th ed., Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey.

Pisano, G. P. (1990): The R&D Boundaries of the Firm: An Empirical Analysis, Administra-tive Science Quarterly, Vol. 35, March, pp. 153-176.

Porat, M. U. (1977). The information economy: Definition and measurement, U.S. Depart-ment of Commerce, Office of Telecommunications, Washington, DC.

279

Porter, L., Steers, R., Mowday, R. and Boulian, P. (1974): Organizational Commitment, job satisfaction and turnover among psychiatric technicians, Journal of Applied Psycholo-gy, Vol. 59, pp. 603-609.

Porter, M. E. (1998): Competitive Advantage – Creating and Sustaining Superior Perfor-mance, New York.

Powell, W. (1990): Neither Market nor Hierarchy: Network Forms of Organization, Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 12, pp. 295-336.

Putnam, R. D. (2000): Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, Simon & Schuster, New York.

Putnam, R. D. (1996): Comunidade e Democracia – a experiência da Itália Moderna, FGV editora, Rio de Janeiro.

Quinn, J. B. and Hilmer, F. G. (1994): Strategic Outsourcing, Sloan Management Review, Summer, pp. 43-55.

Rabin, M. (2004): Behavioural Economics, in: Szenberg, M. and Ramrattan, L. (eds.), New Frontiers in Economics, Cambridge University Press, pp. 68-102.

Rehu, M. (2005): Country-Compatible Incentive Design – A German-U.S. Comparison of Employee’s Performance Reward Preferences, Doctoral Dissertation, University of Magdeburg, Magdeburg.

Rehu, M., Lusk, E. and Wolff, B. (2004): A Performance Motivator in One Country, a Disin-centive in Another?, Otto-von-Guericke Universität Magdeburg, Faculty of Econom-ics and Management Magdeburg, Working Paper No. 19, September 2004.

Reputation Institute, http://www.reputationintitue.com, 14.10.05.

Ricketts, M. (2002): The Economics of Business Enterprise, 3rd ed., Edward Elgar (ed.), Chel-tenham, UK, and Northampton, MA, USA.

Ring, P. S. and Van de Ven, A. H. (1992): Structuring cooperative Relationships between Organizations, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 13, pp. 483-498.

Ring, P. S. and Van de Ven, A. H. (1994): Developmental Processes of Cooperative Interor-ganizational Relationships, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 90-118.

Ripperger, T. (1998): Ökonomik des Vertauens, Tübingen.

Robbins, S. P. and Coulter, M. (1999): Management, 6th ed., Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

Robbins, S. P. (2002): Organizational Behavior – Concepts – Controversies - Applications, 9th ed. Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall, London, UK.

280

Roberts, J. H. (2000): Developing New Rules for New Markets, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 31-44.

Roberts, J. (2000): From know-how to show-how? Questioning the role of information and communication technologies in knowledge transfer, Technology Analysis and Strateg-ic Management, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 429-443.

Roberts, J. and Van den Steen, E. (2001), Human Capital and Corporate Governance, in: Schwalbach, J. (ed.), Corporate Governance Essays in Honor of Horst Albach, Sprin-ger, pp. 128-143.

Robertson, T. S. and Gatignon, H. (1998): Technology Development Mode: A Transaction Cost Conceptualization, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 19, pp. 515-531.

Rolland, N. and Chauvel, D. (2000): Knowledge Transfer in Strategic Alliances, in: Despres, C. and Chauvel, D. (eds.) Knowledge Horizons: The Present and the Promise of Knowledge Management, Boston, MA: Butterworth Heinemann, pp. 225-236.

Romer, P. M. (1990): Endogenous Technological Change, The Journal of Political Economy, Vol.98, No.05, Part2: The Problem of Development: A Conference of the Institute for the Study of Free Enterprise Systems, October, pp. 71-102.

Rothwell, R. (1989): Small firms, innovation and industrial change, Small Business Econom-ics, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 51-64.

Rothwell, R. (1992): Successful Industrial Innovation: Critical Factors for the 1990s, R&D Management, Vol. 22, No. 3, pp. 221-239.

Sacconi, L. (2000): The Social Contract of the Firm – Economics, Ethics and Organizations, Springer, Berlin, etc.

Sako, M. (1992): Price, Quality and Trust: Inter-firm Relations in Britain and Japan. Cam-bridge University Press, Cambridge.

Sako, M. and Helper, S. (1998): Determinants of Trust in Supplier Relations: Evidence from the Automotive Industry in Japan and the United States, Journal of Economic Beha-vior & Organization, Vol. 34, pp. 387-417.

Sako, M. (1998): Does Trust Improve Business Performance? in: Lane, C. and Bachmann, R. (eds.), Trust Within and Between Organizations. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Sall, J., Lehman, A. and Creighton, L. (2001): JMP Start Statistics, 2nd edition, Thomson Learning: Pacific Grove.

Sawyer, M. and Shapiro, N. (2002): Market Structure, uncertainty and unemployment, in: Keynes, Uncertainty and the Global Economy – Beyond Keynes, Vol. 2, Dow, S. C. and Hillard, J. (eds.), Edward Edgar, Cheltenham, UK, pp. 45-54.

281

Sextante Brasil (2004): Relatório Gestão do Capital Humano – Benchmarking, IX Pesquisa Brasileira.

Selznick, P. (1949): TVA and the Grass Roots, University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles.

Selznick, P. (1957): Leadership in Administration – A Sociological Interpretation, Har-per&Row, New York.

Sen, A. (1967): Isolation, Assurance, and the Social Rate of Discount, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 81, No. 1, p. 112-124.

Schweer, M. and Thies, B. (2003): Vertrauen als Organizatiosprinzip – Perspektiven für kom-plexe soziale System, Verlag Hans Huber,Bern, Germany.

Scherer, F. M. (1991): Changing Perspectives on the firm size problem, In: Acs, Z. J. and Audretsch, D. B. (eds.), Innovation and Technological Change: An International Comparison, Ann Arbor, MI, University of Michigan Press, pp. 24-38.

Schumpeter, J. A. (1934): Theory of economic development, Harvard University Press, Cam-bridge MA.

Schumpeter, J. A. (1942): Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, Harper and Row Publishers, New York, NY., republished by Harper & Colophon in 1975.

Shan, W. (1990): An Empirical Analysis of Organizational Strategies by Entrepreneurial High-Technology Firms, Strategy Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 129-139.

Shapiro, C. and Varian, H. R. (1999): Information Rules – A Strategic Guide to the Network Economy, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Massachusetts.

Shepard, S. B. (1997): The New Economy: What It really means, Business Week 17 Novem-ber, http//www.buinessweek.com/1997/46/b3553084.htm, 19.07.2004.

Simon, H. A. (1951): A Formal Theory of the Employment Relationship, Econometrica, Journal of the Econometric Society, Vol. 19, No. 3, July.

Simon, H. A. (1991): Organizations and Markets, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 25-44.

Slonim, R. (2004): Gender Selection Discrimination: Evidence of a Trust Game, Working Paper, Department of Economics, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio.

Solow, R. M. (1956): A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 70, February, pp. 65-94.

Steers, R. M. (1977): Antecedents and Outcomes of Organizational Commitment, Administra-tive Science Quarterly, Vol. 22, pp. 46-56.

