




































AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMANITIES, ARTS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES 5(1) (2023), 1-10 

 

1 

 

 

    Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences 

                                                             AIJHASS VOL 5 NO 1 (2023) P-ISSN 2643-0061  E-ISSN 2643-010X 
                                                  

                                                                                                                        Available online at www.acseusa.org      

                                                                                                                                Journal homepage: https://www.acseusa.org/journal/index.php/aijhass 
                                                                                                                                        Published by American Center of Science and Education, USA 

STRENGTHENING TRUST TO REINFORCE ORGANIZATIONAL 

PERFORMANCE OF LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN MALAYSIA

                            
 

 Ahmad Fadzli Bin Ahmad Tajuddin (a)1    Hamdan Bin Mohd Salleh (b)    Abul Bashar Bhuiyan (c)     

 

(a) Senior Fellow, Institute of Electoral Studies & The Advancement of Democracy, Universiti Selangor, Bestari Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia; E-mail: 

iesad@unisel.edu.my 
(b) Associate Professor, Faculty of Education and Social Sciences, Universiti Selangor, Bestari Jaya,  Selangor, Malaysia; E-mail: hamdan@unisel.edu.my 
(c) Associate Professor, Faculty of Business and Accountancy, Universiti Selangor, Shah Alam, Malaysia; E-mail: bashariuk@gmail.com  

 

 
A R T I C L E I N F O 

 
 

Article History: 

 

Received: 15th October 2023 

Reviewed & Revised: 16th October to 

24th December 2023 
Accepted: 25th December 2023 

Published: 30th December 2023 

 

Keywords: 

 

Reinforce, Organizational 

Performance, Local Authorities, 

Malaysia. 
 

JEL Classification Codes:  

 

D73 

    

 
A B S T R A C T     

 
This study explores the imperative of fostering Trust to enhance the organizational performance of local 
authorities in Malaysia. Recognizing Trust as a pivotal factor, the research delves into strategies for 

strengthening interpersonal relationships and institutional credibility. By addressing trust deficits, the 

study aims to provide actionable insights that can contribute to the overall effectiveness and efficiency 
of local governance in Malaysia. The primary focus of this research is to put into practice the idea of 

Trust, precisely honing in on the effectiveness of local authorities (LAs) in Malaysia. In this instance, the 

study employs the Community Integrity Building (CIB) concept, emphasizing the pivotal roles played by 

community monitors, contractors, and LAs in collectively navigating toward improved performance. It 

offers a continuous feedback mechanism that enhances understanding and improves Trust in services 

provided by the LAs. The paper objectively explores the measuring of Trust, therefore linking the vacuum 

between conceptualization and realization, which is hardly seen in LAs. Finally, it concludes by 

reflecting some insights on the potential of the CIB approach regarding the trust agenda towards 
building a more progressive and dynamic new public management ecosystem in a Malaysian 

organization setting.  

 
 

© 2023 by the authors. Licensee CRIBFB, USA. This article is an open access article distributed 
under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license 
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). 

                                                                                   

 

INTRODUCTION 

It is significant to note that although the subject of Trust is essential in any organization (Zand, 1972; Lewis & Weigert, 

1985; Lane, 1998; Noteboom, 2002), it only received considerable attention throughout the era of the 1990s and 2000s 

(Oomsel & Bouckert, 2012). Similarly, though citizens regarded Trust as a means for effective administration and showed 

interest in this issue (Kenning, 2008), research on Trust within the ambit of public administration remained limited 

(Paliszkiewicz, 2010). Furthermore, within the public sector spectrum, the issue of Trust is very pertinent at the service 

delivery level in line with the New Public Management (NPM), which calls for reform, especially at the local authority level 

(Bovaird & Löffler, 2002). It has been mentioned that within an organizational context, Trust is illustrated as an essential 

driver of outcomes about several aspects, namely cooperative behavior (Zalabak et al., 2000), organizational citizenship 

behavior (Van Dyne, Vanderwell, Kostova, Latham, & Cummings; 2002), organizational commitment (Aryee et al., 2002), 

and employee loyalty (Costigan et al., 1998)     

Within this research, we underscored the example of local authorities (LA) for several significant reasons. Firstly, 

as the third tier of the government, LAs are intricately engaged in providing services to the public under the purview of the 

Local Government Act 1976 (Act of 171), the Town and Country Planning Act (1976), and the Street, Drainage, and 

Building Act (1974) in Peninsular Malaysia. Likewise, LAs in Sabah and Sarawak adhere to Local Ordinance No. 11 and 

the Local Authority Bill (Amendment) 1977. Thus, in the context of NPM, delivering service is paramount for LA and 

essential for enhancing Trust because it illustrates the government's concerted effort to improve the residents' social lives. 

                                                      
1Corresponding author: ORCID ID: 0009-0000-3495-1718 

© 2023 by the authors. Hosting by ACSE. Peer review under responsibility of ACSE, USA.  

https://doi.org/10.46545/aijhass.v5i1.309 
 

To cite this article: Tajuddin, A. F. B. A., Salleh, H. B. M., & Bhuiyan, A. B. (2024). STRENGTHENING TRUST TO REINFORCE ORGANIZATIONAL 

PERFORMANCE OF LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN MALAYSIA. American International Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, 5(1), 1–10. 
https://doi.org/10.46545/aijhass.v5i1.309 

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
https://www.openaccess.nl/en
https://doi.org/10.46545/aijhass.v5i1.309
https://orcid.org/0009-0000-3495-1718
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8704-9189
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1763-124X


Tajuddin et al., American International Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences 5(1) (2023), 1-10 

 

2 

Secondly, LAs are heavily criticized for their poor performance, which contributed to the low ranking of the corruption 

index. At this juncture, Kenning (2008) argued that LAs could be more responsive, efficient, and friendly government 

agencies. Therefore, the study will investigate how Trust will be more prominent in promoting services delivered to 

residents. 

