The article is devoted to the study of corporate solidarity in Russian industrial enterprises and the influence of organisational trust on the processes of its formation. The results of surveys conducted in 2021 - 2022 at three large industrial enterprises (the total number of respondents was 2764 people) were used as the empirical basis of the study. It is based on methods for studying attitudes and work behaviour, repeatedly tested by Russian authors, as well as on the method for measuring organisational trust, used in domestic practice for the first time. It was found that the characteristics of most employees correspond to the model of corporate solidarity, while organisational trust really plays a positive role in its formation: trusting relationships with colleagues help to strengthen the identification of employees with the enterprise, and vertical trust stimulates the development of pro-organisational attitudes.

A typology of trust definitions is proposed, as well as a conceptualisation of trust in the field of labour relations, that allowed to interpret the level of trust at the surveyed enterprises as relatively high. Understanding trust in scientific literature tends to psychologise this concept - to reduce it to a psychological attitude. Taking into account the status and temporal aspects of labour relations allows, in our opinion, to resociologise the concept of "trust". Trust in the sphere of production should be understood as reciprocal and based on institutional action. As a measure to stimulate trust between management and employees, it is proposed to take into account the experience of working directors in foreign practice as a channel for informing employees about the financial and economic situation of the enterprise and legitimising of management decisions. Historically, this institution was associated with the participation of employees in management, that rather discredited its capabilities in the eyes of both parties, since it can seem ephemeral to one side and an encroachment on the prerogatives of management to the other.

The specificity of the interaction of various types of trust allows us to conclude that the prospects for the development of corporate solidarity at domestic enterprises depend mainly on the vector of development of the organisational environment and labour relations.

