Challenges of Trust Building in Intercultural Teams With Focus on German-Indian Collaboration

Table of Contents

Abstract

List of figures

List of Tables

List of abbreviations

1. Introduction
1.1 Introduction and Problem Definition
1.2 Motivation and Objective
1.3 Methodology and Structure

2. Explanation of Terms 6
2.1 Trust
2.2 Culture

3. Theoretical Background on trust in intercultural collaboration
3.1 Fundamental aspects of intercultural influences on trust
3.2 Trust misunderstanding

4. Theoretical framework to describe the Indian business culture

5. Business Culture in India
5.1 History and background about business in India
5.2 Leadership
5.3 Relationships
5.4 Communication
5.6 Tradition
5.7 Ethical Values in Business

6. Empirical Part: The Study
6.1 Research Design
6.1.1 Research Issue and Objective
6.1.2 Critical Incident Methodology
6.1.3 Critical reflection of the methodology
6.2 Sampling and conducting the study
6.2.1 Selection criteria and process for study participants
6.2.2 Planning and conducting the interviews
6.3 Data Collection Methodology
6.3.1 Recruitment of interview partner and interview procedure
6.3.2 Specification of sampling and data material
6.3.3 Representativeness of the sampling
6.4 Evaluation Methodology

7. Results and Discussion
6.5 Short discussion of the German business culture
6.6 Definition of trust factors and overview
6.7 Detailed discussion of the trust factors identified
6.7.1 Interpersonal Relationship
6.7.2 Hierarchy
6.7.3 Fair Play
6.7.4 Handling of Agreements and Tasks
6.7.5 Communication
6.7.6 Environment

8. Recommendations for action

9. Conclusion

10. Bibliography

Appendix

Abstract

Today’s business world is global, complex, dynamic, highly competitive and extremely volatile. This has increased the importance of internationalization strategies for companies in order to be competitive. In recent years, the interest for emerging markets has increased due to the size of the markets and the amount of customers, as well as the technology and human resources available. India has grown to one of the world’s leading exporters of computer software and is an attractive country for Foreign Direct Investments (FDI). However, intercultural collaborations often fail to succeed due to cultural differences and difficulties in the process of trust building. Nonetheless, the presence of interpersonal trust is highly important to successfully manage the increase in complexity and uncertainty of today’s business environment.

Based on the existing literature and an empirical study conducted with 15 German managers, this work derived 22 trust factors that are important for the development of trust between German managers and Indian colleagues or business partners. The results show that, there is a vast variety of trust factors that need to be considered. Additionally, the results show that cultural differences can lead to trust misunderstandings, initiated by different interpretation and diagnosis of behavior. Afterwards, recommendations for action were derived from the research findings. With this work, German managers are able to acquire knowledge about the Indian business culture, trust factors that are important in the development of trust between Germans and Indians and how they can understand, prevent or dissolve cultural misunderstandings.

List of figures

Figure 1 - Structure of this master thesis (own illustration)

Figure 2 – Model of interpersonal trust (own illustration, inspired by Münscher 2011:50)

Figure 3 - Key Areas to Study in the Indian Business Culture (own illustration)

Figure 4 – Overview of structured, content-related queries (Münscher, 2011: 124)

Figure 5 - Age and Gender of Interview Partner (own illustration)

Figure 6 - Industry and Management Level (own illustration)

Figure 7 - Illustration of the duration of the contact and the frequency (own illustration)

Figure 8 - Illustration of longest stay in India and contact frequency (own illustration)

Figure 9 - Overview of evaluation methodology (own illustration, inspired by Münscher, 2011: 142 and 149)

Figure 10 - Illustration of the software program MAXQDA (own illustration)

List of Tables

Table 1 - Evaluation Steps (own illustration)

Table 2 - Criteria for coding case examples and general comments (own illustration inspired by Münscher, 2011: 145)

Table 3 - Overview of trust factors (own illustration)

Table 4 - Overview of the cluster Interpersonal Relationship (own illustration)

Table 5 - Overview of the cluster Hierarchy (own illustration)

Table 6 - Overview of the cluster Fair Play (own illustration)

Table 7 - Overview of the cluster Handling of Agreements and Tasks (own illustration)

Table 8 - Overview of the cluster Communication (own illustration)

List of abbreviations

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

1. Introduction

The following chapter initially contains an introduction to the topic of this master thesis and the problem definition, followed by a description of the motivation and the objective of this research. Lastly, a description of the structure is given.

1.1 Introduction and Problem Definition

Today’s business environment is characterized as a global, complex, dynamic, highly competitive and extremely volatile environment (Tarique & Schuler,2010). This development has led to an increasing importance of strategic alliances, joint-ventures, mergers and acquisitions (M&A), networking and semi-autonomous working groups (Todeva & Knoke, 2005). Although various studies have examined the financial and strategic effects of intercultural collaboration, managing cultures usually receives less attention (Gunkel et al.,2015). Nevertheless, to successfully manage the increase in complexity and uncertainty of today’s business environment, the presence of interpersonal trust is of high importance (Lane, 1998). Fukuyama (1995) claims that ‘a nation’s ability to compete is conditioned by a single, pervasive cultural characteristic: the level of trust inherent in a society’. In addition, trust is connected to knowledge sharing, which has become a competitive necessity as a result of the need for more knowledge-intensive products and processes (Chow & Chan, 2008). Robinson and Morrison (2000) state, that if employees feel they are treated with fairness, honesty and trust, the feeling of anger and betrayal is reduced.

The development of a much more competitive and uncertain business environment has made it difficult to develop and keep trust between business partners or colleagues, but also necessary to identify challenges in the process of trust building. The higher the level of mistrust, the more difficult it will be for different groups working together (Fontaine & Richardson, 2005). Therefore, it is necessary to understand the concept of trust.The interest of this paper is on the trust building process of German managers with Indian business partners or colleagues. The rise of major emerging markets has been followed by the necessity of understanding intercultural management concept and practices within these economies (Becker- Ritterspach & Raaijman, 2013). As a study conducted by Ernst&Young (2017) shows, India takes increasing trade, FDI and M&A activities in Germany. The study shows that Germany has been the second-most targeted country in the EU for M&A activities of Indian companies (Ernst&Young, 2017) Nevertheless, Indian companies have become international acquires as well, that are able to compete within international markets (Cappelli et al., 2010). Furthermore, offshore outsourcing of IT services to India has become a major activity of global organizations, such as IBM and SAP (Winkler, Dibbern & Heinzl, 2008). Kunnanatt (2008) entitles India as the abode of enriched talents of engineering, technology and management. Marr and Reynard (2010) describe India as being part of the next generation of the economic superpowers.

