<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article
  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "http://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.0/JATS-journalpublishing1.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.0" specific-use="sps-1.7" xml:lang="pt" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
	<front>
		<journal-meta>
			<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">rap</journal-id>
			<journal-title-group>
				<journal-title>Revista de Administração Pública</journal-title>
				<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">Rev. Adm. Pública</abbrev-journal-title>
			</journal-title-group>
			<issn pub-type="ppub">0034-7612</issn>
			<issn pub-type="epub">1982-3134</issn>
			<publisher>
				<publisher-name>Fundação Getulio Vargas</publisher-name>
			</publisher>
		</journal-meta>
		<article-meta>
			<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1590/0034-7612167811</article-id>
			<article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">00006</article-id>
			<article-categories>
				<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
					<subject>Artigo</subject>
				</subj-group>
			</article-categories>
			<title-group>
				<article-title>Uma análise dos antecedentes da confiança no líder numa unidade policial de operações especiais</article-title>
				<trans-title-group xml:lang="es">
					<trans-title>Un análisis de los antecedentes de confianza en el líder en una unidad policial de operaciones especiales</trans-title>
				</trans-title-group>
				<trans-title-group xml:lang="en">
					<trans-title>An analysis of the antecedents of trust in the leader of a special operations police unit</trans-title>
				</trans-title-group>
			</title-group>
			<contrib-group>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Zanini</surname>
						<given-names>Marco Tulio</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Conceição</surname>
						<given-names>Maurilio Nunes da</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3">1</xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Migueles</surname>
						<given-names>Carmen Pires</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">1</xref>
				</contrib>
			</contrib-group>
				<aff id="aff1">
					<label>1</label>
					<institution content-type="original">Fundação Getulio Vargas/ Escola Brasileira de Administração Pública e de Empresas, Rio de Janeiro / RJ- Brasil</institution>
					<institution content-type="normalized">Fundação Getúlio Vargas</institution>
					<institution content-type="orgname">Fundação Getulio Vargas</institution>
					<institution content-type="orgdiv1">Escola Brasileira de Administração Pública e de Empresas</institution>
					<addr-line>
						<named-content content-type="city">Rio de Janeiro</named-content>
        				<named-content content-type="state">RJ</named-content>
					</addr-line>
					<country country="BR">Brazil</country>
					<email>marco.zanini@fgv.br</email>
				</aff>
				<aff id="aff2">
					<label>1</label>
					<institution content-type="original">Fundação Getulio Vargas/ Escola Brasileira de Administração Pública e de Empresas, Rio de Janeiro / RJ- Brasil</institution>
					<institution content-type="normalized">Fundação Getúlio Vargas</institution>
					<institution content-type="orgname">Fundação Getulio Vargas</institution>
					<institution content-type="orgdiv1">Escola Brasileira de Administração Pública e de Empresas</institution>
					<addr-line>
						<named-content content-type="city">Rio de Janeiro</named-content>
        				<named-content content-type="state">RJ</named-content>
					</addr-line>
					<country country="BR">Brazil</country>
					<email>carmen.migueles@fgv.br</email>
				</aff>
				<aff id="aff3">
					<label>1</label>
					<institution content-type="original">Fundação Getulio Vargas/ Escola Brasileira de Administração Pública e de Empresas, Rio de Janeiro / RJ- Brasil</institution>
					<institution content-type="normalized">Fundação Getúlio Vargas</institution>
					<institution content-type="orgname">Fundação Getulio Vargas</institution>
					<institution content-type="orgdiv1">Escola Brasileira de Administração Pública e de Empresas</institution>
					<addr-line>
						<named-content content-type="city">Rio de Janeiro</named-content>
        				<named-content content-type="state">RJ</named-content>
					</addr-line>
					<country country="BR">Brazil</country>
					<email>nunes113@hotmail.com</email>
				</aff>
			<author-notes>
				<fn fn-type="other" id="fn6">
					<p>Marco Tulio F. Zanini - Fundação Getulio Vargas / Escola Brasileira de Administração Pública e de Empresas. E-mail: marco.zanini@fgv.br.</p>
				</fn>
				<fn fn-type="other" id="fn7">
					<p>Maurilio Nunes da Conceição - Mestre em gestão empresarial pela Escola Brasileira de Administração Pública e de Empresas (FGV). E-mail: nunes113@hotmail.com.</p>
				</fn>
				<fn fn-type="other" id="fn8">
					<p>Carmen P. Migueles - Fundação Getulio Vargas / Escola Brasileira de Administração Pública e de Empresas. E-mail: carmen.migueles@fgv.br.</p>
				</fn>
			</author-notes>
			<pub-date pub-type="epub-ppub">
				<season>May-Jun</season>
				<year>2018</year>
			</pub-date>
			<volume>52</volume>
			<issue>3</issue>
			<fpage>451</fpage>
			<lpage>468</lpage>
			<history>
				<date date-type="received">
					<day>23</day>
					<month>07</month>
					<year>2017</year>
				</date>
				<date date-type="accepted">
					<day>10</day>
					<month>08</month>
					<year>2017</year>
				</date>
			</history>
			<permissions>
				<license license-type="open-access" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xml:lang="pt">
					<license-p>Este é um artigo publicado em acesso aberto sob uma licença Creative Commons</license-p>
				</license>
			</permissions>
			<abstract>
				<title>Resumo</title>
				<p>Este artigo se propõe a aprofundar a compreensão dos elementos de coordenação informal na gestão de equipes que atuam em cenários complexos e imprevisíveis. Apresentamos os resultados de um estudo realizado numa unidade de operações especiais de polícia, o Batalhão de Operações Policiais Especiais do Rio de Janeiro (Bope/RJ), utilizando métodos quantitativos. Analisamos a relação entre os antecedentes da confiança e a dimensão distância de poder e a confiança pessoal e profissional no líder. Os resultados confirmam uma relação direta e negativa entre distância de poder e confiança profissional no líder, e uma relação direta e positiva com alguns antecedentes da confiança. Quanto maior a percepção da qualidade da comunicação interna e o compartilhamento e delegação de autoridade nos processos decisórios, maior é a confiança pessoal no líder.</p>
			</abstract>
			<trans-abstract xml:lang="es">
				<title>Resumen</title>
				<p>Este artículo se propone profundizar en la comprensión de los elementos de coordinación informal en la gestión de equipos que actúan en escenarios complejos e imprevisibles. Presentamos los resultados de un estudio realizado en una unidad de operaciones especiales de policía, el <italic>Batalhão de Operações Policiais Especiais do Rio de Janeiro</italic> (Bope/RJ), utilizando métodos cuantitativos. Analizamos la relación entre los antecedentes de la confianza y la dimensión distancia de poder y la confianza personal y profesional en el líder. Los resultados confirman una relación directa y negativa entre distancia de poder y confianza profesional en el líder, y una relación directa y positiva con algunos antecedentes de la confianza. Cuanto mayor es la percepción de la calidad de la comunicación interna y el compartir y delegación de autoridad en los procesos decisorios, mayor es la confianza personal en el líder.</p>
			</trans-abstract>
			<trans-abstract xml:lang="en">
				<title>Abstract</title>
				<p>This article aims to widen the understanding of informal coordination elements in the management of teams working in complex and unpredictable scenarios. It presents the results of a study carried out in a special operations police unit, the <italic>Batalhão de Operações Policiais Especiais do Rio de Janeiro</italic> (Bope/RJ), using quantitative methods. The study analyzed the relationship between the antecedents of trust and power distance and personal and professional trust in the leader. The results confirm a direct and negative relationship between power distance and professional trust in the leader, and a direct and positive relationship with some antecedents of trust. The greater the perceptions of internal communication quality, and sharing and delegation of authority in the decision process, the greater the trust in the leader.</p>
			</trans-abstract>
			<kwd-group xml:lang="pt">
				<title>Palavras-chave:</title>
				<kwd>antecedentes da confiança</kwd>
				<kwd>confiança</kwd>
				<kwd>liderança</kwd>
				<kwd>unidades policiais especiais</kwd>
				<kwd>gestão de equipes</kwd>
			</kwd-group>
			<kwd-group xml:lang="es">
				<title>Palabras clave:</title>
				<kwd>antecedentes de confianza</kwd>
				<kwd>confianza</kwd>
				<kwd>liderazgo</kwd>
				<kwd>unidades policiales especiales</kwd>
				<kwd>gestión de equipos</kwd>
			</kwd-group>
			<kwd-group xml:lang="en">
				<title>Keywords:</title>
				<kwd>antecedents of trust</kwd>
				<kwd>trust</kwd>
				<kwd>leadership</kwd>
				<kwd>special police units</kwd>
				<kwd>team management</kwd>
			</kwd-group>
			<counts>
				<fig-count count="0"/>
				<table-count count="3"/>
				<equation-count count="0"/>
				<ref-count count="71"/>
				<page-count count="18"/>
			</counts>
		</article-meta>
	</front>
	<body>
		<sec>
			<title>1. Introdução</title>
			<p>Este trabalho tem como objetivo aprofundar a compreensão dos elementos da coordenação informal nas organizações que operam em cenários de alta complexidade e incerteza.<xref ref-type="fn" rid="fn1"><sup>1</sup></xref> Entre eles, liderança e confiança aparecem em alguns trabalhos como elementos de maior relevância para explicar a diferença de desempenho entre organizações muitas vezes similares (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Braun et al., 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">Pinheiro Neto, 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B70">Zanini et al., 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">Haas, 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">Legood, Thomas e Sacramento, 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">Hasel e Grover, 2017</xref>). Especialmente em contextos de alta complexidade e imprevisibilidade, o engajamento e a confiança são apontados como fundamentais para garantir a cooperação na busca dos ajustes internos necessários para a construção de respostas rápidas aos desafios do ambiente (Zanini et al., 2013; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">Hannah et al., 2009</xref>).</p>
			<p>Neste sentido, apresentamos uma análise dos antecedentes da confiança no líder nas equipes operacionais no Batalhão de Operações Policiais Especiais da Polícia Militar do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (Bope/RJ), uma unidade policial de operações especiais, que constitui uma força de intervenção da Polícia Militar do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (PMERJ). Na literatura, essas organizações são reconhecidas como <italic>critical action organizations</italic> (CAOs) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">Hannah et al., 2009</xref>). Segundo Hannah e colaboradores (2009), as organizações de ação crítica se caracterizam pelo engajamento em eventos extremos, como em combates, com alto potencial de consequências críticas de grandes proporções envolvendo o risco de vida de ambos, membros e não membros.</p>
			<p>Para melhor compreender esses elementos de coordenação informal, liderança e confiança, estudamos o caso do Bope/RJ, onde alta incerteza, imprevisibilidade, complexidade e volatilidade do ambiente podem ser estudadas em situações extremas, pois ao contrário das organizações produtivas, onde há controle e relativa previsibilidade sobre as variáveis que interferem nas rotinas operacionais, o combate ao crime pressupõe a capacidade de enfrentar ações randômicas ou propositalmente planejadas para reduzir a efetividade das ações policiais. Ou seja, a rotina de trabalho ocorre em um ambiente onde a reação proposital aos esforços das equipes policiais é a característica fundamental da atividade e onde o erro ou um eventual fracasso pode resultar em perdas de vidas de policiais ou civis.</p>
			<p>Em linha com o estudo das CAOs, alguns trabalhos preliminares abordando a organização (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B67">Zanini, Colmerauer e Lima, 2015</xref>; Zanini, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B38">Migueles e Colmerauer, 2014</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B70">Zanini et al., 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">Pinheiro Neto, 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B55">Storani, 2008</xref>) demonstram que a confiança no líder é fator fundamental para a aceitação de risco, mesmo em contextos extremos, onde os riscos pessoais e institucionais próprios da atividade-fim da organização podem ser de grande magnitude. Nesses estudos anteriores, os antecedentes de confiança foram investigados de acordo com escalas internacionalmente testadas.<xref ref-type="fn" rid="fn2"><sup>2</sup></xref> O aprofundamento desta análise nos fez perceber, no entanto, que aspectos característicos do ambiente institucional onde a organização opera podem colocar desafios específicos para a definição dos fatores-chave dos antecedentes de confiança.</p>
			<p>Ao abordarmos o contexto institucional específico onde está inserida a organização e seu impacto na relação entre os antecedentes da confiança e a confiança no líder, este estudo contribui igualmente para a formulação das teorias e definições de liderança em contexto. Alguns estudiosos têm chamado a atenção para essa necessidade (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">Oc, 2017</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B40">Nevicka et al., 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">Hannah et al., 2009</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">Avolio, 2007</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B45">Porter e McLauglin, 2006</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B59">Waldman et al., 2006</xref>).</p>
			<p>Assim, ao examinarmos os estudos qualitativos de <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B69">Zanini, Migueles e Colmerauer (2014</xref>) e <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">Pinheiro Neto (2013)</xref>, que apontam para a redução da <italic>distância de poder</italic> (definida por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Hofstede, 2001</xref>, como um indicador do grau de aceitação da desigualdade e da distância entre o topo e a base) e o exercício da liderança compartilhada, como fatores críticos para a aceitação da liderança e do risco, levantamos a hipótese de que a dimensão cultural <italic>distância de poder</italic>, comparativamente alta no Brasil, correlaciona-se negativamente com a confiança no líder e, portanto, com a efetividade e a produtividade dos esforços da organização. Anteriormente, na perspectiva da teoria da troca entre líder e liderado (LMX), estudos empíricos (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B48">Rockstuhl et al., 2012</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">Dulebohn et al., 2012</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B54">Smritianand e Park, 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B65">Yu, Matta e Cornfield, 2017</xref>) já demostraram que a dimensão <italic>distância de poder</italic>, tal como definida por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Hofstede (2001)</xref>, modera as relações de confiança entre líder e liderado. Adicionalmente, utilizando as escalas dos antecedentes da confiança de <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Whitener e colaboradores (1998)</xref>, buscamos aprofundar este estudo dos antecedentes da confiança, por meio de uma análise quantitativa, relacionando separadamente cada escala com a confiança profissional e pessoal no líder.</p>
		</sec>
		<sec>
			<title>2. Estudo do caso Bope/RJ</title>
			<p>Criada em 1978, esta unidade de intervenção da Polícia Militar do Estado do Rio de Janeiro conta com aproximadamente 400 policiais especializados em ações de combate ao crime em áreas de alto risco e resgate de reféns. Buscamos compreender a especificidade dos vínculos existentes entre os policiais do Bope/RJ, que possuem um trabalho intenso de combate ao tráfico de drogas infiltrado nas favelas cariocas com fortes características de guerrilha urbana, para o qual desenvolveram competências específicas. A forma de organização e o estilo de liderança do Bope/RJ, bem como suas competências essenciais (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B44">Prahalad, 1993</xref>), já foram estudados em outros trabalhos. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">Pinheiro Neto (2013)</xref> observa que a capacidade de planejar de forma participativa, com baixo grau de distância de poder nas relações hierárquicas, é estruturante do conjunto das competências organizacionais que sustentam sua excelência operacional, fortalecendo as relações de confiança entre líderes e liderados e entre pares. Segundo <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">Pinheiro Neto (2013)</xref>, a baixa <italic>distância de poder</italic> contribui positivamente para o aumento da confiança. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B70">Zanini e colaboradores (2013</xref>) observam o papel central das relações de confiança e da liderança como fatores críticos para gerar cooperação e aceitação do risco extremo no Bope/RJ e que a predisposição do policial combatente em se engajar em situações críticas está relacionada de maneira significante com a confiança no líder, confirmando a relevância da liderança em organizações militares (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B60">Weber, 1968</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">Clausewitz, 1996</xref>). O mesmo estudo identificou que a confiança profissional no líder está positivamente relacionada com o comprometimento afetivo e normativo. Zanini, Colmerauer e Lima (2015) analisam a relação entre a confiança no líder e o comprometimento dos subordinados e confirmam que o estilo mais consultivo de liderança está positivamente relacionado com a confiança pessoal e profissional no líder.</p>
		</sec>
		<sec>
			<title>3. Efeitos da distância de poder</title>
			<p>Os estudos quantitativos sobre cultura comparada realizados por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Hofstede (2001</xref>) selecionam seis dimensões comparativas em culturas nacionais. Entre elas, identificamos a <italic>distância de poder</italic> (IDP - índice de distância de poder) como uma dimensão crítica para a efetividade e a eficiência operacional, impactando especialmente as relações entre líderes e liderados dentro das organizações (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B38">Migueles, Lafraia e Costa, 2007</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B48">Rockstuhl et al., 2012</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">Dulebohn et al., 2012</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B70">Zanini et al., 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">Pinheiro Neto, 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B54">Smritianand e Park, 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B39">Mulki, Caemmerer e Heggde, 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B57">Tian e Peterson, 2016</xref>). Para esta pesquisa, a seleção dessa dimensão cultural específica foi realizada após a análise de outros estudos em que essa dimensão aparece como crítica para a capacidade da organização de desenvolver relações de confiança interna (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B70">Zanini et al., 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B69">Zanini, Migueles e Colmerauer, 2014</xref>).</p>
			<p>Na pesquisa comparativa realizada por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Hofstede (2001</xref>), o Brasil foi considerado um país com alta distância de poder. Essa dimensão reflete, comparativamente, como os indivíduos menos poderosos de cada sociedade esperam e aceitam que o poder seja distribuído desigualmente (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">Hofstede, 1997</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">2001</xref>). Quanto maior o índice de distância de poder de um país, mais confortáveis encontram-se os indivíduos daquele país com uma repartição desigual de poder. Segundo <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Hofstede (1997</xref>:42), distância de poder é “a medida do grau de aceitação, por aqueles que têm menos poder nas instituições e organizações de um país, de uma repartição desigual de poder”. No ambiente de trabalho de países com baixa distância de poder, a hierarquia é vista apenas como um arranjo temporário estabelecido por conveniência. Os empregados esperam um estilo consultivo do seu chefe, a diferença entre os salários da base e do topo é relativamente pequena e os subordinados esperam ser consultados nas decisões que afetam seu trabalho. Em países com alta distância de poder, a diferença de hierarquia é vista como um fato existencial, e os empregados esperam um chefe autoritário e paternalista (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">Hofstede, 2001</xref>).</p>
			<p>Analisando o contexto específico do Bope/RJ, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B55">Storani (2008</xref>) e <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">Pinheiro Neto (2013)</xref> observam que o processo seletivo rigoroso funciona como um rito de passagem do policial. A aceitação é parte do processo de integração na equipe e a convivência com regras disciplinares rígidas regula os comportamentos, a exposição constante ao alto risco de vida durante as operações, estabelecendo, ao final, uma relação mais estreita entre os policiais de diferentes patentes militares, criando uma estrutura única que promove a redução da percepção de distância de poder e um maior sentimento de igualdade aos que pertencem ao grupo. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">Pinheiro Neto (2013</xref>:47) observa que o exercício da liderança compartilhada, o planejamento participativo e o treinamento rigoroso se somam ao processo fundamental para aceitação e redução do risco nas operações, garantindo o aumento da previsibilidade em relação ao comportamento dos membros e da confiabilidade em relação aos planos táticos e operacionais.</p>
			<p>A velocidade da operação, por um lado, e a impossibilidade da total compreensão do cenário onde ela ocorre à distância, por outro, demandam um processo de tomada de decisão <italic>ad hoc</italic>. A possibilidade de o líder de uma equipe em operação ferir-se em combate é parte integral do planejamento dos riscos da operação (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">Pinheiro Neto, 2013</xref>:48). Portanto, a liderança compartilhada passa a ser fundamental para a continuidade das operações e para a necessidade de realizar eventuais resgates de policiais feridos. Assim, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">Pinheiro Neto (2013)</xref> observa que o preparo para assumir a liderança é parte da formação dos membros das unidades. Nesse contexto, a redução da distância de poder aparece como um fator-chave para a efetividade em cenários velozes, complexos e com inúmeros imprevistos. Nesses estudos anteriores, no entanto, não foi considerada a redução da <italic>distância de poder</italic> na análise das relações causais entre os elementos antecedentes da confiança e sua influência na confiança dos subordinados no líder. Assim, neste presente trabalho, aprofundamos o estudo dessa relação, por meio de uma análise quantitativa, relacionando separadamente cada um dos antecedentes da confiança com a confiança no líder. Para tanto, utilizamos o banco de dados usado por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B70">Zanini e colaboradores (2013</xref>). As questões que avaliam a distância de poder já se encontravam nesse questionário, originalmente utilizado por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Hofstede (2001</xref>).<xref ref-type="fn" rid="fn3"><sup>3</sup></xref>