Therefore, the central premise of this study is to investigate and explore the trust level and its influence on the 

performance of LAs by examining and exploring the following questions: 

 

RQ1: What is the extent of Trust within the LAs in Malaysia? 

RQ2: What is the relationship between Trust and the performance of LAs? 

 

We hope that the study contributes in at least three ways remarkably: 

Though the concept of Trust is familiar, measuring it within LAs will have some significance because, as far as we are 

concerned, this is the first study undertaken, particularly in the local context. On top of that, the study may serve as a 

benchmark for similar research to help understand LA's working culture, especially regarding Trust. 

Employees, including top and middle management in LAs, are only interested in achieving organizational output 

and outcome rather than what Trust has to do to influence organizational performance. Trust is perceived as less emphasized 

because it is an intangible element and is not structured in the input-process-output framework. Though there are various 

opinions, the study will investigate and explore the relationship between Trust and performance. The tenet of the discussion 

is to put the realization of the trust concept into practicality, which will be appreciated and visible in the eyes of the 

employees. 

Community engagement is pivotal in improving LA's performance in tandem with Local Agenda 21. The study 

will center on how communities can make an impact by addressing suggestions and complaints from the community to 

improve negative perceptions of service delivery provided by LAs. 

 

LITERATURE REVIEW 

Trust in a General Term 

Literature highlights a multi-perspective definition of Trust, where most focus on Trust as a state, belief, or positive 

expectation perceived as a link between previous experience and the anticipated future (Paliszkiewicz, 2010). Similarly, 

Nyhan and Marlowe (1997) and Nyhan (2000) look at Trust as the level of confidence one has in another person's 

competence and willingness to act ethically. However, Romano (2003) argued that confidence, credibility, risk, and 

trustworthiness are used interchangeably with Trust. In addition, Butler and Cantrell (1984) highlighted Integrity, 

competence, consistency, loyalty, and openness as significant elements that illustrated Trust. Studies on Trust cover a range 

of dimensions such as interpersonal Trust (Mikulincer, 1997; Davis, 1999), political Trust (Hetherington, 1998; 

Parker,1989), peer trust in the workplace (McAllister,1995; Ammeter, 2000) trust between superiors, and subordinates 

(Cherry,2000; Dirks & Ferrin,2002; Velez,2000)and organizational Trust (Courtney,1998; Shockley-Zalabak et al., 

2000).On top of that, Trust is perceived as having two associated components, which include trusting beliefs (competence, 

benevolence, and vendor integrity) and trusting intentions (willingness to depend) Rousseau et al. (1998) defined Trust as 

an 'a psychological state comprising the intention to accept vulnerability based on positive expectations of the purposes or 

behavior of another. This also aligns with scholars such as McKnight and Chervany (2001) and Morgan and Hunt (1994), 

who link Trust with the depth of assurance of feelings, which is inconclusive evidence and becomes a central element of the 

exchange relationship. Similarly, Snijders and Keren (2015) argued that whether we trust someone depends on who we are, 

the one to be trusted, and the specific situation. They also suggested that two concepts were perceived as identical: 

trustfulness (willingness to trust) and trustworthiness (willingness to honor a given trust).  

Trustfulness and trustworthiness come hand in hand, which need not be accurate. This notion is also concurred by 

Mayer et al. (1995), who defined trustworthiness as a quality that the trustee has; meanwhile, Trust is something that the 

trustor does. This is somewhat true because trust scales such as Rotter's (1967) and Lazarus and Huston's (1980) only 

measure trustfulness. On the other hand, the literature also includes studies on distrust (Bigley & Pearce, 1998) and betrayal 

of Trust (Elangovan & Shapiro, 1998). Understanding when and how Trust erodes would complement our knowledge of 

building, increasing, and maintaining Trust (Elangovan et al., 2007). Researchers use different concepts and indicators for 

measuring Trust (Morgan & Hunt, 1994), but surprisingly, marketing management can more likely influence trust (Kenning, 

2008). In this spectrum, Trust is further divided into two parts, namely, (i)general Trust is defined as the ability to build up 

Trust in someone or something (Morrow et al., 2004), and (ii)specific Trust, which is influenced by marketing. In elaborating 

on this, Kenning (2008) postulated that the former is related to the characteristics of a personal trait. In contrast, the latter is 

a long-term relationship between a company and the buyer. 

It is peculiar to note that within an organization setup, Trust is described as an essential predictor of outcome in 

the case of cooperative behavior (Zalabak et al., 2000) and organizational citizenship behavior (Van Dyne, Vandewalle, 

Kostova, Latham, and Cummings, 2000) organizational commitment (Aryee et al., 2002) and employee loyalty (Costigan 

et al., 1998). Reason why it is challenging to build Trust, some studies viewed it from 3 factors such as (i) trust building 

involves an interactive process for individuals to learn each other trustworthiness (Zand, 1972; Zucker, 1996), (ii) the 

underpinning systems of both Trust and distrust is related to positive feedbacks, reinforcing the initial behavior (Zand, 1972) 

but with essential asymmetry (iii) no complete certainty that Trust will be honored (Mollering, 2001). 

Another significant point is what the features of the concept of Trust are. About this, Paliszkiewicz (2011) 

suggested several features, namely (i) it is interpersonal between specific individuals and connected with communication 

(ii) it depends on the particular situation rather than global, where Trust is placed in one specific individual (iii)voluntary-



Tajuddin et al., American International Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences 5(1) (2023), 1-10 

 

3 

where Trust must come from option and cannot be compulsory  (iv)committed-each party depends on the other (v)conscious-

each party is aware of the other party's Trust (vi)relevant-the result of breaching the Trust by one of the groups cannot be 

regarded insignificant by the other (vii)dynamic because it evolves (viii) action-oriented (ix)if damage occurs to the 

relationship thus Trust is probably to diminish (not a linear process). On top of that, Paliszkiewicz (2010) believes that Trust 

is a bridge between previous experiences and the projected future.           