1.2 Motivation and Objective

This paragraph deals with the motivation of the author and the objectives of this master thesis. First, this master thesis is intended to analyze the challenges within German-Indian collaborations during the process of trust building on the basis of existing literature. In a second step, a qualitative study with German managers who are experienced in German-Indian collaboration will be run in order to identify specific challenges and obstacles for the development of trust that may arise from cultural differences between Germany and India.

The overriding research question of this master thesis is the following:

Do cultural differences influence the development of trust in German-Indian collaboration, and if so: in what sense?

Additionally, this work discusses the following research questions:

1. How does the development of trust distinguishes between Indians and Germans?
2. What factors are decisive for the development and maintenance of trust in German-Indian collaborations?
3. What are specific challenges for German managers when doing business with Indian colleagues or business partner?

The primary objective of this master thesis is to contribute to the question of trust building within German-Indian collaborations in order to create successful business relations. Based on the outcomes of the literature research and the empirical study, the objective is to develop recommendations for managers and to provide a possibility to acquire cultural knowledge, that enables them to work efficient and avoid trust misunderstandings due to cultural differences.

This work is addressed to managers and companies that already have a collaboration between Indian and German colleagues or business partners or that strive for such a collaboration. Additionally, this work is addressed to expatriates and those who will become expatriates, since it discusses the challenges that accompany the process of trust building due to cultural differences.

It should be noted that it is not the intent of this paper to describe the German business culture but rather to discuss the Indian business culture and compare these findings to the German business culture.

1.3 Methodology and Structure

This thesis discusses the influence of intercultural differences on the development of trust and the challenges German managers are facing when building trust with Indian business partners or colleagues. This work is divided into five major parts which are illustrated in figure 1.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 1 - Structure of this master thesis (own illustration)

After the introduction, the first part of this master thesis will contain a theoretical construct based on a literature review that will yield the basis for an empirical study. The theoretical construct includes an explanation of the terms trust and culture before continuing with an overview of trust building in intercultural collaboration. Followed by that, this paper shortly reviews cultural frameworks that have been used in management theory in order to develop a framework to analyze the Indian business culture. Using this framework, the key areas of Indian business culture are analyzed.

The second part and the core of this work is an empirical study. Core element of the methodical approach is the data collection through qualitative interviews in which German managers report about what they have experienced during the process of trust building with an Indian colleague or business partner. These interviews are conducted using the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) developed by John C. Flanagan in order to identify aspects that promote trust building, aspects that lead to a weakening or loss of trust and aspects that disable trust building from the start of the relationship.

The interviews are analyzed using the qualitative content analysis and the three basic techniques suggested by Philipp Mayring (2008).

At the end of this work, the results of both, the literature review and the qualitative interviews are compared and critically questioned. This helps to assess which parts of the reports of the interviewees might be culturally biased and ways how cultural differences influence the development of trust in German-Indian collaboration. On the basis of the outcomes, recommendations for the process of trust building in German-Indian collaboration are formulated.

2. Explanation of Terms

The constructs of trust and culture are essential for this work. The following paragraph contains definitions of these essential constructs by considering definitions of cultural theorists and relevant literary works.

2.1 Trust

Although the concept of trust has been a research topic in many disciplines, such as psychology, philosophy, management theory and economics, the literature provides a wide range of different explanations of the term ‘trust’.

Hosmer (1995) describes interpersonal trust as an optimistic expectation by an individual, a group or an organization of the behavior of another individual, group or organization under conditions of vulnerability and dependence on the part of the thrusting party. The purpose of this is to facilitate cooperation between these parties. According to Mayer et al. (Mayer, 1995) trust occurs when a party is willing to be vulnerable to the actions of another party by reason of expecting that the other party is willing to perform an action which is important to the trustor, although these actions cannot be controlled or monitored. This definition indicates a direct relation between trust and taking risks, since the willingness to be vulnerable means taking risks. Bhattacharya, Devinney & Pillutla (1998: 462) also argue that trust exists in uncertain and risky environments by defining trust as ‘an expectancy of positive (or nonnegative) outcomes that one can receive based on the expected action of another party in an interaction characterized by uncertainty’.

In summary, the definitions mentioned above emphasize that trust is related to an expectancy about another parties behavior and the outcomes of this behavior. It involves vulnerability and occurs in uncertain environments.

This work refers to interpersonal trust and uses the following definition given by Münscher (2011: 16-17):

“Therefore trust means, to make yourself dependent on another person, although it could have negative consequences and nonetheless expect that these negative consequences will not occur.”

2.2 Culture

Culture is one of the most complex terms to define. One of the most popular definition was established by Kroeber and Kluckhorn in 1952 after critically reviewing numerous definitions:

“Culture consists of patterns, explicit and implicit, of and for behavior acquired and transmitted by symbols, constituting the distinctive achievement of human groups, including their embodiments in artifacts; the essential core of culture consists of traditional (i.e. historically derived and selected) ideas and especially their attached value; culture systems may, on the one hand, be considered as products of action, on the other as conditioning elements of further action.” (Kroeber & Kluckhohn 1952: 181)

Traditionally, management research uses the definition of culture by Hofstede, which defines culture as ‘the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one group or category of people from another’ (Hofstede 1997: 5). This definition has the focus to compare one culture with another based on variables and constructs common to both cultures (Luna & Gupta 2001). More recently, House et al. (2004:15) define culture for their project Global Leadership and Organizational Behaviour (GLOBE) as ‘shared motives, values, beliefs, identities, and interpretations or meanings of significant events that result from common experiences of members of collectives that are transmitted across generations’ and emphasize that this definition can be applied to societal and organizational levels of analysis. According to Schein (2010), culture is a pattern of shared basic assumptions learned by a group as the correct way to perceive, think and feel in relation to problems and is taught to new members of the group as it worked well enough. Therefore, culture is something every individual has to learn based on socializing in the society and learning what this group perceives as correct or incorrect. Søderberg and Holden (2002) state that traditionally the term culture was seen as a problem rather than an opportunity and emphasize the need for acknowledging the growing complexity for inter- and intra-organizational connections and identities and to think about multiple cultures in a globalizing business context. Experts are now recognizing that culture can become a source of competitive advantage, if properly managed (Schneider, Barsoux & Stahl, 2014).

