Homepage Contact us Sitemap


Karen Cook
Ray Lyman Wibur Professor of Sociology
Stanford University, Stanford CA, USA

Don Ferrin
Associate Professor of Organizational Behavior
Lee Kong Chian School of Business
Singapore Management University, Singapore

Aks Zaheer
Curtis L. Carlson Professor of
Strategic Management & Organization
Director Strategic Management Research Centre
University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA


Katinka Bijlsma-Frankema
Professor of Organization Sciences at EIASM
Associate professor of Organization Theory Department of Public Administration & Organization Science
Free University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Sim Sitkin
Professor of Management and
Faculty Director, Center of Leadership and Ethics
Fuqua School of Business
Duke University Durham - North Carolina - USA


In the past decade, issues of trust in inter- and intra-organizational relationships have been increasing in importance on the agendas of organizational scholars, legitimated by changes in the social structure of societies, economic exchange relations and organizational forms. Due to deterioration in the binding power of reciprocal obligations, of hierarchical relations and of social institutions relying on hierarchy to sanction deviant behavior, other mechanisms seem to be required to support co-operative behavior in interactions. Within firms, lateral relationships and alliances are growing in importance, while new linkages between firms are being formed to achieve and maintain competitive advantage in the marketplace. In network forms and alliances, organizational performance becomes increasingly dependent on trustful relations between individuals and groups. A related development is the globalization and virtualization of markets and relations within and between organizations. Emerging ‘new communities’ like virtual teams and global business networks may bring new problems and related trust requirements that permanently challenge current insights within the field.

By establishing an international forum for scholars from different disciplines, the workshop series seeks to make a contribution to the development of an international research program on ‘Trust within and between Organizations.’ The first three Amsterdam workshops on this theme, organized in 2001, 2003 and 2005, each succeeded in bringing together scholars from over 20 countries and a wide range of disciplines, such as economics, marketing, work and organization psychology, sociology of organizations, political sciences, information sciences and linguistics. At the first workshop, the participants decided to organize themselves in FINT, the First International Network on Trust. FINT aims to further international cooperation in trust theory and research (for membership, mail to rvzolin@nps.edu).

FINT members have since organized tracks on trust at 2002 and 2003 EURAM conferences, 2004 till 2007 EGOS colloquia, and symposia at the Academy of Management 2002 and 2005 meetings. FINT actively aims to further publications on trust, preferably co-authored by scholars from different countries. Workshop- and track papers have been brought together in special issues on trust of Personnel Review (2003, vol 32, 5), Journal of Managerial Psychology (2004, vol 19, 6) and Strategic Change (2005), an edited volume on ‘Trust under pressure (Edward Elgar, 2005) and special issues on ‘Trust and control’ of International Sociology (2005) and Group and Organization Management (in press).


Please click HERE to upload the final version of the programme.


Trust scholars are invited to submit an abstract on any topic within the broad field of ‘Trust within and between organizations’ and to help make this workshop an inspiring event. The expansion of trust research and the variety of topics studied by scholars nowadays makes us look forward to meet you again or to meet you anew, curious after ideas, arguments and findings you will bring to the table. We will organize the submissions in thematic sessions, dependent on the themes covered by the papers. Next to this general call for papers, there are nine calls for contributions to special theme sessions, all very worthy of the special attention proposed.

At the workshop, moreover, two core members of FINT, Guido Möllering and Fergus Lyon, will organize a panel session on ‘Trust and Research Methods,’ an interactive session about which participants of the workshop will hear in due course.

It is hoped that at the workshop further exchanging of theoretical ideas, research methods and findings will produce new exciting knowledge, new forms of collaboration, and new publications.




Kurt T. Dirks, Olin School of Business, University of Washington in St Louis, USA

Roy J. Lewicki, The Ohio State University, Columbus, USA

Evidence reports that trust in leaders and team members has direct or indirect effects on a number of desired outcomes such as cooperation, individuals’ performance and work-related attitudes, and work group performance, among other outcomes. Indeed, there is a fair degree of consensus across disciplines that trust is an important factor for organizations to possess.

Consequently, research directed at better understanding how trust can be created, maintained, and repaired is of great importance. In the past decade, research has made important progress on these issues. However, there is still much work to be done ranging from testing and refining existing theories of trust to exploring new territory by drawing on other disciplines. The three issues of creation, maintenance and repair represent three factors of the antecedents of trust. These issues often involve a common set of underlying processes and insights from the study of one issue can inform the others ,e.g. work on the repair of trust may contribute new insights on the structure of trust and how it is created and sustained.