Service Delivery and Trust 

It is pivotal to note that public service quality and citizen satisfaction have become the dominant mantras under new public 

management (NPM). In line with this, NPM disciples persistently urged better public engagement to enhance public 

satisfaction. In this regard, Kenning (2008) observed that service quality does not influence trust but governance practices 

are the ones that must be strengthened. Similarly, Paliszkiewicz (2011) highlighted the reasons for perceived low Trust, 

namely: (i) the government is not offering the services citizens want, and (ii) the government is offering services of low 

quality. Besides that, Covey (2009) noticed that influential leaders practice 13 behaviors to maintain and build Trust, which 

constitute talking straight, showing respect, creating transparency, righting wrongs, showing loyalty, delivering results, 

getting better, confronting reality, clarifying expectations, practicing accountability, listening first, keeping commitments, 

and extending Trust first. Nevertheless, those behaviors must be balanced, and if they are pushed to the extreme, they 

become a liability. Moreover, Heintzmen and Marson mooted the notion of a service value chain to enhance Trust, which 

includes three components such as (i) cultivating staff satisfaction and obligation, (ii) improving service quality, and (iii) 

restoring Trust and confidence in public institutions. 

In elaborating on Trust in the public sector, Paliszkiewicz (2011) argued that the former correlates with types of 

institutions. Among the trusted institutions are schools, the health system, and the fire service. In this aspect, Raaphorst and 

Van de Welle (2016) pointed out that individuals within those services, specifically teachers, doctors, and firefighters, 

experience more Trust. On the other hand, the issue of low Trust should not be perceived from within public services per se 

but is likely to be just one aspect of broader social changes or the domino effect. Examples of institutions in which citizens 

have low Trust include public administration, civil servants, and bureaucrats (Van Dyne et al., 2000). However, opinions 

on the army are mixed: positive in some countries but negative in others (Raaphorst & Van de Welle, 2016).     

Regarding the role of Trust in a citizen-government relationship, Levi (1998) mentioned that when people can trust 

the government, they are more likely to give their behavioral consent. In contrast, distrust in the government contributes to 

a low level of paying taxes and obeying the law (Tyler, 1990). Therefore, citizens will engage in exit behaviors if Trust and 

loyalty towards the public sector are low. This notion is supported by Oomsels and Bouckaert (2012), who cited that when 

citizens do not trust the public sector, its pride will suffer. The most general reason for the deteriorating public Trust is that 

the public sector is said to fail to perform. In explaining this, Van de Walle, Van Roosbroek, and Bouckert (2008) stated 

that outputs and outcomes are below target, efficiency, and effectiveness are declining, and governments must accomplish 

what was promised. On the contrary, Bok (1997, 2001) argued that government performance may not have declined, but 

citizens' perceptions may have; for instance, citizens probably use different standards to gauge performance, deeply 

influenced by ad hoc news and swayed by adverse media reports.       

About different types of Trust, Lewicki and Bunker (1996) categorized them into three types, namely (i)calculus-

based, which mainly relies on the expected consequences of trusting or not trusting (ii)knowledge-based Trust, which is 

based on information and probability, and (iii) identification-based trust-which appeared from shared values and goals; 

hence involve emotions. Nevertheless, citizens' Trust in the public sector is also revealed to fluctuate, thus rejecting the 

hypothesis of a universal decline of Trust in the public sector Van de Walle et al. (2008). At this spectrum, Van de Welle et 

al. (2008) noticed a positive attitude towards the civil service in Ireland and Norway compared to other European countries.    

 

Dimension of Trust 

Meanwhile, various studies on concepts and items measure Trust (Zaheer et al., 1998; Rampel et al.,1985). In this aspect, 

looking from a psychological perspective, scholars such as Lewis and Weigert (1985) differentiate between affective, 

cognitive, and behavioral dimensions of Trust. In congruence with this, Mayer et al. (1995) proposed a dyadic trust model, 

which explains that Trust for the trustee is the function of the trustee's perceived ability, benevolence, and Integrity, and the 

trustor's propensity to trust. To simplify this, it is crystal clear that Trust in the leader is a product of the leader's behavior.  

Another peculiar thing to discuss is regarding Trust from the political dimension domain where Schiffman, Thelen, 

and Sherman (2010) identified it from three viewpoints, namely (i)trust in government form where responses tend to vary 

depending on the nature of the specific aspect of politics trusting being investigated (ii)Political cynicism-appears to possess 

of many interrelated meanings, and (iii)incumbent trust-where it illustrates of how well (or poorly) the public perceives of 

the job that the officeholder is responsible to meet the citizens' expectation. In measuring conceptual definition of Trust, 

Dietz and Hartog (2006) reviewed different conceptual dimensions of Trust from several scholars such as McAllister (1995), 

Robinson (1996), Clark and Payne(1997), three separate measures from Brockner et al. (2000), Mayer and Davis(1999), 

Spreitzer and Mishra (1999), Shockley-Zalabak et al.(2000), Huff and Kelley (2003), Tyler (2003), Gillespie (2003) and 

Tzafrir and Dolan (2004).              