282

Sutter, M. and Kocher, M. G. (2003), Age and the Development of Trust and Reciprocity, Max Planck Institute for Research into Economic Systems Jena, University of Innsbruck, 15 December.

Teece, D. J. (1992): Competition, Cooperation, and Innovation, Journal of Economic Beha-vior and Organization, Vol. 18, pp. 01-25.

The American Heritage Dictionary of English Language (2000), fourth edition, Houghton Mifflin Company.

The New Economy Index (1998): Understanding America’s Economic Transformation. http://www.neweconomyindex.org, 15.12.2004.

The School of Information Management of Berkley (2001), http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/resources/infoecon, 15.11.2004.

Thietart, R. and Xuereb, J. (1998): Rationality and the Management of Uncertainty in New Product Development, working paper, ESSEC.

Thom, D. H., Bloch, D. A. and Segal, E. S. (1999): An Intervention to Increase Patients’ Trust in Their Physicians, Academic Medicine, Vol. 74, No. 2, pp. 195-198.

Thompson, G. (1998): Networks – Introduction. in: Thompson, G.; Frances, J.; Levacic, R. E Mitchell, J. (eds.), Markets, Hierarchies & Networks – The Coordination of Social Life, Sage, London, pp. 171-172.

Tirole, J. (2003): The Theory of Industrial Organization, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA and London, England.

Tosi, H. L., Rizzo, J. R. and Carroll, S. J. (1994): Managing Organizational Behaviour, 3rd ed., Blackwell Publishers, Cambridge, MA, USA.

Tyler, T. R. (1998): Trust and Democratic Governance, In: Trust and Governance, Braith-waite, V. and Levi, M. (eds.), Russell Sage Foundation, New York, pp. 269-294.

Ugboro, I. O. (2003): Influence of Managerial Trust on Survivors’ Perceptions of Job Insecur-ity and Organizational Commitment in a Post Restructuring and Downsizing Envi-ronment, Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, Winter 2003, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp. 231-253.

Uzzi, B. (1997): Social Structure and Competition in Interfirm Networks: The paradox of Embeddedness, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 42, pp. 35-67.

Van den Broek, F. (2000): Management of International Networks – Cost-Effective Strategies for the New Telecom Regulations and Services, CRC Press, London, etc.

Van den Steen, E. (2003): On the Origin and Evolution of Corporate Culture, working paper, March 27, MIT.

283

Van de Ven, A. H. and Walker, G. (1984): The Dynamics of Interorganizational Coordina-tion, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 29, pp. 598-621.

Vogt, J. (1997): Vertrauen und Kontrolle in Transaktionen: eine institutionenökonomische Analyse, Gabler, Wiesbaden.

Vranceanu, R. (2003): Manager Unethical Behavior during the New Economy Bubble, work-ing paper, December, ESSEC.

Vroom, H. V. (1995): Work and Motivation, Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco.

Walker, G. and Weber, D. (1984): A Transaction Cost Approach to Make-or-Buy Decisions, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 29, pp. 373-391.

Walker, G. and Weber, D. (1987): Supplier Competition, Uncertainty, and Make-or-Buy De-cisions, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 589-596.

Weber, M. (1946): Essays in Sociology, Gerth, H. H. and Mills, C. W. Oxford University Press, New York. (First published in 1906-1924).

Webster, F. (1995): Theories of the Information Society, Routledge, London.

Webster, F. (1996): The Information Society: Conceptions and Critique, in: Kent, A. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science, Vol. 58, No. 21, Marcel Dekker, New York, pp. 74-112.

Wellins, R., Byham, W. C. and Wilson, J. M. (1991): Empowered Teams – Creating Self-Directed Workgroups that Improve Quality, Productivity and Participation, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

When, I. and Kwon, G. (2004): Factors Affecting the Levels of Trust and Commitment in Supply Chain Relationship, Journal of Supply Chain Management, Spring, Vol. 40, No. 2, Abi/Inform Global.

Whitener, E. M., Brodt, S. E., Korsgaard, M. A. and Werner, J. M. (1998): Managers as initia-tors of trust: An exchange relationship framework for understanding managerial trust-worthy behavior. Academy of Management Review, Vol. 23, pp. 513-530.

Wholey, D. R. and Sommers, A. R. (2001): The Effect of Preferences, Choices, Markets, and Managed Care on Satisfaction with Choice and Trust, Working Paper, http://www.hsr.umn.edu/mcc/Research/Papers/WholeyandSommers_Trust.pdf.

Wigand, R., Picot, A. and Reichwald, R. (1999): Information, Organization and Management: Expanding Markets and Corporative Boundaries, John Wiley & Sons, West Sussex, England.

Wieland, J. (1996): Ökonomische Organisation, Allokation und Status, J.C.B. Mohr, Tübin-gen.

284

Williamson, O. E. (1975): Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications, The Free Press, New York.

Williamson, O. E. (1985): The Economic Institutions of Capitalism – Firms, Markets, Rela-tional Contracting, Free Press, New York.

Williamson, O. E. (1991): Comparative Economic Organization: The Analysis of Discrete Structural Alternatives, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 36, pp. 269-296.

Williamson, O. E. (1993): Calculativeness, Trust, and Economic Organization, in Journal of Law & Economics, Vol. 36, pp. 453-486.

Williamson, O. E. (1996): The Mechanisms of Governance, Oxford University Press, Oxford etc.

Williamson O. E. (1998): Transaction Cost Economics: How It Works; Where It is Headed, De Economist, Vol. 146, No. 1.

Wilson, J. W. (1985): The New Ventures, Addison-Wesley, Wokingham.

Wolff, B. (1995a): Organisation durch Verträge, DUV, Glaber, Wiesbaden.

Wolff, B. (1995b): Contractual Problems in Market Relations, in: Bernitz, U. and Hallström, P. (Hg.): Principles of justice and the European Union, Juristförlaget, pp. 83-95.

Wolff, B. (1996): Constitutional Contracting and Corporate Constitution, in: Picot, A. and Schlicht, E. (1996) (Hg.): Perspectives on Contract Theory, Springer, pp. 95-108.

Wolff, B. (1999): Anreizkompatible Reorganization von Unternehmen, Schäffer-Poeschel: Stuttgart.

Wolff, B. (2000): Kalkül und Vertrauen. Zur Institutionalisierung von Moral in der Ökono-mik, Manuskript zum Vortrag im Rahmen der Tagung „Vertrauen in Gesellschaft und Organisationen“, Tutzing, 20, Mai 2000.

Wolff, B. and Lazear, P. (2001): Einführung in die Personalökonomik, Schäffer-Poeschel, Stuttgart.

Wolff, B. and Huppert, W. (2002): Governance by contractual rules – Improving service rela-tions in irrigation, in: Zeitschrift für Bewässerungswirtschaft, Vol. 37, No. 2, pp. 139-153.

Wolff, B. (2005): Internationales Management aus der Perspektive der Neuen Institutionenö-konomik, in: Schauenberg, B.; Schreyögg, G. and Sydow, J. (2005) (Hg.): Insttitutio-nenökonomik als Managementlehre?, Springer, pp. 107-143.

