Organizational trust does not follow formal hierarchies only. Informal networks via mentorship, collaboration, and peer influence are often the difference between success or failure for a transformation. In this paper, we employ Graph Attention Networks (GATs) to model trust influence patterns in organizations, with the node features being 53-competency trust profiles from the DEEP (Drive, Engage, Empower, Purpose-align) Framework. Trust graphs are constructed from N=12,400 employees in 14 organizations with |E|=47,312 weighted directed edges, and four sources of interaction: formal reporting, 360-degree nominations, project co-participation, and meeting co-attendance. The 2-layer GAT with 4 attention heads achieved a R^2=0.879 on Trust Influence Score (TIS) prediction, which is 46.9% higher than PageRank, 11.1% higher than GCN and 23.5% higher than Node2Vec. The pipeline is formalized by four algorithms: Multi-Source Graph Construction, GAT Trust Influence Prediction, Bridge Leader Identification and Trust Propagation Simulation. Key findings: (1) 23.4% of Exceptional trust leaders lack management titles, suggesting an informal trust infrastructure invisible to org charts; (2) high-trust organizations have 2.3x higher network density and 1.7x higher clustering; (3) ablation analysis shows bridge leaders (4.7% of population) account for 31.2% of organizational trust variance; (4) the Engage dimension is the most effective predictor of cross-cluster influence (β=0.41, p<.001); (5) GAT attention weights show asymmetric trust influence patterns with upward trust flow (subordinate→manager) being 1.4x stronger than downward flow. This work provides a methodology to identify and leverage informal trust infrastructure during purpose-driven organizational transformation.
P. Somani, Rupali Khaire· International journal of res...· 0 citations
What conditions does AI need to meet to improve leadership and trust inside a technology firm rather than damage them? That question is the starting point of this paper. We pulled together recent research alongside production case studies from six major firms (Google, Microsoft, IBM, Salesforce, Adobe, LinkedIn) and tried to separate the marketing claims from what these tools deliver in practice. Some numbers hold up well: AI-driven leadership assessment improves prediction accuracy by 80%, and hiring costs drop 30–50% in firms where the technology is deployed well. Other claims are conditional. Returns only show up once the cultural work is done. We trace four maturity stages and find that 91% of what blocks adoption is cultural rather than technical. Firms that get past those blockers report 40–75% less time spent on recruitment, 95% accuracy in spotting employees about to leave, and 14.9% higher leadership-performance scores. Trust sits underneath every one of these outcomes. Where it already exists, AI adoption runs 21 percentage points smoother. Where it does not, AI makes things worse, not better. The remainder of the paper sets out the conditions under which AI strengthens leadership instead of eroding it.
P. Somani, Rupali Khaire· International journal of res...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.