 

Community Integrity Building 

Community Integrity Building (CIB) 

In our previous work, we discussed the importance of Community Integrity Building (CIB) in enhancing the performance 

of LAs. To recapitulate on this, the CIB engagement with the community is significant because the community can see the 

visibility and cost-effectiveness of project implementation near their community. This also serves well about contractors' 



Tajuddin et al., American International Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences 5(1) (2023), 1-10 

 

4 

performance and becomes the check-and-balance mechanism in promoting good governance. The five phases of CIB 

remarkably (i) context sensitivity, (ii) joint learning, (iii)evidence base, (iv) constructive engagement, and (v)closing the 

loop had glued well in illustrating the CIB concept. At this point, it can further investigate and explain the relationship 

between Trust and performance because some literature discusses the concepts of Integrity and trust interchangeably. 

  Furthermore, Integrity and Trust are on the same continuum. Organizations with a high level of Integrity 

will have the Trust of the community and vice versa. More work could be embarked on this matter. If CIB can be used to 

improve the performance of LAs, then it can also be utilized to investigate Trust using the same paradigm, thus paving the 

way for this research.    

 

Proposition Development 

An exploratory approach is adopted within the framework of this investigation. Consequently, we propose specific assertions 

based on existing literature and observations about three distinct types of local authorities, specifically City Hall, 

Municipality, and District Council. These three entities generally represent urban, semi-urban, and rural areas in Peninsular, 

Sabah, or Sarawak. The categorization of those organizations is based on revenue collection, number of staff, and population 

(Saib, 2004). The main motive for doing this is to comprehend the dynamics of reality and academia to benefit academicians 

and professionals. Bridging the gap between theory and reality will always be an essential mantra for both worlds. Therefore, 

we suggested the following; 

Proposition 1: Level of Trust influences the performance of LAs 

Proposition 2: Trust level can be measured to benefit the organization    

 

MATERIALS AND METHODS 

Participants and Procedure  

This paper employed two methodological approaches: pre-test and post-test evaluations and a straightforward technical 

methodology. Initially, we piloted the project with three distinct types of local authorities, specifically Melaka City Hall, 

Subang Jaya Municipal Council, and Hulu Terengganu District Council. Subsequently, these local authorities were enlisted 

to recommend and propose local community contributors for six months. Additionally, we traversed the five phases of the 

Community Integrity Building (CIB) process, involving numerous deliberations, discussions, and visits to secure 

community buy-in. Participants from each local authority were chosen as members of the Monitoring Committee and 

actively participated in the project. We also involved contractors responsible for garbage collection, drainage, and grass 

clearance, given their significance and priority from the community's perspective. Each local authority selected a specific 

zone for project implementation: Paya Rumput in Melaka, Zone 3 in Subang Jaya, and Zone A in Ajil, Terengganu. The 

project's beneficiaries include 71,000 residents residing near these local authorities (19,000 from Melaka City Hall, 40,000 

from Subang Jaya Municipal Council, and 12,000 from Hulu Terengganu District Council). 

Broadly, we embrace and tailor Integrity Action's methodology for gauging organizational Trust, utilizing the four 

dimensions of Integrity encompassing (i) accountability, (ii) competency, (iii) ethical behavior, and (iv) corruption control 

(v) Alignment. Moreover, we introduce an additional dimension, transparency, by revisiting and refining the competency 

component from the original integrity formula employed in our prior study. Consequently, these elements must converge 

towards fostering heightened Trust, each holding equal significance and value. Therefore, the absence of any of these 

elements precludes the existence of Trust. The specifics of these elements are as follows:  

 

Accountability:  Willingness to be open and transparent is crucial, allowing interested parties like stakeholders to scrutinize 

and verify if the organization's daily operations align with its vision and mission. Conversely, an organization needing more 

readiness for responsibility and transparency can assert a high level of Trust. 

 

Competence: Possessing the competencies and abilities required to attain individual or organizational objectives is vital. 

This encompasses a well-rounded blend of both managerial and technical skills and qualities. Conversely, even if an 

individual or an organization exhibits ethical standards, remains accountable to stakeholders, and avoids Corruption but 

showcases incompetence, it cannot assert a high level of Trust. 

 

Ethical behavior: Conducting oneself in alignment with a set of principles established to direct policy formulation and 

behavior involves an understanding of moral, legal, obligatory, and permissible considerations. However, an individual or 

organization must demonstrate accountability, competence, and a firm stance against Corruption while lacking ethical 

behavior. In that case, it cannot be deemed to possess a high level of Trust. 

 

Corruption Control: Maintaining a staunch stance against Corruption and ensuring that an organizational framework is 

robust enough to mitigate the risk of Corruption is essential. Suppose an individual upholds strong values regarding 

accountability, competence, and ethics but succumbs to Corruption. In that case, asserting that they have achieved a high 

standard of Trust needs to be revised. 

 

Alignment: Ensuring alignment between an organization's intentions and actions, exemplifying consistency and a shared 

purpose in applying trust-related elements and its conduct. 

 

 

 



Tajuddin et al., American International Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences 5(1) (2023), 1-10 

 

5 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 

Pre-Test and Post-Test Approach 

We adopted a pre-test and post-test methodology to examine changes in perceptions regarding the monitoring committee, 

local community, and contractors responsible for services like garbage collection, drainage, and grass clearance. The 

questionnaire items were formulated based on relevant literature, community discussions, and consultation with an expert. 

We employ the Likert Scale of (5) where '1-Highly Disagree', '2-Disagree', '3-Not sure', '4-Agree', and '5-Highly Agree'. 

The pre-test and post-test encompassed... questions/items, and we received feedback from 239 respondents. The 

demographic details of the respondents are presented in Table 1. 

 

Table 1. The respondents’ demographic profile 

 
.No. Name of LA Monitoring Committee Community  Contractor 

1. Melaka City Hall 12 54 10 

2. Subang Jaya Municipal Council 21 62 13 

3. Hulu Terengganu District Council 12 38 17 

 Total 45 154 40 

 

Assessment of Organizational Trust and Dependability Before and After the Implementation of the CIB Program. 