Woolthuis, R. K., Hillebrand, B. and Nooteboom, B. (2002): Trust and Formal Control in Interorganizational Relationships, Publications in the ERIM Report Series Research in Management, http://www.ers.erim.eur.nl, in 12.04.2005.

285

Yamagishi, T. and Yamagishi, M. (1994): Trust and Commitment in the United States and Japan, Motivation and Emotion, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 129-166.

Yamagishi, T. (2003): Cross-Societal Experimentation on Trust: A Comparision of the United States and Japan, in: Trust and Reciprocity, Elionor Ostrom and James Walker (eds.), Russell Sage Foundation, New York.

Zand, D. E. (1972): Trust and managerial problem solving, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 17, pp. 229-239.

Zadek, S., Hojensgard, N. and Raynard, P. (2001): Perspectives on the New Economy of Cor-porate Citizenship, Zadek, S., Hojensgard, N. and Raynard, P.(eds.), The Copenhagen Centre, Copenhagen, pp. 13-32.

Zaheer, A. and Venkatraman, N. (1995): Relational Governance as an Interorganizational Strategy: An Empirical Test of the Role of Trust in Economic Exchange, Strategic Management Journal, 16, pp. 373-392.

Zaheer, A., McEvily, B. and Perrone, V. (1998): Does Trust Matter? Exploring the Effects of Interorganizational and Interpersonal Trust on Performance, Organization Science, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 141-159.

Zak, P. and Knack, S. (1998): Trust and Growth, September 10, 1998, in: http//: www.res.org.uk/society/ mediabriefings/pdfs/2001/April/zak.pdf, 05.12.2004.

Zucker, L. G. (1986), Production of Trust: institutional sources of economic structure, 1840-1920, Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 8, pp. 53-111.

287

APPENDIX Appendix 1: The Questionnaire

Questionnaire

Trust Inventory Project (TIP)

Instructions:

1. Your answers to the questions in this questionnaire are completely confidential. Do no sign or write your name.

2. The evaluation and processing of the questionnaires will be done by researchers from the Otto-von-Guericke University of Magdeburg, Germany. No one in the company will ever see your answers. We will never identify any individual responses; results will always be combined into groups for reporting purposes.

3. On average, completing the answers will take approximately 20 minutes of your time.

4. It is important that your answers reflect exactly the way you feel, so be comfortable to express your initial reaction to the questions. Do not spend a lot of time thinking over each question. We would rather have your first impression, your first idea. This is not a test. Your opinion is the only right answer.

5. Please mark just one answer per question.

6. Please answer the questions in order. Do not skip around.

7. When you have finished, please put the questionnaire into the envelope, seal it, and return it to the designated area. Remember: do not sign the questionnaire.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION!

OTTO-VON-GUERICKE-UNIVERSITY MAGDEBURG Faculty of Economics & Management

DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT

PROF. DR. BIRGITTA WOLFF PROF. EDWARD LUSK, PHD

MARCO TULIO ZANINI, RESEARCHER

288

This is the first part of the questionnaire. These questions deal with your professional relation-ships with people in your company.

SECTION 1 – YOUR MANAGER

Please indicate how willing you are to engage in each of the following behaviours with your MANAGER, by marking a number from 1 to 7.

How willing you are to do the following with your MANAGER?

Not at allwilling

Completelywilling

A.01 Rely on your manager’s task related skills and abilities.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

A.02 Depend on your manager to handle an important issue on your behalf.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

A.03 Rely on your manager to represent your work accurately to others.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

A.04 Depend on your manager to back you up in diffi-cult situations.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

A.05 Rely on your manager’s work-related judge-ments.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

A.06 Share your personal feelings with your manager. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

A.07 Discuss work-related problems or difficulties with your manager that could potentially be used to disadvantage you.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

A.08 Confide in your manager about personal issues that are affecting your work.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

A.09 Discuss with your manager how you honestly feel about your work, even negative feelings and frustration.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

A.10 Share your personal beliefs with your manager. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

289

SECTION 2 – A TEAM MEMBER

In answering the following questions, we ask you to keep in mind ONE particular team mem-ber who is not your manager. Indicate how willing you are to engage in each of the following behaviours with THIS TEAM MEMBER—here called Team Member X, by marking a number from 1 to 7.

How willing you are to do the following with Team Member X?

Not at all willing

Completelywilling

A.11 Rely on Team Member X’s task related skills and abilities.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

A.12 Depend on Team Member X to handle an impor-tant issue on your behalf.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

A.13 Rely on Team Member X to represent your work accurately to others.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

A.14 Depend on Team Member X to back you up in difficult situations.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

A.15 Rely on Team Member X’s work-related judge-ments.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

A.16 Share your personal feelings with Team Member X.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

A.17 Discuss work-related problems or difficulties with Team Member X that could potentially be used to disadvantage you.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

A.18 Confide in Team Member X about personal is-sues that are affecting your work.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

A.19 Discuss with Team Member X how you honestly feel about your work, even negative feelings and frustration.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

A.20 Share your personal beliefs with Team Member X.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

290

SECTION 3 – YOUR TEAM

Please indicate how willing you are to engage in each of the following behaviours with YOUR TEAM, by marking a number from 1 to 7.

How willing you are to do the following with yourTeam?

Not at all willing

Completely willing

A.21 Rely on your team’s collective task related skills and abilities.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

A.22 Depend on your team to handle an important is-sue on your behalf.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

A.23 Rely on your team to represent your work accu-rately to others.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

A.24 Depend on your team to back you up in difficult situations.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

A.25 Rely on your team’s collective work-related judgements.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

A.26 Share your personal feelings with your team. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

A.27 Discuss work-related problems or difficulties with your team that could potentially be used to disadvantage you.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

A.28 Confide in your team about personal issues that are affecting your work.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

A.29 Discuss with your team how you honestly feel about your work, even negative feelings and frus-tration.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

A.30 Share your personal beliefs with your team. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

291

This is the second part of the questionnaire. Following are statements about your organization. SECTION 4 – YOUR ORGANIZATION Please mark the response that best indicates the extent to which the statement describes the current reality for your organization—i.e., the way that it is now.

STATEMENTS Strongly disagree

Disagree Neither

agree nor disagree

Agree Strongly

agree

B.01 Based upon the past decisions of man-agement of this organization, I am able to predict what management will do in the future.

1

2

3

4

5

B.02 Since my employment in this organiza-tion, management’s behavior and deci-sions have been consistent.

1

2

3

4

5

B.03 I can always rely on every word of the management of this organization.

1

2

3

4

5

B.04 The management of this organization tells the truth to employees in all situati-ons.

1

2

3

4

5

B.05 The management of this organization always keeps its promise to employees.

1

2

3

4

5

B.06 I have never been disappointed whenev-er I rely on what management says in all situations.

1

2

3

4

5

B.07 In this organization, management seeks the inputs of employees when making decisions that affect employees.

1

2

3

4

5

B.08 In this organization, management makes a great deal of effort to involve em-ployees in all aspects of the decision-making process.

1

2

3

4

5

292

STATEMENTS Strongly disagree

Disagree Neither

agree nor disagree

AgreeStrongly

agree

B.09 Whenever possible, management dele-gates decision-making authority to em-ployees.

1 2 3 4 5

B.10 The management of this organization is always sensitive to the interests of em-ployees when making critical decisions.

