Mayer, Davis, Schoorman 1995 (AMR) — trust = ability + benevolence + integrity; all three required; absence of any forecloses trust
Claim: Mayer, Davis, and Schoorman (1995) decompose trustworthiness into three components, all of which are required:
- Ability — domain-specific competence
- Benevolence — the trustee's positive orientation toward the trustor's interests
- Integrity — adherence to a set of principles the trustor accepts
The absence of any one forecloses trust.
Source: Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). "An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust." Academy of Management Review 20(3): 709–734. https://journals.aom.org/doi/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080335
Confidence: Verified (foundational paper in the trust literature).
For Candid: The three components require different evidence and respond to different signals. Candid case studies that show only completed work demonstrate ability but leave benevolence and integrity unaddressed. Trust-building content needs all three dimensions surfaced.
The ability/benevolence/integrity decomposition is the substrate for [[kim-ferrin-cooper-dirks-2004-competence-vs-integrity-trust-repair]], which shows that violations of these dimensions repair through opposite mechanisms.
Referenced by (3)
- reference Kim, Ferrin, Cooper, Dirks 2004 (JAP) — competence violations repair via apology; integrity violations repair via denial; opposite mechanisms depends-on
- rule R5 — Diagnose previous-vendor failures as competence or integrity; route the repair strategy accordingly (apology vs structural commitments) depends-on
- reference Levin & Cross 2004 (Mgmt Sci) — competence- and benevolence-based trust mediate tie-strength → useful knowledge transfer; once trust is controlled for, weak ties re-emerge as valuable depends-on