This part illustrates how the concept of Trust is measured before and after the implementation of the CIB to identify any 

change that took place as a result of the program's implementation. Generally, organizational Trust is 'calculated' by 

measuring the 'achievement/score' of the elements, which entails accountability (A), integrity (I), transparency (T), and 

Corruption (C). In this study, we suggest the equation of T= a (AIT)-c, where a represents alignment       

Organizational Trust (T) 

The measure of organizational transparency, R,  is the mean score for the relevant questions. To measure the pre-CIB 

perception for  R among the community responses to questions B9-3, B9-5, and B9-6 were used. The value of R obtained 

was  

  84.200.212.441.2
3

1
R

 

Organizational Trust (T) is defined as  

  CRIACRIAgT .....),,,(
23021100

 
 

  CRIACRIA 5.015.02.015.05.03.0.4.03.05.0
0


 

Where 32121
,,,, 

are weights that enable the adoption of a measurement range 0
T

between -2 and 2? To achieve  a 

range between 0 to 100, the following transformation was done: 

   CRIATT 5.015.02.015.0225225
00


 

Usage of the formula for T yields 

 CRIAT 5.015.02.015.0225
0


 

         67.3085.35.084.215.010.22.004.215.0225 
 

This suggests that before implementing the CIB program, the community's perceived level of organizational Trust was 30.67 

on a scale ranging from 0 (low organizational Trust) to 100 (high organizational Trust). Similar computations using a post-

CIB survey yielded 57.46T  an indication that there has been an improvement in organizational Trust after CIB.  

The computation of Organizational Trust among the three evaluators, the community,  observers, and contractors are 

exhibited in Table Com1 to Table Com 3.  

The summary result of the trust level based on the three LAs is illustrated as follows: 

Hulu Terengganu District Council 

Based on the given data for Resident Perception in the Hulu Terengganu District Council, The highest score after CIB 

implementation, with an increase from 43.79 to 72.37. This indicates that residents perceive a significant improvement in 

the council's transparency in their operations and decision-making processes. The increase suggests that the commission has 

tried providing more transparent and more accessible information to the residents. The second-highest score after CIB 

implementation, with a rise from 33.05 to 71.38. This suggests that residents perceive a significant improvement in the 



Tajuddin et al., American International Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences 5(1) (2023), 1-10 

 

6 

council's accountability for their actions and responsibilities. The increase indicates that the commission has taken steps to 

be more answerable to the residents and to address their concerns. The third-highest score after CIB implementation, with 

an increase from 64.66 to 72.37. This suggests that residents perceive a reduction in Corruption within the council. The 

increase indicates that the council has taken measures to combat Corruption and improve the Integrity of its operations. 

The fourth-highest score after CIB implementation, with a decrease from 34.51 to 47.12. This suggests that 

residents perceive a decline in the council's Integrity, although it is still relatively high. The decrease indicates that there 

may be some concerns regarding the council's ethical behavior and adherence to principles. The lowest score after CIB 

implementation, with a reduction from 36.10 to 44.75. This indicates that residents have a relatively low level of Trust in 

the council's actions and decisions. The decrease suggests that there is a need for the council to work on building Trust with 

the residents and improving their confidence in the council's abilities. 

Table 2. Resident Perception (Scale: 0-100) 

Before CIB Score After CIB  Score 

Accountability 33.05 Accountability 71.38 

Integrity  34.51 Integrity  47.12 

Transparency  43.79 Transparency  72.37 

Corruption 64.66 Corruption 72.37 

TRUST  36.10 TRUST  44.75  

 

           Implementing CIB has had a mixed impact on residents' perception of the Hulu Terengganu District Council. 

While there have been significant improvements in Transparency, Accountability, and Corruption, there have been slight 

declines in Integrity and TRUST. The council should focus on addressing the concerns related to Integrity and trust to 

enhance resident perception and confidence in the council's operations further. 
 

Table 3. Monitoring Committee Perception (Scale:0-100) 
 

Before CIB  Score After CIB   Score 

Accountability 35.00 Accountability 73.96 

Integrity 51.92 Integrity 78.38 

Transparency  37.50 Transparency  74.58 

Corruption 30.00 Corruption 19.79 

TRUST 56.26 TRUST  78.03 

 

Based on the given data for Monitoring Committee Perception in the Hulu Terengganu District Council, the 

implementation of CIB has positively impacted the perception of the monitoring committee in the Hulu Terengganu District 

Council. There have been significant improvements in Integrity, TRUST, Accountability, and Transparency, while 

Corruption has decreased. These changes indicate that the monitoring committee has a more positive perception of the 

council's actions, Integrity, and transparency after implementing CIB. 

 

Table 4. Contractor Perception (Scale: 1-100) 

 

 

 

 

 

Based on the given data for Contractor Perception in the Hulu Terengganu District Council, implementing CIB has 

positively impacted the perception of contractors in the Hulu Terengganu District Council. There have been significant 

improvements in Accountability, Transparency, and TRUST, while Corruption has significantly decreased. Although there 

is a slight decline in Integrity, it remains relatively high. These changes indicate that contractors have a more positive 

perception of the council's actions and Integrity after implementing CIB. 