			</p>
		</sec>
		<sec>
			<title>4. Relações de confiança líder-liderado</title>
			<p>A teoria dos contratos e da agência (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B64">Wolff, 1996</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B63">Williamson, 1996</xref>) mostra que contratos formais representam uma redução imperfeita da natureza das relações que ocorrem nas organizações. Mecanismos alternativos são necessários para garantir que todos os eventos imprevisíveis e contingenciais, quando da realização dos acordos iniciais, sejam adequadamente endereçados pela cooperação entre as partes. A confiança é reconhecida na literatura da teoria dos contratos como um elemento central para uma melhor avaliação dos contratos relacionais (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B64">Wolff, 1996</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B46">Ripperger, 1998</xref>). Para o propósito deste artigo, assumimos a definição de confiança proposta por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B46">Ripperger (1998</xref>:36) como: “a aceitação voluntária e antecipada de um investimento de risco, pela abdicação de mecanismos contratuais explícitos de segurança e de controle, na expectativa de que a outra parte não agirá de forma oportunista”. Na definição da confiança, outras perspectivas teóricas assumem igualmente a centralidade da vulnerabilidade e do risco (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">Rousseau et al., 1998</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Gillespie, 2003</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B58">Tzafrir e Dolan, 2004</xref>). Por exemplo, Rousseau e colaboradores (1998:395) definem confiança como: “um estado psicológico que consiste na intenção de aceitar a vulnerabilidade baseado em expectativas positivas sobre as intenções ou comportamentos de outra pessoa”. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B58">Tzafrir e Dolan (2004)</xref> observam a existência de componentes comuns às diferentes definições de confiança associadas à vulnerabilidade e ao risco, por exemplo, a reciprocidade.</p>
			<p>Nessas perspectivas, a confiança é uma crença, expectativa ou percepção do liderado, e não uma característica da relação ou do líder. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Gillespie (2003</xref>) afirma que a confiança nas relações de trabalho é predominantemente manifesta por meio de dois comportamentos distintos, sendo o primeiro relacionado com contar com os outros, e o segundo relacionado com divulgação de informações pessoais ou confidenciais para outras pessoas. A autora distingue duas dimenssões: <italic>pessoal</italic> e <italic>profissional</italic>. A confiança <italic>profissional</italic> contrasta com a natureza mais pessoal orientada para confidências, portanto cabendo a distinção entre as formas <italic>pessoal</italic> e <italic>profissional</italic> de confiança. Segundo a autora, ao confidenciar ou compartilhar algo pessoal, prevalece uma base emocional e relacional de confiança, revelando vulnerabilidade, frequentemente acompanhada de apego, expressões de cuidado e preocupação. Nesse sentido, a dimensão pessoal é semelhante à noção de confiança afetiva, e é consistente com a opinião de que há componentes de confiança que diferem na medida em que eles têm base emocional (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">Mcallister, 1995</xref>). Segundo <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Gillespie (2003)</xref>, ao contrário da confiança <italic>pessoal</italic>, a confiança <italic>profissional</italic> está baseada na percepção das habilidades profissionais e das competências que levam à confiabilidade, isto é, contar com o líder para lhe ajudar a resolver questões importantes, obter seu apoio em situações difíceis, ou confiar na sua avaliação do trabalho.</p>
			<p>As relações de confiança entre líderes e liderados têm sido abordadas em algumas linhas de pesquisa, notavelmente entre elas na teoria da troca entre líder e liderado - <italic>leader member exchange</italic> (LMX) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B42">Pillai, Schriesheim e Williams, 1999</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B53">Schriesheim, Castro e Cogliser, 1999</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Braun et al., 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B71">Zhu et al., 2013</xref>). Nessa perspectiva, a confiança na liderança emerge e é descrita operacionalmente como um processo de troca social (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Whitener et al., 1998</xref>) assumindo centralidade, uma vez que a teoria LMX tem sido definida propriamente como um processo de construção da confiança (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4">Bauer e Green, 1996</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B33">Liden, Wayne e Stilwell, 1993</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B51">Scandura e Pellegrini, 2008</xref>). Estudos empíricos desenvolvidos dessa perspectiva teórica apontam para a confiança no líder como um dos principais fatores relacionados com o desempenho organizacional (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">Martin et. al., 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Banks et al., 2014</xref>) e revelam alguns fatores críticos como antecedentes para a confiança no líder. Por exemplo, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Dirks e Ferrin (2002</xref>) realizaram uma meta-análise buscando compreender os fatores críticos na relação de confiança no líder e, entre as variáveis antecedentes da confiança, aquelas que apresentaram maior relação, encontram-se o estilo de liderança transformacional (envolvendo elementos afetivos na relação), a percepção de justiça (interacional, processual e distributiva) e a percepção de suporte organizacional. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">Gillespie e Mann (2004</xref>) confirmam que a confiança no líder está relacionada direta e positivamente com um estilo de liderança consultivo, com o compartilhamento das decisões, com a qualidade da comunicação interna e com o compartilhamento de valores comuns. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">Holland, Cooper e Sheehan (2017</xref>) confirmam que a confiança na liderança está positivamente relacionada com o suporte direto do líder ao subordinado. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Boies, Fiset e Gill (2015</xref>) e <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B50">Ruppel e Harrington (2000</xref>) confirmam que a qualidade da comunicação é um fator crítico para a confiança no líder. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">Clark e Payne (2006</xref>) identificam uma forte relação entre percepções de habilidade, integridade, justiça e abertura ao outro, por parte do liderado, como fatores determinantes para a construção das relações de confiança no líder. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Caza (2015</xref>) confirma que a confiança no líder aumenta na medida em que o subordinado percebe sinceridade emocional do líder. Ainda que esses estudos confirmem algumas variáveis como antecedentes da confiança no líder, observamos que estes variam e precisam ser compreendidos em seu contexto específico.</p>
			<p>Para a melhor compreensão da construção da confiança no líder em contextos específicos (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Dirks e Ferrin, 2002</xref>), buscamos aprofundar a compreensão da relação de causalidade pela análise dos antecedentes da confiança. Neste sentido, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Whitener e colaboradores (1998</xref>) apresentam um modelo teórico para a análise dos antecedentes da confiança nas organizações, com base em cinco dimensões selecionadas a partir de trabalhos acadêmicos com forte relação com a confiança, que são: <italic>percepção de consistência</italic>, <italic>integridade</italic>, <italic>compartilhamento e delegação de autoridade em processos de tomada de decisão</italic>, <italic>demonstração de preocupação com o subordinado</italic> e <italic>comunicação interna</italic>.</p>
			<p>Neste artigo, utilizamos essas mesmas escalas para analisar as hipóteses que são sugeridas, a fim de melhor compreender os elementos críticos do modelo de coordenação informal nas equipes de operações policiais especiais. Assim, a partir da análise dos estudos anteriores sobre a confiança no líder e após identificar seus antecedentes, formulamos as seguintes hipóteses, identificando separadamente as dimensões de confiança profissional e pessoal no líder:</p>
			<p>
				<list list-type="simple">
					<list-item>
						<p>H1a: Distância de poder possui uma relação direta e inversa com confiança profissional no líder.</p>
					</list-item>
					<list-item>
						<p>H1b: Distância de poder possui uma relação direta e inversa com confiança pessoal no líder.</p>
					</list-item>
					<list-item>
						<p>H2a: Percepção da comunicação interna está associada a maiores níveis de confiança profissional no líder.</p>
					</list-item>
					<list-item>
						<p>H2b: Percepção da comunicação interna está associada a maiores níveis de confiança pessoal no líder.</p>
					</list-item>
					<list-item>
						<p>H3a: Percepção de consistência da gestão está associada a maiores níveis de confiança profissional no líder.</p>
					</list-item>
					<list-item>
						<p>H3b: Percepção de consistência da gestão está associada a maiores níveis de confiança pessoal no líder.</p>
					</list-item>
					<list-item>
						<p>H4a: Percepção de integridade da gestão está associada a maiores níveis de confiança profissional no líder.</p>
					</list-item>
					<list-item>
						<p>H4b: Percepção de integridade da gestão está associada a maiores níveis de confiança pessoal no líder.</p>
					</list-item>
					<list-item>
						<p>H5a: Percepção de compartilhamento e delegação de autoridade está associada a maiores níveis de confiança profissional no líder.</p>
					</list-item>
					<list-item>
						<p>H5b: Percepção de compartilhamento e delegação de autoridade está associada a maiores níveis de confiança pessoal no líder.</p>
					</list-item>
					<list-item>
						<p>H6a: Percepção de demonstração de preocupação com os subordinados está associada a maiores níveis de confiança profissional no líder.</p>
					</list-item>
					<list-item>
						<p>H6b: Percepção de demonstração de preocupação com os subordinados está associada a maiores níveis de confiança pessoal no líder.</p>
					</list-item>
				</list>
			</p>
		</sec>
		<sec>
			<title>5. Metodologia</title>
			<p>Para testar as hipóteses propostas foram aplicados questionários estruturados divididos em quatro partes: perguntas sobre motivação, liderança e distância de poder (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Hofstede, 2001</xref>); um inventário de perguntas sobre confiança interpessoal (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Gillespie, 2003</xref>); antecedentes da confiança (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Whitener et al., 1998</xref>); e variáveis demográficas. Os respondentes eram todos policiais operacionais do Bope/RJ.</p>
			<sec>
				<title><italic>5.1 População e amostra</italic></title>
				<p>A distribuição dos questionários ocorreu em 2012, de forma direta e manual, dentro das instalações do Bope/RJ, que contava naquele momento com cerca de 400 policiais operacionais, correspondendo a nossa população total. A amostra do estudo contou com 115 policiais do Bope/RJ, representando 28,75% do total de policiais operacionais da unidade. A amostra se caracteriza por policiais de faixa etária entre 30 e 39 (cerca de 64%), casados (cerca de 70%) e com grau de instrução até o ensino médio (66%). Possuem um tempo médio de aproximadamente oito anos na unidade, e 74% dos policiais possuem mais de cinco anos de trabalho na unidade. Em sua grande maioria, são cabos (68,6%) e soldados (17,6%).</p>
			</sec>
			<sec>
				<title><italic>5.2 Instrumento de pesquisa e coleta de dados</italic></title>
				<p>O instrumento de coleta, um questionário estruturado, foi dividido em quatro partes. A primeira parte do questionário continha questões que investigavam as motivações dos policiais para participarem de operações de risco, os fatores motivacionais, o estilo de liderança que possuem e o que desejam. Tais perguntas foram desenvolvidas exclusivamente para esta pesquisa e estão ligadas ao contexto específico do Bope. Exemplos de questões: <italic>o que mais lhe motiva a trabalhar nesta unidade? Qual é a principal característica que deve ter um membro do Bope?</italic> Além desses aspectos, a primeira parte do questionário continha o construto distância de poder (DP) por meio das questões propostas por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Hofstede (2001</xref>). As questões se relacionavam com o grau de aceitação dos subordinados em discordarem do seu superior direto e o estilo de liderança do superior (consultivo, autocrático/paternalista ou baseado na opinião da maioria, mas não consultivo).</p>
				<p>A segunda parte apresentava questões relativas à confiança no superior, no colega e na equipe, escala originalmente denominada <italic>behavioral trust inventory</italic> (BTI) por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Gillespie (2003</xref>). A escala possui boa confiabilidade, com ambos os fatores com Alfas de Cronbach superiores a 0,89 (Fator 1 - <italic>Dependência</italic> α = 0.90 a 0.92 | Fator 2 - <italic>Divulgação</italic> α = 0.89 a 0.95), sendo apontada em diversos trabalhos como uma medida alternativa e confiável para confiança (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B36">McEvily e Tortoriello, 2011</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B52">Schoorman et al., 2007</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Lewicki et al., 2006</xref>; Gillespie e Mann, 2004). Tal questionário já havia sido validado para o contexto brasileiro por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B66">Zanini (2007</xref>), <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">Cotta (2010</xref>) e <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Frederico (2012</xref>). A escala é composta de 10 itens, avaliados em escala Likert de sete pontos, variando de 1 a 7 (1: nem um pouco disposto, 7: extremamente disposto). No referido questionário, cada grupo de cinco perguntas tem por objetivo medir aspectos diferentes da confiança, e os itens de número 1 a 5 medem a <italic>confiança profissional</italic>, enquanto os itens de 6 a 10 medem a <italic>confiança pessoal</italic>.</p>
				<p>A terceira parte do questionário continha as escalas de <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Whitener e colaboradores (1998</xref>) relativas aos <italic>antecedentes de confiança</italic>, formado por cinco fatores: <italic>comunicação interna</italic> (α = 0.73); <italic>integridade na gestão</italic> (α = 0.91); <italic>consistência na gestão</italic> (α = 0.74); <italic>compartilhamento e delegação de autoridade</italic> (α = 0.82); e <italic>demonstração de preocupação com os subordinados</italic> (α = 0.92). Cada um desses cinco indicadores é formado por três itens, medidos em uma escala de 5 pontos (em que 1 = discordo completamente e 5 = concordo completamente). Em <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Whitener e colaboradores (1998)</xref>, <italic>consistência</italic> refere-se à percepção do comportamento da pessoa a que se deposita a confiança (por exemplo, nos superiores) por meio de uma expectativa de reciprocidade e dignidade que a mesma possui em ser confiável. <italic>Integridade</italic> refere-se à percepção do nível com que a gestão da organização, mediante seus representantes, diz a verdade e cumpre com suas promessas. <italic>Compartilhamento e delegação de autoridade</italic> mede a percepção do grau de envolvimento dos membros no processo decisório da organização e como esta busca compartilhar tais decisões com seus membros. Essa atribuição adiciona valor ao envolvimento dos membros como sendo parte do processo de decisão na organização indicando o nível com que a organização valoriza a contribuição dos seus membros. A <italic>demonstração de preocupação</italic> refere-se à percepção dos membros quanto à disposição da gestão da organização em se preocupar com seu bem-estar quando na tomada de decisões importantes ou cotidianas em detrimento de outros interesses. A <italic>percepção da comunicação interna</italic> está relacionada com o grau de acessibilidade, confiabilidade e transparência da informação que é compartilhada com os membros da organização.</p>
				<p>A quarta parte do questionário continha variáveis demográficas pessoais, como educação, faixa etária, quantidade de subordinados e tempo de trabalho. Uma parte final do instrumento foi disponibilizada para que expressassem sua opinião e quaisquer comentários adicionais.</p>
			</sec>
			<sec>
				<title><italic>5.3 Análise de dados</italic></title>
				<p>O trabalho utilizou o modelo de Equações Estruturais, por meio de algoritmo de máxima verossimilhança (<italic>maximum likelihood</italic>), com rotação oblíqua Promax. A análise foi feita em duas etapas. A primeira analisou as variáveis latentes a serem utilizadas nos testes das hipóteses propostas, com o objetivo de mensurar e avaliar a qualidade da mensuração realizada, ao analisar a validade convergente, discriminante e confiabilidade do instrumento de mensuração dos construtos (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">Hair, Ringle e Sarstedt, 2014</xref>). A segunda etapa avaliou as hipóteses do presente estudo, ao estimar os betas que correspondem às relações existentes entre variáveis independentes e as dependentes.</p>
			</sec>
		</sec>
		<sec>
			<title>6. Resultados</title>
			<sec>
				<title><italic>6.1 Análise das variáveis latentes</italic></title>
				<p>A verificação da consistência foi realizada pela análise das variáveis latentes utilizando o modelo de equação estrutural com coeficientes padronizados. As variáveis analisadas são: <italic>confiança pessoal no líder</italic>, <italic>confiança profissional no l</italic>íder, <italic>percepção da comunicação interna</italic>, <italic>percepção de consistência da gestão</italic>, <italic>percepção de integridade da gestão</italic>, <italic>percepção de compartilhamento e delegação de autoridade</italic> e <italic>percepção de demonstração de preocupação com os subordinados</italic>.</p>
				<p>Conforme demonstrado na tabela 1, o teste modelo apresenta boa validade convergente. Todas as perguntas apresentaram bom carregamento dos fatores (cargas acima de 0,5), exceto por um item (consistência 1).<xref ref-type="fn" rid="fn4"><sup>4</sup></xref> Para o teste de validade convergente, utilizamos igualmente a variância média extraída (AVE). Nos construtos utilizados, o AVE é superior ao limite de 0,5 indicado pela literatura (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">Fornell e Larcker, 1981</xref>). Assim, podemos verificar boa validade convergente dos construtos.<xref ref-type="fn" rid="fn5"><sup>5</sup></xref> Para medir a confiabilidade, utilizamos o critério definido por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B22">Hair e colaboradores (2009</xref>), de que a confiabilidade composta (CC) deve ser superior a 0,7, o que também foi atingido, sendo 0,82 a menor CC entre as variáveis analisadas. Assim, os resultados apresentados fornecem subsídios para que as relações testadas no modelo estrutural sejam consideradas válidas, já que o instrumento de mensuração apresentou validade discriminante, validade convergente e confiabilidade. A <xref ref-type="table" rid="t1">tabela 1</xref>sumariza os resultados.</p>
				<p>
					<table-wrap id="t1">
						<label>Tabela 1</label>
						<caption>
							<title>Cargas fatoriais, AVE e CC</title>
						</caption>
						<alternatives>
							<graphic xlink:href="tabla1-gt1.jpg"/>
						<table>
							<colgroup>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
							</colgroup>
							<thead>
								<tr>
									<th align="left">Construtos e Itens</th>
									<th align="center">C1</th>
									<th align="center">C2</th>
									<th align="center">C3</th>
									<th align="center">C4</th>
									<th align="center">C5</th>
									<th align="center">C6</th>
									<th align="center">C7</th>
								</tr>
							</thead>
							<tbody>
								<tr>
									<td align="left" colspan="8">C1: Confiança Profissional no Líder </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Profissional 1</td>
									<td align="center">0,75</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Profissional 2</td>
									<td align="center">0,78</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Profissional 3</td>
									<td align="center">0,82</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Profissional 4</td>
									<td align="center">0,85</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Profissional 5</td>
									<td align="center">0,78</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left" colspan="8">C2: Confiança Pessoal no Líder </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Pessoal 1</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="center">0,89</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Pessoal 2</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="center">0,62</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Pessoal 3</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="center">0,77</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Pessoal 4</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="center">0,67</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Pessoal 5</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="center">0,80</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left" colspan="8">C3: Percepção de Consistência da Gestão </td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Consistência 1</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="center">0,28</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Consistência 2</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="center">0,52</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Consistência 3</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="center">0,88</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left" colspan="8">C4: Percepção de Integridade da Gestão</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Integridade 1</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="center">0,82</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Integridade 2</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="center">0,88</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Integridade 3</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="center">0,79</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left" colspan="8">C4: Delegação de Autoridade</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Delegação 1</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="center">0,81</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Delegação 2</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="center">0,84</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Delegação 3</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="center">0,63</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left" colspan="8">C5: Demonstração de Preocupação</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Preocupação 1</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="center">0,77</td>
									<td align="left"/>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Preocupação 2</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="center">0,82</td>