This session is looking for research-based knowledge that systematically examines the factors, actions, processes, and contexts that impact the creation, maintenance and repair of trust. Empirical research, theoretical papers, and insightful reviews are welcome. Examples of relevant issues include, but are not limited to, the following:

o The individual, interpersonal, and/or structural factors that create trust.
o The influence of social networks on the creation of interpersonal trust
o Neurological or biological foundations of trust
o The implications of evolutionary psychology for the creation of trust
o Differences in processes and mechanisms between building and repairing trust.
o The role of cultural, demographic, or value differences in repairing relationships
o Repairing relationships involving alternative exchange principles, e.g., market-based, authority-based, equality-based, communal-based.
o The creation or trust following a cycle of conflict or revenge
o Creating trust when contexts are inhospitable to it, e.g., high levels of uncertainty, incentives negatively aligned between parties.




Paul W.L. Vlaar
RSM Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Dries Faems
Catholic University Leuven, Research Centre for Organisation Studies. Leuven, Belgium.

Anoop Madhok
Schulich School of Business, York University, Toronto, Canada
and Free University Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Research on trust and distrust in the area of interorganizational relationships – such as alliances, joint ventures, and outsourcing initiatives – has burgeoned. Unfortunately, most of these studies exhibit a rather static image, paying little attention to the origins and evolution of governance mechanisms (Cardinal et al., 2004; Inkpen and Curall, 2004; Narayandas and Rangan, 2004). Nonetheless, relationships unfold and governance mechanisms change (Bijlsma-Frankema and Costa, 2005). Trust and distrust develop as managers continually update their expectations and assessments of partners (Wicks et al., 1999). Levels of trust and distrust may change as a result of negotiation processes, partner interactions and external events, and as a result of changes in managerial interpretations and collaborative environments (Ariño et al., 2001; Carson et al., 2006; March and Olsen, 1975). Despite, little attention has been paid to the evolution of trust and distrust in cooperative relationships (De Wever et al., 2006; Inkpen and Curall, 2004, for some notable exceptions, see Doz, 1996; Ferrin et al., 2005; Ghoshal and Moran, 1996; Klein Woolthuis et al., 2005; Serva et al., 2005; Zand, 1972).

In this session, we wish to explore this issue by discussing papers that allow us to obtain better insights into the evolution of trust and distrust within interorganizational relationships. Some possible research topics could be:

• The significance and implications of trust and distrust in various stages of external cooperation.
• Vicious and virtuous cycles of trust and distrust.
• Dynamic representations of the trust-control nexus.
• The development of collaboration in the presence of distrust and in the absence of trust.
• Co-evolution of organizations and alliances, with a focus on changes in trust and distrust.
• The dynamic interplay between trust, distrust, and other constructs, such as interpretation, sensemaking, understanding, and information-sharing and hoarding.
• Trust-building and trust-demolishing as sequences of interaction among multiple actors
• Changes in the ambiguity of partners’ intentions affecting the development of trust and distrust during the course of collaboration.
• Factors affecting the ability of trading partners to “read” each other and to “signal” their own trustworthiness.

Multi-disciplinary and inter-disciplinary contributions are encouraged, including contributions from psychology, sociology, organizational behavior and theory, and economics.

In addition, authors are asked to submit work building on various methods, including case studies, interviews, surveys, simulations, and other types of studies. We will consider promoting high-quality papers towards publication in a special issue of a journal or in an edited book-volume.




Sandro Castaldo, SDA School of Management Bocconi University, Italy

Fabrizio Zerbini, SDA School of Management Bocconi University, Italy

The key role of trust in shaping the governance of business relationships towards value creation is well-documented in current literature. Several research streams, including industrial marketing, distribution channel, and sales management research, on the one hand, and organization studies, on the other hand, have documented the implication of developing trustworthy relationships within the exchange domain.
Indeed, in unpredictable marketplaces like the current ones trust increasingly becomes a key driver to create sustainable value through market ties, and trust-based companies have been proved to enjoy higher customer retention and higher stability in economic returns.