Subang Jaya Municipal Council 

 

Table 5. Resident Perception (Scale: 0-100) 

Before CIB  Score After CIB  Score 

Accountability 37.80 Accountability 73.72 

Integrity  37.29 Integrity 49.52 

Transparency  45.29 Transparency 71.82 

Corruption 62.50 Corruption 69.07 

TRUST  38.67 TRUST  47.30 

 

Based on the data given for resident perception in the Subang Jaya Municipal Council, the implementation of CIB 

has had mixed effects on residents' perceptions in the Subang Jaya Municipal Council. While there have been improvements 

Before CIB  Score After CIB  Score 

Accountability 46.32 Accountability 73.53 

Integrity 48.28 Integrity 71.29 

Transparency 48.04 Transparency  73.53 

Corruption 48.53 Corruption 30.15 

TRUST  49.55 TRUST  71.24 



Tajuddin et al., American International Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences 5(1) (2023), 1-10 

 

7 

in Accountability, Transparency, and Corruption, there has been a decline in Integrity and TRUST. These changes indicate 

that there is still room for improvement in maintaining Integrity and building Trust among residents despite progress in 

accountability, transparency, and corruption reduction. 

Table 6. Monitoring Committee Perception (Scale: 0-100) 

 
Before CIB  Score After CIB  Score 

Accountability 27.78 Accountability 85.17 

Integrity 26.53 Integrity  78.27 

Transparency  31.25 Transparency  78.06 

Corruption 77.08 Corruption 24.31 

TRUST  25.62 TRUST  78.34 

 

Based on the given data for Monitoring Committee Perception in the Subang Jaya Municipal Council, the 

implementation of CIB has positively impacted the perception of the monitoring committee in the Subang Jaya Municipal 

Council. There have been significant improvements in Accountability, Integrity, Transparency, and TRUST, while 

Corruption has significantly decreased. These changes indicate that the monitoring committee has a more positive perception 

of the council's actions and Integrity after implementing CIB. 

 

Table 7. Contractor Perception (Scale: 0-100) 

Before CIB  Score After CIB  Score 

Accountability 41.35 Accountability 67.31 

Integrity  42.47 Integrity 51.06 

Transparency  49.36 Transparency  67.31 

Corruption 50.96 Corruption 65.38 

TRUST  46.62 TRUST  47.71 

 

Based on the given data for Contractor Perception in the Subang Jaya Municipal Council, the implementation of 

CIB has had mixed effects on the perception of contractors in the Subang Jaya Municipal Council. While there have been 

improvements in Accountability, Transparency, and Corruption, there has been a decline in Integrity and TRUST. These 

changes indicate that there is still room for improvement in maintaining Integrity and building Trust among contractors 

despite progress in accountability, transparency, and corruption reduction. 

 

Melaka City Council  

Table 8. Resident Perception (Scale: 0-100) 

Before CIB  Score After CIB  Score 

Accountability 25.93 Accountability 75.12 

Integrity  27.62 Integrity 49.05 

Transparency  46.02 Transparency  71.53 

Corruption 71.30 Corruption 70.83 

TRUST  30.67 TRUST  46.57 

 

Based on the given data for Resident Perception in Melaka City Council, implementing CIB has had mixed effects 

on the residents' perception in Melaka City Council. While there have been improvements in Accountability and 

Transparency, there has been a decline in Integrity and TRUST. The Corruption score remains relatively stable. These 

changes indicate that there is still room for improvement in maintaining Integrity and building Trust among residents despite 

progress in accountability and transparency. 

 

Table 9. Monitoring Committee Perception (Scale: 0-100) 

 
Before CIB  Score After CIB Score  

Accountability 7.58 Accountability 80.56 

Integrity  8.33 Integrity  81.93 

Transparency  10.61 Transparency  85.83 

Corruption 90.91 Corruption 17.71 

TRUST  8.94 TRUST  82.23 

 

Based on the given data for Monitoring Committee Perception in Melaka City Council, the highest score after CIB 

implementation, with a significant increase from 10.61 to 85.83. This suggests the monitoring committee has improved 

transparency in their operations and decision-making processes. The second-highest score after CIB implementation, with 

a notable increase from 8.33 to 81.93. This indicates that the committee has significantly improved in maintaining Integrity 

and ethical standards. Moreover, the third-highest score after CIB implementation, with an increase from 8.94 to 82.23. This 

suggests the committee has gained more stakeholder trust due to its improved performance and actions. The fourth-highest 

score after CIB implementation, with a substantial increase from 7.58 to 80.56. This indicates that the committee has become 

more accountable for its actions and responsibilities. 



Tajuddin et al., American International Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences 5(1) (2023), 1-10 

 

8 

In the same way, the lowest score after CIB implementation, with a significant decrease from 90.91 to 17.71. This 

suggests that the committee has made considerable efforts to combat Corruption within its operations. Implementing CIB 

has had a transformative effect on the perception of the monitoring committee in Melaka City Council. There have been 

significant improvements in Transparency, Integrity, TRUST, and Accountability, while the score for Corruption has 

decreased significantly. These changes indicate a positive shift towards a more transparent, accountable, and trustworthy 

committee with reduced Corruption. 

 

Table 10. Contractor Perception (Scale: 0-100) 

 
Before CIB  Score After CIB Score  

Accountability 56.25 Accountability 57.50 

Integrity  56.04 Integrity  57.13 

Transparency  54.17 Transparency  53.75 

Corruption 43.75 Corruption 43.75 

TRUST  55.90 TRUST  56.43 

 

Based on the given data for Contractor Perception in Melaka City Council, here are the before and after CIB: There 

was an improvement in the scores for Accountability, Integrity, and TRUST among contractors in Melaka City Council. 

However, there was a slight decrease in the Transparency score, while the Corruption score remained the same. These 

changes suggest that there has been progress in enhancing accountability, Integrity, and trust in the council, but there may 

be room for improvement in transparency. 

 

CONCLUSIONS 

The paper delineated the correlation between Trust and Local Authorities (LAs) performance, particularly in garbage 

collection, drainage, and grass clearance. Within this context, the significance of service delivery is paramount, given the 

community's sensitivity in these LAs toward the cleanliness and environmental conditions of their areas. Consequently, 

Trust emerges as a foundational element, wielding a direct impact on both service delivery and the overall performance of 

LAs. 