									<td align="left"/>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Preocupação 3</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="center">0,84</td>
									<td align="left"/>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left" colspan="8">C6: Comunicação Interna</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Comunicação 1</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="center">0,84</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Comunicação 2</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="center">0,84</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Comunicação 3</td>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="left"/>
									<td align="center">0,78</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">AVE</td>
									<td align="center">0,63</td>
									<td align="center">0,57</td>
									<td align="center">0,37</td>
									<td align="center">0,69</td>
									<td align="center">0,59</td>
									<td align="center">0,66</td>
									<td align="center">0,67</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">CC</td>
									<td align="center">0,90</td>
									<td align="center">0,87</td>
									<td align="center">0,86</td>
									<td align="center">0,82</td>
									<td align="center">0,85</td>
									<td align="center">0,85</td>
									<td align="center">0,86</td>
								</tr>
							</tbody>
						</table>
					</alternatives>
						<table-wrap-foot>
							<fn id="TFN1">
								<p>Fonte: Elaborada pelos autores.</p>
							</fn>
						</table-wrap-foot>
					</table-wrap>
				</p>
				<p>
					<table-wrap id="t1b">
						<label>Tabela 1. (Cont.)</label>
						<caption>
							<title>Cargas fatoriais, AVE e CC</title>
						</caption>
							<graphic xlink:href="tabla1-gt1b.jpg"/>
							<table-wrap-foot>
							<fn id="TFN2">
								<p>Fonte: Elaborada pelos autores.</p>
							</fn>
						</table-wrap-foot>
					</table-wrap>
				</p>
			</sec>
			<sec>
				<title><italic>6.2 Testes das hipóteses</italic></title>
				<p>Após as análises da validade e confiança dos construtos, partimos para a análise das hipóteses, a partir de um modelo de equações estruturais. Para tal, utilizamos o método da máxima verossimilhança, com coeficientes padronizados. Dois modelos foram estimados, para cada uma das variáveis dependentes analisadas (<italic>confiança profissional no líder</italic> e <italic>confiança pessoal no líder</italic>), com o objetivo de testar as hipóteses anteriormente elencadas.</p>
				<p>Ao analisar as relações entre as variáveis independentes e a variável dependente <italic>confiança profissional no líder</italic>, podemos perceber que, conforme proposto na hipótese H1a, existe uma relação direta e inversa com confiança profissional no líder (β = -0,30; SE = 0,89; p &lt; 0,01). Quanto maior a distância de poder, menor é a confiança profissional no líder imediato. Contudo, em relação a esse construto, nenhuma outra hipótese é confirmada. Diante dos resultados, as hipóteses H2a, H3a, H4a, H5a e H6a foram rejeitadas, uma vez que não apresentaram significância estatística. Em termos práticos, a percepção de comunicação interna, de percepção de consistência e integridade na gestão, de compartilhamento e delegação de autoridade e demonstração de preocupação com os empregados não possuem relação com a <italic>confiança profissional no líder</italic> no contexto do Bope/RJ.</p>
				<p>Partimos então para o teste da relação entre as variáveis independentes e a variável dependente <italic>confiança pessoal no líder</italic>. Os resultados demonstram significância na relação entre a <italic>percepção de compartilhamento e delegação de autoridade</italic> e a <italic>confiança pessoal no líder</italic> (β = 0,31; SE = 0,14; p &lt; 0,05). Quanto maior a <italic>percepção de compartilhamento e delegação de autoridade</italic> no processo de decisão do Bope/RJ, maior a <italic>confiança pessoal no líder</italic>. Além disso, a relação entre a <italic>percepção da qualidade da comunicação interna</italic> e <italic>confiança pessoal no líder</italic> (β = 0,28; SE = 0,15; p &lt; 0,10) é igualmente significante. Ou seja, quanto maior a <italic>percepção da qualidade da comunicação interna</italic> (avaliada pela acessibilidade, confiabilidade e transparência da informação, que é compartilhada com os membros), maior é a <italic>confiança pessoal no líder</italic>. Assim, suportamos as hipóteses H2b e H5b, e rejeitamos as proposições H1b, H3b, H4b e H6b. Os resultados dos testes de hipóteses estão sumarizados na <xref ref-type="table" rid="t2">tabela 2</xref>.</p>
				<p>
					<table-wrap id="t2">
						<label>Tabela 2</label>
						<caption>
							<title>Resultados dos testes das hipóteses</title>
						</caption>
						<alternatives>
							<graphic xlink:href="tabla2-gt2.jpg"/>
						<table>
							<colgroup>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
								<col/>
							</colgroup>
							<thead>
								<tr>
									<th align="left"> </th>
									<th align="center"> β</th>
									<th align="center">S.E.</th>
									<th align="center">p-Valor</th>
									<th align="center">Hipótese</th>
								</tr>
							</thead>
							<tbody>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">H1a</td>
									<td align="center">-0,30</td>
									<td align="center">-0,30</td>
									<td align="center">0,01</td>
									<td align="center">Suportada</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">H1b</td>
									<td align="center">-0,13</td>
									<td align="center">0,09</td>
									<td align="center">0,15</td>
									<td align="center">Não Suportada</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">H2a</td>
									<td align="center">0,20</td>
									<td align="center">0,15</td>
									<td align="center">0,20</td>
									<td align="center">Não Suportada</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">H2b</td>
									<td align="center">0,28</td>
									<td align="center">0,15</td>
									<td align="center">0,06</td>
									<td align="center">Suportada</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">H3a</td>
									<td align="center">0,00</td>
									<td align="center">0,13</td>
									<td align="center">1,00</td>
									<td align="center">Não Suportada</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">H3b</td>
									<td align="center">-0,01</td>
									<td align="center">0,14</td>
									<td align="center">0,93</td>
									<td align="center">Não Suportada</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">H4a</td>
									<td align="center">0,07</td>
									<td align="center">0,16</td>
									<td align="center">0,65</td>
									<td align="center">Não Suportada</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">H4b</td>
									<td align="center">-0,22</td>
									<td align="center">0,15</td>
									<td align="center">0,14</td>
									<td align="center">Não Suportada</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">H5a</td>
									<td align="center">0,00</td>
									<td align="center">0,16</td>
									<td align="center">0,98</td>
									<td align="center">Não Suportada</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">H5b</td>
									<td align="center">0,31</td>
									<td align="center">0,14</td>
									<td align="center">0,02</td>
									<td align="center">Suportada</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">H6a</td>
									<td align="center">0,25</td>
									<td align="center">0,18</td>
									<td align="center">0,16</td>
									<td align="center">Não Suportada</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">H6b</td>
									<td align="center">0,05</td>
									<td align="center">0,19</td>
									<td align="center">0,80</td>
									<td align="center">Não Suportada</td>
								</tr>
							</tbody>
						</table>
					</alternatives>
						<table-wrap-foot>
							<fn id="TFN3">
								<p>Fonte: Elaborada pelos autores.</p>
							</fn>
						</table-wrap-foot>
					</table-wrap>
				</p>
			</sec>
			<sec>
				<title><italic>6.2 Testes das hipóteses</italic></title>
				<p>Após as análises da validade e confiança dos construtos, partimos para a análise das hipóteses, a partir de um modelo de equações estruturais. Para tal, utilizamos o método da máxima verossimilhança, com coeficientes padronizados. Dois modelos foram estimados, para cada uma das variáveis dependentes analisadas (<italic>confiança profissional no líder</italic> e <italic>confiança pessoal no líder</italic>), com o objetivo de testar as hipóteses anteriormente elencadas.</p>
				<p>Ao analisar as relações entre as variáveis independentes e a variável dependente <italic>confiança profissional no líder</italic>, podemos perceber que, conforme proposto na hipótese H1a, existe uma relação direta e inversa com confiança profissional no líder (β = -0,30; SE = 0,89; p &lt; 0,01). Quanto maior a distância de poder, menor é a confiança profissional no líder imediato. Contudo, em relação a esse construto, nenhuma outra hipótese é confirmada. Diante dos resultados, as hipóteses H2a, H3a, H4a, H5a e H6a foram rejeitadas, uma vez que não apresentaram significância estatística. Em termos práticos, a percepção de comunicação interna, de percepção de consistência e integridade na gestão, de compartilhamento e delegação de autoridade e demonstração de preocupação com os empregados não possuem relação com a <italic>confiança profissional no líder</italic> no contexto do Bope/RJ.</p>
				<p>Partimos então para o teste da relação entre as variáveis independentes e a variável dependente <italic>confiança pessoal no líder</italic>. Os resultados demonstram significância na relação entre a <italic>percepção de compartilhamento e delegação de autoridade</italic> e a <italic>confiança pessoal no líder</italic> (β = 0,31; SE = 0,14; p &lt; 0,05). Quanto maior a <italic>percepção de compartilhamento e delegação de autoridade</italic> no processo de decisão do Bope/RJ, maior a <italic>confiança pessoal no líder</italic>. Além disso, a relação entre a <italic>percepção da qualidade da comunicação interna</italic> e <italic>confiança pessoal no líder</italic> (β = 0,28; SE = 0,15; p &lt; 0,10) é igualmente significante. Ou seja, quanto maior a <italic>percepção da qualidade da comunicação interna</italic> (avaliada pela acessibilidade, confiabilidade e transparência da informação, que é compartilhada com os membros), maior é a <italic>confiança pessoal no líder</italic>. Assim, suportamos as hipóteses H2b e H5b, e rejeitamos as proposições H1b, H3b, H4b e H6b. Os resultados dos testes de hipóteses estão sumarizados na <xref ref-type="table" rid="t2">tabela 2</xref>.</p>
			</sec>
		</sec>
		<sec>
			<title>7. Discussões</title>
			<p>Baseado nos estudos anteriores de <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B69">Zanini, Migueles e Colmerauer (2014</xref>) e Pinheiro Neto (2013) que identificaram a dimensão cultural <italic>distância de poder</italic> como fator crítico para a promoção das relações de confiança no líder no Bope/RJ, neste presente estudo, aplicando métodos quantitativos, pudemos confirmar os achados desses estudos anteriores. Quanto maior a distância de poder, menor é a confiança profissional no líder imediato (b = -0,30, p &lt; 0,01). Portanto, a hipótese H1a foi confirmada. No entanto, não encontramos relação entre a variável <italic>distância de poder</italic> e a confiança pessoal no líder. Ou seja, a hipótese H1b não se confirmou. A confirmação da hipótese H1a corrobora os resultados de outros estudos empíricos na perspectiva da teoria da troca entre líder e liderado (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B48">Rockstuhl et al.; 2012</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">Dulebohn et al., 2012</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B54">Smritianand e Park, 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B65">Yu, Matta e Cornfield, 2017</xref>) que confirmam a dimensão cultural <italic>distância de poder</italic>, tal como definida por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Hofstede (2001</xref>), como moderadora das relações de confiança entre líderes e liderados.</p>
			<p>Referente às hipóteses utilizando as escalas de <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Whitener e colaboradores (1998</xref>), estudos anteriores (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B30">Krosgaard, Brodt e Whitener, 2002</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B68">Zanini, Lusk e Wolff, 2009</xref>; Zanini et al., 2013) confirmam uma relação positiva entre os antecedentes da confiança e a confiança no líder. Nesses estudos, no entanto, as escalas que compõem os antecedentes da confiança foram analisadas em conjunto, e não separadamente como procedemos em nosso estudo.</p>
			<p>Em nossa análise, as hipóteses H2a, H3a, H4a, H5a e H6a foram rejeitadas. Não encontramos significância estatística na análise das variáveis: <italic>percepção de comunicação interna</italic>, <italic>consistência e integridade na gestão</italic>, <italic>compartilhamento e delegação de autoridade</italic> e <italic>demonstração de preocupação com os empregados</italic>, com a confiança profissional no líder. Igualmente, não encontramos relação entre as variáveis: <italic>percepção de consistência e integridade na gestão</italic> e <italic>demonstração de preocupação com os empregados</italic>, com a confiança pessoal no líder. Ou seja, as hipóteses H3b, H4b e H6b igualmente não se confirmaram.</p>
			<p>As hipóteses H2b e H5b foram confirmadas. Ou seja, quanto maior a percepção da qualidade da comunicação interna (avaliada pela acessibilidade, confiabilidade e transparência da informação compartilhada com os subordinados), maior é a confiança pessoal no líder. Além disso, quanto maior a percepção do compartilhamento e delegação de autoridade no processo de decisão do Bope/RJ, maior a confiança pessoal no líder. Esses resultados corroboram estudos anteriores que indicam uma relação positiva entre a qualidade da comunicação interna e a confiança no líder (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B47">Robert e You, 2017</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B67">Zanini, Colmerauer e Lima, 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Drescher, 2014</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B37">Men e Stacks, 2014</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B56">Thomas, Zolin e Hartman, 2009</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">Gillespie e Mann, 2004</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B30">Krosgaard, Brodt e Whitener, 2002</xref>). Especialmente com os estudos de <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">Gillespie e Mann (2004)</xref>, que confirmam que a confiança no líder está relacionada direta e positivamente com um estilo de liderança consultivo (com o compartilhamento das decisões), com a qualidade da comunicação interna e com o compartilhamento de valores comuns. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B56">Thomas, Zolin e Hartman (2009)</xref> confirmam igualmente uma forte relação entre o compartilhamento e a transparência da comunicação com a confiança no líder. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B37">Men e Stacks (2014)</xref> confirmam que a transparência na comunicação e a participação dos subordinados estão diretamente relacionadas com a confiança no líder, com o comprometimento e a satisfação do subordinado. Corroborando a confirmação da hipótese H5b, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B47">Robert e You (2017)</xref> confirmam uma relação positiva entre o compartilhamento da liderança e a confiança no líder, e <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">Drescher e colaboradores (2014)</xref> confirmam uma relação positiva entre compartilhamento da liderança e confiança no líder e na equipe.</p>
			<p>Além disso, nossos resultados encontram consonância com outros estudos mais recentes, indicando uma relação positiva com desempenho. Por exemplo, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Boies, Fiset e Gil (2015</xref>) observam uma relação positiva entre a qualidade da comunicação interna e a confiança no líder, com efeito moderador sobre o desempenho e a criatividade da equipe. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Drescher e colaboradores (2014</xref>) observam uma relação positiva entre o compartilhamento e delegação da liderança e a confiança no líder, que por sua vez estão positivamente relacionados com o desempenho da equipe. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Drescher e Garbers (2016)</xref> confirmam que o compartilhamento da liderança e a qualidade da comunicação possuem efeito positivo com desempenho e satisfação. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">Hoch (2014</xref>) confirma uma relação positiva entre o compartilhamento da liderança e o desempenho, mediado pelo compartilhamento da informação.</p>
			<p>Ao analisarmos o conjunto dos resultados do teste das hipóteses, nosso estudo revela uma distinção entre os antecedentes da confiança e as formas <italic>pessoal</italic> e <italic>profissional</italic> de confiança no líder. Há uma relação direta e negativa entre <italic>distância de poder</italic> e confiança profissional no líder. Ou seja, quanto maior a <italic>distância de poder</italic>, menor a confiança profissional no líder. Esse resultado confirma as observações de <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">Pinheiro Neto (2013)</xref>, abordando a mesma organização, quando ressalta a relevância dos aspectos profissionais da relação líder-liderado para a redução da distância de poder, como o exercício da liderança compartilhada, o planejamento participativo e o treinamento conjunto para gerar credibilidade. Segundo o autor, tais aspectos se somam ao processo fundamental de aceitação do risco nas operações, garantindo o aumento da previsibilidade em relação ao comportamento dos membros e a confiabilidade em relação aos planos táticos e operacionais realizados em conjunto entre líderes e subordinados. Segundo o mesmo autor, essa dinâmica integrativa de trabalho estabelece uma relação mais estreita entre policiais de diferentes patentes militares, criando uma estrutura única que promove a redução da <italic>distância de poder</italic> e um maior sentimento de igualdade aos que pertencem ao grupo. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B69">Zanini, Migueles e Colmerauer (2014</xref>:73) observam que, pela própria dinâmica das operações, a liderança compartilhada é um exercício permanente nas rotinas operacionais. Os líderes das equipes assumem um papel mediador entre os objetivos organizacionais, traduzidos pela “missão comum” e a ação autônoma dos membros das equipes. Ou seja, segundo essas observações de campo, agora confirmadas pelo nosso estudo, não são as atitudes, habilidades e qualidades individuais dos líderes que definem a redução da <italic>distância de poder</italic>, mas pesam os processos e rotinas da gestão que conferem autonomia ao executante. Esse resultado corrobora o estudo de <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">Haas (2015</xref>), investigando um contexto de mesma natureza (Polícia Metropolitana de Buenos Aires), confirmando que a confiança nos superiores está positivamente relacionada com os aspectos profissionais da relação com os subordinados que estabelecem igualdade entre os indivíduos, por exemplo, na aplicação e aceitação das regras de conduta.</p>
			<p>Ao mesmo tempo, nossos resultados confirmam que os antecedentes da confiança das escalas de <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Whitener e colaboradores (1998</xref>) estão relacionados com a <italic>confiança pessoal no líder</italic>. Ou seja, quando prevalece uma base afetiva e emocional, revelando situações de vulnerabilidade do indivíduo (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Gillespie, 2003</xref>). Quando analisamos separadamente essas escalas, observamos que as escalas de <italic>consistência</italic>, <italic>integridade</italic> e <italic>demonstração de preocupação</italic> reforçam uma relação de dependência do subordinado por traços pessoais de seu superior hierárquico (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Whitener et al., 1998</xref>), ou seja, o impacto do superior e suas características individuais sobre o subordinado. Especificamente, a escala de <italic>preocupação com o subordinado</italic> sugere uma relação paternalista/personalista, de impacto indefinido ou irrelevante na autonomia do executante. Por outro lado, as escalas <italic>qualidade da comunicação</italic> e <italic>compartilhamento e delegação de autoridade</italic> remetem a atributos organizacionais e práticas da gestão (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Whitener et al., 1998</xref>).</p>
			<p>Nossos resultados confirmam que os antecedentes da confiança que induzem à <italic>confiança pessoal no líder</italic> não estão baseados nessas escalas que remetem aos atributos individuais desse líder (<italic>consistência</italic>, <italic>integridade</italic> e <italic>demonstração de preocupação</italic>), mas naqueles que remetem aos atributos organizacionais (<italic>qualidade da comunicação</italic> e <italic>compartilhamento e delegação de autoridade</italic>). Portanto, observamos que o impacto dos atributos pessoais do líder tem um peso menor para a autonomia do executante, uma vez que os atributos organizacionais estão presentes. Esses atributos organizacionais diminuem o impacto das características pessoais do líder, tanto na definição do fluxo do trabalho como na criação do “espaço de autonomia” do executante. Nesse sentido, constituem-se precondições para o aumento da autonomia do subordinado e para sua autodeterminação no trabalho, especialmente na tomada de decisões <italic>ad hoc</italic> na execução de tarefas críticas. Consideramos a confirmação dessas relações consistente com a redução da <italic>distância de poder</italic> pela confiança profissional no líder, pois são atributos organizacionais que garantem o “espaço de autonomia” ao executante pelo aumento da confiabilidade e previsibilidade.</p>
		</sec>
		<sec>
			<title>8. Limitações e direção para pesquisas futuras</title>
			<p>O presente estudo indica oportunidades para futuras pesquisas, por exemplo, buscando melhor compreender como a relação entre os antecedentes da confiança e a confiança profissional e pessoal no líder podem impactar o desempenho das equipes operacionais. Outra possibilidade de investigação é observar a dinâmica da relação temporal dos elementos que determinam as relações de confiança entre líderes e liderados (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">Jones e Shah, 2016</xref>). Outras limitações deste estudo representam igualmente oportunidades para pesquisas futuras. Não analisamos a efetividade da relação entre esses elementos de coordenação informal e os elementos de coordenação formal, nem analisamos em profundidade a cultura organizacional (seu misticismo, ritos, rituais e símbolos) que poderia nos ajudar a melhorar nossa análise sobre os nossos resultados. Finalmente, não comparamos a unidade estudada com outras unidades policiais de mesma natureza institucional.</p>
		</sec>
		<sec>
			<title>9. Conclusões</title>
			<p>O presente trabalho busca aprofundar a compreensão dos elementos da coordenação informal nas organizações que operam em cenários de alta complexidade e incerteza, reconhecidas na literatura como <italic>critical action organizations</italic>, a partir da análise dos antecedentes da confiança no líder. O estudo oferece uma contribuição relevante para a melhor compreensão dos elementos antecedentes que formam o vínculo de confiança no líder, identificando e isolando as variáveis de maior relevância do modelo de coordenação informal nessas organizações. Nossos resultados confirmam que a dimensão cultural <italic>distância de poder</italic> tem relação direta com a confiança profissional no líder, e que a percepção da <italic>qualidade da comunicação interna</italic> e a percepção do <italic>compartilhamento e delegação de autoridade</italic> estão diretamente relacionadas com a confiança pessoal no líder. Assim, este estudo contribui igualmente para a análise do contexto onde a organização está inserida e seus desafios específicos, na definição dos fatores-chave dos antecedentes de confiança. O estudo contribui, igualmente, para a teoria da troca entre líder e liderado (LMX), bem como para a perspectiva de uma teoria da liderança em contexto, buscando identificar os fatores críticos específicos de acordo com a tipologia organizacional.</p>