3. Theoretical Background on trust in intercultural collaboration

The first part of the following chapter discusses the theoretical research of the literature on trust and the challenges intercultural teams face during the process of developing trust. The second part of this chapter will examine trust misunderstandings.

3.1 Fundamental aspects of intercultural influences on trust

The theory of trust building shows different perspectives on the relation of trust. In the developmental and personality psychology, trust is seen as an aspect of an individual that describes a fundamental aspect of human relations, as trust is a descriptive construct of the handling of dependency and risks (Münscher, 2011). A person develops an individual trust profile from childhood on. Therefore, trust is seen as a part of a person’s personality, the so called trust disposition. Furthermore, a sociological perspective resorts to a game theoretic approach, in particular the prisoner’s dilemma where trust is seen as a decision in the context of a situation and can be applied as an economic perspective as well. A third perspective describes trust as a social mechanism which reduces social complexity.

Particularly in intercultural collaborations, trust building represents a major challenge for managers because of intercultural differences. In order to prevent misapprehensions, the awareness and the effect of cultural differences when dealing with trust indicators play an essential role (Münscher, 2006), as the trust pattern of people is influenced by their cultural background (Münscher & Hormuth, 2013). The development of trust in intercultural teams could be impaired by intercultural differences. One possible restriction factor could be people perceiving each other as a part of different social groups, since social group membership is often associated with beliefs about trustworthiness (Williams, 2001). Different studies indicate a direct relationship between an individual’s country culture and his or her values (Meglino & Ravlin,1998). Therefore, another obstacle for the development of trust could be the impression of different value concepts. Cultural misunderstandings often compromise information flow and communication (Veiga et al., 2000). The present paper uses the model of influence of cultural differences on the development of trust developed by Münscher (Münscher, 2001: 50)

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 2 – Model of interpersonal trust (own illustration, inspired by Münscher 2011: 50)

This model explains how and at which point cultural differences influence the process of developing trust. Especially the diagnosis and the weighting of trust factors significantly influence the intercultural trust development. The so called trust factors are neutral and abstract constructs which have to be diagnosed by a person based on the observation of another person’s behavior (Münscher,2001). An individual assesses observations and information consciously or unconsciously as relevant information about trust (Münscher 2001). Vangen and Huxham (2003) describe trust as a cyclic process in which expectations, risk and vulnerability are directly interconnected to each other as it requires an individual to take a risk and form expectations about the behavior of another individual or group. Once the expectations of an individual about another individual or group are fulfilled, it becomes part of their relationship and will lead to an increase in trust. Butler and Gill (1995) as cited by Vangan and Huxham (2003) see the increase of trust through a cycle of learning since individuals observe and assess previous experiences about the behavior of other individuals or groups. These trust factors are weighted differently of different cultures which has an impact on the development of trust. One trust factor might be an essential aspect of trustworthiness in one culture but within another culture this trust factor might not be an essential aspect and therefore represents no base to build trust (Münscher, 2001). Not only the weighting of trust factors but also the diagnosis significantly influences the development of trust as individuals often cannot directly perceive trust factors. Rather, they have to diagnose the perceptible symptoms to conclude factors of trust (Münscher, 2001). How cultural standards affect behavior becomes visible when individuals of different cultures interact. During situations of intercultural contact it might occur that accustomed codes of behavior lead to difficulties because they are interpreted differently (Mitterer, Mimler & Thomas, 2013). This work will focus on the factors relevant to develop trust between German and Indian managers, their interpretation and diagnosis.

3.2 Trust misunderstanding

The previous chapter dealt with the diagnosis and weighting of trust factors that lead to trust or mistrust. As already executed above, different interpretation and diagnosis of trust factors resulting from cultural differences might be a challenge for the development of trust between colleagues or business partners from different cultures. Do cultural differences influence the development of trust misunderstandings? How is it possible that situations occur in which one questions the trust because of a specific incident that the other person considers as not justified from their own point of view?

According to Schweer (2008) different norms, values and value hierarchies or communication forms could lead to a series of misunderstandings depending on the cultural context whereby the development of trust could be prevented. He emphasizes that especially if both sides do not address such irritations but rather rely on their subjective conception of reality, the interaction is badly compromised. These circumstances could possibly lead to economic failure or a failure in international relationships. Lewicki, McAllister and Bies (1998) also emphasize that trust can be sometimes misattributed, although trust is typically rational and grounded in experience. The misinterpretation of the behavior or the outcome of the behavior of an individual might lead to mistrust of another individual. These so called trust misunderstandings can occur during the diagnosis of trust factors when individuals interpret trust factors in different ways without recognizing the different interpretation or in a second step during the weighting of trust factors if individuals weigh factors differently that lead to a generalization of trust (Münscher, 2011). Trust misunderstandings can possibly lead to mistrust, however, they can also lead to positive misunderstandings of an individual that trusts another party without justification.

4. Theoretical framework to describe the Indian business culture

Literature suggests different frameworks to describe and compare cultures. The following paragraph will give a short insight into three different cultural frameworks of Hofstede, the GLOBE study and Schwartz that have been used to compare cultures during the past decades. Afterwards, the framework that has been developed based on these frameworks will be introduced. This framework is used to analyze the Indian business culture.

Hofstede

One of the most widely used frameworks in the areas of psychology, marketing or management studies is Geert Hofstede’s framework of cultural dimensions (Sondergaars, 1994; Steenkamp, 2001). Hofstede created the five dimensions Individualism vs. Collectivism, Uncertainty Avoidance, Power Distance and Masculinity vs. Femininity. He assigned them with indexes and linked them to demographic, economic, geographic and political aspects of a society (Soares, Farhangmehr & Shoham, 2007). However, Hofstede’s framework has been criticized due to weak points in the research design, since his findings were solely based on a consulting project conducted for IBM in the 1960s (Javidan et al., 2006).

GLOBE Study

Another study represents The Global Leadership and Organizational Behaviour Effectiveness Research Program that is based on a ten-year research program of 62 societies. The researchers developed further dimensions, such as the institutional and in-group collectivism and organizational culture, mainly on the basis of cultural studies of Hofstede, Kluckhohn, Strodtbeck and McClelland and extended them with further dimensions (Lang & Baldauf, 2016). A major focus of this study was to what extent culture influences leaderships patterns and organizational cultures (House et al., 2004). The core dimensions of the GLOBE study include Uncertainty Avoidance, Power Distance, Institutional and in-group Collectivism, Gender Egalitarianism, Future Orientation, Performance Orientation and Humane Orientation. The major limitation of the GLOBE study is that the respondents were middle managers from corporations and therefore only represent a group within each culture that has been analyzed (Terlutter, Diehl & Mueller, 2006). Furthermore, the focus of this study was to examine universal and culture-based differences in the perceived effectiveness of leadership attributes. It is questionable if other focus groups and further data collection would have been generated other results (Den Hartog et al., 1999).