The active participation and engagement of the monitoring committee, local community, and contractors 

underscore the critical necessity for LAs to consider multiple stakeholders, thereby consolidating Trust and portraying a 

positive image of the LAs. Moreover, LAs must integrate the trust agenda into their core operations to lead transformative 

change and cultural shifts from the community's perspective. It is not merely a superficial display but needs to be ingrained 

in the corporate culture of LAs. 

While acknowledging the exploratory nature of the study, it contributes distinctly in several aspects: (i) challenging 

the notion that Trust is merely theoretical and generic, demonstrating its quantifiability through both reality and perception 

as evident in the three samples of LAs, though premature for definitive conclusions, it merits further examination, (ii) the 

study operationalizes the concept of Trust, transforming it from an abstract idea into a tangible reality, (Saib, 2004); 

providing a defined meaning from both professional and academic perspectives, and (iii) emphasizes the imperative need 

for a revamped approach and culture within LAs, emphasizing a people-centric community focus as a prerequisite for 

delivering responsive and trustworthy services, promoting Trust, and instigating administrative reform. 

In summary, our propositions warrant further discussion. Specifically, regarding Proposition 1, we are firm in our 

conviction that there is a positive correlation between Trust and the performance of Local Authorities (LAs). Our hesitation 

in unequivocally asserting this relationship stems from the limited body of research on Trust within the public administration 

domain, as previously emphasized by Klijin et al. (2010) and the multidimensional concept of Trust (McAllister, 1995; 

Mayer & Davis, 1999; Hossain et al., 2021; Gillespie, 2003; Tzafrir & Dolan, 2004; Asheq et al., 2021).   Nevertheless, we 

hold a positive outlook on Proposition 2. We regard Trust as a distinctive product/service differentiation strategy in this 

context. Here, Local Authorities (LAs) can actively cultivate positive values and Trust within the community, thereby 

contributing significantly to the long-term success of the National Anti-Corruption Plan (NACP). 

 

Limitations 

The findings of this research have at least two areas for improvement. First and foremost- the sample size of 3 LAs restricts 

the generalization of the results to be extended to other public entities vertically or horizontally (Ministry et al. or other LAs 

not only in Peninsular but also in Sabah and Sarawak). If we are to make generalizations, structural and policy differences 

need to be considered, as well as cultural perspectives. This is fundamental due to the different trust practices in LAs. 

Making inferences and generalizations will be more appropriate if the sample is more significant.  

Secondly, it is essential to note that this study captures only a momentary perspective, relevant at a specific time 

and contingent upon the ongoing nature of the exploratory project. The aspiration is that this study prompts a heightened 

sense of proactivity and responsiveness, emphasizing the importance of Trust at both individual and organizational levels. 

 

Implications 

In summary, this study serves as a vital connection between theoretical concepts and practical applications, delving into the 

discourse and operationalization of Trust within the context of Local Authorities (LAs). The examination encompasses 

elements such as accountability, Integrity, transparency, and Corruption to define the concept of Trust in this paper. They 

anticipate that the findings will offer valuable insights for practitioners and professionals in assessing contractor 



Tajuddin et al., American International Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences 5(1) (2023), 1-10 

 

9 

performance and the responsiveness of local communities. Furthermore, for LA managers, prioritizing Trust in their daily 

activities can enhance service delivery and overall organizational performance. Additionally, the research provides 

researchers with insights into quantifying Trust and its positive influence on organizational performance. 
 

 

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, A.F.B.A.T., H.B.M.S. and A.B.B.; Methodology, A.F.B.A.T.; Software, A.F.B.A.T.; Validation, A.F.B.A.T., 

H.B.M.S. and A.B.B.; Formal Analysis, A.F.B.A.T., H.B.M.S. and A.B.B.; Investigation, A.F.B.A.T., H.B.M.S. and A.B.B.; Resources, A.F.B.A.T., 

H.B.M.S. and A.B.B.; Data Curation, A.F.B.A.T.; Writing – Original Draft Preparation, A.F.B.A.T., H.B.M.S. and A.B.B.; Writing – Review & Editing, 
A.F.B.A.T., H.B.M.S. and A.B.B.; Visualization, A.F.B.A.T., H.B.M.S. and A.B.B.; Supervision, A.F.B.A.T.; Funding, A.F.B.A.T., H.B.M.S. and A.B.B. 

Authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.  

Institutional Review Board Statement: Ethical review and approval were waived for this study due to the research does not deal with vulnerable groups 
or sensitive issues. 

Funding: The authors received no direct funding for this research. 

Acknowledgement: Not applicable.  
Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study. 

Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available 

due to restrictions. 

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   

 

REFERENCES 

Ammeter, A. P. (2000). The role of Trust in international cooperative alliances. Journal of World Business, 35(3), 251–

281. 

Asheq, A. A., Tanchi, K. R., Kamruzzaman, M., & Karim, M. M. (2021). The impact of e-marketing orientation, 

technological orientation and learning capacity on online SME performance. Innovative Marketing, 17(3), 168-

179. 

Aryee, S., Budhwar, P. S., & Chen, Z. X. (2002). Trust as a mediator of the relationship between organizational justice and 

work outcomes: Test of a social exchange model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(3), 267–285. 

Bigley, G. A., & Pearce, J. L. (1998). Straining for shared meaning in organization science: Problems of Trust and distrust. 

Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 405–421. 

Bovaird, T., & Löffler, E. (2002). Public Management and Governance. Routledge. 

Butler, J. K., & Cantrell, R. S. (1984). A behavioral decision theory approach to modeling dyadic Trust in superiors and 

subordinates. Psychological Reports, 55(1), 19-28. 

Cherry, M. A. (2000). Trust in organizations: A conceptual framework linking organizational forms, managerial 

philosophies, and the opportunity costs of controls. Academy of Management Review, 25(2), 438–458. 