The momentous consequences of trust have induced scholars to focus on the conditions allowing to nurture trust in business relationships. However, most efforts have been devoted so far to understand drivers and processes for increasing and developing existing trust, or even if less frequently, for initiating trust between exchange partners – what can be labeled the ‘physiology’ of trust in business relationships.
Much less is known about the conditions which allow to cope with situations of failure in building and maintaining trust – what can be labeled the ‘pathology’ of trust in business relationships. Yet, these conditions occur with an increasing frequency in business relationships, as growing competition require transactions to increase efficiency, and emerging tensions of bargaining and pie sharing lead exchange partners from cooperative dynamics to conflicting ones even after trust is established.

This track focuses on the implication of trust failure for the maintenance and development of business relationships, and seeks papers with a strong theo¬retical grounding and clear ambition towards first-rate publication on this topic.
Conceptual as well as empirical works that shed light into the conditions and processes that help in restoring trust once broken as well as in overcoming trust failure within exchange settings are invited for submission.
Possible focuses include, but are not restricted to, the intervention of third parties belonging to the inter-organizational network where the dyad is embedded in, the interplay of organizational actors involved in the exchange – including boundary spanners – the co-evolution of trust at different levels of the business relationship (e.g. organizational vs. individual), the multiplexity of business relationships.
Papers adopting inter-disciplinary approaches, triangulation in methodologies, and bringing novel views from research streams other than marketing and organization studies are particularly welcomed.




Roxanne Zolin, Naval Postgraduate University, Monterey, CA.

Tom Elfring, Free University Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Entrepreneurship is the “discovery, evaluation and exploitation of opportunities to introduce new goods and services, ways of organizing, markets, processes and raw materials through organizing efforts that had not existed” (Shane, 2003; 4).
Although entrepreneurship is very valuable activity, it typically requires collaborative relationships in a context of uncertainty and risk, which makes trust necessary, but also sometimes difficult.
Entrepreneurial activities require many different trust relationships, from partnerships, to inter-firm collaboration, to public - private partnerships. Different forms of trust are employed in these relationships, including interpersonal trust, organizational trust, generalized trust or swift trust.
The multi-level nature of these relationships means that a rich variety of methodologies are useful in studying trust in entrepreneurship, such as case study method, social network analysis and ethnography, to name just a few.
In this session we are interested in studies that explore different forms of trust or distrust in a variety of types of entrepreneurial relationships, using the most appropriate methodologies available.

Researchers are invited to submit conceptual or empirical papers dealing in particular with the following topics:

• Antecedents to trust or distrust in entrepreneurial relationships
• Effects of trust or distrust in entrepreneurial relationships
• Effects of social networks on entrepreneurial relationships
• Influence of bilateral mechanisms, such as contracts, on trust in entrepreneurial relationships
• Influence of governance mechanisms on trust in entrepreneurial networks
• Trust in Open Source Software (OSS) communities
• Trust in regional or industry clusters
• Development of swift trust in entrepreneurial relationships




Guido Möllering, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, Köln, Germany

Don Ferrin, Singapore Management University, Singapore

Nicole Gillespie, University of Warwick, UK

Boundaries, whether objective (e.g., formal, physical) and/or perceived (e.g., informal, perceptual), are a fundamental element of the context of trust. Boundaries exist between work¬groups, departments, hierarchical levels, organizations, professions, genders, cultures, religions, ethnic groups, societies, and nations, to name just a few. They often define arenas of tension, conflict, and power struggles, but also friendships, alliances, and collaborations. The sheer omnipresence of such boundaries in organizational life suggests that it would be difficult if not impossible to identify a context for the study of trust in which boundaries are irrelevant. Thus, it is ironic that scholars have only recently recognized the potential for developing a systematic understanding of the effects of boundaries on trust and the potentially recursive relationships that may exist between boundaries and trust.

In July 2006, approximately 30 scholars met for three days at the European Group for Organization Studies conference in Bergen, Norway to discuss their research on trust and boundaries. The present special session aspires to consolidate and extend this research.

We seek submissions that help to clarify, conceptually and/or empirically, the inter-relationships between trust and boundaries, including what boundaries are, and how they impact and may be impacted by, trust within and between social groups. Although papers may naturally place relatively more emphasis on boundaries, or on trust, successful submissions should at least consider both concepts. We encourage papers across a wide range of contexts, examining a wide assortment of boundaries. We particularly encourage papers that provide conceptual clarification of the nature and meaning of boundaries, including typologies or taxonomies of boundaries, papers that explore the dynamic or emergent nature of boundaries as they relate to trust, and papers that consider the potential for using boundaries strategically to influence trust and other organizational outcomes. We also encourage disciplinary variety and exploratory approaches.




