Jenna-Lyn R. Roman, Juanne Greene, James A. Swaim, Graham H. Lowman, Michael J. Maloni
{"title":"Re-examining the ability, benevolence, and integrity (ABI) model of trust: Do business professors really need all three?","authors":"Jenna-Lyn R. Roman, Juanne Greene, James A. Swaim, Graham H. Lowman, Michael J. Maloni","doi":"10.1016/j.ijme.2025.101207","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Students’ trust in their professors is a critical success factor for student satisfaction and retention, and ultimately professor performance. The seminal ABI model of trust maintains that all three dimensions of ability (A), benevolence (B), and integrity (I) are necessary to establish trust. In contrast to this one-size-fits-all perspective, our qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) on undergraduate and graduate business student survey data finds that professors generally do not always need all three ABI dimensions. For instance, benevolence or a combination of ability and integrity can suffice for most students. Moreover, configurations for higher trust differ from those leading to lower levels of trust. Complementing these results, an ensuing qualitative study reveals that the specific dimensions of ABI that students perceive as important for building trust differ from professor perceptions. Specifically, students prioritize relational indicators as opposed to task indicators, which are favored by professors. Additionally, personal attributes emerged as a fourth dimension, suggesting the ABI model of trust may be incomplete for trust in professors. In combination, these results challenge a key underlying assumption of the ABI model and provide novel and practical insight into how to train new professors and re-train established professors to foster trust with students.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47191,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Management Education","volume":"23 3","pages":"Article 101207"},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Management Education","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1472811725000771","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Students’ trust in their professors is a critical success factor for student satisfaction and retention, and ultimately professor performance. The seminal ABI model of trust maintains that all three dimensions of ability (A), benevolence (B), and integrity (I) are necessary to establish trust. In contrast to this one-size-fits-all perspective, our qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) on undergraduate and graduate business student survey data finds that professors generally do not always need all three ABI dimensions. For instance, benevolence or a combination of ability and integrity can suffice for most students. Moreover, configurations for higher trust differ from those leading to lower levels of trust. Complementing these results, an ensuing qualitative study reveals that the specific dimensions of ABI that students perceive as important for building trust differ from professor perceptions. Specifically, students prioritize relational indicators as opposed to task indicators, which are favored by professors. Additionally, personal attributes emerged as a fourth dimension, suggesting the ABI model of trust may be incomplete for trust in professors. In combination, these results challenge a key underlying assumption of the ABI model and provide novel and practical insight into how to train new professors and re-train established professors to foster trust with students.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Management Education provides a forum for scholarly reporting and discussion of developments in all aspects of teaching and learning in business and management. The Journal seeks reflective papers which bring together pedagogy and theories of management learning; descriptions of innovative teaching which include critical reflection on implementation and outcomes will also be considered.