1 2 3 4 5

B.11 In this organization, management gives employees’ welfare high priority.

1 2 3 4 5

B.12 In all situations, management takes the extra step to protect the interests of em-ployees.

1 2 3 4 5

B.13 The management of this organization provides employees with accurate in-formation about the affairs of the organi-zation.

1 2 3 4 5

B.14 The management makes an effort always to explain major organizational decisionsto the employees.

1 2 3 4 5

B.15 The management of this organization freely shares ideas with the employees.

1 2 3 4 5

293

SECTION 5 – STABILITY OF JOB FEATURES

Following are statements about your JOB FEATURES. Looking into the future, what is the likelihood that changes that you oppose could occur and negatively affect each of the follow-ing aspects or features of your current job?

STATEMENTS Veryunlikely Unlikely

Neither likely nor unlikely

Likely Verylikely

B.16 Your potential to get ahead in your organization.

1 2 3 4 5

B.17 Your potential to maintain your current pay.

1 2 3 4 5

B.18 Your potential to attain pay in-creases.

1 2 3 4 5

B.19 The status that comes with your position in the organization.

1 2 3 4 5

B.20 Your current freedom to scheduleyour own work.

1 2 3 4 5

B.21 Your current freedom to perform your work in a manner you see fit.

1 2 3 4 5

B.22 Your current access to resources (people, materials, information) in the organization.

1 2 3 4 5

B.23 Your sense of community in working with coworkers.

1 2 3 4 5

B.24 The variety of tasks you perform. 1 2 3 4 5

B.25 The opportunity to do an entire piece of work from start to finish.

1 2 3 4 5

B.26 The significance of your job. 1 2 3 4 5

B.27 The extent to which you can tell how well you are doing your job as you do it.

1 2 3 4 5

294

SECTION 6 – POTENTIAL CHANGES

Looking into the future, what is the likelihood that changes that you oppose could occur and cause the following to occur?

STATEMENTS Veryunlikely Unlikely

Neither likely nor unlikely

Likely Verylikely

B.28 Lose your job and be moved to a lower level within the organiza-tion.

1 2 3 4 5

B.29 Lose your job and be moved to another job at the same level.

1 2 3 4 5

B.30 Find that the number of hours the company can offer you to work fluctuates from day to day.

1 2 3 4 5

B.31 Lose your job and be laid off for a while.

1 2 3 4 5

B.32 Lose your job and be laid off permanently.

1 2 3 4 5

B.33 Find your department and divi-sion’s future uncertain.

1 2 3 4 5

B.34 Lose your job by being fired. 1 2 3 4 5

B.35 Lose your job by being pressured to accept early retirement.

1 2 3 4 5

295

Please indicate your degree of agreement or disagreement with each of the following state-ments about your ability to change events that may affect you and your job in your organiza-tion.

STATEMENTS Strongly disagree Disagree

Neither agree nor disagree

Agree Strongly agree

B.36 I have enough power in this or-ganization to control events that affect my job.

1 2 3 4 5

B.37 In this organization, I can preventnegative things from affecting my work situation.

1 2 3 4 5

B.38 I understand this organization well enough to be able to control things that affect me.

1 2 3 4 5

296

SECTION 7 – RELATIONSHIP TO YOUR ORGANIZATION

Following are statements about personal feelings regarding your organization. Please mark the response that best indicates the extent to which the statement describes the current reality of your feelings with your organization—i.e., this is the way it is now.

STATEMENTS Strongly disagree Disagree

Neither agree nor disagree

Agree Strongly agree

B.39 I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career with this organization.

1 2 3 4 5

B.40 I really feel as if this organiza-tion’s problems are my own.

1 2 3 4 5

B.41 I feel a sense of belonging to this organization.

1 2 3 4 5

B.42 I feel emotionally attached to this organization.

1 2 3 4 5

B.43 I feel like I am a part of the fami-ly at this organization.

1 2 3 4 5

B.44 This organization has a great deal of personal meaning to me.

1 2 3 4 5

B.45 Right now staying in this organi-zation is a matter of necessity.

1 2 3 4 5

B.46 It would be very hard for me to leave this organization right now, even if I wanted to.

1 2 3 4 5

297

STATEMENTS Strongly disagree Disagree

Neither agree nor disagree

Agree Strongly agree

B.47 Too much of my life would be disrupted if I decided I wanted to leave this organization at this time.

1 2 3 4 5

B.48 I feel that I have too few options to consider leaving this organiza-tion.

1 2 3 4 5

B.49 If I had not put so much of my-self into this organization, I might consider working else-where.

1 2 3 4 5

B.50 One of the few negative aspects of leaving this organization would be the scarcity of available alternatives.

1 2 3 4 5

B.51 I feel an obligation to remain with my current employer.

1 2 3 4 5

B.52 Even if it were to my advantage, I do not feel it would be right to leave this organization now.

1 2 3 4 5

B.53 I would feel guilty if I left this organization now.

1 2 3 4 5

B.54 This organization deserves my loyalty.

1 2 3 4 5

B.55 I would not leave this organiza-tion right now because I have a sense of obligation to the people in it.

1 2 3 4 5

B.56 I owe a great deal to this organi-zation.

1 2 3 4 5

298

Please answer the following questions about your personal data and perspectives:

C.01 Are you: 01 Male 02 Female C.02 Please, indicate your current work area: 01 Marketing/Sales 02 Finance 03 Administration/Management 04 Human Resources 05 Engineering/Production 06 Technical Support/Systems 07 Other, please describe:______________________________________________ C.03 The number of people reporting to you?

01 None 02 1 to 5 people 03 6 to 20 people 04 More than 20 people C.04 What is your educational level? 01 Completed High School 02 Technical School Diploma 03 College Diploma 04 Some post-graduate education 05 MBA 06 Master Degree 07 Doctor Degree C.05 What is your age range? 01 Under 25 02 25-29 03 30-34 04 35-39 05 40-49 06 50 or over

299

C.06 How long have you been employed by this company? 01 Less than 1 year 02 1-2 years 03 2-3 years 04 3-4 years 05 4-7 years 06 More than 7 years C.07 How many hours per day on average do you work?

01 Under 7 02 7-8 03 8-10 04 10-11 05 11-12 06 More than 12 hours per day

C.08 How many other employers have you had in the last 8 years (since 1996)? (Do not con-sider this current one)

01 None 02 One 03 Two 04 Three 05 Four 06 More than Four C.09 Which of these objectives would you consider the most important in so far as it would

improve your work situation? (please check only one) 01 More job stability 02 Better salary 03 More free time 04 More responsibility 05 Perform different tasks 06 Chances to enhance my skills

300

C.10 Which of these attitudes do you most agree with?

01 It is important for me to compete, even considering that it might not benefit directly oth-ers—e.g. team or company

02 It is important to cooperate, even considering that it might reduce my immediate chances

to advance in the company

C.11 Assuming that you have the choice, how long do you think you will continue working for this company?

01 Only a few more months 02 Two years at the most 03 From two to five years 04 More than five years (but I probably will leave before I retire) 05 Until I retire C.12 What is the likelihood that your trust in the organisation and its people will be mutu-

ally beneficial?