Richard Priem, University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee, USA

Antoinette Weibel, University of Zurich, Switzerland

“…a group within which there is extensive trustworthiness and extensive trust is able to accomplish much more than a comparable group without that trustworthiness and trust” (Coleman, 1988, p.101).

Consequently, trust facilitates effective action. But at either extreme for Coleman’s exemplar groups, the level of trust is properly aligned with the degree of trustworthiness among group members. When such matches occur between trust and trustworthiness, it is relatively easy to see that effective action might be facilitated by trust or thwarted by distrust.

Yet what of those situations when trust is misallocated, at the individual, group, organization or societal level, or across levels? Specifically, what happens when trust is given to those individuals, groups, organizations or institutions that are untrustworthy, or when it is denied to those that are trustworthy?

Evidence of the former case – wherein trust is granted to those who are untrustworthy – is seen quite often in the research on managerial fraud and in the popular press. Typical accounts describe intentional wrongdoing, for either personal or corporate gain, involving acts such as embezzlement, insider trading, fraud, misrepresentation, or swindling customers. Companies such as Enron, WorldCom and Tyco have become infamous as examples of misplaced trust in top executives.

The latter case – wherein there is distrust of those who are trustworthy – is reported less frequently but may occur just as often. Misplaced distrust seems to be plaguing inter-organizational co-operations quite often. For example the lack of trust in their suppliers seems to come at a high cost for US automobile producers. Toyota is very likely to surpass its last competitor GM for world market leadership because Toyota has managed to build trusting relationships with the same suppliers that are locked in deep distrust with Ford and GM. Another potential area of misalignment between distrust and trustworthiness threatening firm’s survival might unfold in the battle for brainpower. Those companies which fail to communicate their trustworthiness as an employer could miss to attract the best and the brightest.

Thus, the central theme underlying this track involves those “off-diagonal” instances where trust and trustworthiness are misaligned. Submissions are invited which examine the antecedents, dynamics, processes and/or outcomes of misalignments between trust and trustworthiness. Contributions may focus on misalignments occurring at the individual, group, organization, institutional or societal levels, or across multiple levels, and they may focus on either excessive (i.e. unwarranted) trust or distrust. In addition to empirical research, we are calling for and encouraging conceptual and theoretical papers, and insightful reviews of existing relevant theory and research. Multi-disciplinary and inter-disciplinary contributions are encouraged, including contributions from psychology, sociology, organizational behavior and theory, critical management, political science, and economics.

Possible research issues and questions include:

• What factors affect the likelihood of a misalignment occurring between trust and trustworthiness? Do these factors differ at different levels of analysis, or across levels?
• What factors affect the difference in speed and degree of alignment between trust and trustworthiness? For example which factors contribute to an “undue” striving for unanimity which overrides motivation to realistically appraise trustworthiness? Which factors contribute to irrational distrust and paranoia?
• In which way are trustworthiness (as characteristics of a person/group/institution) and perceived trustworthiness linked? How do different stakeholders perceive trustworthiness? How are these singular perspectives transformed into a more coherent picture of top management/firm/group trustworthiness?
• How might the untrustworthy “fake” trustworthiness and build legitimacy? How can the trustworthy signal their positive intent? What signs or signals allow determining who is trustworthy?
• What processes take place when a trust–trustworthiness misalignment is discovered in a relationship? Can a categorization/typology of likely processes be developed? How might these processes differ across levels of analysis?
• Under what conditions do organizations “normalize” either a) their own trustworthy or untrustworthy behavior, or b) trust or distrust of others? How might this affect the likelihood of developing an appropriate match between trust and trustworthiness in new relationships?
• Under what conditions can actions to address a misalignment between trust and trustworthiness widen/narrow the gap? For example controls and safeguards are often applied if trust was misplaced. These “remedies” however may backfire and aggravate the problem by promoting vicious cycles and by corrupting trustworthiness.
• What are the consequences of trust–trustworthiness misalignments, and what specific mechanisms lead to these consequences? How can negative consequences be minimized?
• What are the costs of trust-trustworthiness misalignments? Specifically what are the costs of forgone opportunities, excessive negotiating and overinvestment in safeguards due to misplaced distrust? What are the costs of betrayal and fraud due to misplaced trust? Under what conditions a possible business relationship should be best started prudent with a bias to trust rather than cautious with a bias to suspicion?
• Is the likelihood of a trust–trustworthiness misalignment greater in cross-cultural relationships? Are the antecedents, processes, mechanisms, and consequences of misalignment different for cross-border, cross-cultural relationships such as international strategic alliances?