Schwartz

The model of Schwartz builds on Hofstede’s framework as he replaced the dimension of Individualism by the two dimensions Autonomy versus Conversation and Hierarchy and Mastery at the cultural-level. Schwartz and his colleagues collected over 44.000 respondents since the 1980s and developed an instrument that compromises 57 cultural values within 10 dimensions at the individual level and seven dimensions at the cultural level (Fontaine & Richardson, 2005) In his model, Schwartz suggests the broad grouping of nations based on shared history, religion, level of development, cultural contact and other factors (Terlutter, Diehl & Mueller, 2006). As with the frameworks mentioned above, Schwartz’s model value framework was based on teachers and students and shows a limitation in the results.

In summary, all three frameworks mentioned above show limitations, however they are widely used and accepted in management research. Therefore, this paper develops key areas to study in the Indian business culture on the basis of these frameworks. The key areas, that are shown in Figure 3, deal with cultural and value dimensions that are important for the development of trust. In the following paragraph, these key areas will be shortly introduced.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 3 - Key Areas to Study in the Indian Business Culture (own illustration)

History: Many researchers point out the influence of historical developments on the evolution of distinctive phenomena, such as the degree of cooperation, morale and commitment to the organization (Redding, Norman & Schlander,1994). This key area includes historical developments that had an influence on today’s business environment.

Leadership: Several cultural comparative studies examined the relationship between culture and leadership styles (House, Wright & Aditya, 1997). The literature on these studies generally emphasizes the connection between culture and leadership styles, pointing to a major divergence of how the universality of leadership patterns is viewed (House, et al., 2002). Therefore, it is highly important to examine the leadership styles in intercultural collaborations. Within the analysis of the leadership patterns, this work will examine the traditional view of leadership, as well as the new approaches towards leadership.

Relationships: The frameworks mentioned above include the dimension of relationship in their studies, examining whether cultures are collectivistic or individualistic cultures. Yuki et al. (2005) argue that various cognitive, affective and behavioral processes take place when people are involved in situation. This category examines to what extent the culture is relationship-oriented and how power distance is seen within the culture. Furthermore, the relationship towards family and time will be discussed.

Communication: Cai and Donohue (1997) portray culture as having a global influence on the communication behavior of people. Communication mechanisms help to manage multicultural team effectiveness by providing cultural sensitivity (Brett et al., 2006). As Kumar (2012) states, the language is the expression of thoughts and experiences of people in terms of their cultural environment and even if the same verbal and nonverbal language is spoken in different cultures, it has to cross cultural, political, social and generation gaps.

Tradition: Lammers & Hickson (1979: 10) argue that specific cultural traditions, values, ideologies and norms are ‘bound to differentiate as much or even more than structural factors between societies’. The key area Tradition includes religion, spirituality, signs and symbols. The challenge of spiritual practices at the work place has become greater as the result of the development of more intercultural groups that have increased employee interaction (Lewis & Geroy, 2000) Religion and spirituality is highly important in India, so this work will examine to what extent these factors influence the trust building in intercultural teams.

Ethical Values: Values have become a major construct of business research. According to Rokeach (1973: 5) values are ‘determinants of virtually all kinds of behavior that could called social behavior or social action’. Therefore, values determine and regulate relationships between individuals, organizations, institutions and societies (Agle & Caldwell, 1999).

5. Business Culture in India

This chapter will analyze the Indian business culture using the framework presented above. Starting with an overview of the history and background of the Indian business culture, this chapter will also deal with the key areas Leadership, Relationship, Communication, Tradition and Ethical Values.

5.1 History and background about business in India

India is described as an old, tradition-bound Asian society (Chatterjee & Pearson, 2016). The great diversity of substantial religion, linguistic, cultural and religious variations across the country resulted in different groups coexisting in mutual harmony despite these differences (Chhokar, 2008).

“[…] The details might vary from place to place, and from one caste to another, yet the sameness of the traditions on which all of them have been reared cannot be overlooked. (Bose, 1967, p.9)

It is more accurate to describe India as a cultural unit rather than a political entity, since the Indian culture and society have long been a loose, informal confederation joined by an indefinable similarity of social and cultural customs and practices (Chhokar, 2008). According to Basham (1954/1967) as cited by Chhokar (2008), the society developed materially, intellectually and spiritually. Today’s business world was greatly influenced by the long tradition of oral history. The influence of kings, described as autocratic monarchs, which ruled in Indian history can be seen in the widespread preference of strong leadership even today (Chhokar, 2008).

From 1858 to 1947, India was ruled by the British crown. In times before the British came and controlled much of India, India claimed to have the second highest of the world’s income (Sinha, 2004). In the early colonial period, India saw positive economic growth rates and a rise in the standard of living, notwithstanding Roy (2002: 122) states:

“General assessment of the impact of British rule on the lives of ordinary people have been overly influenced by the gloomy economic experience of the interwar period.”In 1991, India’s liberalization and economic restructuring program was caused due to a serious balance of payment crisis and very low foreign exchange reserves. This program included various processes, such as a macro- economic stabilization process and the opening of Indian markets, which made India attractive for multinational firms (Gopinath, 1998; Sinha, 2004). However, liberalization forced India to face increasing challenges of intensive competition. India developed to one of the world’s most popular emerging markets during this time (Som, 2008). Today, India is the world’s largest democracy with a total area of 3.3 million square kilometers, a population of 1,3 billion and a variety of climate zones. It has grown to one of the world’s leading exporters of computer software, however, the economy is a mixture of traditional village farming, modern agriculture, a wide range of modern industries and a multitude of services (Chhokar, 2008). Notwithstanding, the liberalization to increase attractiveness for foreign firms, companies are often faced with ownerships restrictions that requires a joint-venture with a local partner (Mohr & Puck, 2003).

The Caste System

The caste system in India is seen as a useful purpose in society as it provides ‘economic security in spite of obvious inequalities; and this security was guaranteed both by law and by custom’ (Bose, 1967:221). In 1500 BC castes are first mentioned in Hindu religious texts (Flood, 1996), however, the origin of the caste system is highly debated. Castas, meaning tribes, clans or families are the basis of social and economic structuring of the society and influenced the leadership practices in India (Chhokar, 2008). Hofstede (1980) identifies the continuous and dynamic existence of the caste system as one of the major sources of the high power index for India. There is evidence that the caste system is still relevant in today’s business context, nevertheless there is also evidence that caste-system related principles are reconsidered in the modern industrial sectors (Becker-Ritterspach & Raaijma, 2013).