01 Very unlikely 02 Unlikely 03 Neither likely nor unlikely 04 Likely 05 Very likely

C.13 I perceive that my future in this company:

01 will be better in approximately one year 02 will be better in approximately three years 03 will continue basically as it is now 04 will deteriorate to the extent that I will leave the company 05 will worsen but I will stay with the company 06 I cannot evaluate it

301

COMMENTS SHEET

Questionnaires cannot, of course, cover all issues on which you might like to express your opinion. We have therefore provided space for you here to make whatever additional com-ments you would like.

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

303

Appendix 2 - Comment Sheet Analysis

1) Telecom 1

Number of Collected Questionnaires

Number of Comment Sheets Percentage

233 41 18%

Work Area Number of Comment Sheets Percentage

01. Marketing/Sales 8 19, 51%

02. Finance 12 29,26%

03. Administration/Management 14 31,14%

04. Human Resources 2 4,87%

05. Engineering/Production 4 9,75%

06. Technical Support/Systems 1 2,43%

Total 41 100%

Commented Subjects:

SUBJECT Frequency of Comments

1. Positive Feelings About the Company in General 22. Positive Work Team Experience 23. Comments about Negative Behaviors at Work 44. Lack of Investments in Human Capital 25. Excessive Work Hours 66. Internal Communication Problems 67. Paternalism Manager X Employee Relationship 28. Lack of Values at Work 39. Reward Plan Problems (salary, bonus) 810. Negative Criticism to Management 311.General Concern to Employees Welfare 612. General Work Conditions (negative aspects) 913. Lack of Career Plan 714. Uncertainty and Change due to Job Insecurity 515. Problems with Physical Work Conditions 3

304

Some Transcriptions:

“Motivate the collaborators to provide better quality of life. Integration Programs”

“There is lack of strategic, consistent lead, excessive value to the short term, excessive variable, individual remuneration, too many directors/managers”

“We are managing to attend external clients with excellence, but it is necessary that it also occurs with the internal clients”

“Some points are important to develop a strong and dedicated team, as to be clearer in its their objectives with clear and transparent policies....... make the employees feel some stability, thus avoiding the high level of stress”

“The company makes you work over 12 hours a day, without paying overtime and without having hour bank and still makes you work smiling as if it were the only and best company in the world”

“Relationship with the company: High Bonus X Limited resources (demotivates). The Benefit Policy also demotivates”

“What does the company lack? Applicability of the Values preached mainly the meritocracy”

“I consider this job a professional school. My learning has been and still is of such magnitude every day that certainly would not be the same were I not here.”

“Lacks transparence in the information related to the future of the company as well as it lacks divulging of the results achieved”

305

2) Telecom 2

Number of Collected Questionnaires

Number of Comment Sheets Percentage

313 57 18.21%

Work Area Number of Comment Sheets Percentage

01. Marketing/Sales 36 63.15% 02. Finance 3 5.26% 03. Administration/Management 6 10.52% 04. Human Resources 5 8.77% 05. Engineering/Production 5 8.77% 06. Technical Support/Systems 1 1.75% Unspecified 1 1.75%

Total 57 100%

Commented Subjects:

SUBJECT Frequency of Comments

1. Positive Feelings About the Company in General 11 2. Positive Feelings about Management 4 3. Positive Feelings about Employees Welfare Conditions 4 4. Positive Feeling about future opportunities 4 5. Positive Work Team Experience 6 6. Comments about Negative Behaviors at Work 2 7. Lack of Investments in Human Capital 8 8. Excessive Work Hours 7 9. Internal Communication Problems 3 10. Paternalism Manager X Employee Relationship 2 11. Lack of Career Plan 4 12. Lack of Values at Work 3 13. Negative Internal Competition 4 14. Reward Plan Problems (salary, bonus) 4 15. Negative Criticism to Management 1 16.General Concern to Employees Welfare 4 17. General Work Conditions (negative aspects) 7 18. Lack of Autonomy 1 19. Uncertainty and Change due to Job Insecurity 13 20. Negative feelings about the future 5

306

Some Transcriptions:

“This company has been going through several changes since the joint-venture and the fact that the process structure and the people have not been previously aligned has brought up several conflicts”

“I believe this company within a possible range has been transparent and concerned about its employees”

“I am very happy to be part of this time and I think that I still have a lot to contribute, and I sincerely hope to go on growing and mainly be recognized for the dedication paid to the company”

“The problem with the company is the constant structure change that has been occurring for 2 years. This situation has turned the company into a disorganized body since the changes happen all the time. Nowadays we cannot have a promotion perspective, or even reach a managerial level because the company does not offer a reliable career plan.”

“The company has become too big and at the moment I see little effective processes, everything occurs very slowly what wears out the companies”

“There is too much uneasiness among people here!”

“I feel very well working for this company, I am respected as an individual and as a professional, I am financially compensated in a fair way and the work environment is excellent”

“The company could help sponsoring courses since there are several people willing to take a University degree and cannot afford it.”

“I am very happy to cooperate with the company, the greatest conflict is that we known our sector will be operated by third parties and in face of this possibility I am sad. Anyway this company has contributed a great deal for my personal and professional growth.”

“My dissatisfaction has to do with the uneasiness generated by the third parties contracts with the company”

“I would like that a transparent career plan for the employee were implemented.”

“The work is very stressing even causing health problems. We are overcharged from all sides and we must perform urgent tasks all at once. The work does not seem productive because it is a nonstop ‘putting out fires’.”

307

3) Telecom 3

Number of Collected Questionnaires

Number of Comment Sheets

Percentage

242 73 30.16%

Work Area Number of Comment Sheets Percentage

01. Marketing/Sales 19 26.02%

02. Finance 14 19.17%

03. Administration/Management 6 8.21%

04. Human Resources 7 9.58%

05. Engineering/Production 18 24.65%

06. Technical Support/Systems 9 12.32%

Unspecified 0.00%

Total 73 100%

Commented Subjects:

SUBJECT

Frequency of Comments

1. Positive Feelings About the Company in General 14

2. Positive Feelings about Management 5

3. Positive Feelings about Employees Welfare Conditions 8

4. Positive Feeling about future opportunities 1

5. Positive Work Team Experience 5

6. Positive Feelings about the Corporate Culture 9

7. Reward Plan Problems (salary, bonus, benefits) 3

8. Criticism to Strategies and Market approach 1

9. Negative Criticism to Management 7

10. Uncertainty and Change due to Job Insecurity 24

11. Concerns about the actual situation of the Company 46

12. Negative feelings about the future 19

308

Some Transcriptions:

“We have just gone through a downsizing and the morale is not very good. Telecom3 is an excellent company to work for however at the moment all employees are experiencing in their own flesh the risk of seeing the great dream end.”

“The buy-off issue certainly harms the job link of the employees in relation to the company. It would be better if the Telecom3 solved this issue as soon as possible.

“The transition phase the company is going through directly influences the answers. These are external factors that many times we have no influence over.”

“We have been living uncertainty moments for over 2 years since the company is under a buy-off process.”

“The Telecom3 is a marvelous, modern, dynamic and participating professional experience with state-of-art, sophisticated technology and with highly qualified personnel.”

“I cannot understand why the buy-out process takes so long (over 2 years!) In this period the capital value of the company decreased and the lack of motivation of the employees increased.”