Denise Rousseau, Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, USA

Jose Maria Peiro, University of Valencia, Spain

Social capital can be defined as the resources embedded within, available though and derived from the network of relationships possessed by an individual or social unit (Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998). It is a potential for positive synergistic action. Thus, the study of structural and relational features of networks is an important area of social capital. Those networks emerge and are built in a context which is regulated by norms and its constitution creates new norms that contribute to social capital. Trust among parties in the relationship is another essential element of social capital. Moreover, when social capital is analyzed within social systems as structured and bounded as organizations, enabling infrastructure and organizational arrangements are also important elements. Research on social capital in organizations is an opportunity to better understand the structural, process and cognitive dimensions of social capital. In addition, the collective properties of social capital and its implications for individual, groups and organizations provides with an opportunity to enhance multilevel and cross-level research within and across-organizations.

The present session is looking for research-based knowledge that systematically examines the factors, actions, processes, and contexts that influence social capital in organizations and its behavioral manifestations. Empirical research, theoretical papers, and insightful reviews are welcome. Examples of relevant issues that could be dealt in this special session could be:

• Comprehensive conceptualization of Social Capital in organizations, paying attention to the quality of connections, more than a mere nexus of contracts. It comprises Norms, Trust, and Social Structure binding people together, as well as structural capital.
• Multilevel analysis of social capital and its behavioral manifestations.
• Trust as the basic process to build social capital in organizations. Implications for bridging and bonding social capital.
• Social capital and trust in employer-employee relations (psychological contract and idiosyncratic deals between employers and employees, Organizational justice, etc.).
• Contextual and Cross-cultural issues on Social capital and Trust in organizations.
• Political and power game functions of social capital in organizations. For whom social capital is positive? 




Teemu Kautonen, University of Vaasa , Finland

Heikki Karjaluoto, University of Oulu, Finland

New technologies, including management information systems, the Internet and mobile technologies, have transformed many aspects of modern business management and marketing. Trust has been attributed a paramount role in this context, for example in reducing the perceived risk of electronic and mobile transactions and in facilitating long-term customer relationships. Even though significant advances have been made in this area, a number of avenues still exist where more knowledge creation is required to increase our understanding of the role, antecedents and development of trust in electronic channels.

Conceptual and empirical contributions are welcome concerning the role of trust in the application of new technologies in business management and marketing contexts. Suitable topics include (but are not limited to) the following:

*  conceptualization of trust in digital channels
* trust in mobile channels
* cross-cultural comparisons of trust in e-commerce and m-commerce
* impact of social, political and legal institutions on the emergence and development of trust in the context of new technologies
* (evolutionary approaches to) the development of trust in Web merchants/in the mobile channel
* antecedents and consequences of trust in the mobile channel/in the context of Web merchants
* trust and branding using new technologies
* trust and search engine advertising




Rosalind Searle, Open University, UK

Denise Skinner, Coventry University, UK

Within an organization, strategies and policies are statements of intent and the nature of their implementation and delivery can be regarded as a measure of the extent to which managements’ intentions are genuine and can be trusted (Skinner et al, 2004). Crucial in this context are those which relate to the experience of the individuals who form the organization itself. In particular, policies relating to areas such as selection, appraisal, reward, discipline and downsizing effect individual and collective perceptions of organizational trust, fairness and justice. Thus HRM (human resource management) policies and strategies are argued to be among the most influential for trust development (e.g. Robinson & Rousseau, 1994) and the perceived fairness of HRM practices, in terms of content, design and implementation, are important in determining employees’ perceptions of organizational trustworthiness ( e.g., Mayer & Davis, 1999).

In this track we seek to explore the nature of the relationship between HRM and trust. Papers which with further our understanding on any aspect of this topic are invited. In addition to empirical research and case studies, we welcome conceptual and theoretical papers which offer insightful into existing relevant theory and research. Topics which would be of interest include:

• The role of trust in specific HRM processes such as selection, appraisal, and training
• Trust in HRM and HR professionals
• Managing the changing nature of the psychological contract
• Whether different HR practices or combinations of practices are more effective in developing trust in the workplace
• HRM strategies and policies and the creation of distrust
• The effect of HRM practices on perceptions of organizational trustworthiness
• The role of trust in determining employee turnover




Keith Jackson, SOAS – University of London, UK

Gerhard Smid, Sioo, Interuniversity Centre for Organization Studies and Change management, Utrecht, The Netherlands