		</sec>
	</body>
	<back>
		<ref-list>
			<title>Referências</title>
			<ref id="B1">
				<mixed-citation>AVOLIO, Bruce J. Promoting more integrative strategies for leadership theory-building. <italic>American Psychologist</italic>, v. 62, n. 1, p. 25-33, 2007.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>AVOLIO</surname>
							<given-names>Bruce J</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Promoting more integrative strategies for leadership theory-building</article-title>
					<source>American Psychologist</source>
					<volume>62</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>25</fpage>
					<lpage>33</lpage>
					<year>2007</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B2">
				<mixed-citation>BANKS, George C. et al. What does team-member exchange bring to the party? A meta‐analytic review of team and leader social exchange. <italic>Journal of Organizational Behavior</italic>, v. 35, n. 2, p. 273-295, 2014.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>BANKS</surname>
							<given-names>George C.</given-names>
						</name>
						<etal/>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>What does team-member exchange bring to the party? A meta‐analytic review of team and leader social exchange</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Organizational Behavior</source>
					<volume>35</volume>
					<issue>2</issue>
					<fpage>273</fpage>
					<lpage>295</lpage>
					<year>2014</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B3">
				<mixed-citation>BARNARD, Chester. <italic>The functions of the executive</italic>. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1938.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>BARNARD</surname>
							<given-names>Chester</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>The functions of the executive</source>
					<publisher-loc>Cambridge</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>Harvard University Press</publisher-name>
					<year>1938</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B4">
				<mixed-citation>BAUER, Tayla N.; GREEN, Stephen G. Development of leader-member exchange: a longitudinal test. <italic>Academy of Management Journal</italic>, v. 39, n. 6, p. 1538-1567, 1996.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>BAUER</surname>
							<given-names>Tayla N.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>GREEN</surname>
							<given-names>Stephen G</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Development of leader-member exchange: a longitudinal test</article-title>
					<source>Academy of Management Journal</source>
					<volume>39</volume>
					<issue>6</issue>
					<fpage>1538</fpage>
					<lpage>1567</lpage>
					<year>1996</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B5">
				<mixed-citation>BOIES, Kathleen; FISET, John; GILL, Harjinder. Communication and trust are key: unlocking the relationship between leadership and team performance and creativity. <italic>The Leadership Quarterly</italic>, v. 26, n. 6, p. 1080-1094, 2015.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>BOIES</surname>
							<given-names>Kathleen</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>FISET</surname>
							<given-names>John</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>GILL</surname>
							<given-names>Harjinder</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Communication and trust are key: unlocking the relationship between leadership and team performance and creativity</article-title>
					<source>The Leadership Quarterly</source>
					<volume>26</volume>
					<issue>6</issue>
					<fpage>1080</fpage>
					<lpage>1094</lpage>
					<year>2015</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B6">
				<mixed-citation>BRAUN, Susanne et al. Transformational leadership, job satisfaction, and team performance: a multilevel mediation model of trust. <italic>The Leadership Quarterly</italic>, v. 24, n. 1, p. 270-283, 2013.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>BRAUN</surname>
							<given-names>Susanne</given-names>
						</name>
						<etal/>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Transformational leadership, job satisfaction, and team performance: a multilevel mediation model of trust</article-title>
					<source>The Leadership Quarterly</source>
					<volume>24</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>270</fpage>
					<lpage>283</lpage>
					<year>2013</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B7">
				<mixed-citation>CAZA, Arran et al. How do you really feel? Effect of leaders’ perceived emotional sincerity on followers’ trust. <italic>The Leadership Quarterly</italic>, v. 26, n. 4, p. 518-531, 2015.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>CAZA</surname>
							<given-names>Arran</given-names>
						</name>
						<etal/>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>How do you really feel? Effect of leaders’ perceived emotional sincerity on followers’ trust</article-title>
					<source>The Leadership Quarterly</source>
					<volume>26</volume>
					<issue>4</issue>
					<fpage>518</fpage>
					<lpage>531</lpage>
					<year>2015</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B8">
				<mixed-citation>CLARK, Murray C.; PAYNE, Roy L. Character-based determinants of trust in leaders. <italic>Risk Analysis</italic>, v. 26, n. 5, p. 1161-1173, 2006.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>CLARK</surname>
							<given-names>Murray C.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>PAYNE</surname>
							<given-names>Roy L</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Character-based determinants of trust in leaders</article-title>
					<source>Risk Analysis</source>
					<volume>26</volume>
					<issue>5</issue>
					<fpage>1161</fpage>
					<lpage>1173</lpage>
					<year>2006</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B9">
				<mixed-citation>CLAUSEWITZ, Carl von. <italic>Da guerra</italic>. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 1996.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>CLAUSEWITZ</surname>
							<given-names>Carl von</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Da guerra</source>
					<publisher-loc>São Paulo</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>Martins Fontes</publisher-name>
					<year>1996</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B10">
				<mixed-citation>COTTA, Cleuza M. <italic>Confiança e cultura organizacional</italic>: um estudo de caso em uma rede de varejo. 2010. Dissertação (mestrado em administração) - Faculdades Pedro Leopoldo, Fundação Pedro Leopoldo, Pedro Leopoldo.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="thesis">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>COTTA</surname>
							<given-names>Cleuza M</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source><italic>Confiança e cultura organizacional</italic>: um estudo de caso em uma rede de varejo</source>
					<year>2010</year>
					<comment content-type="degree">mestrado em administração</comment>
					<publisher-name>Faculdades Pedro Leopoldo, Fundação Pedro Leopoldo</publisher-name>
					<publisher-loc>Pedro Leopoldo</publisher-loc>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B11">
				<mixed-citation>DIRKS, Kurt T.; FERRIN, Donald L. Trust in leadership: meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. <italic>Journal of Applied Psychology</italic>, v. 87, n. 4, p. 611-628, 2002.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>DIRKS</surname>
							<given-names>Kurt T.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>FERRIN</surname>
							<given-names>Donald L</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Trust in leadership: meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Applied Psychology</source>
					<volume>87</volume>
					<issue>4</issue>
					<fpage>611</fpage>
					<lpage>628</lpage>
					<year>2002</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B12">
				<mixed-citation>DRESCHER, Gesche; GARBERS, Yvonne. Shared leadership and commonality: a policy-capturing study. <italic>The Leadership Quarterly</italic>, v. 27, n. 2, p. 200-217, 2016.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>DRESCHER</surname>
							<given-names>Gesche</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>GARBERS</surname>
							<given-names>Yvonne</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<chapter-title>Shared leadership and commonality: a policy-capturing study</chapter-title>
					<source>The Leadership Quarterly</source>
					<volume>27</volume>
					<issue>2</issue>
					<fpage>200</fpage>
					<lpage>217</lpage>
					<year>2016</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B13">
				<mixed-citation>DRESCHER, Marcus A. et al. The dynamics of shared leadership: Building trust and enhancing performance. <italic>Journal of Applied Psychology</italic>, v. 99, n. 5, p. 771, 2014.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>DRESCHER</surname>
							<given-names>Marcus A.</given-names>
						</name>
						<etal/>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>The dynamics of shared leadership: Building trust and enhancing performance</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Applied Psychology</source>
					<volume>99</volume>
					<issue>5</issue>
					<fpage>771</fpage>
					<lpage>771</lpage>
					<year>2014</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B14">
				<mixed-citation>DULEBOHN, James H. et al. A meta-analysis of antecedents and consequences of leader-member exchange: integrating the past with an eye toward the future. <italic>Journal of Management</italic>, v. 38, n. 6, p. 1715-1759, 2012.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>DULEBOHN</surname>
							<given-names>James H.</given-names>
						</name>
						<etal/>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>A meta-analysis of antecedents and consequences of leader-member exchange: integrating the past with an eye toward the future</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Management</source>
					<volume>38</volume>
					<issue>6</issue>
					<fpage>1715</fpage>
					<lpage>1759</lpage>
					<year>2012</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B15">
				<mixed-citation>FORNELL, Claes; LARCKER, David F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. <italic>Journal of Marketing Research</italic>, v. 18, n. 1, p. 39-50, 1981.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>FORNELL</surname>
							<given-names>Claes</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>LARCKER</surname>
							<given-names>David F</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Marketing Research</source>
					<volume>18</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>39</fpage>
					<lpage>50</lpage>
					<year>1981</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B16">
				<mixed-citation>FREDERICO, Joana M. B. <italic>A relação entre confiança, idade e escolaridade no ambiente organizacional</italic>. 2012. 62f. Dissertação (mestrado em gestão empresarial) - Escola Brasileira de Administração Pública e de Empresas, Fundação Getulio Vargas, Rio de Janeiro.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="thesis">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>FREDERICO</surname>
							<given-names>Joana M. B</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>A relação entre confiança, idade e escolaridade no ambiente organizacional</source>
					<year>2012</year>
					<size units="pages">62f.</size>
					<comment content-type="degree">mestrado em gestão empresarial</comment>
					<publisher-name>Escola Brasileira de Administração Pública e de Empresas, Fundação Getulio Vargas</publisher-name>
					<publisher-loc>Rio de Janeiro</publisher-loc>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B17">
				<mixed-citation>GILLESPIE, Nicole. <italic>Measuring trust in working relationships</italic>: the behavioral trust inventory. In: PROCEEDINGS OF THE ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE, 2003, Seattle, WA, USA.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="confproc">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>GILLESPIE</surname>
							<given-names>Nicole</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source><italic>Measuring trust in working relationships</italic>: the behavioral trust inventory</source>
					<conf-name>PROCEEDINGS OF THE ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE</conf-name>
					<year>2003</year>
					<publisher-name>Seattle</publisher-name>
					<publisher-loc>WA, USA</publisher-loc>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B18">
				<mixed-citation>GILLESPIE, Nicole; MANN, Leon. Transformational leadership and shared values: the building blocks of trust. <italic>Journal of Managerial Psychology</italic>, v. 19, n. 6, p. 588-607, 2004.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>GILLESPIE</surname>
							<given-names>Nicole</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>MANN</surname>
							<given-names>Leon</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Transformational leadership and shared values: the building blocks of trust</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Managerial Psychology</source>
					<volume>19</volume>
					<issue>6</issue>
					<fpage>588</fpage>
					<lpage>607</lpage>
					<year>2004</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B19">
				<mixed-citation>GUERREIRO RAMOS, Alberto. <italic>A nova ciência das organizações</italic>. Rio de Janeiro: Editora FGV, 1981.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>GUERREIRO RAMOS</surname>
							<given-names>Alberto</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>A nova ciência das organizações</source>
					<publisher-loc>Rio de Janeiro</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>Editora FGV</publisher-name>
					<year>1981</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B20">
				<mixed-citation>HAAS, Nicole E. et al. Explaining officer compliance: the importance of procedural justice and trust inside a police organization. <italic>Criminology &amp; criminal justice</italic>, v. 15, n. 4, p. 442-463, 2015.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>HAAS</surname>
							<given-names>Nicole E.</given-names>
						</name>
						<etal/>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Explaining officer compliance: the importance of procedural justice and trust inside a police organization</article-title>
					<source>Criminology &amp; criminal justice</source>
					<volume>15</volume>
					<issue>4</issue>
					<fpage>442</fpage>
					<lpage>463</lpage>
					<year>2015</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B21">
				<mixed-citation>HAIR, Joe F.; RINGLE, Christian M.; SARSTEDT, Marko. PLS-SEM: indeed a silver bullet. <italic>Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice</italic>, v. 19, n. 2, p. 139-152, 2014.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>HAIR</surname>
							<given-names>Joe F.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>RINGLE</surname>
							<given-names>Christian M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>SARSTEDT</surname>
							<given-names>Marko</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>PLS-SEM: indeed a silver bullet</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice</source>
					<volume>19</volume>
					<issue>2</issue>
					<fpage>139</fpage>
					<lpage>152</lpage>
					<year>2014</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B22">
				<mixed-citation>HAIR, Joseph F. et al. <italic>Análise multivariada de dados</italic>. São Paulo: Bookman Editora, 2009.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>HAIR</surname>
							<given-names>Joseph F.</given-names>
						</name>
						<etal/>
					</person-group>
					<source>Análise multivariada de dados</source>
					<publisher-loc>São Paulo</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>Bookman Editora</publisher-name>
					<year>2009</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B23">
				<mixed-citation>HANNAH, Sean T et al. A framework for examining leadership in extreme contexts. <italic>The Leadership Quarterly</italic>, v. 20, n. 6, p. 897-919, 2009.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>HANNAH</surname>
							<given-names>Sean T</given-names>
						</name>
						<etal/>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>A framework for examining leadership in extreme contexts</article-title>
					<source>The Leadership Quarterly</source>
					<volume>20</volume>
					<issue>6</issue>
					<fpage>897</fpage>
					<lpage>919</lpage>
					<year>2009</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B24">
				<mixed-citation>HASEL, Markus C.; GROVER, Steven L. An integrative model of trust and leadership. <italic>Leadership e Organization Development Journal</italic>, v. 38, n. 6, p. 849-867, 2017.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>HASEL</surname>
							<given-names>Markus C.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>GROVER</surname>
							<given-names>Steven L</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>An integrative model of trust and leadership</article-title>
					<source>Leadership e Organization Development Journal</source>
					<volume>38</volume>
					<issue>6</issue>
					<fpage>849</fpage>
					<lpage>867</lpage>
					<year>2017</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B25">
				<mixed-citation>HOCH, Julia E. Shared leadership, diversity, and information sharing in teams. <italic>Journal of Managerial Psychology</italic>, v. 29, n. 5, p. 541-564, 2014.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>HOCH</surname>
							<given-names>Julia E</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Shared leadership, diversity, and information sharing in teams</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Managerial Psychology</source>
					<volume>29</volume>
					<issue>5</issue>
					<fpage>541</fpage>
					<lpage>564</lpage>
					<year>2014</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B26">
				<mixed-citation>HOFSTEDE, Geertz. <italic>Culture’s consequences</italic>: comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations. 2. ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2001.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>HOFSTEDE</surname>
							<given-names>Geertz</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source><italic>Culture’s consequences</italic>: comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations</source>
					<edition>2. ed.</edition>
					<publisher-loc>Thousand Oaks</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>Sage Publications</publisher-name>
					<year>2001</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B27">
				<mixed-citation>HOFSTEDE, Geertz. <italic>Cultures and organizations</italic>: software of the mind. Londres: McGraw-Hill, 1997.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>HOFSTEDE</surname>
							<given-names>Geertz</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source><italic>Cultures and organizations</italic>: software of the mind</source>
					<publisher-loc>Londres</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>McGraw-Hill</publisher-name>
					<year>1997</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B28">
				<mixed-citation>HOLLAND, Peter; COOPER, Brian; SHEEHAN, Cathy. Employee voice, supervisor support, and engagement: the mediating role of trust. <italic>Human Resource Management</italic>, v. 56, n. 6, p. 915-929, 2017.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>HOLLAND</surname>
							<given-names>Peter</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>COOPER</surname>
							<given-names>Brian</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>SHEEHAN</surname>
							<given-names>Cathy</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Employee voice, supervisor support, and engagement: the mediating role of trust</article-title>
					<source>Human Resource Management</source>
					<volume>56</volume>
					<issue>6</issue>
					<fpage>915</fpage>
					<lpage>929</lpage>
					<year>2017</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B29">
				<mixed-citation>JONES, Stephen L.; SHAH, Priti P. Diagnosing the locus of trust: a temporal perspective for trustor, trustee, and dyadic influences on perceived trustworthiness. <italic>Journal of Applied Psychology</italic>, v. 101, n. 3, p. 392-414, 2016.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>JONES</surname>
							<given-names>Stephen L.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>SHAH</surname>
							<given-names>Priti P</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Diagnosing the locus of trust: a temporal perspective for trustor, trustee, and dyadic influences on perceived trustworthiness</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Applied Psychology</source>
					<volume>101</volume>
					<issue>3</issue>
					<fpage>392</fpage>
					<lpage>414</lpage>
					<year>2016</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B30">
				<mixed-citation>KROSGAARD, Audrey M.; BRODT, Susan E.; WHITENER, Ellen M. Trust in the face of conflict: the role of managerial trustworthy behavior and organizational context. <italic>Journal of Applied Psychology</italic>, v. 87, n. 2, p. 312-319, 2002.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>KROSGAARD</surname>
							<given-names>Audrey M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>BRODT</surname>
							<given-names>Susan E.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>WHITENER</surname>
							<given-names>Ellen M</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Trust in the face of conflict: the role of managerial trustworthy behavior and organizational context</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Applied Psychology</source>
					<volume>87</volume>
					<issue>2</issue>
					<fpage>312</fpage>
					<lpage>319</lpage>
					<year>2002</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B31">
				<mixed-citation>LEGOOD, Alison; THOMAS, Geoff; SACRAMENTO, Claudia. Leader trustworthy behavior and organizational trust: the role of the immediate manager for cultivating trust. <italic>Journal of Applied Social Psychology</italic>, v. 46, n. 12, p. 673-686, 2016.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>LEGOOD</surname>
							<given-names>Alison</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>THOMAS</surname>
							<given-names>Geoff</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>SACRAMENTO</surname>
							<given-names>Claudia</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Leader trustworthy behavior and organizational trust: the role of the immediate manager for cultivating trust</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Applied Social Psychology</source>
					<volume>46</volume>
					<issue>12</issue>
					<fpage>673</fpage>
					<lpage>686</lpage>
					<year>2016</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B32">
				<mixed-citation>LEWICKI, Roy J.; TOMLINSON, Edward C.; GILLESPIE, Nicole. Models of interpersonal trust development: theoretical approaches, empirical evidence, and future directions. <italic>Journal of Management</italic>, v. 32, n. 6, p. 991-1022, 2006.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>LEWICKI</surname>
							<given-names>Roy J.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>TOMLINSON</surname>
							<given-names>Edward C.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>GILLESPIE</surname>
							<given-names>Nicole</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Models of interpersonal trust development: theoretical approaches, empirical evidence, and future directions</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Management</source>
