The big circle (conceptual space) of vulnerability
F. David Schoorman et al.
What the paper says
In this work we respond to recent theorising by Hamm et al. [2024. Integrating focal vulnerability into trust research. Journal of Trust Research, 14(2), 237–255] on the concept of focal vulnerability and its relationship to trust. We argue that the concept of vulnerability in management research is a wide conceptual space with room for novel ways of thinking and that focal vulnerability is helpful in thinking about trust in general. We consider the common elements of vulnerability in trust as being relational and volitional. As trust researchers dig deeper into the operation of relationships, it is important to consider the dynamic nature of vulnerability and its experience at the level of the multiple concurrent exchanges that take place between trustors and trustees. We discuss challenges presented by the consideration of when to assess focal vulnerability so as to better predict trustor behaviours and relationship outcomes. To that end, we argue for a greater emphasis on the fluctuations in experience of vulnerability such as are specified by the ‘felt vulnerability’ concept introduced by Hamm and colleagues.
5 citations
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.41 × 0.4 = 0.16 |
| M · momentum | 0.63 × 0.15 = 0.09 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.