5.2 Leadership

Traditional View of Leadership

Leadership is a very popular topic in India, however, there is a huge difference between political leaders and business leaders. The leadership style in India was greatly influenced by historical and religious leaders such as Gandhi, who shaped the destiny of modern India. According to Chhokar (2008) outstanding leadership in India is described as doing things that are path breaking, being a visionary, charismatic and inspiring people. Outstanding leaders are expected to develop trust and loyalty and command respect without having to ask for it (Chhokar,2008). Leaders generally have a high status within the Indian society as the social system in India is still hierarchical and status is strongly defined within the business culture (Chatterjee & Pearson, 2000). It is closely associated with high moral standards and responsibilities (Doh, Stumpf & Tymon, 2011). Indian people often look up to founders and successors of business organizations with adulation and respect (Chhokar, 2008) and often people approach work because they look up to their superior and want to show their affection and regard (Gopalan & Stahl, 1998). It is common that subordinates seek for directions, assistance and support of their senior (Gupta & Singh, 2012). Engaging with their country, culture and employees and following the approach of a commitment to social goals fueled by enlightened self-interest characterizes Indian leaders (Capelli et al., 2010). Leadership is seen as necessary and the majority of decisions are made at the highest position of the organization, since Indians value obedience and conformity (Chatterjee & Pearson, 2000). According to Sinha & Sinha (1990), the power play between leaders and their followers can be characterized by ‘sneh’ for the subordinate, which means affection and ‘shradha’ for the superior, which means deference. Those who devote to superiors and to power are treated with due and favor and those who disregard power are discriminated.

New Approach of leadership

Recent studies found out that Indian leadership was influenced by the globalization, which induced a shift from a traditional Indian management culture to a combination of Indian and international aspects (Davis, Chatterjee & Heuer, 2006). Especially top executives in India received a management education at well-known Western universities or institutions, while the top leadership positions are still filled by the members of the founding family. Becker-Ritterspach and Raaijma (2013) argue that the Western education, the internet and English language cause the development of a hybrid approach of management by combining indigenous and western leadership approaches where some Indian values mentioned above, such as loyalty and charisma continue to exist despite the Western influence. Gupta and Singh (2012) follow the same approach by emphasizing that educational institutes, the increasing ease of access of technology and different media forms led to an awareness of ideals and values of Western societies. However, other traditional practices, such as preferential hiring are expected to disappear. Nevertheless, Western hiring practices may not be reflected in family-owned organizations and public sector organizations in which the caste system and family consideration still plays a major role (Gopalan & Stahl, 1998). Different studies argue that primary and secondary modes of value expression coexist; the primary modes are grounded in traditional Indian culture, while the secondary modes are influenced by Western concepts (Neelankavil, Mathur & Zhang, 2000; Sinha, 2000). Concurrently, various studies are more skeptical towards global practices having a real impact on Indian management and argue that it does not change their core personality and Indian culture still has a pervasive influence on the conduct of business and expectations of leaders (Kakar et al., 2002; Sinha, 1995).

There is a generally shared perception that current management practices exit of a mix between traditional and Western or global elements (Becker- Ritterspach, 2013). However, the studies mentioned above differ in the evaluation to what extent Indian management practices are influenced by Western approaches.

To sum it up, Indian management practices and leadership are greatly influenced by India’s long history and globalization of markets. Educational systems, media forms and the easy access of technology led to the development of a broader world view and an orientation towards Western values, such as achievement, advancement and ability utilization (Gupta & Singh, 2012).

5.3 Relationships

Gopalan and Stahl (1998: 37) refer to Sinha (1988) by summarizing:

“In India, relationships are long lasting, organized on a hierarchical basis, and status oriented – husband over wife, elder brother over younger brothers and sisters, patriarchical side over matriarchical side, etc.”

Power Distance and Orientation

A study of Bamel et al. (2013) has shown that a result-reward orientation in Indian organizations positively affects effectiveness and is likely to develop an emotional bond that enhances employee effectiveness by increasing loyalty. Being loyal is considered as highly ethical behavior (Jackson, 2001) in India and is preferred over efficiency and independence (Gopalan & Stahl, 1998). As the GLOBE study showed, Indian Managers are more relationship and emotion oriented rather than task oriented (Chhokar, 2008). Job-relate decisions are influenced by interpersonal considerations rather than by task demands (Kanungo & Mendonca, 1994). Furthermore, the study of Bamel et al. (2013) showed that altruistic behavior, which means helping others, demonstrates an important point within the Indian business culture, since altruistic behavior creates a sense of belongingness and trust. The altruistic behavior and workplace support increases work commitment by moderating workplace conflicts and decreases depression and mental stress (Choenrom et al., 2005, Carmeli, 2003). In addition, the study has shown that Indian business people emphasize role clarity that minimizes the role ambiguity and helps prioritizing activities which are expected to the role (Bamel et al., 2013). These findings accompany the findings of Leadership mentioned above, since Indian business people value obedience and accept hierarchy.

Indian business people believe in group performance, since they seek for harmony. In fact, Indians strive for individual achievement but they are likely to share their success with others. It is quite common that some may sacrifice their individual goals and desires for a collective goal and welfare of their family or larger collective entities (Gopalan & Stahl, 1998). Group welfare is a fundamental virtue for all classes in the society and the commitment to serve others to achieve an ultimate goal is the stated route of success (Banerjee, 2008). Indian people cope with situations of crisis collectively and grow together. The members of a group are bounded in personalized relationships and strangers or non-group members are kept on distance (Sinha & Sinha, 1990). Sinha (2004) goes even further by stating that Indians are competitive, exploitative and manipulative towards outgroup members. Despite the fact that the Indian culture is considered to be of collectivist nature, especially younger generations show strands of thoughts, feelings and action that reflect the value of individualism (Gupta & Singh, 2012). Gupta and Singh (2012) describe India as being composed of two parts – the traditional part and the unconventional and outward-looking parts characterized by values, such as individualism. Various studies (Christie et al., 2003; Mohr and Puck, 2003; Monga, 2005) support an undertaking shift towards more individualism. However, in comparison to other countries, India is still a more collectivist culture (Christie et al., 2003). Merchant, Rose and Rose (2014) describe India as a vertical collectivist culture which means people perceive themselves as independent while accepting differences in status and hierarchy.