					<volume>32</volume>
					<issue>6</issue>
					<fpage>991</fpage>
					<lpage>1022</lpage>
					<year>2006</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B33">
				<mixed-citation>LIDEN, Robert C.; WAYNE, Sandy J.; STILWELL, Dean. A longitudinal study on the early development of leader-member exchanges. <italic>Journal of Applied Psychology</italic>, v. 78, n. 4, p. 662, 1993.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>LIDEN</surname>
							<given-names>Robert C.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>WAYNE</surname>
							<given-names>Sandy J.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>STILWELL</surname>
							<given-names>Dean</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>A longitudinal study on the early development of leader-member exchanges</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Applied Psychology</source>
					<volume>78</volume>
					<issue>4</issue>
					<fpage>662</fpage>
					<lpage>662</lpage>
					<year>1993</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B34">
				<mixed-citation>MARTIN, Robin et al. Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) and performance: a meta‐analytic review. <italic>Personnel Psychology</italic>, v. 69, n. 1, p. 67-121, 2016.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>MARTIN</surname>
							<given-names>Robin</given-names>
						</name>
						<etal/>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) and performance: a meta‐analytic review</article-title>
					<source>Personnel Psychology</source>
					<volume>69</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>67</fpage>
					<lpage>121</lpage>
					<year>2016</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B35">
				<mixed-citation>MCALLISTER, Daniel J. Affect-and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. <italic>Academy of Management Journal</italic>, v. 38, n. 1, p. 24-59, 1995.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>MCALLISTER</surname>
							<given-names>Daniel J</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Affect-and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations</article-title>
					<source>Academy of Management Journal</source>
					<volume>38</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>24</fpage>
					<lpage>59</lpage>
					<year>1995</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B36">
				<mixed-citation>MCEVILY, Bill; TORTORIELLO, Marco. Measuring trust in organisational research: review and recommendations. <italic>Journal of Trust Research</italic>, v. 1, n. 1, p. 23-63, 2011.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>MCEVILY</surname>
							<given-names>Bill</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>TORTORIELLO</surname>
							<given-names>Marco</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Measuring trust in organisational research: review and recommendations</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Trust Research</source>
					<volume>1</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>23</fpage>
					<lpage>63</lpage>
					<year>2011</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B37">
				<mixed-citation>MEN, Linjuan R.; STACKS, Don. The effects of authentic leadership on strategic internal communication and employee-organization relationships. <italic>Journal of Public Relations Research</italic>, v. 26, n. 4, p. 301-324, 2014.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>MEN</surname>
							<given-names>Linjuan R.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>STACKS</surname>
							<given-names>Don</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>The effects of authentic leadership on strategic internal communication and employee-organization relationships</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Public Relations Research</source>
					<volume>26</volume>
					<issue>4</issue>
					<fpage>301</fpage>
					<lpage>324</lpage>
					<year>2014</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B38">
				<mixed-citation>MIGUELES, Carmen; LAFRAIA, João Ricardo; COSTA, Gustavo. <italic>Criando o hábito da excelência</italic>. Rio de Janeiro: Qualitymark, 2007.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>MIGUELES</surname>
							<given-names>Carmen</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>LAFRAIA</surname>
							<given-names>João Ricardo</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>COSTA</surname>
							<given-names>Gustavo.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Criando o hábito da excelência</source>
					<publisher-loc>Rio de Janeiro</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>Qualitymark</publisher-name>
					<year>2007</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B39">
				<mixed-citation>MULKI, Jay P.; CAEMMERER, Barbara; HEGGDE, Githa S. Leadership style, salesperson’s work effort and job performance: the influence of power distance. <italic>Journal of Personal Selling e Sales Management</italic>
 <italic>, v.</italic> 
 <italic>35</italic>
 <italic>, n.</italic> 1<italic>, p.</italic> 
 <italic>3-22</italic>, <italic>2015</italic>.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>MULKI</surname>
							<given-names>Jay P.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>CAEMMERER</surname>
							<given-names>Barbara</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>HEGGDE</surname>
							<given-names>Githa S</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Leadership style, salesperson’s work effort and job performance: the influence of power distance</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Personal Selling e Sales Management</source>
					<volume>35</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>3</fpage>
					<lpage>22</lpage>
					<year>2015</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B40">
				<mixed-citation>NEVICKA, Barbora et al. Uncertainty enhances the preference for narcissistic leaders. <italic>European Journal of Social Psychology</italic>, v. 43, n. 5, p. 370-380, 2013.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>NEVICKA</surname>
							<given-names>Barbora</given-names>
						</name>
						<etal/>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Uncertainty enhances the preference for narcissistic leaders</article-title>
					<source>European Journal of Social Psychology</source>
					<volume>43</volume>
					<issue>5</issue>
					<fpage>370</fpage>
					<lpage>380</lpage>
					<year>2013</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B41">
				<mixed-citation>OC, Burak. Contextual leadership: a systematic review of how contextual factors shape leadership and its outcomes. <italic>The Leadership Quarterly</italic>, v. 29, n. 1, p. 218-235, 2017.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>OC</surname>
							<given-names>Burak</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Contextual leadership: a systematic review of how contextual factors shape leadership and its outcomes</article-title>
					<source>The Leadership Quarterly</source>
					<volume>29</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>218</fpage>
					<lpage>235</lpage>
					<year>2017</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B42">
				<mixed-citation>PILLAI, Rajnandini; SCHRIESHEIM, Chester A.; WILLIAMS, Eric S. Fairness perceptions and trust for transformational and transactional leadership: a two-sample study. <italic>Journal of Management</italic>, v. 25, n. 6, p. 897-933, 1999.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>PILLAI</surname>
							<given-names>Rajnandini</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>SCHRIESHEIM</surname>
							<given-names>Chester A.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>WILLIAMS</surname>
							<given-names>Eric S</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Fairness perceptions and trust for transformational and transactional leadership: a two-sample study</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Management</source>
					<volume>25</volume>
					<issue>6</issue>
					<fpage>897</fpage>
					<lpage>933</lpage>
					<year>1999</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B43">
				<mixed-citation>PINHEIRO NETO, Alberto. <italic>A competência essencial do Bope</italic> - uma análise exploratória. Tese (mestrado) - Escola Brasileira de Administração Pública e de Empresas, Fundação Getulio Vargas, Rio de janeiro, 2013.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="thesis">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>PINHEIRO</surname>
							<given-names>Alberto</given-names>
							<suffix>NETO</suffix>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source><italic>A competência essencial do Bope</italic> - uma análise exploratória</source>
					<comment content-type="degree">mestrado</comment>
					<publisher-name>Escola Brasileira de Administração Pública e de Empresas, Fundação Getulio Vargas</publisher-name>
					<publisher-loc>Rio de janeiro</publisher-loc>
					<year>2013</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B44">
				<mixed-citation>PRAHALAD, Coimbatore K. The role of core competencies in the corporation. <italic>Research-Technology Management</italic>, v. 36, n. 6, p. 40-47, 1993.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>PRAHALAD</surname>
							<given-names>Coimbatore K</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>The role of core competencies in the corporation</article-title>
					<source>Research-Technology Management</source>
					<volume>36</volume>
					<issue>6</issue>
					<fpage>40</fpage>
					<lpage>47</lpage>
					<year>1993</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B45">
				<mixed-citation>PORTER, Lyman W.; MCLAUGHLIN, Grace B. Leadership and the organizational context: like the weather? <italic>The Leadership Quarterly</italic>, v. 17, n. 6, p. 559-576, 2006.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>PORTER</surname>
							<given-names>Lyman W.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>MCLAUGHLIN</surname>
							<given-names>Grace B</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Leadership and the organizational context: like the weather?</article-title>
					<source>The Leadership Quarterly</source>
					<volume>17</volume>
					<issue>6</issue>
					<fpage>559</fpage>
					<lpage>576</lpage>
					<year>2006</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B46">
				<mixed-citation>RIPPERGER, Tanja. <italic>Ökonomik des Vertauens</italic>. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>RIPPERGER</surname>
							<given-names>Tanja</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Ökonomik des Vertauens</source>
					<publisher-loc>Tübingen</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>Mohr Siebeck</publisher-name>
					<year>1998</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B47">
				<mixed-citation>ROBERT, Lionel P.; YOU, Sangseok. Are you satisfied yet? Shared leadership, individual trust, autonomy, and satisfaction in virtual teams. <italic>Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology</italic>, v. 69, n. 4, p. 503-513, 2017.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>ROBERT</surname>
							<given-names>Lionel P.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>YOU</surname>
							<given-names>Sangseok</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Are you satisfied yet? Shared leadership, individual trust, autonomy, and satisfaction in virtual teams</article-title>
					<source>Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology</source>
					<volume>69</volume>
					<issue>4</issue>
					<fpage>503</fpage>
					<lpage>513</lpage>
					<year>2017</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B48">
				<mixed-citation>ROCKSTUHL, Thomas et al. Leader - member exchange (LMX) and culture: a meta-analysis of correlates of LMX across 23 countries. <italic>Journal of Applied Psychology</italic>, v. 97, n. 6, p. 1097-1130, 2012.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>ROCKSTUHL</surname>
							<given-names>Thomas</given-names>
						</name>
						<etal/>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Leader - member exchange (LMX) and culture: a meta-analysis of correlates of LMX across 23 countries</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Applied Psychology</source>
					<volume>97</volume>
					<issue>6</issue>
					<fpage>1097</fpage>
					<lpage>1130</lpage>
					<year>2012</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B49">
				<mixed-citation>ROUSSEAU, Denise M. et al. Not so different after all: a cross-discipline view of trust. <italic>Academy of Management Review</italic>, v. 23, n. 3, p. 393-404, 1998.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>ROUSSEAU</surname>
							<given-names>Denise M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<etal/>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Not so different after all: a cross-discipline view of trust</article-title>
					<source>Academy of Management Review</source>
					<volume>23</volume>
					<issue>3</issue>
					<fpage>393</fpage>
					<lpage>404</lpage>
					<year>1998</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B50">
				<mixed-citation>RUPPEL, Cynthia P.; HARRINGTON, Susan J. The relationship of communication, ethical work climate, and trust to commitment and innovation. <italic>Journal of Business Ethics</italic>, v. 25, n. 4, p. 313-332, 2000.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>RUPPEL</surname>
							<given-names>Cynthia P.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>HARRINGTON</surname>
							<given-names>Susan J</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>The relationship of communication, ethical work climate, and trust to commitment and innovation</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Business Ethics</source>
					<volume>25</volume>
					<issue>4</issue>
					<fpage>313</fpage>
					<lpage>332</lpage>
					<year>2000</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B51">
				<mixed-citation>SCANDURA, Terri A.; PELLEGRINI, Ekin K. Trust and leader - member exchange: a closer look at relational vulnerability. <italic>Journal of Leadership &amp; Organizational Studies</italic>, v. 15, n. 2, p. 101-110, 2008.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>SCANDURA</surname>
							<given-names>Terri A.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>PELLEGRINI</surname>
							<given-names>Ekin K</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Trust and leader - member exchange: a closer look at relational vulnerability</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Leadership &amp; Organizational Studies</source>
					<volume>15</volume>
					<issue>2</issue>
					<fpage>101</fpage>
					<lpage>110</lpage>
					<year>2008</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B52">
				<mixed-citation>SCHOORMAN, F. David; MAYER, Roger C.; DAVIS, James H. An integrative model of organizational trust: past, present, and future. <italic>Academy of Management Review</italic>, v. 32, n. 2, p. 344-354, 2007.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>SCHOORMAN</surname>
							<given-names>F. David</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>MAYER</surname>
							<given-names>Roger C.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>DAVIS</surname>
							<given-names>James H</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>An integrative model of organizational trust: past, present, and future</article-title>
					<source>Academy of Management Review</source>
					<volume>32</volume>
					<issue>2</issue>
					<fpage>344</fpage>
					<lpage>354</lpage>
					<year>2007</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B53">
				<mixed-citation>SCHRIESHEIM, Chester A.; CASTRO, Stephanie L.; COGLISER, Claudia C. Leader-member exchange (LMX) research: a comprehensive review of theory, measurement, and data-analytic practices, <italic>Leadership Quarterly</italic>, v. 10, n. 1, p. 63-113, 1999.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>SCHRIESHEIM</surname>
							<given-names>Chester A.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>CASTRO</surname>
							<given-names>Stephanie L.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>COGLISER</surname>
							<given-names>Claudia C</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Leader-member exchange (LMX) research: a comprehensive review of theory, measurement, and data-analytic practices</article-title>
					<source>Leadership Quarterly</source>
					<volume>10</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>63</fpage>
					<lpage>113</lpage>
					<year>1999</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B54">
				<mixed-citation>SMRITIANAND, Prajya R. Vidyarthi; PARK, Hae Sang. LMX differentiation: understanding relational leadership at individual and group level. In: BAUER, Talya N.; ERDOGAN, Berrin (Ed.). <italic>Oxford handbook of leader-member exchange</italic>. Nova York: Oxford University Press, 2015. p. 263-291.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>SMRITIANAND</surname>
							<given-names>Prajya R. Vidyarthi</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>PARK</surname>
							<given-names>Hae Sang</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<chapter-title>LMX differentiation: understanding relational leadership at individual and group level</chapter-title>
					<person-group person-group-type="editor">
						<name>
							<surname>BAUER</surname>
							<given-names>Talya N.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>ERDOGAN</surname>
							<given-names>Berrin</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Oxford handbook of leader-member exchange</source>
					<publisher-loc>Nova York</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>Oxford University Press</publisher-name>
					<year>2015</year>
					<fpage>263</fpage>
					<lpage>291</lpage>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B55">
				<mixed-citation>STORANI, Paulo. <italic>Vitória sobre a morte</italic>: a glória prometida. O “rito de passagem” na construção da identidade das Operações Especiais do Bope/PMERJ. 2008. Dissertação (mestrado em antropologia social) - Programa de Pós-graduação em Antropologia Social, Universidade Federal Fluminense, Rio de Janeiro.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="thesis">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>STORANI</surname>
							<given-names>Paulo</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source><italic>Vitória sobre a morte</italic>: a glória prometida. O “rito de passagem” na construção da identidade das Operações Especiais do Bope/PMERJ</source>
					<year>2008</year>
					<comment content-type="degree">mestrado em antropologia social</comment>
					<publisher-name>Programa de Pós-graduação em Antropologia Social, Universidade Federal Fluminense</publisher-name>
					<publisher-loc>Rio de Janeiro</publisher-loc>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B56">
				<mixed-citation>THOMAS, Gail F.; ZOLIN, Roxanne; HARTMAN, Jackie L. The central role of communication in developing trust and its effect on employee involvement. <italic>The Journal of Business Communication</italic>, v. 46, n. 3, p. 287-310, 2009.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>THOMAS</surname>
							<given-names>Gail F.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>ZOLIN</surname>
							<given-names>Roxanne</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>HARTMAN</surname>
							<given-names>Jackie L</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>The central role of communication in developing trust and its effect on employee involvement</article-title>
					<source>The Journal of Business Communication</source>
					<volume>46</volume>
					<issue>3</issue>
					<fpage>287</fpage>
					<lpage>310</lpage>
					<year>2009</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B57">
				<mixed-citation>TIAN, Qing; PETERSON, Dane K. The effects of ethical pressure and power distance orientation on unethical pro-organizational behavior: the case of earnings management. <italic>Business Ethics: A European Review</italic>, v. 25, n. 2, p. 113-216, 2016.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>TIAN</surname>
							<given-names>Qing</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>PETERSON</surname>
							<given-names>Dane K</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>The effects of ethical pressure and power distance orientation on unethical pro-organizational behavior: the case of earnings management</article-title>
					<source>Business Ethics: A European Review</source>
					<volume>25</volume>
					<issue>2</issue>
					<fpage>113</fpage>
					<lpage>216</lpage>
					<year>2016</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B58">
				<mixed-citation>TZAFRIR, Shay S.; DOLAN, Simon L. Trust me: a scale for measuring manager-employee trust. <italic>Management Research: The Journal of the Iberoamerican Academy of Management</italic>, v. 2, n. 2, p. 115-132, 2004.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>TZAFRIR</surname>
							<given-names>Shay S.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>DOLAN</surname>
							<given-names>Simon L</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Trust me: a scale for measuring manager-employee trust</article-title>
					<source>Management Research: The Journal of the Iberoamerican Academy of Management</source>
					<volume>2</volume>
					<issue>2</issue>
					<fpage>115</fpage>
					<lpage>132</lpage>
					<year>2004</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B59">
				<mixed-citation>WALDMAN, David A. et al. Cultural and leadership predictors of corporate social responsibility values of top management: a Globe study of 15 countries.<italic>Journal of International Business Studies</italic>, v. 37, n. 6, p. 823-837, 2006.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>WALDMAN</surname>
							<given-names>David A.</given-names>
						</name>
						<etal/>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Cultural and leadership predictors of corporate social responsibility values of top management: a Globe study of 15 countries.</article-title>
					<source>Journal of International Business Studies</source>
					<volume>37</volume>
					<issue>6</issue>
					<fpage>823</fpage>
					<lpage>837</lpage>
					<year>2006</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B60">
				<mixed-citation>WEBER, Max. <italic>On charisma and institution building</italic>. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1968.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>WEBER</surname>
							<given-names>Max</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>On charisma and institution building</source>
					<publisher-loc>Chicago</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>The University of Chicago Press</publisher-name>
					<year>1968</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B61">
				<mixed-citation>WHITENER, Ellen M. et al. Managers as initiators of trust: an exchange relationship framework for understanding managerial trustworthy behavior. <italic>Academy of Management Review</italic>, v. 23, n. 3, p. 513-530, 1998.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>WHITENER</surname>
							<given-names>Ellen M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<etal/>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Managers as initiators of trust: an exchange relationship framework for understanding managerial trustworthy behavior</article-title>
					<source>Academy of Management Review</source>
					<volume>23</volume>
					<issue>3</issue>
					<fpage>513</fpage>
					<lpage>530</lpage>
					<year>1998</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B62">
				<mixed-citation>WILLIAMSON, Oliver E. <italic>Organization theory</italic>. Nova York; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>WILLIAMSON</surname>
							<given-names>Oliver E</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Organization theory</source>
