Coordination behind a leader generates trust because followers can withdraw support

Evidence

Can a collectivity be trustworthy on the encapsulated-interest account? Consider two very different strategically defined classes of groups: groups mobilized by coordination and groups mobilized for collective action (see further Hardin 1991a). Suppose a group is coordinated behind a leader, as happens with charismatic leaders, in response to what the leader wants it to do, as in the case of the seventeenth-century Sabbatai Sevi, “the mystical Messiah,” who led a messianic movement in central Europe. Coordinators can commonly count on such a leader because they will withdraw support if the leader violates their mission, making it generally in the leader’s interest to attempt to fulfill their expectations. Of course, the leader’s interest in fulfilling that expectation can be trumped by changed incentives or preferences. So long as the leader has an interest in pursuing the goals behind which the followers are coordinated, however, he or she can be trusted and derives power from the coordination of the followers. It is limited power in the sense that it cannot be used for just any purpose. Rather, it can be used only for the group’s purposes or mission (Hardin 1995, chapter 3). Coordination power therefore fits very well with the three-part relational account of trust. — Russell Hardin, Trust and Trustworthiness, 809

Categorization

Category: Causal Relationships

• XREF: Connects to the reader’s trust/monitoring theme and to the doctor’s wife as sole guarantor in Saramago — coordination power depends on observable, withdrawable support.

Broader Connections

• Trust grows out of the specific relationship between the parties #expands (0.85) — Russell Hardin, Trust and Trustworthiness, 876