As already mentioned in the area of leadership, India is very hierarchically influenced. The society accepts changes, however, changes need to balance between old and new ideas (Banerjee, 2008). Dev and Babu (2007) state that individual human being and society are interrelated and one cannot create an independent identity. Since recognition or social acceptability is valued more than individual achievements in India, there is a strong socio-cultural influence of the personality and the behavior of Indian people (Shivani, Mukherjee & Sharan, 2006). Zimmermann and Sparrow (2007) argue that the less independent way of working in India might be connected to their culture’s tradition of more authoritative and less self-determined decision making. Becker-Ritterspach and Raaijma (2013: 156) follow a similar approach by arguing that professional distance is on the one hand created by the education system and on the other hand ‘complemented by a social distance which has its key roots in the Indian caste system’. The existence of continuing links between caste backgrounds and educational levels, occupations and labor market access (Saha, 2012) creates a general preference and acceptance for mental work over physical work (Shah, 2010). Indians have a strong distinction between ‘insiders’ and ‘outsiders’ (Gopalan & Stahl, 1998). Similar to an observable shift in the areas of collectivism and leadership, Kumar and Sankaran (2007) follow a related approach regarding power distance by arguing that the political equality since India’s independency resulted in a desire to reduce power distance.

Family

Family is one of the basic units and generations often live together in one house (Chhokar, 2008). People search for security and prestige within the family and value systems are transmitted through family, especially through storytelling of the older generations. Indians do not prioritize individual space but rather rely on balance between independent self and interdependent self- concepts (Banerjee, 2008). Often Indians work primarily to satisfy their family’s needs but once their primary needs are satisfied, the average Indian shifts it’s focus away from work to other pursuits (Gopalan & Stahl, 1998). Wisdom and experience of older generations is highly respected and older generations are socially active and enjoy their lives (Banerjee, 2008). Happiness is seen as a core value in Indian society for which some may sacrifice their own comfort and ambition, however, happiness is not expressed in materialistic gains. (Banerjee, 2008).

Time

India is characterized as a polychromic culture (Mitterer, Mimler & Thomas,2013) , doing many things simultaneously and being more concerned about people and the present moment. They believe that they are in command of time rather than being controlled by it (Hall, 2000). Indians are used to be interrupted during tasks and they show a high degree of spontaneity. Their plans are more short-term oriented, however, if the priority of a task is clearly communicated, they demonstrate a talent for improvisation (Mitterer, Mimler & Thomas, 2013). Time is seen in a more flexible and relaxed way as it is viewedas an infinite loop which has always been there and will continue to exist (Gopalan & Stahl, 1998).

5.4 Communication

India has an intense linguistic diversity with 22 official languages (Mohanty, 2010) and many Indians grow up bilingual or even trilingual. The most common language is Hindi however, English is the second official language of 100 million speakers and the language of law and government (Nishimura, Nevgi & Tella, 2008). Indian English was considered to be the language spoken by the educated people (Zaidman, 2001), ‘it symbolizes in Indians’ minds, better education, better culture and higher intellect’ (Vijayalakshmi & Babu, 2014: 1). It is not only used to communicate with people from other countries but also for inter-state and intrastate communication as the language of national communication (Vijayalakshmi & Babu, 2014; Gannon, 1994). Indian English is considered to be formal, poetic and includes stately and elegant forms sanctified by literary tradition (Mehrotra, 1995). Mehrotra (1995) states that the longer the sentence and the more indirect die expression, the more polite it is considered to be. The politeness depends on the length and sentences often include complicated structures which leads to a more indirect communication. In India communication is seen as an expression of humility and subservience in hierarchical relationships (Zaidmann, 2001). Nevertheless communication is highly valued in India, in their study with 245 Indian managers Bamel et al. (2013) indicate that effective communication enables developing positive affinities with co-workers and creates trust among colleagues. Nonverbal communication also plays a major role in Indian culture. (Vilanilam, 2005) Ceremonial greetings and gesture are very meaningful and have its own name (Banerjee, 2008).

5.6 Tradition

India’s culture has a long history of tradition and people are spiritually conscious and the trust in their own religion is high (Peter, 2002). Indians believe that life is predetermined and that an individual’s situation in his or her present life is a consequence of actions committed in previous birth or births (Kuppuswamy, 1994). India’s sages, seers and saints renounced the material world and practiced and propagated spiritualism (Chhokar, 2008). Indian people are characterized by a great sense of fairness in social and civic relations. Basham (1954/1967: 8) states ‘[…] The most striking feature of ancient India`s civilization is its humanity’. People enjoyed life, passionately delighting both in the things of the senses and the things of spirit.

Banerjee (2008) describes rituals and customs as a set of actions practiced in a society to follow cultural norms. In India rituals are quite customary, that is why often activities or business events are scheduled around what is considered to be an auspicious date and time (Chokkar, 2008). Indian systems of thought and spiritual traditions have emphasized on high standards of morality since ancient times and greatly influenced the lives of Indian people (Vivekananda, 2003).

5.7 Ethical Values in Business

Indians are ‘safe players’ by nature and only take calculated risks in terms of investment, expenditure and advancement (Banerjee, 2008). Sheshadri, Raghavan & Hegde (2007) state that business ethics and compliance in Indian companies is at an early stage of development. In 1997, Monappa (1977) already showed in his study that the majority of Indian managers tend to ignore ethical values in their daily practice. Chakraborty (1997) argues that along with the liberalization in 1991, an era of unethical business practices has been introduced. Kanagasabapathi (2007: 584) underlines this assumption by arguing: ‘The modern State of Independent India failed to understand the ethical orientations of the ancient Indian economy and business’. Indians rely more on intuition and on assessing relational attributes of specific situations (Chakraborty, 1997). They try to maintain a basic norm however, when they deal with outsiders, there are failures of ethical behavior (Kanagasabapathi,2007). Moral perspectives and ethical values are shaped on the basis of factors, such as culture, education and gender (Ardichvili et al., 2012). According to Sheth (2008), the Indian government acts as a gatekeeper with slow approval processes, a complex bureaucracy and corruption. Therefore, money and influence within high levels of management play a significant role to get things done (Ardichvili et al., 2012). Consequently, India scores 41 out of 100 points in the Corruption Perceptions Index 2018 of Transparency International and ranks 78th of 180 countries (Transparency International,2018).