					<publisher-loc>Nova York; Oxford</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>Oxford University Press</publisher-name>
					<year>1995</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B63">
				<mixed-citation>WILLIAMSON, Oliver E. <italic>The mechanisms of governance</italic>. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>WILLIAMSON</surname>
							<given-names>Oliver E</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>The mechanisms of governance</source>
					<publisher-loc>Oxford</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>Oxford University Press</publisher-name>
					<year>1996</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B64">
				<mixed-citation>WOLFF, Birgitta. Constitutional contracting and corporate constitution. In: PICOT, Arnold; SCHLICHT, Ekkehart (Ed.). <italic>Perspectives on contract theory</italic>. Nova York: Springer, 1996. p. 95-108.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>WOLFF</surname>
							<given-names>Birgitta</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<chapter-title>Constitutional contracting and corporate constitution</chapter-title>
					<person-group person-group-type="editor">
						<name>
							<surname>PICOT</surname>
							<given-names>Arnold</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>SCHLICHT</surname>
							<given-names>Ekkehart</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Perspectives on contract theory</source>
					<publisher-loc>Nova York</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>Springer</publisher-name>
					<year>1996</year>
					<fpage>95</fpage>
					<lpage>108</lpage>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B65">
				<mixed-citation>YU, Andrew; MATTA, Fadel K.; CORNFIELD, Bryan. Is LMX differentiation beneficial or detrimental for group effectiveness? A meta-analytic investigation and theoretical integration. <italic>Academy of Management Journal</italic>, 2017. Disponível em:&lt;<comment>Disponível em:<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://journals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/amj.2016.1212">https://journals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/amj.2016.1212</ext-link>
					</comment>&gt;. Acesso em: 15 maio 2016.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>YU</surname>
							<given-names>Andrew</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>MATTA</surname>
							<given-names>Fadel K.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>CORNFIELD</surname>
							<given-names>Bryan</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Is LMX differentiation beneficial or detrimental for group effectiveness? A meta-analytic investigation and theoretical integration</article-title>
					<source>Academy of Management Journal</source>
					<year>2017</year>
					<comment>Disponível em:</comment>
					<comment>Disponível em:<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://journals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/amj.2016.1212">https://journals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/amj.2016.1212</ext-link>
					</comment>
					<comment>Acesso em:</comment>
					<date-in-citation content-type="access-date" iso-8601-date="2016-05-15">15 maio 2016</date-in-citation>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B66">
				<mixed-citation>ZANINI, Marco Tulio. <italic>Trust within organizations of new economy</italic> - a cross-industrial study. Wiesbaden: DUV, 2007.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>ZANINI</surname>
							<given-names>Marco Tulio</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source><italic>Trust within organizations of new economy</italic> - a cross-industrial study</source>
					<publisher-loc>Wiesbaden</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>DUV</publisher-name>
					<year>2007</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B67">
				<mixed-citation>ZANINI, Marco Tulio; COLMERAUER, Marcio; LIMA, Diego F. P. A influência do estilo de liderança consultivo nas relações de confiança e comprometimento no Batalhão de Operações Policiais Especiais do Rio de Janeiro. <italic>Revista de Administração</italic>, v. 50, n. 1, p. 105-120, 2015.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>ZANINI</surname>
							<given-names>Marco Tulio</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>COLMERAUER</surname>
							<given-names>Marcio</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>LIMA</surname>
							<given-names>Diego F. P</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>A influência do estilo de liderança consultivo nas relações de confiança e comprometimento no Batalhão de Operações Policiais Especiais do Rio de Janeiro</article-title>
					<source>Revista de Administração</source>
					<volume>50</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>105</fpage>
					<lpage>120</lpage>
					<year>2015</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B68">
				<mixed-citation>ZANINI, Marco Tulio; LUSK, Edward F.; WOLFF, Birgitta. Confiança dentro das organizações da nova economia: uma análise empírica sobre as consequências da incerteza institucional. <italic>Revista de Administração Contemporânea</italic>, v. 13, n. 1, p. 72-91, 2009.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>ZANINI</surname>
							<given-names>Marco Tulio</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>LUSK</surname>
							<given-names>Edward F.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>WOLFF</surname>
							<given-names>Birgitta</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Confiança dentro das organizações da nova economia: uma análise empírica sobre as consequências da incerteza institucional</article-title>
					<source>Revista de Administração Contemporânea</source>
					<volume>13</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>72</fpage>
					<lpage>91</lpage>
					<year>2009</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B69">
				<mixed-citation>ZANINI, Marco Tulio; MIGUELES, Carmen P.; COLMERAUER, Marcio. <italic>A ponta da lança</italic>. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Elsevier, 2014.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>ZANINI</surname>
							<given-names>Marco Tulio</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>MIGUELES</surname>
							<given-names>Carmen P.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>COLMERAUER</surname>
							<given-names>Marcio</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>A ponta da lança</source>
					<publisher-loc>Rio de Janeiro</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>Editora Elsevier</publisher-name>
					<year>2014</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B70">
				<mixed-citation>ZANINI, Marco Tulio et al. Os elementos de coordenação informal em uma unidade policial de Operações Especiais. <italic>RAC-Revista de Administração Contemporânea</italic>, v. 17, n. 1, p. 106-125, 2013.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>ZANINI</surname>
							<given-names>Marco Tulio</given-names>
						</name>
						<etal/>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Os elementos de coordenação informal em uma unidade policial de Operações Especiais</article-title>
					<source>RAC-Revista de Administração Contemporânea</source>
					<volume>17</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>106</fpage>
					<lpage>125</lpage>
					<year>2013</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B71">
				<mixed-citation>ZHU, Weichun et al. Revisiting the mediating role of trust in transformational leadership effects: do different types of trust make a difference?<italic>The Leadership Quarterly</italic>, v. 24, n. 1, p. 94-105, 2013.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>ZHU</surname>
							<given-names>Weichun</given-names>
						</name>
						<etal/>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Revisiting the mediating role of trust in transformational leadership effects: do different types of trust make a difference?</article-title>
					<source>The Leadership Quarterly</source>
					<volume>24</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>94</fpage>
					<lpage>105</lpage>
					<year>2013</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
		</ref-list>
		<fn-group>
			<fn fn-type="other" id="fn1">
				<label>1</label>
				<p> O que chamamos aqui de <italic>elementos de coordenação informal</italic> se refere aos aspectos não estruturais das organizações que Chester Barnard aborda como relevantes já em 1938, e que mais tarde são tratados como os aspectos políticos e simbólicos das organizações. Ver: Barnard (1938); Williamson (1995); Guerreiro Ramos (1981).</p>
			</fn>
			<fn fn-type="other" id="fn2">
				<label>2</label>
				<p>Ver Whitener e colaboradores (1998) em Krosgaard, Brodt e Whitener (2002), Zanini, Lusk e Wolff (2009) e Zanini e colaboradores (2013).</p>
			</fn>
			<fn fn-type="other" id="fn3">
				<label>3</label>
				<p>O banco de dados original construído para a medição do nível de confiança interna na organização traz em si questões que puderam ser analisadas, nessa perspectiva, para avaliar a força dessa hipótese. Outros estudos seriam necessários para afirmar definitivamente que a redução da distância de poder (IDP) é fundamental para ganhos de efetividade da liderança no contexto brasileiro, mas sua confirmação, mesmo que parcial, em uma organização militar, tradicionalmente mais hierárquica, nos permite supor que esforços mais consistentes na validação desse achado sejam relevantes.</p>
			</fn>
			<fn fn-type="other" id="fn4">
				<label>4</label>
				<p>As cargas fatoriais (<italic>factor loadings</italic>) são indicadores de boa validade convergente, quando são superiores a 0,5 e não apresentam nenhuma carga fatorial cruzada superior a 0,3 (Guadagnoli e Velicer, 1988).</p>
			</fn>
			<fn fn-type="other" id="fn5">
				<label>5</label>
				<p>Segundo o critério de Fornell e Larcke (1981), um construto possui boa validade discriminante quando a raiz quadrada de sua variância média extraída (AVE) é maior do que qualquer correlação com os outros construtos mensurados, o que é válido para esta base de dados.</p>
			</fn>
		</fn-group>
	</back>
	<!--sub-article article-type="translation" id="s1" xml:lang="en">
		<front-stub>
			<article-categories>
				<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
					<subject>Article</subject>
				</subj-group>
			</article-categories>
			<title-group>
				<article-title>An analysis of the antecedents of trust in the leader of a special operations police unit</article-title>
			</title-group>
			<contrib-group>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Zanini</surname>
						<given-names>Marco Tulio</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">¹</xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Conceição</surname>
						<given-names>Maurilio Nunes da</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">¹</xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<name>
						<surname>Migueles</surname>
						<given-names>Carmen Pires</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">¹</xref>
				</contrib>
				<aff id="aff2">
					<label>¹</label>
					<institution content-type="original"> Fundação Getulio Vargas / Escola Brasileira de Administração Pública e de Empresas, Rio de Janeiro / RJ — Brazil</institution>
				</aff>
			</contrib-group>
			<author-notes>
				<fn fn-type="other" id="fn11">
					<p>Marco Tulio F. Zanini - Fundação Getulio Vargas/Brazilian School of Public and Business Administration (FGV EBAPE). E-mail: marco.zanini@fgv.br.</p>
				</fn>
				<fn fn-type="other" id="fn12">
					<p>Maurilio Nunes da Conceição - Master’s in Business management from the Brazilian school of public and business Administration (FGV EBAPE). E-mail: nunes113@hotmail.com.</p>
				</fn>
				<fn fn-type="other" id="fn13">
					<p>Carmen P. Migueles - Fundação Getulio Vargas/Brazilian School of Public and Business Administration (FGV EBAPE). E-mail: carmen.migueles@fgv.br.</p>
				</fn>
			</author-notes>
			<abstract>
				<title>Abstract</title>
				<p>This article aims to widen the understanding of informal coordination elements in the management of teams working in complex and unpredictable scenarios. It presents the results of a study carried out in a special operations police unit, the <italic>Batalhão de Operações Policiais Especiais do Rio de Janeiro</italic> (Bope/RJ), using quantitative methods. The study analyzed the relationship between the antecedents of trust and power distance and personal and professional trust in the leader. The results confirm a direct and negative relationship between power distance and professional trust in the leader, and a direct and positive relationship with some antecedents of trust. The greater the perceptions of internal communication quality, and sharing and delegation of authority in the decision process, the greater the trust in the leader.</p>
			</abstract>
			<kwd-group xml:lang="en">
				<title>Keywords:</title>
				<kwd>antecedents of trust</kwd>
				<kwd>trust</kwd>
				<kwd>leadership</kwd>
				<kwd>special police units</kwd>
				<kwd>team management</kwd>
			</kwd-group>
		</front-stub>
		<body>
			<sec sec-type="intro">
				<title>1. Introduction</title>
				<p>This article aims to deepen the understanding of the elements of informal coordination in organizations that operate in highly complex and uncertain situations. Leadership and trust are two relevant elements to explain the difference in performance between organizations that are often similar (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Braun et al., 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">Pinheiro Neto, 2013</xref>; Zanini et al., 2003; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">Haas, 2005</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">Legood, Thomas and Sacramento, 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">Hasel and Grover, 2017</xref>). Especially in contexts of high complexity and unpredictability, engagement and trust are essential to ensure cooperation in the search for internal adjustments necessary to construct rapid responses to the challenges of the environment (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">Hannah et al., 2009</xref>).</p>
				<p>This article presents an analysis of the antecedents of trust in the leader in the operational teams in Bope/RJ (Special operations police unit of the Rio de Janeiro Military Police, PMERJ). In the literature, these organizations are recognized as Critical Action Organizations (CAOs) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">Hannah et al., 2009</xref>). According to Hannah and collaborators (2009), CAOs are characterized by engagement in extreme events such as combats, with high potential for major critical consequences involving the risk of life of both members and nonmembers.</p>
				<p>To better understand these elements of informal coordination, leadership and trust, we study the case of Bope/RJ, where high uncertainty, unpredictability, complexity and volatility of the environment can be studied in extreme situations. Unlike productive organizations, where there is control and relative predictability about the variables that interfere in the operational routines, combating crime presupposes the capacity to face random or planned actions with the intention to reduce the effectiveness of the police activities. That is, the work routine occurs in an environment where the intentional reaction to the efforts of the police teams is the fundamental characteristic of the activity and where the error or a failure can result in loss of lives of police or civilians.</p>
				<p>In line with the study of the CAOs, some preliminary works addressing the organization (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B67">Zanini, Colmerauer and Lima, 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B69">Zanini, Migueles and Colmerauer, 2014</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B70">Zanini et al., 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">Pinheiro Neto, 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B55">Storani, 2006</xref>) show how having trust in the leader is a key factor for accepting risk, even in contexts of extreme personal and institutional danger, inherent in the organization’s activity. In these previous studies, confidence records were investigated according to internationally tested scales. The deepening of this analysis made us realize, however, that characteristic aspects of the institutional environment where the organization operates may pose specific challenges for the definition of the key factors of antecedents of trust.</p>
				<p>In addressing the specific institutional context and its impact on the relationship between antecedents of trust and trust in the leader, this study contributes to the formulation of theories and definitions of leadership. Some scholars have brought attention to this need such as <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">Oc (2017</xref>), <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B40">Nevicka and collaborators (2013</xref>), <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">Hannah and collaborators (2009</xref>), <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">Avolio (2007</xref>), <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B45">Porter and McLauglin (2006</xref>), <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B59">Waldman and collaborators (2006</xref>).</p>
				<p>Thus, when we examine the qualitative studies of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B69">Zanini, Migueles and Colmerauer (2014</xref>) and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">Pinheiro Neto (2013)</xref>, which point to the reduction of <italic>power distance</italic> (defined by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Hofstede (2001</xref>), as an indicator of the degree of acceptance of inequality and distance between top and bottom), and the exercise of shared leadership, as critical factors for the acceptance of leadership and risk, the hypothesis was that the cultural dimension of power distance (comparatively high in Brazil), negatively correlates with trust in the leader and therefore with the effectiveness and productivity of the organization’s efforts. In previous empirical studies adopting the Leader-Member Exchange Theory (LMX) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B48">Rockstuhl et al., 2012</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">Dulebohn et al., 2012</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B54">Anand, Vidyarthi and Park, 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B65">Yu, Matta and Cornfield, 2017</xref>), it was demonstrated that the dimension power-distance, as defined by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Hofstede (2001)</xref>, moderates the relations of trust between leader and follower. In addition, using the antecedent of trust scales developed by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Whitener and collaborators (1998</xref>), this research sought to better understand the antecedents of trust by means of a quantitative analysis, separately relating each scale to professional and personal trust in the leader.</p>
			</sec>
			<sec sec-type="cases">
				<title>2. Case study Bope/RJ</title>
				<p>Created in 1978, this military police intervention unit of the State of Rio de Janeiro has approximately 400 police officers specializing in actions to combat crime in areas of high risk, and in rescuing hostages. The aim is to understand the specificity of the links between Bope/RJ police officers, who work hard to combat drug trafficking in the Rio de Janeiro favelas with strong urban guerrilla characteristics, for which they have developed specific skills. The organizational form and leadership style of Bope/RJ, as well as its essential competencies (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B44">Prahalad, 1993</xref>) have already been studied in other works. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">Pinheiro Neto (2013)</xref> observes that the ability to plan in a participatory way, with a low degree of power distance in the hierarchical relations, is the foundation for the set of organizational competencies that sustain its operational excellence, strengthening the relations of trust between leaders and followers and among peers. According to <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">Pinheiro Neto (2013)</xref>, the low power distance contributes positively to the increase of trust. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B70">Zanini and collaborators (2013</xref>) note the central role of trust and leadership relationships as critical factors in generating cooperation and acceptance of extreme risk in BOPE/RJ. The predisposition of the police officer to engage in critical situations is significantly related with their trust in the leader, confirming the relevance of leadership in military organizations (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B60">Weber, 1968</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">Clausewitz, 1996</xref>). The same study identified that professional trust in the leader is positively related to affective and normative commitment. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B67">Zanini, Colmerauer and Lima (2015)</xref>, analyze the relationship between trust in the leader and the commitment of subordinates, and confirm that the leadership style based on consultation is positively related to personal and professional trust in the leader.</p>
			</sec>
			<sec>
				<title>3. Effects of power distance</title>
				<p>The quantitative studies on comparative culture performed by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Hofstede (2001</xref>) selected six comparative dimensions in national cultures. Among them, power distance (power distance index — PDI) was identified as a critical dimension for effectiveness and operational efficiency, especially impacting the relationships between leaders and followers within organizations (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B38">Migueles, Lafraia and Costa, 2007</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B48">Rockstuhl et al., 1990</xref>; Dirk et al., 2012; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B70">Zanini et al., 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">Pinheiro Neto, 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B54">Anand, Vidyarthi and Park, 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B39">Mulki, Caemmerer and Heggde, 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B57">Tian and Peterson, 2016</xref>). For this research, the selection of this specific cultural dimension was performed after the analysis of other studies in which this dimension was considered critical for the organization’s capacity to develop internal trust relationships (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B70">Zanini et al., 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B69">Zanini, Migueles and Colmerauer, 2014</xref>).</p>
				<p>In the comparative research conducted by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Hofstede (2001</xref>), Brazil was considered a country with a high power distance. This dimension reflects, comparatively, how the less powerful individuals in each society expect and accept that power is distributed unequally (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">Hofstede, 1997</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">2001</xref>). The greater the power distance index of a country, the more comfortable individuals of that country are with an unequal distribution of power. According to <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">Hofstede (1997</xref>:42), power distance is “the measure of the degree of acceptance, by those who have less power in the institutions and organizations of a country, of an unequal distribution of power”. In the work environment of countries with low power distance, the hierarchy is seen only as a temporary arrangement established for convenience. Employees expect a style based on consultancy from their managers, the difference between base and top salaries is relatively small, and employees expect to be consulted on the decisions that affect their work. In countries with high power distance, the hierarchy difference is seen as an existential fact, and the employees expect an authoritarian and paternalistic manager (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Hofstede, 2001</xref>).</p>