“I helped build this company; I will do my best to make it successful. The acknowledgment of this company as successful endeavor will be a personal accomplishment.”

“I have high hopes in the Telecom3, but even saying that I would stay 5 years longer. I am not sure whether it will stand or whether it will be that good for me that way.”

“This entire insecure picture causes many employees to look for other jobs to leave Telecom3 simply because they are afraid of being in the next lit of dismissals.”

“The work environment is excellent, the inter-departmental crews are united, and everybody gets along well, and helps one another. Consequently the production is higher and our joy of producing better, bringing better results is huge.”

“This environment of insecurity and uncertainty of the buy-out of the company has been generating a great discomfort among the employees.”

“This company is great. The people who work here are marvelous and true friends. It is a pity that the stockholders cannot come to an agreement and do not want to keep the business. I would love to stay much longer in this dear company!”

“The worst is to be sure that this dream is ending....”

“The management made an option for the easiest solution, the dismissal of employees, what has been occurring since 2001, in the mid-year of each year.”

“My quality of life has improved approximately after I came to Telecom3.”

309

4) Steelworks

Number of Collected Questionnaires

Number of Comment Sheets Percentage

302 52 17.21%

Work Area Number of Comment Sheets Percentage

01. Marketing/Sales 0.00%

02. Finance 1 1.92%

03. Administration/Management 2 3.84%

04. Human Resources 4 7.69%

05. Engineering/Production 36 69.23%

06. Technical Support/Systems 9 17.30%

Unspecified 0.00%

Total 52 100%

Commented Subjects:

SUBJECT Frequency of Comments

1. Positive Feelings About the Company in General 22

2. Positive Feelings about Management 4

3. Positive Feelings about Employees Welfare Conditions 8

4. Positive Feeling about future opportunities 3

5. Positive Work Team Experience 4

6. Job Satisfaction 6

7. Positive Feedback about Rewards 6

8. Positive Feedback about Social Responsibility 5

9. Comments about Negative Behaviors at Work 3

10. Lack of Investments in Human Capital 3

11. Internal Communication Problems 2

12. Paternalism Manager X Employee Relationship 1

13. Reward Plan Problems (salary, bonus) 4

14. Negative Criticism to Management 5

15. General Work Conditions (negative aspects) 3

310

Some Transcriptions: “It is extremely gratifying to work for Steelworks”

“I would like to stress my enormous satisfaction in being a member of the personnel of the Steelworks for over 20 years. I have already been recognized for my work and professionalism, having been promoted.”

“I am proud of working for this company because I have been part of it since its implementation until now.... the relationship among the people has improved a great deal and the behavioral level is high as showed in the organizational morale poll.”

“The HR management has been fundamental in the support to operational areas.”

“I am very proud of belonging to this organization.”

“Working for Steelworks is as if I had won the lottery because in this company I have freedom of speech, and I work with the assurance that I will not be laid off.”

“I trust the company management totally, and after my retirement I would like to go on rendering services to the company.”

“Have been working for this company for 20 years and I am very proud because I deem it one of the best in the country.”

“Among the missions of the company, the noticeable mission is the welfare of the employees.”

“The company I work for is undoubtedly the best in the whole country.”

“The opportunities at Steelworks are many and appear all the time; you just have to be prepared.”

“This company is an entity extremely coherent with what it preaches in its mission and values. There is a concern with all the parties that need to be involved in the processes or suffer the consequences of its stages.”

“I state that during my preparation in the period of studies I had in mind finding and be proud of working for this company.”

“There is discrimination with the personnel that work in the shift of the time to leave; the bus of the shift is stopped to be inspected while the personnel of other shifts are not checked.”

“I have an excellent relationship with my superior, nowadays he is more a friend than a boss.”

311

5) Mining

Number of Collected Questionnaires

Number of Comment Sheets

Percentage

155 24 15.48%

Work Area Number of Comment Sheets Percentage

01. Marketing/Sales 0.00%

02. Finance 5 20.83%

03. Administration/Management 1 4.16%

04. Human Resources 6 25.00%

05. Engineering/Production 10 41.66%

06. Technical Support/Systems 2 8.33%

Unspecified 0.00%

Total 24 100%

Commented Subjects:

SUBJECT Frequency of Comments

1. Positive Feelings About the Company in General 10

2. Positive Feelings about Employees Welfare Conditions 5

3. Positive Feeling about future opportunities 2

4. Positive Feelings about the Corporate Culture 1

5. Comments about Negative Behaviors at Work 2

6. Lack of Investments in Human Capital 1

7. Reward Plan Problems (salary, bonus) 5

8.General Concern to Employees Welfare (negative) 3

9. Negative Criticism to Management 3

10. Negative feelings about the future 4

11. Problems with Work Schedule 1

312

Some Transcriptions:

“I have been working for this company since 1977, therefore for 27 years and I have had several positions including managerial position in different areas.”

“Mining is an enterprise that believes in the future and therefore, plans do researches and take decisions based on fundaments, it supports its technological and human potential. Mining has a solid position in the market and develops a sustainable work.”

“Lacks acknowledgment of high potentials within the company, there is no coherence in the professional growth processes, change of positions and re-qualifications. There are different and unfair remuneration policies/personnel appraisals.”

“There is a difference between the quality of training for the technical-operational and the managerial.”

“The present changes need to be dealt with more criterions otherwise we lose the acquired culture. In the case of Mining, the differential has always been the commitment of its personnel who has always had corporate loyalty, and as a result the exceptional achievements reached.”

“Mining is one of the best companies to work for; I have only thanks to give.”

“I think the work I do for the company is not well divulged due to the indifference of the boss in relation to the crew. The management pays little importance to our work for the company for the little technical knowledge they have.... the management should show more interest in our work.”

“I am under a temporary contract; this explains the lack of fondness for the company and the low capacity of control over my work in this company.”

“This company is very good to work for, however it has let its employees down lately”

“I love working here”

“I am very fond of this company, the people, the work and the work environment. However, as the chances for promotions are few (there are no opportunities for all), and this is a negative point for me, consequently this affects the chances for a salary raise.”

313

6) Petrochemical

Number of Collected Questionnaires

Number of Comment Sheets

Percentage

188 29 15.42%

Work Area Number of Comment Sheets Percentage

01. Marketing/Sales 2 6.89%

02. Finance 3 10.34%

03. Administration/Management 2 6.89%

04. Human Resources 1 3.44%

05. Engineering/Production 13 44.82%

06. Technical Support/Systems 8 27.58%

Unspecified 0.00%

Total 29 100%

Commented Subjects:

SUBJECT

Frequency of

Comments

1. Positive Feelings About the Company in General 10

2. Positive Feelings about Management 3

3. Positive Feelings about Employees Welfare Conditions 6

4. Positive Feeling about future opportunities 1

5. Lack of Investments in Human Capital 2

6. Internal Communication Problems 1

7. Paternalism Manager X Employee Relationship 2

8. Lack of Career Plan 1

9. Reward Plan Problems (salary, bonus, opportunities) 9

10. Negative Criticism to Management 1

11. Negative feelings about the future 1

314

Some Transcriptions:

“After 16 years in this company, I have witnessed continuous changes and improvements within each sector. I am positive that this company will be outstanding for the management and that will provide a marvelous future for the employees as it has been demonstrated each year.”