6. Empirical Part: The Study

After a theoretical consideration, the following paragraphs describe the methodology of the chosen empirical approach to examine intercultural influences on trust building. This chapter will firstly deal with fundamental considerations of the research design, followed by the sampling strategy, the implementation of the study and a description of the evaluation methodology.

6.1 Research Design

The following paragraphs will briefly explain the research issue and the research objective, followed by an explanation and a critical review of the chosen research technique, the so called ‘Critical Incident Technique’.

6.1.1 Research Issue and Objective

As already discussed in the introductory part, German-Indian alliances, joint- ventures or outsourcing activities of IT services to India have become a major activity of global organizations (Winkler, Dibbern & Heinzl, 2008). As one of the emerging markets, India is of high importance for global players. In the recent decades, researchers have shown that trust is an essentials factor for managing the competitive market environment nowadays. Cultural misunderstandings represent a major challenge that might affect the development of trust. In particular it is relevant for specific persons within the organization, the so called ‘boundary spanning persons’ (Jemison, 1984) that operate in an interface function between the organization and project structures.

The general aim of this empirical study and therefore the relevant research question is Do cultural differences influence the development of trust in German-Indian collaboration, and if so: how do cultural differences affect the trust factor diagnosis and trust factor weighting relevant for the development of trust between German managers and their Indian colleagues or business partners.

6.1.2 Critical Incident Methodology

The critical incident technique (CIT), introduced by Flanagan in 1954 has become a widely used qualitative research method, which gathers important facts concerning behavior in defined situations. Flanagan developed the method out of a number of studies conducted in the Aviation Psychology Program, which had the objective to select and classify aircrews (Flanagan,1954). The technique was primarily used to determine job requirements that are critical for the success and failure in different industries (Flanagan, 1954).

The CIT is used to identify triggers and other influencing factors regarding different sorts of phenomena (Münscher & Kühlmann, 2011). The respondents are asked to describe significant incidents, involving their own and their partner’s behavior and the outcomes of perceived effects. The method takes into account cognitive, affective and behavioral elements in order to understand the incident from the perspective of the individual (Chell, 2004). More specifically, the respondents are asked to describe critical behaviors of their colleagues or partners that were significant for the development of an attitude.

Since the introduction of the technique, it has been used in a number of research disciplines, such as performance measurement (White and Locke,1981) or intercultural management (Hiller, 2009). Hiller (2009) describes critical incidents as situations in which misunderstandings, problems or conflicts arise in consequence of cultural differences between interaction partners. This empirical study will use the CIT to gather experience reports from 15 German managers on trust development to identify factors that affect the process of trust building between German and Indian managers. On the basis of these reports, the factors that either facilitate or complicate trust building between colleagues or business partners will be classified into categories. As already described in a previous chapter, the interview partners are German managers which have comprehensive experiences in working together with Indian colleagues or business partner.

Flanagan (1954: 354) emphasizes the flexibility and applicability of the technique by summarizing the two basic principles as following: ‘(a) reporting of facts regarding behavior is preferable to the collection of interpretations, ratings, and opinions based on general impressions; (b) reporting should be limited to those behaviors which, according to competent observers, make a significant contribution to the activity’. Furthermore, he defines critical incidents as extreme behaviors that are either effective or ineffective in achieving the general aim of an activity (Flanagan, 1954). The CIT procedure includes five steps which should be followed to ensure meaningful results. These steps include (1) the determination of the general aim of the activity, which should be a brief statement involving the formulation of the research question; (2) the development of plans and specifications for collecting incidents, which involves defining specific instructions for the respondents with respect to the standards to be used in evaluating and classifying the behavior observed. After the planning and specification, (3) the data collection takes place, which will be done by means of individual interviews. Thereby, it is essential that the reports include relevant details about the situation, the behavior and the consequences. After collecting the data, (4) the analysis with the purpose of summarizing and classifying the data into categories takes place. The last step (5) is the interpretation and presentation of results. At this point the identified categories will be used to derive recommendations for German managers.

6.1.3 Critical reflection of the methodology

The CIT represent a useful method to collect detailed and realistic descriptions, nonetheless it presents challenges with regards to reliability and validity. As the CIT is a retrospective research method, it may result in undesirable biases, such as consistency factors or memory lapses (Singh and Wilkes, 1996). The retrospective nature of this method might lead to a distortion or reinterpretation of an incident (Gremler, 2004). To overcome this challenge, different strategies are used to ensure an accurate and truthful report of an incident that might have taken place some time before the data collection. The interviewees will be asked to focus on details when reporting positive and negative critical incidents. Furthermore, memory-enhancing techniques in form of queries that support the respondents during the process of memorizing will be used (Münscher & Kühlmann, 2015). These techniques are presented in Chapter 6.2. Another challenge of the sensitive nature of critical incidents reported is, that it requires the respondents to report positive, as well as negative details about experiences concerning trust development. Therefore, it is necessary to report the anonymity to the respondents to create a trustful interview environment in which the respondent feels comfortable to open up.

Generally speaking, CIT is a valuable research method to be able to identify categories that affect the creation, strengthening or destruction of trust (Münscher & Kühlmann, 2015).

6.2 Sampling and conducting the study

This chapter contains the selection criteria for the study participants and a description of how the study is planned and conducted.

6.2.1 Selection criteria and process for study participants

For this empirical study German managers that have extensive experiences in German-Indian collaboration were interviewed, which means they work or have worked together with Indian colleagues or business partners. For the interviews, managers in leading positions with German nationality were recruited. Furthermore, the interview partners should represent a heterogeneous group of leadership personalities across diverse industries and companies to guarantee a meaningful result.

6 .2.2 Planning and conducting the interviews

The study is conducted according to the above presented CIT method in the form of open guided interviews. The focus is on the simplest case of the interpersonal trust development, the relationship between two people. Therefore, the interview partners are supposed to report about relations of trust between themselves and a colleague or business partner. The interview guideline is structured into two parts:

Part 1 – Experiences with successful trust development

If you think of different colleagues or business partners with whom you work with: Pick someone of whom you think: I trust this person.

How did you win that persons trust? Please start from the point where you got to know each other: What did happen one after another? How did you recognize that you can trust this person?

Part 2 – Experiences with loss of trust

In professional life, you sometimes have to question the trust of your colleagues or business partners. If you think of different colleagues or business partners with whom you work with: Can you remember a situation in which something happened that led to mistrust? Why did you question those persons’ trust? What has happened?