				<p>Analyzing the specific context of Bope/RJ, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B55">Storani (2006)</xref> and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">Pinheiro Neto (2013)</xref>, observe that the rigorous selection process functions as a rite of passage for the police officer. Acceptance is part of the integration process in the team and coexisting with rigid disciplinary rules regulates behavior. Constant exposure to high risk to life during operations, establishes a closer relationship between police officers of different military patents. This creates a unique structure that promotes the reduction of perception of power distance and a greater sense of equality to those who belong to the group. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">Pinheiro Neto (2013</xref>:47) observes that the exercise of shared leadership, participatory planning, and rigorous training add to the fundamental process for accepting and reducing risk in operations, ensuring predictability in relation to the behavior of members and reliability in relation to tactical and operational plans.</p>
				<p>The speed of operation, on the one hand, and the impossibility of fully understanding the scenario where it occurs, on the other, demand an ad hoc decision-making process. The possibility of the team leader being injured in combat is an integral part of the operation’s risk planning (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">Pinheiro Neto, 2013</xref>:48). Therefore, shared leadership becomes fundamental to the continuity of operations and to the need to rescue injured police officers. Thus, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">Pinheiro Neto (2013)</xref> notes that the preparation to take the lead is part of the training of the unit’s members. In this context, the reduction of power distance appears as a key factor for effectiveness in fast, complex scenarios and with numerous unforeseen possibilities. In these previous studies, however, the reduction of power distance in the analysis of causal relationships between the antecedents of trust and its influence on subordinate trust in the leader was not considered. Thus, this work deepens the study of this relationship, through quantitative analysis, separately relating each of the antecedents of trust with trust in the leader. The database used by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B70">Zanini and collaborators (2013</xref>) was also used in this study. The questions that assess the power distance are within the database, originally used by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Hofstede (2001</xref>).<xref ref-type="fn" rid="fn9"><sup>1</sup></xref>
				</p>
			</sec>
			<sec>
				<title>4. Trust relations leader-followers</title>
				<p>Contract and agency theory (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B64">Wolff, 1996</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B63">Williamson, 1996</xref>) shows that formal contracts represent an imperfect reduction in the nature of relationships that occur in organizations. Alternative mechanisms are necessary to ensure that all unforeseeable and contingent events, when making the initial agreements, are adequately addressed by the cooperation between the parties. Trust is recognized in the literature on contract theory as a central element for a better evaluation of relational contracts (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B64">Wolff, 1996</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B46">Ripperger, 1998</xref>). For the purpose of this article, we take <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B46">Ripperger’s (1998</xref>:36) definition of trust as: “voluntary and early acceptance of a risk investment, by abdication of explicit contractual mechanisms of security and control, in the expectation that another party will not act opportunistically”. In the definition of trust, other theoretical perspectives also assume the centrality of vulnerability and risk (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">Rousseau et al., 1998</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Gillespie, 2003</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B58">Tzafrir and Dolan, 2004</xref>). For example, Rousseau and collaborators (1998:395), define trust as “a psychological state consisting of the intention to accept vulnerability based on positive expectations about the intentions or behaviors of another person”. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B58">Tzafrir and Dolan (2004)</xref> note the existence of components common to the different definitions of trust associated with vulnerability and risk, such as reciprocity.</p>
				<p>In these perspectives, trust is a belief, expectation or perception of the leader, not a leader’s characteristic or a characteristic of the relationship. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Gillespie (2003</xref>) states that trust in work relationships is predominantly manifested through two distinct behaviors: counting on the others and to disclose personal or confidential information to others. The author distinguishes between two dimensions, personal and professional. Professional trust contrasts with the more personal, confidentiality-oriented nature, hence the distinction between personal and professional forms of trust. For Gillespie (2003), confiding or sharing something personal means that there is an emotional and relational basis of trust, revealing vulnerability, often accompanied by attachment, expressions of care and concern. In this sense, according to <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">Mcallister (1995</xref>) the personal dimension is similar to the notion of affective trust, and is consistent with the view that there are trust components that are different as far as they have an emotional basis. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Gillespie (2003)</xref> says that, contrary to <italic>personal</italic> trust, <italic>professional</italic> trust is based on the perception of professional skills and competencies that lead to reliability, that is, having the leader to help to solve important issues, to support in difficult situations, or trusting the leader’s evaluation about the work.</p>
				<p>The trust relations between leaders and followers has been approached in some lines of research, notably, in the Leader-ember Exchange (LMX) theory (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B53">Pillai, Schriesheim and Williams 1999</xref>; Schriesheim, Castro and Cogliser, 1999; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Braun et al., 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B71">Zhu et al., 2013</xref>). In this perspective, trust in leadership emerges and is operationally described as a process of social exchange (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Whitener et al., 1998</xref>), assuming centrality, since the LMX theory has been properly defined as a process of trust building (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4">Bauer and Green, 1996</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B33">Liden, Wayne and Stilwell, 1993</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B51">Scandura and Pellegrini, 2008</xref>). Empirical studies developed under this theoretical perspective point to trust in the leader as one of the main factors related to organizational performance (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">Martin et al., 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Banks et al., 2014</xref>) and reveal some critical factors as antecedents of trust in the leader. For example, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Dirks and Ferrin (2002</xref>) conducted a meta-analysis to understand the critical factors in the relationship of trust in the leader, and among the antecedent variables of trust, those that presented the greatest relation, are the transformational leadership style (involving affective elements in the relation), the perception of justice (interactional, procedural and distributive), and the perception of organizational support. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">Gillespie and Mann (2004</xref>) confirm that trust in the leader is directly and positively related to a leadership style of consultation, sharing of decisions, quality of internal communication, and sharing of common values. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">Holland, Cooper, and Sheehan (2017</xref>) confirm that trust in leadership is positively related to the leader’s support and direct relationship with the subordinate. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Boies, Fiset and Gill (2015</xref>) and Ruppel and Harrington (2002) confirm that the quality of communication is a critical factor for trust in the leader. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">Clark and Payne (2006</xref>) identify a strong relationship between perceptions of ability, integrity, fairness and openness to the other, on the part of the follower, as determining factors for the construction of relationships of trust in the leader. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Caza (2015</xref>) confirms that trust in the leader increases as the subordinate realizes the leader’s emotional honesty. Although these studies confirm some variables as antecedents of trust in the leader, we observe that these vary and need to be understood in their specific context.</p>
				<p>For a better understanding of trust building in the leader in specific contexts (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Dirks and Ferrin, 2002</xref>), we explored the causal relationship using the analysis of trust antecedents. In this sense, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Whitener and collaborators (1998</xref>) present a theoretical model for the analysis of the antecedents of trust in organizations, based on five dimensions selected from academic works with a strong relationship to trust, namely: <italic>perception of consistency, integrity, authority sharing and delegation when it comes to decision-making processes, demonstration of concern for subordinates,</italic> and <italic>internal communication.</italic></p>
				<p>In this article, we use these same scales to analyze the hypotheses that are suggested in order to better understand the critical elements of the informal coordination model in the special operation police units. Thus, based on the analysis of the previous studies about trust in the leader and after identifying the antecedents, we formulated the following hypotheses, separately identifying the dimensions of professional and personal trust in the leader:</p>
				<p>
					<list list-type="simple">
						<list-item>
							<p>H1a: Power distance has a direct and inverse relationship with professional trust in the leader.</p>
						</list-item>
						<list-item>
							<p>H1b: Power distance has a direct and inverse relationship with personal trust in the leader.</p>
						</list-item>
						<list-item>
							<p>H2a: Perception of internal communication is associated with higher levels of professional trust in the leader.</p>
						</list-item>
						<list-item>
							<p>H2b: Perception of internal communication is associated with higher levels of personal trust in the leader.</p>
						</list-item>
						<list-item>
							<p>H3a: Perception of management consistency is associated with higher levels of professional trust in the leader.</p>
						</list-item>
						<list-item>
							<p>H3b: Perception of management consistency is associated with higher levels of personal trust in the leader.</p>
						</list-item>
						<list-item>
							<p>H4a: Perception of management integrity is associated with higher levels of professional trust in the leader.</p>
						</list-item>
						<list-item>
							<p>H4b: Perception of management integrity is associated with higher levels of personal trust in the leader.</p>
						</list-item>
						<list-item>
							<p>H5a: Perception of authority sharing and delegation is associated with higher levels of professional trust in the leader.</p>
						</list-item>
						<list-item>
							<p>H5b: Perception of authority sharing and delegation is associated with higher levels of personal trust in the leader.</p>
						</list-item>
						<list-item>
							<p>H6a: Perception of demonstration of concern for subordinates is associated with higher levels of professional trust in the leader.</p>
						</list-item>
						<list-item>
							<p>H6b: Perception demonstration of concern for subordinates is associated with higher levels of personal trust in the leader.</p>
						</list-item>
					</list>
				</p>
			</sec>
			<sec sec-type="methods">
				<title>5. Methodology</title>
				<p>The study tested the hypotheses by using a structured questionnaire divided into four parts. The questionnaire included questions about motivation, leadership and power distance (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Hofstede, 2001</xref>); an inventory of interpersonal trust questions (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Gillespie, 2003</xref>); antecedents of trust (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Whitener et al., 1998</xref>); and demographic variables. The respondents were operational police officers of the special operations police unit of the Military Policy of the State of Rio de Janeiro (Bope/RJ).</p>
				<sec>
					<title><italic>5.1 Population and sample</italic></title>
					<p>The distribution of the questionnaires occurred in 2012, directly and manually, within the premises of Bope/RJ, which at that time had about 400 operational police officers, corresponding to our total population. Sample of the study counted on 115 Bope/RJ police officers, representing 28.75% of the population. The sample is characterized by police officers aged between 30 and 39 (about 64%), married (about 70%) and with high school education (66%). The average time in the unit is approximately eight years, and 74% of respondents have served there for more than five years. The majority of them are corporals (68.6%) and soldiers (17.6%).</p>
				</sec>
				<sec>
					<title><italic>5.2 Research and data collection tools</italic></title>
					<p>The data collection instrument was a structured questionnaire, divided into four parts. The first part had questions that explored the motivations of police officers to participate in risk operations, the motivational factors, and the leadership style they have and what they want. These questions were developed exclusively for this research and are linked to the specific context of Bope, for example: <italic>What motivates you most to work in this unit? What is the main characteristic that a Bope member should have?</italic> In addition, this first part of the questionnaire explored the construct power distance (PD) using the questions proposed by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Hofstede (2001</xref>). The questions related to the degree of acceptance of subordinates disagreeing with their direct superior and the leadership style of the superior (consultative, autocratic/paternalistic or not consultative but based on the majority opinion).</p>
					<p>The second part presented questions about trust in the superior, the colleagues and the team, a scale originally called Behavioral Trust Inventory (BTI) by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Gillespie (2003</xref>). The scale has good reliability, both factors with Cronbach Alphas greater than 0.89 (Factor 1 — <italic>Dependence</italic> α = 0.90 to 0.92 | Factor 2 — Disclosure α = 0.89 to 0.95), being pointed out in several works as an alternative and reliable trust measure (McEvily and Tortoriello, 2011; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B52">Schoorman, et al., 2007</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Lewicki, et al., 2006</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">Gillespie and Mann, 2004</xref>). This questionnaire had already been validated for the Brazilian context by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B66">Zanini (2007</xref>), <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">Cotta (2010</xref>) and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Frederico (2012</xref>). The scale is composed of 10 items, evaluated on a seven-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 to 7 (1: not at all willing; 7: extremely willing). In this questionnaire, each group of five questions aims to measure different aspects of trust. Items 1 to 5 measure professional trust, while items 6 to 10 measure personal trust.</p>
					<p>The third part of the questionnaire contained the scales by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Whitener and collaborators (1998</xref>) regarding the antecedents of trust, formed by five factors: <italic>internal communication</italic> (α = 0.73); <italic>management integrity</italic> (α = 0.91), <italic>management consistency</italic> (α = 0.74); <italic>authority sharing and delegation</italic> (α = 0.82); and <italic>demonstration of concern for subordinates</italic> (α = 0.92). Each of these indicators is formed by 3 items, measured on a 5-point scale (1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree). In <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Whitener et al. (1998)</xref>, <italic>consistency</italic> refers to the perception of the behavior of the person to whom the trust is deposited (for example, in the superiors) through an expectation of reciprocity and dignity of being trustworthy. <italic>Integrity</italic> refers to the perception of the level with which the management of the organization, through their representatives, tells the truth and fulfills their promises. <italic>Authority sharing and delegation</italic> measures the perception of the degree of involvement of members in the decision-making process of the organization and how it seeks to share such decisions with its members. This adds value to the members’ involvement as being part of the decision-making process in the organization, indicating the level at which the organization values the contribution of its members. The <italic>demonstration of concern</italic> refers to the members’ perception of the willingness of the organization’s management to care about their well-being when making important or day-to-day decisions to the detriment of other interests. The <italic>perception of internal communication</italic> is related to the degree of accessibility, reliability and transparency of the information that is shared with the members of the organization.</p>
					<p>The fourth part of the questionnaire collects personal demographic variables, such as education, age group, number of subordinates and time in current work place. A final section was made available for respondents to express their opinion and additional comments.</p>
				</sec>
				<sec>
					<title><italic>5.3 Data analysis</italic></title>
					<p>The study used the Structural Equations Modeling (SEM) and Maximum Likelihood algorithm, with Promax oblique rotation. The analysis was carried out in two stages. The first analyzed the latent variables to be used in the proposed hypotheses test, with the objective of measuring and evaluating the quality of the measurement performed, analyzing the convergent and discriminant validity, and the reliability of the construct measurement instrument (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">Hair, Ringle and Sarstedt, 2014</xref>). The second stage evaluated the hypotheses of the study, when estimating the betas that correspond to the relationships between independent and dependent variables.</p>
				</sec>
			</sec>
			<sec sec-type="results">
				<title>6. Results</title>
				<sec>
					<title><italic>6.1 Análise das variáveis latentes</italic></title>
					<p>The consistency check was performed by analyzing the latent variables using the SEM with standardized coefficients. The variables analyzed were: personal trust in the leader, professional trust in the leader, perception of internal communication, perception of management consistency, perception of management integrity, perception of authority sharing and delegation, and perception of demonstration of concern for subordinates.</p>
					<p>As shown in table 1, the model test showed a good convergent validity. All questions presented good factor loading (loads over 0.5), except for one item (Consistency 1). For the convergent validity test, we also used average variance extracted (AVE). In the constructs used, the AVE is higher than the limit of 0.5 indicated by the literature (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">Fornell and Larcker, 1981</xref>). Thus, it is possible to observe good convergent validity of the constructs. To measure reliability, we used the criterion defined by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B22">Hair and collaborators (2009</xref>), that the composite reliability (CR) should be higher than 0.7, which was also achieved, with 0.82 being the lowest CR among the analyzed variables. Thus, the results provide subsidies for the relationships tested in the structural model to be considered valid, since the measurement instrument has discriminant validity, convergent validity and reliability. <xref ref-type="table" rid="t3">Table 1</xref> summarizes the results.</p>
					<p>
						<table-wrap id="t3">
							<label>Table 1</label>
							<caption>
								<title>Factor loading, AVE and CR</title>
							</caption>
							<alternatives>
								<graphic xlink:href="tabla1-gt1-en.jpg"/>
							<table>
								<colgroup>
									<col/>
									<col/>
									<col/>
									<col/>
									<col/>
									<col/>
									<col/>
									<col/>
								</colgroup>
								<thead>
									<tr>
										<th align="left">Constructs and items</th>
										<th align="center">C1</th>
										<th align="center">C2</th>
										<th align="center">C3</th>
										<th align="center">C4</th>
										<th align="center">C5</th>
										<th align="center">C6</th>
										<th align="center">C7</th>
									</tr>
								</thead>
								<tbody>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">C1: Professional trust in the leader</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Professional 1</td>
										<td align="center">0.75</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Professional 2</td>
										<td align="center">0.78</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Professional 3</td>
										<td align="center">0.82</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Professional 4</td>
										<td align="center">0.85</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Professional 5</td>