“The enterprise is very good to work for; there is nothing to complain about.”

“I feel privileged for working for this great enterprise, because with the technical level we have achieved we also have acquired a fair compensation and a work environment that would be difficult to find somewhere else.”

“I am happy with the company, I only would like more support in personnel investments for courses of professional enhancement.”

“I have historical links with the company and gratitude for what I could provide me and my family with on the salary I earn in this work contract.”

“In the activities developed (in the same position) there should never be salary differences among the employees.”

“The organizational environment is good and the confidence in the professional capacity characterizes the relationship.”

“The company is one of the best to work for and to learn. There are still people who are not motivated as in any place and they make the necessary changes difficult to take place but they do not impede them from occurring. There is lack of opportunities for some people while others have more opportunities.”

“It is a productive enterprise with high potential resources but that is not using its full force energy, yet. I hope to be able to contribute more so that in a near future I may feel the results of a totally integrated work.”

“The management of this company has been investing in the quality of life of its employees....I hope it does not change.”

“The problem is the lack of growth opportunities.”

“What impressed me most positively was the way the company faced its social and technical responsibilities. The employees are treated seriously and tenderly by all the superiors... the benefits added to the salaries are highly motivating.”

“Our salaries should be equivalent to those in the market.”

315

7) Media

Number of Collected Questionnaires

Number of Comment Sheets

Percentage

188 40 21.27%

Work Area Number of Comment Sheets Percentage

01. Marketing/Sales 17 42.50%

02. Finance 3 7.50%

03. Administration/Management 5 12.50%

04. Human Resources 4 10.00%

05. Engineering/Production 10 25.00%

06. Technical Support/Systems 0.00%

Unspecified 1 2.50%

Total 40 100%

Commented Subjects:

SUBJECT

Frequency of

Comments

1. Positive Feelings About the Company in General 10 2. Positive Feelings about Employees Welfare Conditions 2 3. Positive Feeling about future opportunities 3 4. Negative Behaviors at Work 2 5. Lack of Investments in Human Capital 6 6. Lack of Leadership 2 7. Excessive Work Hours 1 8. Internal Communication Problems 5 9. Paternalism Manager X Employee Relationship 4 10. Lack of Career Plan 5 11. Reward Plan Problems (salary, bonus) 17 12. Negative Criticism to Management 3 13.General Concern to Employees Welfare 2 14. Lack of Autonomy 1

316

Some Transcriptions:

“I have been working for this company for 12 years, and have grown personally and professionally a lot. I respect and admire my superiors.”

“I miss a career plan within the company, better salaries even if the responsibility level increases as well. The company does not offer meal tickets what is another drawback.”

“The company is great and the people too, the work environment is good but I think there should be more integration among the different sectors.”

“For a more efficient future in the management o the company I work for, there should be implemented a salary and career plan suggested some years ago but not performed so far.”

“Some salaries paid by the company could be reviewed mainly by the top management. Not that they do not deserve them by there is a high discrepancy in relation to the others.”

“I work for an ethical enterprise that deals with transparence and honesty in relation to its employees. I think we still have some problems in respect to career management and in the salary evolution in some sectors.”

“I think the company does not give the right value to the professionals that work for it. We have many peers with low salaries, others with personal problems or health problems who do not receive the support they should.”

“Media has everything to work out but there are basic things lacking such as: delegate more, clear communications, and commitment of all units (synergy) etc.”

“Working for Media is like being in the Ferrari of F1 crew. You may not win all the races but is part of the best and most traditional team in the world.”

“The company needs to invest more in the human resources that have been working for the company for a long time. They should have better salaries, profit share; better benefits... implement a career and salary plan eliminating the injustices of different salaries for the same positions.”

“What lacks in the company is that more opportunities are given to its employees, some sponsoring for those seeking higher levels of education and other benefits...”

“Media does not have clear policies, there are constant changes in the management and it is common to replace the whole team bringing "friends" without experience. We must evolve a lot in this field.”

317

Appendix 3 – E-Mail model to the CEO DELIVERING THE FEEDBACK REPORT TO COMPANY NAME – THE TRUST INVENTORY PROJECT (TIP)

Dear Mr. /Ms. CEO,

Recently, we carried out the “Trust Inventory Project” (TIP) project in Brazil and we were happy to have had COMPANY NAME as one of the participant companies in this project that is the first cross-industry project assessing trust for Brazilian organizations. We would especially wish to thank Mr. H who provided invaluable assistance in the management of logistics for the distribution and collection of the questionnaire information. As part of our agreement, we now would like to provide you with the Feedback Report.

We would like to propose the following options for the timely delivery of the report:

1. By special-delivery post directly to you;

2. Delivery of the report by a member of the research team who will be in Brazil from the 18th of April until the 4th of May;

Also please let us know if you would like to have a PowerPoint presentation of the report made to a group of your choosing.

If you could let us know the above information by the end of February this will greatly facilitate our planning. We greatly appreciate your participation and collaboration in this pioneering project.

Yours Sincerely,

Prof. Dr. Birgitta Wolff,

Edward Lusk, PhD, and

Marco Tulio Zanini, M.sc.

(Research Team Members)

University of Magdeburg – Germany

319

Appendix 4 – Company’ s Guideline / Research Agreement

June 29th, 2004

Trust Inventory Project (TIP)

Company’s Guideline for the Participation in the Research Project

1. Objectives

Thank you for participating in this research project. We believe that the research will pro-vide NAME many benefits regarding the important role that human resources (HR) manage-ment plays in the organization. The information that one may develop from the questionnaire addressees the core management issues about shaping the corporate culture and insuring the highest level of employee commitment to the organization’s performance goals. The objective of the research is to better understand possible changes in the implicit control mechanisms between companies in the New and Old Economy. Implicit mechanisms, such as trust, have considerable impact on internal costs and represent assets of companies.

In the 90’s the Brazilian market place changed dramatically with the privatization initiative. Emerging markets provided “first mover advantages”, and the opportunities to profit seemed to be guaranteed. Now, after some years, companies face more mature and competitive mar-kets and management issues become key factors in the competitive environment that one as-sociates with mature markets. Trust is at the core of these management issues. Recent re-search shows that trust is one of the main features for successful management related to many issues as efficiency and performance.

The study will seek to measure the complex relationships among organizational commit-ment, job features and trust. Many scholars are studying these mechanisms. In order to better understand the changes in the internal situation of firms, the proposed research project ad-dresses selected companies who are major players in the Brazilian business scene. Following you will find important information about the research project.

OTTO-VON-GUERICKE-UNIVERSITY MAGDEBURG Faculty of Economics & Management

DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT

PROF. DR. BIRGITTA WOLFF PROF. EDWARD LUSK, PHD

MARCO TULIO ZANINI, RESEARCHER

320

2. Research Period

The data collection extends from 15th August to 20th September, 2004. Your company is welcome to choose the most convenient dates within this period. We believe that three (3) to five (5) days are needed to distribute the questionnaires and conduct the interviews. We re-quest you to choose dates convenient to your organization.

