As with understanding of marketing needs, the element of trust in the data in the CDW is strongly related to the concept of data quality. Trust was not initially predicted as a success factor in the original model. Organizational trust and rust of the data in the warehouse emerged as significant factors in predicting whether users would use the data in the corporate data warehouse to perform CRM analyses (Figure 2). Schoorman et al. (1995) synthesized how trust had been defined among multiple disciplines including organizational development, psychology, organizational behavior and strategy. Notwithstanding the plethora of definitions, Schoorman et al. (1995) determined that several common
Fay Cobb Payton and Debra Zahay themes existed, namely: the willingness to take risks; and minimal presence of two parties - a trustor and a trustee.
In a marketing context, the literature has specifically focused on trust in an organizational context, with organizations as trustor and trustee as the two parties necessary for trust to occur. Morgan and Hunt (1994) suggested the importance of trust and commitment in the development of long-term exchange partner relationships. Like much of the research in the area of relationship marketing, Morgan and Hunt's (1994) work is based upon social relations theory. Just as two individuals need trust as the basis of an interpersonal relationship, so do two organizations (or in this case two units of the same organization) need to trust each other in order to develop a commercial relationship.
Trust needs to be present in an exchange relationship, such as using information from a central depository like a CDW, for that relationship to function. In the context of marketing information use, trust is defined as a willingness to rely on an exchange partner in whom one has confidence (Moorman et al., 1992). In fact, Moorman et al. (1992) suggest that information supplier and information user relationships influence the extent by which "data" are used in decision making in marketing research applications. In fact, the situation studied here of the CDW implementation can be seen analogous to the marketing research situation studied by Moorman et al. (1992) with the internal information systems department as the information supplier and the marketing department as the information user.
In this study, users mentioned two aspects of trust. One aspect of trust in this situation was organizational in nature and referred to the lack of established working relationships among functional areas and a lack of commitment to information sharing. Yet in the context of organizational trust, there is also the need for individuals involved in the commercial exchange, i.e. trust in the salesperson as well as the organization h/she represents. Ganesan and Hess (1997) have found that in exchange relations, buyers distinguish between both interpersonal and organizational credibility. In this research context, our preliminary analysis indicated that there was a level of trust between individuals working in the organization. Users reported a long-term social relation among functional areas (Appendix 2) but not established working relationships among functional area and no commitment to information sharing. In other words, employees trusted each other individually enough to interact on a daily basis but the organization did not necessarily operate with a high degree of trust. Because trust issues arose in this intra-organizational context, the marketing function was hesitant to use data prepared by the information systems function in the organization. In the language of organizational trust, marketing was unwilling to rely on IT as an exchange partner, in this case the exchange being marketing information prepared by another department.
Another aspect of trust in adoption of the CDW uncovered in this study was trust in the underlying information in the shared system. This concept of trust in the underlying information in this shared system is related to the concept of data quality as well. Moorman et al. (1992) suggest that, although trust and data quality are separate, trust heightens the perception of data quality in our study context. Although this prior literature indicates trust is a prerequisite to quality, is it possible that quality might also signal trust in a system and a willingness to move forward in the relationship, or, in
this case, the implementation the data warehouse. Consequently, our revised model shows trust and data quality to be correlated. It is difficult to imagine a situation in this type of implementation where users would trust the data yet not use some aspect of the system. In fact, Moorman et al. (1992) also suggest that both well defined, pre-established relationships with high quality interactions and data quality define the degree of trust in the provider-user relationship.
Was this article helpful?
You won’t want to miss this. Get Paid Taking Surveys In Your Spare Time. I know what you’re thinking, ‘Oh great, another get rich quick scheme’. WRONG! This is your guide to making money from home by participating in paid surveys on the internet.