										<td align="center">0.78</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">C2: Personal trust in the leader</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Personal 1</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="center">0.89</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Personal 2</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="center">0.62</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Personal 3</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="center">0.77</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Personal 4</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="center">0.67</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Personal 5</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="center">0.80</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left" colspan="8">C3: Perception of management consistency</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Consistency 1</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="center">0.28</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Consistency 2</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="center">0.52</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Consistency 3</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="center">0.88</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left" colspan="8">C4: Perception of management integrity</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Integrity 1</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="center">0.82</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Integrity 2</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="center">0.88</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Integrity 3</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="center">0.79</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left" colspan="8">C4: Authority delegation</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Delegation 1</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="center">0.81</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Delegation 2</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="center">0.84</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Delegation 3</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="center">0.63</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left" colspan="8">C5: Demonstration of concern</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Concern 1</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="center">0.77</td>
										<td align="left"/>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Concern 2</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="center">0.82</td>
										<td align="left"/>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Concern 3</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="center">0.84</td>
										<td align="left"/>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left" colspan="6">C6: Internal communication</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Communication 1</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="center">0.84</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Communication 2</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="center">0.84</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Communication 3</td>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="left"/>
										<td align="center">0.78</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">AVE</td>
										<td align="center">0.63</td>
										<td align="center">0.57</td>
										<td align="center">0.37</td>
										<td align="center">0.69</td>
										<td align="center">0.59</td>
										<td align="center">0.66</td>
										<td align="center">0.67</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">CR</td>
										<td align="center">0.90</td>
										<td align="center">0.87</td>
										<td align="center">0.86</td>
										<td align="center">0.82</td>
										<td align="center">0.85</td>
										<td align="center">0.85</td>
										<td align="center">0.86</td>
									</tr>
								</tbody>
							</table>
						</alternatives>
							<table-wrap-foot>
								<fn id="TFN4">
									<p>Source: Elaborated by the authors.</p>
								</fn>
							</table-wrap-foot>
						</table-wrap>
					</p>
					<p>
						<table-wrap id="t3b">
							<label>Table 1. (Cont.)</label>
							<caption>
								<title>Factor loading, AVE and CR</title>
							</caption>
							<graphic xlink:href="tabla1-gt1b-en.jpg"/>
							<table-wrap-foot>
								<fn id="TFN5">
									<p>Source: Elaborated by the authors.</p>
								</fn>
							</table-wrap-foot>
						</table-wrap>
					</p>
				</sec>
				<sec>
					<title><italic>6.2 Test of hypotheses</italic></title>
					<p>After analyzing the validity and trust of the constructs, we analyzed the hypotheses, based on the SEM. The maximum likelihood method was used, with standardized coefficients. Two models were estimated for each of the dependent variables analyzed (<italic>professional trust in the leader</italic> and <italic>personal trust in the leader</italic>), in order to test the hypotheses previously mentioned.</p>
					<p>When analyzing the relationships between the independent variables and the dependent professional trust variable in the leader, it was observed that, as proposed in hypothesis H1a, there is a direct and inverse relationship with professional confidence in the leader (β = -0.30, SE = 0. 89, p &lt;0.01). The greater the distance of power, the less professional trust in the immediate leader. However, in relation to this construct, no other hypothesis is confirmed. Considering the results, the hypotheses H2a, H3a, H4a, H5a and H6a were rejected, since they did not present statistical significance. In practical terms, the perception of internal communication, perception of management consistency and integrity, authority sharing and delegation and demonstration of concern for subordinates are not related to <italic>professional trust in the leader</italic> in the context of Bope/RJ.</p>
					<p>We then set out to test the relationship between the independent variables and the dependent variable <italic>personal trust in the leader</italic>. The results show a significant relationship between the <italic>perception of authority sharing and delegation</italic> and <italic>personal trust in the leader</italic> (β = 0.31, SE = 0.14, p &lt;0.05). The greater the <italic>perception of authority sharing and delegation</italic> in the BOPE/RJ decision process, the greater the <italic>personal trust in the leader.</italic> In addition, the relationship between <italic>perceived quality of internal communication</italic> and <italic>personal trust in the leader</italic> (β = 0.28, SE = 0.15, p &lt;0.10) is equally significant. That is, the greater the <italic>perception of the quality of internal communication</italic> (measured by the accessibility, reliability and transparency of the information, which is shared with the members), the greater the <italic>personal trust in the leader</italic>. Thus supporting hypotheses H2b and H5b. Hypotheses H1b, H3b, H4b and H6b were then rejected. The results of the hypotheses tests are summarized in <xref ref-type="table" rid="t4">table 2</xref>.</p>
					<p>
						<table-wrap id="t4">
							<label>Table 2</label>
							<caption>
								<title>Results of the hypotheses tests</title>
							</caption>
							<alternatives>
								<graphic xlink:href="tabla2-gt2-en.jpg"/>
							<table>
								<colgroup>
									<col/>
									<col/>
									<col/>
									<col/>
									<col/>
								</colgroup>
								<thead>
									<tr>
										<th align="left"/>
										<th align="center"> β</th>
										<th align="center">S.E.</th>
										<th align="center">p-Value</th>
										<th align="center">Hyphotesis</th>
									</tr>
								</thead>
								<tbody>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">H1a</td>
										<td align="center">-0.30</td>
										<td align="center">-0.30</td>
										<td align="center">0.01</td>
										<td align="center">Supported</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">H1b</td>
										<td align="center">-0.13</td>
										<td align="center">0.09</td>
										<td align="center">0.15</td>
										<td align="center">Rejected</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">H2a</td>
										<td align="center">0.20</td>
										<td align="center">0.15</td>
										<td align="center">0.20</td>
										<td align="center">Rejected</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">H2b</td>
										<td align="center">0.28</td>
										<td align="center">0.15</td>
										<td align="center">0.06</td>
										<td align="center">Supported</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">H3a</td>
										<td align="center">0.00</td>
										<td align="center">0.13</td>
										<td align="center">1.00</td>
										<td align="center">Rejected</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">H3b</td>
										<td align="center">-0.01</td>
										<td align="center">0.14</td>
										<td align="center">0.93</td>
										<td align="center">Rejected</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">H4a</td>
										<td align="center">0.07</td>
										<td align="center">0.16</td>
										<td align="center">0.65</td>
										<td align="center">Rejected</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">H4b</td>
										<td align="center">-0.22</td>
										<td align="center">0.15</td>
										<td align="center">0.14</td>
										<td align="center">Rejected</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">H5a</td>
										<td align="center">0.00</td>
										<td align="center">0.16</td>
										<td align="center">0.98</td>
										<td align="center">Rejected</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">H5b</td>
										<td align="center">0.31</td>
										<td align="center">0.14</td>
										<td align="center">0.02</td>
										<td align="center">Supported</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">H6a</td>
										<td align="center">0.25</td>
										<td align="center">0.18</td>
										<td align="center">0.16</td>
										<td align="center">Rejected</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">H6b</td>
										<td align="center">0.05</td>
										<td align="center">0.19</td>
										<td align="center">0.80</td>
										<td align="center">Rejected</td>
									</tr>
								</tbody>
							</table>
						</alternatives>
							<table-wrap-foot>
								<fn id="TFN6">
									<p>Source: Elaborated by the authors.</p>
								</fn>
							</table-wrap-foot>
						</table-wrap>
					</p>
				</sec>
			</sec>
			<sec sec-type="discussion">
				<title>7. Discussion</title>
				<p>Based on previous studies by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B69">Zanini, Migueles and Colmerauer (2014</xref>) and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">Pinheiro Neto (2013)</xref> that identified the cultural distance dimension of power as a critical factor for the promotion of trust in the leader in Bope/RJ, this study applied methods that confirm the findings of these previous studies. The higher the power distance, the lower the professional trust in the immediate leader (b = -0.30, p &lt;0.01). Therefore, hypothesis H1a was supported. However, no relation was found between the variable power distance and personal trust in the leader. Therefore, hypothesis H1b was rejected. Hypothesis H1a, corroborates with the results of other empirical studies from the perspective of the LMX theory (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B48">Rockstuhl et al., 2012</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">Dulebohn et al., 2012</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B54">Anand, Vidyarthi and Park, 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B65">Yu, Matta and Cornfield, 2017</xref>). These studies confirmed that the cultural dimension of power distance, as defined by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Hofstede (2001</xref>), is a moderator of trust relations between leaders and led.</p>
				<p>Regarding the hypotheses using the scales by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Whitener and collaborators (1998</xref>), previous studies (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B30">Krosgaard, Brodt and Whitener, 2002</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B68">Zanini, Wolff and Lusk, 2009</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B70">Zanini et al., 2013</xref>) confirm a positive relation between antecedents of trust and trust in the leader. In these studies, however, the scales that compose the antecedents of trust were analyzed together and not separately as in this study.</p>
				<p>In this analysis, the hypotheses H2a, H3a, H4a, H5a and H6a were rejected. There was no statistical significance in the analysis of the variables: <italic>perception of internal communication</italic>, <italic>of management consistency and integrity</italic>, <italic>authority sharing and delegation</italic> and <italic>demonstration of concern for subordinates</italic>, with <italic>professional confidence in the leader</italic>. Likewise, we did not find any relationship between the variables: <italic>perception of management consistency and integrity</italic> and <italic>demonstration of concern for subordinates</italic>, with <italic>personal confidence in the leader</italic>. That is, hypotheses H3b, H4b and H6b were also rejected.</p>
				<p>Hypotheses H2b and H5b were confirmed. That is, the greater the perception of the quality of internal communication (measured by the accessibility, reliability and transparency of information shared with subordinates), the greater the personal trust in the leader. In addition, the greater the perception of authority sharing and delegation in the Bope/RJ decision-making process, the greater the personal trust in the leader. These results corroborate previous studies that indicate a positive relationship between the quality of internal communication and trust in the leader (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B47">Robert and You, 2017</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B67">Zanini, Colmerauer and Lima, 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Drescher, 2014</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B37">Men and Stacks, 2014</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B56">Thomas, Zolin and Hartman, 2009</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">Gillespie and Mann, 2004</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B30">Krosgaard, Brodt and Whitener, 2002</xref>). Especially with the studies of Gillespie and Mann (2004), which confirm that trust in the leader is directly and positively related to a consultative leadership style (with the sharing of decisions), the quality of internal communication and the sharing of common values. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B56">Thomas, Zolin and Hartman (2009)</xref> also confirm a strong relationship between sharing and transparency of communication with trust in the leader. Men and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B37">Stacks (2014)</xref> confirm that transparency in communication and the involvement of subordinates are directly related to trust in the leader, to the commitment and satisfaction of the subordinate. Corroborating with the confirmation of hypothesis H5b, Robert and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B47">You (2017)</xref> confirm a positive relationship between leadership sharing and trust in the leader, and Drescher and collaborators (2014) confirm a positive relationship between leadership sharing and trust in the leader and in the team.</p>
				<p>In addition, our results are in line with other more recent studies, indicating a positive relationship with performance. For example, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Boies, Fiset and Gil (2015</xref>) note a positive relationship between the quality of internal communication and trust in the leader, with moderating effect on team performance and creativity. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Drescher and collaborators (2014</xref>) note a positive relationship between leadership sharing and delegation and trust in the leader, which in turn are positively related to team performance. Drescher and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">Garbers (2016)</xref> confirm that leadership sharing and the quality of communication have a positive effect on performance and satisfaction. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">Hoch (2014</xref>) confirms a positive relationship between sharing of leadership and performance, mediated by information sharing.</p>
				<p>When analyzing the set of results of our hypotheses test, this study reveals a distinction between the antecedents of trust and the personal and professional forms of trust in the leader. The reduction of power distance is associated with professional trust. This result confirms the observations of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">Pinheiro Neto (2013)</xref>, addressing the same organization, when he emphasizes the relevance of the professional aspects of the leader-led relationship to the reduction of power distance, such as the exercise of shared leadership, participatory planning and training credibility. According to the author, these aspects add to the fundamental process of risk acceptance in operations, ensuring greater predictability in relation to the behavior of members and the reliability of tactical and operational plans made jointly between leaders and subordinates. He also shows that this integrative dynamic of work establishes a closer relationship between police officers of different military patents, creating a unique structure that promotes the reduction of power distance and a greater sense of equality to those who belong to the group. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B69">Zanini, Migueles, and Colmerauer (2014</xref>:73) observe that, through the very dynamics of operations, shared leadership is a permanent exercise in operational routines. Team leaders assume a mediating role between the organizational goals, translated by the “common mission” and the autonomous action of the team members. That is, according to these field observations, now confirmed here, it is not the individual attitudes, abilities and qualities of the leaders that define the reduction of power distance, but they weigh the processes and routines of management that grant autonomy to the performer. This result corroborates the study of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">Haas (2015</xref>), investigating a context of the same nature (Metropolitan Police of Buenos Aires), confirming that trust in superiors is positively related to the professional aspects of the relationship with subordinates that establish equality between individuals, for example, in the application and acceptance of rules of conduct.</p>
				<p>At the same time, the results confirm that the trust records of the <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Whitener and collaborators (1998</xref>) scales are related to personal trust in the leader. That is, when an affective and emotional basis prevails, situations of vulnerability of the individual are revealed (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Gillespie, 2003</xref>). When these scales are analyzed separately, the scales of consistency, integrity and demonstration of concern are seen to reinforce a relationship of dependence of the subordinate by personal traits of his hierarchical superior (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Whitener et al., 1998</xref>), that is, the impact of the superior and characteristics of the subordinate. Specifically, the scale of concern with the subordinate suggests a paternalistic/personalistic relationship, of indefinite or irrelevant impact on the autonomy of the performer. On the other hand, the scales quality of communication and sharing and delegation of authority, refer to organizational attributes and management practices (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Whitener et al., 1998</xref>).</p>
				<p>The results confirm that the antecedents of trust that induce personal trust in the leader are not based on these scales that refer to the individual attributes of the leader (consistency, integrity and demonstration of concern), but in those that refer to the organizational attributes (quality of communication and sharing and delegation of authority). Therefore, we observe that the impact of the personal attributes of the leader has a smaller weight for the autonomy of the subordinate, when the organizational attributes are present. These organizational attributes reduce the impact of the leader’s personal characteristics, both in defining the workflow and in creating the performer’s “autonomy space”. In this sense, they are preconditions for increasing the autonomy of the subordinate and for his self-determination at work, especially in making ad hoc decisions in performing critical tasks. We consider the confirmation of these relations consistent with the reduction of power distance by the professional trust in the leader, because they are organizational attributes that guarantee the “autonomy space” to the subordinate for the increase of reliability and predictability.</p>
			</sec>
			<sec>
				<title>8. Limits and suggestions for future research</title>
				<p>This study indicates opportunities for future research, such as, to better understand how the connection between the antecedents of trust and the professional and personal trust in the leader may be related to the performance of the operational teams. Another possibility of investigation is to observe the dynamics of the temporal relation of the elements that determine the relations of trust between leaders and followers (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">Jones and Shah, 2016</xref>). Other limitations of this study were that we did not analyze the effectiveness of the relationship between the elements of both formal and informal coordination and the elements of formal coordination, nor did we analyze, in depth, the organizational culture (its mysticism, rites, rituals and symbols) that could help to improve analysis of the results. Finally, we did not compare the studied police unit with other units of the same institutional nature.</p>
			</sec>
			<sec sec-type="conclusions">
				<title>9. Conclusion</title>
				<p>This article seeks to deepen the understanding of the elements of informal coordination in organizations operating in scenarios of high complexity and uncertainty, recognized in the literature as Critical Action Organizations (CAO), based on the analysis of the antecedents of trust in the leader. In this sense, the study provides a relevant contribution to a better understanding of the antecedent elements that build trust in the leader, identifying and isolating the variables of greater relevance of the informal coordination model in these organizations. The results confirm that the cultural dimension of <italic>power distance</italic> is directly related to professional trust in the leader, and that the <italic>perception of the quality of internal communication</italic> and the perception of <italic>authority sharing and delegation</italic> are directly related to personal trust in the leader. Therefore, this study contributes to the analysis of the context and specific challenges of the organization, and in the definition of the key factors of the antecedents of trust. In this sense, the study also contributes to the leader-member exchange theory (LMX), as well as to the perspective of a theory of leadership in context, seeking to identify the specific critical factors according to the organizational typology.</p>
			</sec>
		</body>
		<back>
			<fn-group>
				<fn fn-type="other" id="fn9">
					<label>1</label>
					<p>The original database built to measure the level of internal trust within the organization brings with it questions that could be analyzed, from this perspective, to assess the strength of this hypothesis. Other studies would be necessary to definitively affirm that the reduction of the power distance index (PDI) is fundamental for gains of leadership effectiveness in the Brazilian context, but its confirmation, even if partial, in a military organization (traditionally more hierarchical), allows to suppose that more consistent efforts in the validation of this finding are relevant.</p>
				</fn>
				<fn fn-type="other" id="fn10">
					<label>10</label>
					<p>{Translated version}Note: All quotes in English translated by this article’s translator.</p>
				</fn>
			</fn-group>
		</back>
	</sub-article-->
</article>