3. Research Instruments

The research project includes three instruments for data collection:

a) Interviews with the Director of the Human Resources Division and the Director of Strategy & Planning Division,

b) HR and organization Information,

c) Distribution and collection of questionnaires for employees.

a) Interviews

The interviews with HR and Strategy & Planning Directors will take approximately 40 mi-nutes. These interviews can be scheduled according to the director’s convenience within the research period (from 15th August to 20th September, 2004).

b) Human Resources Information

The information about the human resources management that we would like to collect is: 1) General information about the firm’s incentive system (benefits packages and advantages for employees). 2) Relative expenses in training and human resources development; 3) Employee turnover rates for the last eight years. We kindly ask you to provide this information during the research period.

c) Distribution of Questionnaires

The research method has been designed to accrue a certain number of valid questionnaires from your company. For reasons of statistical significance, a certain number must be reached. In order to attend this requirement we ask you to consider the distribution of 300 question-naires. Moreover, we ask you to consider the formal procedures for questionnaire distribution detailed in item No. 5.

321

4. Questionaire Respondents Profile

Employees should be invited to cooperate by the board of directors at least one week or so in advance. The sample of employees should cover all departments of the company (sales, marketing, HR, products, engineering, legal, etc.). It is very important to assure a considerable degree of participation of respondents from the development, management and sales depart-ments of different products and/or services. For this reason we would also like to attach a cover letter signed by the CEO or managing director of the board. We find this to be essential in insuring the enthusiastic participation of all people concerned.

5. Formal procedures for questionnaire distribution

The research process follows formal scientific standards of data-collection in order to assure that results provide reliable information. We want to produce accurate and reliable results for the benefit of your company as well as the research project. Thus, we kindly ask for your at-tention and cooperation regarding the following procedures:

a) As mentioned above, from our experience it is essential to obtain formal support from the board of directors before and during the research period. We ask the Board of directors to inform and invite all managers and employees participating in the survey at least one week before. Please request the special support of local managers. This could take the form of a memo or an e-mail. Moreover, enclosed with our questionnaire we would like to distribute also a cover letter from the CEO or board of directors supporting the survey. We provide you a sample of this letter in the Appendix No. 1 enclosed.

b) Questionnaires should be distributed within the research period (from 15th August to 20th

September, 2004).

c) It is fundamental in order to get reliable information that the questionnaires be distributed and collected only by the members of the research team. Contact with third parties or oth-er company members should be avoided. In this way, employees will feel free to express their feelings and perceptions about their relationship with company’s members and with the company. The research team will be available to distribute and collect all question-naires during all questionnaire distribution phases. For that, a research team member will be available for the days scheduled by the company. The research team will go to each site to assure that questionnaires will be distributed and collected so as to maintain the confidentiality critical for this project.

d) The questionnaire distribution process should be established in advance with the research team and according to the company’s routine. We kindly ask the HR department to sup-port the coordination of the employees during the questionnaire distribution process. For the days scheduled by the company, there should be easy access to the research team

322

member(s) inside the company. Respondents should fill out the questionnaire during the same day. It will proceed as follows: once employees were informed and invited in ad-vance by HR department, generally two possible ways can take place according to com-pany’s resources and routine: 1) one special room or auditorium inside the company (an easy access central location) will be reserved in those days and groups of employees will be invited in advance by HR to go there in different times of the day in order to fill out the questionnaire; 2) The research team will distribute the questionnaire in each location, floor, and building of the company and will go back in these same places to collect it some time later. A member of the research team will be there during the entire day to as-sure that no one has access to the questionnaires.

e) The questionnaire includes approximately 70 short questions and is designed to be filled out in approximately 25 minutes.

6. Mutual nondisclosure agreement and data publishing

For the essential data protection vis à vis third parties, the following indicates the formal relationship between the company and the research team. The deliverable to the company will be a comprehensive consulting report presented by the research team to the CEO and Board of directors and their invited designates. This will take the form of a detailed report of the state of the organization and inter-company comparisons. Hard copies will be delivered to the individuals participating in the presentation of the report and also an electronic copy will be available to the CEO. The research team has the intention to publish, in academic journals, some results of the study. In this regard, no information which would disclose the name of the participating companies or any private information will be contained in such publications. Also, all information of the comment sheets will be summarized so that individual direct comments or quotes will never be available to the company. We will keep confidentiality re-garding to all individual information collected by the research team. We (the research team) will exclusively own the data and we will have the right to publish the results. Finally, the questionnaires will be maintained by the research team and the data base of response will be exclusive property of the research team.

7. Contact Person

With the objective to create efficiency between our team representative and your company, we kindly ask you to indicate a contact person in your company responsible for all commu-nication and contact with the research team. It would be important for this individual to have decision-making authority so as to facilitate the many detailed decisions that need to be made on an ongoing basis to execute this research project.

323

8. Project Schedule to be fixed by your company

- One day between 19th July to 10th August to discuss with the research team the company specific details of the project.

- At least three days between 15th August to 20th September for the questionnaire distribu-tion.

- One or two days between 15th August to 20th September for Interviews with HR and Strategy and Planning Directors.

We ask you to fix these dates as soon as possible

We greatly appreciate your participation and collaboration in this project and will be happy to share these valuable results with you. From 19th July to 10th August the research team will be available in Brazil looking forward to discussing further details also in person. However, feel free to contact our research team anytime for any further question about the research:

Yours sincerely,

Prof. Dr. Birgitta Wolff Prof. Dr. Edward J. Lusk Marco Tulio Zanini

Chair of International Management, Vice Dean of the Faculty of Econom-

ics and Management

Chair of Business Administra-tion

Researcher

Our contacts: Prof. Dr. Birgitta Wolff, Office: 00-49-391/ 67-18789, birgitta.wolff@ww.uni-magdeburg.de Prof. Dr. Edward J. Lusk, Office: 00-49-391/ 67-18729, edward.lusk@ww.uni-magdeburg.de Marco Tulio Zanini, Office: 00-49-391/ 67-18630, marco.zanini@student.uni-magdeburg.de

We ask you to sign the present document as a nondisclosure agreement and return it signed to the research team.

Place, Date Company’s Representative Name and Signature

324

APPENDIX No. 1

Memorandum (Draft)

To: All COMPANY’S NAME employees

DATE:

FROM: CEO

Cc:

SUBJECT: COMPANY’S NAME Participation in the Trust Inventory Project

Our company has agreed to participate in the research project “Trust Inventory Project” with the University of Magdeburg, Germany.

Researchers from the University of Magdeburg, Germany have found out in their research that important “hidden factors” related to trust have critical importance for the success of companies. These factors have considerable importance regarding to the core issues on the quality of management and performance. The survey will be conduced simultaneously at var-ious locations in our company.

The research project team from the University will conduct the survey at our locations but the company will not have access to the complete questionnaires or view any of the informa-tion; it is completely confidential. The analysis of the questionnaires will be done by a scien-tist team from the University of Magdeburg in Germany.

Please give your full support and participation to the survey. This is an important opportuni-ty for the company to learn from our employees. Your feedback is extremely important and valuable tool to keep us on the right track.

One final comment: the survey is a document which cannot be changed. There are several questions in the survey which under normal circumstances as your employer we would not ask our employees. But due to the nature of the project, we must keep the survey as it is pre-sented. We need your participation in the survey to be meaningful but do not answer any question that you are not comfortable with.

Thanks for your cooperation,

Name of the CEO/President or Representative

COMPANY’S LABEL