As already mentioned in the critical reflection of the CIT, it is of high importance that the respondents report details, which might be a challenge and this process should not be influenced by the interviewer. Possible influences might be individual expectations, type of questions and reactions (Münscher, 2011). Therefore, a neutral interview-behavior is essential to minimize these interview effects. Especially in open interviews without a standardized structure, the interviewer has to address questions individually. Figure 4 shows an overview of structured, content-related queries which were used during the interviews:

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 4 – Overview of structured, content-related queries (Münscher, 2011: 124)

6.3 Data Collection Methodology

The following chapter will include a description of the the recruitment of the interview partners, the procedure of the interview, a specification of the sampling and a description of the representativeness of this study.

6.3.1 Recruitment of interview partner and interview procedure

The recruitment of interview partners took place through different channels. In the first place the employment as a working student at an international automotive supplier led to a list of interview partners across the whole company group. The recruitment process was partly supported by seniors that acted as a mediator and partly by directly connecting to potential interview partners. Furthermore, some of the interview partners were recruited through the mediation of family members and acquaintances. Another access to potential interview partners represented the social network platform for business contacts, LinkedIn. Subsequently, the written request of potential interview partners took place via E-Mail. This request included a specification of the study with information for participants about the recording, the confidentiality of data and the transcription approach. It also included the structure of the interviews to enable previous thoughts about the topic (Appendix A). The scheduling of the interviews took place through correspondence or by telephone. The interviews were conducted between calendar week 10 and 20. 14 of 15 interviews were conducted without a postponement. Every interview was conducted in the mother tongue of the interview partner, German. At the beginning of every interview, a short self- introduction, an explanation of the research project and the interview technique took place. The introductory part of the interviews are highly important to establish a connection and build up a relationship to the interview partner in order to create a sense of well-being and an environment in which the interview partner feels safe to open up. It is precisely explained what the study is about, what methodology is used and underlined that a detailed explanation of incidents is very important. Additionally, the interview partner is asked if he or she agrees to a recording of the interview, which is critical for the data evaluation. Every interview partner agreed to the recording of the interview. The interviews were recorded with a smartphone and subsequently transcribed. The interview partners were asked to shortly outline their position and field of activity before the interview started with Part 1. Following the interviews, a short questionnaire was filled out together with the interview partner on site or in the case of an audio-telephone interview it was sent to them after the interview with the request to fill it out, sign it and send it back. This questionnaire includes socio-demographic data, as well as data about the experiences of the interview partner within India. Furthermore, this questionnaire serves as a declaration of consent that the anonymized transcript will be used for the purpose of research (Appendix B).

6.3.2 Specification of sampling and data material

The sample includes 15 interviews with German managers with a recording time that compromises to 561.41 minutes in total, which means 9.36 hours. The average interview duration is 37.43 minutes. An overview of the key data of the sampling is given in the following figures.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 5 - Age and Gender of Interview Partner (own illustration)

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 6 - Industry and Management Level (own illustration)

The figures above illustrate that the sampling consists of 14 male and one female interview partner of which the majority represents the age group between 50 and above 60. The interview partners belong to nine different industries of which the manufacturing industry and the sealing solution industry represent 60%. Eight of the interview partners belong to the upper management level including the following positions: one Senior Vice President, one Chief Financial Officer, two Chief Executive Officers and four Managing Directors. The middle management includes three Vice President positions, three Directors of different departments and one leading project manager.

The following figures 7 illustrates the duration since the interview partner have been in contact with Indians and the contact frequency with their Indian colleagues or business partner.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 7 - Illustration of the duration of the contact and the frequency (own illustration)

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 8 - Illustration of longest stay in India and contact frequency (own illustration)

The sampling includes seven expatriates in total, four people who are in contact with Indians on a daily basis, one who is in contact with Indian colleagues every second day, two who are in contact once per week and one who is in contact with Indian colleagues or business partners every second week. 60 percent of the interview partners have been in contact with Indians since more than eleven years, of which four have been in contact since more than 20 years on a daily basis as an expatriate. One of the other expatriates is in contact since one to five years and the other two are in contact with Indians since six to ten years. When it comes to the longest stay in India the sampling shows a wide range between two days to 24 years. 60 percent of the interview partners stayed in India between one week and three years. It should be noted that one of the interview partner who is included in the time range one to two weeks indicated that he stayed in India 30 times for one to two weeks. A detailed list of the interviewees can be found in Appendix C.

6.3.3 Representativeness of the sampling

According to Münscher (2011) the representativeness refers to the structural equality between the sampling and the population it is related to. This study represents the experience reports of 15 interview partners from nine different industries. The duration since they have been in contact varies from one year to 26 years which represents a long time frame and guarantees a long period under review. The quality of the results depends on how detailed the interview partners share their experiences and to what extent they are willing to share information. To prevent negative interview effects and ensure detailed reports, the dialogue techniques presented in chapter 6.2.2 were used. Due to time reasons, this study is limited to 15 interviews and an unequal distribution of genders.

6.4 Evaluation Methodology

The evaluation of the data material that amounts to 9.36 hours takes place through a qualitative content analysis. In the following chapter, the procedure of evaluating the interviews in order to be able to answer the research question will be described.

In the first place, this analysis investigates the interview material with regards to three evaluation steps that are presented in table 1.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Table 1 - Evaluation Steps (own illustration)

In the course of this analysis, the results of the theoretical analysis from chapter five will be included in Step 2 and Step 3.

The qualitative content analysis is carried out following the scheme of Mayring (2015). He suggests three basic forms of interpretation: the summary, the explication and the structuring. Firstly, this approach recommends reducing the data material to the essential content to build a manageable corpus that illustrates the basic material. In the explication, additional material is being involved to extend the understanding. The last form represents the structuring in which specific aspects are filtered and the data material is evaluated according to specific criteria (Mayring, 2015). The following figure 9 shows a complete overview of the data evaluation.

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 9 - Overview of evaluation methodology (own illustration, inspired by Münscher, 2011: 142, 149)

The preparation starts with a transcription of the 15 interviews following the transcription convention guideline which is illustrated in the Appendix D. For the reconstruction of trust factors based on experience reports of the interview partners, it is important that the exact wording of the interview partner is available for the analysis. To guarantee a reading flow, the grammar and colloquial language is corrected while the terminology of the interview partner is maintained. Given the sensibility of this research topic, the transcripts are edited to guarantee that there is no possibility to draw conclusions between the statements and the interview partner. Followed by that, the 186 text pages (Word-standard formatting, 1.5 line spacing, Arial, font size 12) are imported into the software program MAXQDA. MAXQDA is a software program that allows the organization, structuring and analysis of data. In Figure 10 an extract of the program is shown.

[...]