organizational trust, corporate solidarity, identification with the enterprise

1.  Bessokirnaya G. P., Tatarova G. G. Identifikatsiya s predpriyatiem: kontseptual'naya model' i instrumentariy issledovaniya [Identification with the enterprise: conceptual model and research tools]. 2013. Accessed 01.12.2022. URL: http://www.isras.ru/publ.html?id=2768 (in Russ.).
2. Voronin G. L., Kozyreva P. M., Kosolapov M. S. Socio-economic behavior of Russian households in 1994–2020. Vestnik RMEPZN NIU VSHE, 2022: 12 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.19181/rlms-hse.2022; EDN: KVGNWX.
3. Klimova S. Personifikaciya ili solidarnost' [Personification or solidarity]. Otechestvennye zapiski, 2003: 3(12) (in Russ.). Accessed 25.03.2022. URL: https://strana-oz.ru/2003/3/personifikaciya-ili-solidarnost.
4. Kozyreva P. M. Doverie i ego resursy v sovremennoj Rossii [Trust and its resources in modern Russia]. Moscow, IS RAN, 2011: 172 (in Russ.). EDN: PVCPIX.
5. Menshikova O. I. The level of well-being of the working population as a concentrated expression of the quality of working life. The world of new economy, 2020: 3: 15–26 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.26794/2220-6469-2020-14-3-15-26; EDN: VWXJCQ.
6. Hired Worker in Modern Russia. Ed. by Z. T. Golenkova. Moscow, Novyy Khronograf, 2015: 368 (in Russ.).
7. Profsoyuznoe prostranstvo sovremennoj Rossii [Trade union space of modern Russia]. Ed. by V. Borisov, S. Klark. Moscow, ISITO, 2011: 331 (in Russ.). EDN: ZRJSFZ.
8. The Russian labor market: trends, institutions, structural changes. Ed. by V. E. Gimpelson, R. I. Kapelyushnikov, S. Yu. Roshchin. Moscow, TSSR, 2017: 145 (in Russ.).
9. Solidarization in the working environment: social and individual. Ed. by V. A. Yadov. Moscow, IS RAN, 1998: 231 (in Russ.).
10. Temnitskiy A. L. Predposylki vyrashchivaniya institutov partnerstva v sfere trudovyh otnoshenij: konceptual'nye modeli i empiricheskaya proverka [Prerequisites for the cultivation of partnership institutions in the field of labor relations: conceptual models and empirical testing]. In Modernizaciya ekonomiki i vyrashchivanie institutov. Ed. by E. G. Yasin. Vol. 2. Moscow, GU VSHE, 2005: 104–116 (in Russ.). EDN: VFKOYP.
11. Toshchenko Zh. T. Precariat: from protoclass to new class. Moscow, Nauka, 2018: 350 (in Russ.). EDN: VKRCMM.
12. Labor rights: who is on guard? 2018. Accessed 01.12.2022. URL: https://wciom.ru/analytical-reviews/analiticheskii-obzor/trudovye-prava-kto-na-strazhe (in Russ.).
13. Baier A. Trust and antitrust. Ethics, 1986: 96: 2: 231–260. DOI: 10.1086/292745.
14. Bales R. F. Interaction Process Analysis: A Method for the Study of Small Groups. Cambridge, MA, Addison-Wesley, 1950: 234.
15. Barber B. The Logic and Limits of Trust. New Brunswick, Rutgers University Press, 1983: 190.
16. Blau P. M. Exchange and Power in Social  Life. New York, Wiley, 1964: 352.
17. Bigley G. A., Pearce J. L. Straining for shared meaning in organization science: Problems of trust and distrust. The Academy of Management Review, 1998: 23: 3: 405–421. DOI: 10.2307/259286.
18. Coleman J. S. Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA, Belknap Press of Harvard University, 1990: 993.
19. Cook J., Wall T. New work attitude measures of trust, organizational commitment and personal need non-fulfilment. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 1980: 53: 39–52. DOI: 10.1111/j.2044-8325.1980.tb00005.x.
20. Costa A. C., Anderson N. Measuring trust in teams: Development and validation of a multifaceted measure of formative and reflective indicators of team trust. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 2011: 20: 1: 119–154. DOI: 10.1080/13594320903272083.
21. Cropanzano R., Mitchell M. S. Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 2005: 31: 6: 874–900. DOI: 10.1177/0149206305279602.
22. Deutsch M. The resolution of conflict, constructive and destructive processes. New Haven, Yale University Press, 1973: 420.
23. Dietz G., den Hartog D. Measuring trust inside organizations. Personnel Review, 2006: 35: 5: 557–588. DOI: 10.1108/00483480610682299.
24. Dirks K. T., Ferrin D. L. The role of trust in organizational settings. Organization Science, 2001: 12: 4: 450–467. DOI: 10.1287/ORSC.12.4.450.10640.
25. Dirks K. T., de Jong B. Trust within the workplace: A review of two waves of research and a glimpse of the third. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2022: 9: 247–276. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012420-083025.
26. Dutton J. E., Dukerich J. M., Harquail C. V. Organizational images and member identification. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1994: 39: 239–263. DOI: 10.2307/2393235.
27. Gambetta D. Can we trust trust? In Gambetta D. (ed.). Trust: Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations. Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1988: 213–237.
28. Giddens A. Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in a Late Modern Age. Stanford, Stanford University Press, 1991: 264.
29. Hardin R. Trust and Trustworthiness. New York, Russell Sage Foundation, 2002: 234.
30. Kramer R. M. Trust and distrust in organizations: emerging perspectives, enduring questions. Annual review of psychology, 1999: 50: 569–98. DOI: 10.1146/ANNUREV.PSYCH.50.1.569.
31. Kramer R. M. Collective Trust within Organizations: Conceptual Foundations and Empirical Insights. Corporate Reputation Review, 2010: 13: 82–97. DOI: 10.1057/CRR.2010.9.
32. Legood A., van der Werff L. et al. A critical review of the conceptualization, operationalization, and empirical literature on cognition‐based and affect‐based trust. Journal of Management Studies, 2023: 60: 2: 495–537. DOI: 10.1111/joms.12811
33. Lewicki R. J., Bunker B. B. Trust in relationships: A model of development and decline. In Bunker B. B., Rubin J. Z. (eds) Conflict, cooperation, and justice: Essays inspired by the work of Morton Deutsch. San Francisco, CA, Jossey-Bass/Wiley, 1995: 133–173.
34. Lewicki R. J., Tomlinson E. C., Gillespie N. M. Models of Interpersonal Trust Development: Theoretical Approaches, Empirical Evidence, and Future Directions. Journal of Management, 2006: 32: 6: 991–1022. DOI: 10.1177/0149206306294405.
35. Lewis J. D., Weigert A. Trust as a social reality. Social Forces, 1985: 63: 4: 967–985. DOI: 10.1093/sf/63.4.967.
36. Luhmann N. Trust and Power. Two works by Niklas Luhmann. Chichester, John Wiley & Sons, 1982: 208.
37. Mayer R. C., Davis J. H., Schoorman F. D. An integrative model of organizational trust. The Academy of Management Review, 1995: 20: 3: 709–734. DOI: 10.2307/258792.
38. McAllister D. J. Affect- and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 1995: 38: 1: 24–59. DOI: 10.5465/256727.
39. Möllering G. The nature of trust: From Georg Simmel to a theory of expectation, interpretation and suspension. Sociology, 2001: 35: 2: 403–20. DOI: 10.1177/S0038038501000190.
40. Möllering G. The trust/control duality. International Sociology, 2005: 20: 3: 283–305. DOI: 10.1177/0268580905055478.
41. Möllering G. The practical wisdom of trust: An interview with Bart Nooteboom. Journal of Trust Research, 2015: 5: 2: 170–183. DOI: 10.1080/21515581.2015.1070731.
42. Parsons T. Research with human subjects and the "professional complex." Daedalus, 1969: 98: 2: 325–360. DOI: 10.2307/20023881.
43. Rousseau D. M., Sitkin S. B. et al. Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 1998: 23: 393–404. DOI: 10.5465/AMR.1998.926617.
44. Schoorman F. D., Mayer R. C., Davis J. H. An integrative model of organizational trust: Past, present, and future. The Academy of Management Review, 2007: 32: 2: 344–354. DOI: 10.2307/20159304.
45. Simmel G. The philosophy of money. 3rd ed. D. Frisby (ed.). Translated by T. Bottomore and D. Frisby. London-New York, Routledge, 2004: 616.
46. Sitkin S. B., Roth N. L. Explaining the Limited effectiveness of Legalistic “Remedies” for Trust/Distrust. Organization Science, 1993: 4: 3: 367–392. DOI: 10.1287/orsc.4.3.367.
47. Six F. E. Building interpersonal trust within organizations: a relational signalling perspective. Journal of Management and Governance, 2007: 11: 285–309. DOI: 10.1007/S10997-007-9030-9.
48. Sztompka P. Trust: A Sociological Theory. Cambridge, MA, Cambridge University Press, 1999: 214.
49. Zand D. Trust and managerial problem solving. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1972: 17: 2: 229–239. DOI: 10.2307/2393957.
50. Zhang S., Liu Z. A meta-analysis of the relationship between organizational identification and turnover intention. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2016: 48: 1561–1573. DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2016.01561.