Costigan, R. D., Ilter, S. S., & Berman, J. J. (1998). A multidimensional study of Trust in organizations. Journal of 

Managerial Issues, 10(3), 303-317. 

Courtney, J. F. (1998). Trust and distrust in organizational adaptation: The case of a corporate acquisition. Academy of 

Management Journal, 41(3), 351–365. 

Davis, D. D. (1999). Trust and the bureaucratic process: An empirical assessment of organizational and contextual 

influences. Public Administration Review, 59(4), 365–374. 

Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. 

Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 611–628. 

Elangovan, A. R., & Shapiro, D. L. (1998). Betrayal of Trust in Organizations. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 

547–566. 

Elangovan, A. R., Auer-Rizzi, W., & Szabo, E. (2007). Trust, distrust, and the erosion of Trust: How managers can be 

trustbusters. In C. L. Cooper, & S. Cartwright (Eds.), Trust and Distrust in Organizations: Dilemmas and 

Approaches (pp. 123-135). Emerald Group Publishing. 

Hetherington, M. J. (1998). The political relevance of political Trust. The American Political Science Review, 92(4), 791–

808. 

Hossain, M. U., Asheq, A. A., & Arifuzzaman, S. M. (2019). Entrepreneurial intention of Bangladeshi students: impact of 

individual and contextual factors. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 17(4), 493-503. 

Kenning, P. (2008). A neuromarketing research agenda for marketing management: A study of the potential of neuroscience 

in marketing management. Journal of Marketing Management, 24(7-8), 815–826. 

Lane, C. (1998). Trustworthiness as a social capital. In D. Gambetta (Ed.), Trust: Making and breaking cooperative relations 

(pp. 169–198). Blackwell. 

Lazarus, R. S., & Huston, T. L. (1980). The social psychology of interpersonal Trust. In L. Wheeler (Ed.). Review of 

Personality and Social Psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 10–37). Sage. 

Lewis, J. D., & Weigert, A. (1985). Trust as a social reality. Social Forces, 63(4), 967-985. 

Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational Trust. Academy of 

Management Review, 20(3), 709–734. 

McAllister, D. J. (1995). Affect- and cognition-based Trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. 

Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 24–59. 

McKnight, D. H., & Chervany, N. L. (2001). Trust and distrust definitions: One bite at a time. In R. Falcone, & S. Barber 

(Eds.), Trust in Cyber-societies (pp. 27–54). Springer. 

Mikulincer, M. (1997). Adult attachment style and information processing: Individual differences in curiosity and cognitive 

closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(5), 1217-1230. 



Tajuddin et al., American International Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences 5(1) (2023), 1-10 

 

10 

Mollering, G. (2001). The nature of Trust: From Georg Simmel to a theory of expectation, interpretation, and suspension. 

Sociology, 35(2), 403-420. 

Morgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. (1994). The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 

20–38. 

Morrow, P. C., McElroy, J. C., & Scheibe, K. P. (2004). The effects of reputation and relationships on lead generation and 

lead conversion: A social capital perspective. Journal of Marketing Research, 41(3), 376-387. 

Noteboom, B. (2002). Trust, appropriability, and the innovation process. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 

47(3), 145–164. 

Nyhan, R. C. (2000). Changing the paradigm: Trust and its role in public sector organizations. American Review of Public 

Administration, 30(1), 87–109. 

Nyhan, R. C., & Marlowe, H. A. (1997). Development and psychometric properties of the organizational trust inventory. 

Evaluation Review, 21(5), 614–635. 

Oomsels, P., & Bouckaert, G. (2012). Trust in the public sector: Is there any evidence for a long-term erosion? International 

Journal of Public Administration, 35(6), 408–419. 

Paliszkiewicz, J. (2010). Trust as a bridge between the past and the future. Organization and Management, 4(138), 9-20 

Paliszkiewicz, J. (2011). Understanding Trust in interpersonal relationships in organizations. Management, 15(2), 145-157. 

Parker, G. (1989). The political consequences of Trust. The Political Quarterly, 60(1), 125–144. 

Romano, R. (2003). Trust and trustworthiness: A survey of the literature. SSRN Electronic Journal. 

Rotter, J. B. (1967). A new scale for the measurement of interpersonal Trust. Journal of Personality, 35(4), 651-665. 

Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of 

Trust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 393-404. 

Shockley-Zalabak, P., Ellis, K., & Winograd, G. (2000). Organizational Trust: What it means, why it matters. 

Organizational Dynamics, 29(4), 259–268. 

Snijders, T. A., & Keren, G. (2015). Trust and trustworthiness. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 615-636. 

Van Dyne, L., Vandewalle, D., Kostova, T., Latham, M. E., & Cummings, L. L. (2000). Collectivism, propensity to trust, 

and self-esteem as predictors of organizational citizenship in a non-work setting. Journal of Organizational 

Behavior, 21(1), 3–23. 

Velez, M. L. (2000). Trust, risk, and betrayal. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 44(4), 502–528. 

Zalabak, P., Ellis, K., & Winograd, G. (2000). Organizational Trust: What it means, why it matters. Organizational 

Dynamics, 29(4), 259-268. 

Zand, D. E. (1972). Trust and managerial problem solving. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(2), 229–239. 

Zucker, L. G. (1996). The role of institutionalization in cultural persistence. American Sociological Review, 61(5), 726-

743.  

 
Publisher’s Note: ACSE stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. 

 

 
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee ACSE, USA. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons 

Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). 

American International Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences (P-ISSN 2643-0061 E-ISSN 2643-010X) by ACSE is licensed under a Creative 
Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. 

 

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
http://ssbfnet.com/ojs/index.php/ijrbs
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