‘Professionals’ in their roles as doctors, lawyers, teachers, researchers and other field-specific ‘experts’ find that their values are increasingly called into question by governments and other agencies and stakeholder groups. What part does trust play in defining people’s perceptions of ‘professionals’ and their ascribed – or self-selected - roles and values?
To what extent are people’s general perceptions of the relative ‘trustworthiness’ of professionals and the institutions they might represent influenced by what these people perceive as ‘appropriate’ behavior, dress, speech, and expressions of non-verbal communication? For example, how do these complex perceptions and observations operate in the context of ‘professional’ or ‘learned’ discourse at a FINT workshop?
As employees, reference to the work of Maister reminds us to face the fact that professional work is also perceived as professional services, quite common in some continental countries like the UK. due to a strong legislation on the professions. In these circumstances, professional bodies play a less pronounced role.

In this special session, papers which further our understanding of trust in the context of professional work are invited. Topics include, but are not limited to the following:

Roles and responsibilities associated with disclosure. For example, the contributions to this track might explore the extent to which professionals believe they should demonstrate sensitivity of other people’s sense of vulnerability , their sense of identity or other social and psychological needs.
• The role of trust in institutions and the systems they operate: e.g. the ‘professional bodies’ that serve to train, certify and monitor the activities of individual ‘professionals’ by underwriting (financially, legally, ethically) the service contracts that these professionals enter in to as they provide services to people and to societies generally.
• Processes of trust building and (in critical incidents) trust re-building in the context of regulating the standards of professional service, generating trust in systems of performance management and evaluation, and trust in relation to service contracts designed to make such standards explicit.
• Trust in defining ‘professional communities’ (e.g. guilds, universities) and their role in communicating and otherwise promoting ‘trust as reputation’
• The role of self-trust as professionals call upon themselves to monitor and regulate their own work: e.g. as professional ‘reflexive practitioners’, assessing their own and their peers’ standards of individual and collective competence and craftsmanship / artisanship.
• Trust in relation to the notions of the ‘Meisterwerk’ and other professional qualifications: e.g. the perceived value of the MBA qualification post-Enron.
• The process of trust development between the professional and his clients at the micro-level, with issues like the relation between the level of trust and the (perceived) performance, the relation between trust and risk taking behaviour, the role of behavioural influence tactics on the creation and improvement of trust, and implications and effects of various types of contracting between clients and the professionals on performance and client perception.

In short, this track offers an opportunity to explore the extent to which notions of personal trust, institutional trust, system trust, contract trust, self trust, and other types of trust might combine in order to generate perceptions of ‘professional trust’ .




At Thursday night, a buffet is offered to the workshop participants by the

Faculty of Social Sciences and the department of Public Administration and Organization Science

The location of the buffet is Rowing Club ‘The Amstel’, overlooking Amstel river.


The conference will take place in the premises of the

Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (Free University)
De Boelelaan 1085
SIXTH FLOOR, 1081 HV Amsterdam
the Netherlands

To download a general map of Amsterdam, please click HERE

TIMING : The workshop will start around 8:30 am on Ocober 25 and will end around 5 pm on the following day.

HOW TO GET TO ‘VU Campus’, Amsterdam :

By car
From the direction of Utrecht/Amersfoort: take the ‘Ringweg A10’ – direction Den Haag. Exit Amstelveen (S 108), at the traffic light go to the left – direction Amstelveen-VU Hospital. **At the traffic light at the VU Hospital go to the left, now you are on De Boelelaan, drive on to the University building, you have to park your car on the parking lot and pay! 

From the direction of Den Haag: Exit Amsterdam/Amstelveen (S108), at traffic light go to the left, direction Amstelveen-VU Hospital. See above **.

By public transport
From the Central Station you can take Metro 51 – direction Amstelveen – and get off at the VU-campus (CS-VU = 30 min). Follow the signs to Entrance number 1085

Tram 5 also goes from CS to the VU through the centre of town = 45 min. For both transports you need a two zones ticket (3 strips).

If you come by train from Schiphol Airport, you get off at the WTC/Zuid Station. You can take the tram 51 or 5 (direction Amstelveen) for one stop – they both stop at this station – or you can walk to the Campus (10 min). Tram is one zone, two strips.

You can always call the secretarial office: 020-598.68.05/-598.68.52/-598.68.54.

Other joining information is also accessible on :


ACCOMMODATION :  Click HERE to download a list of suggested hotels.
You are requested to contact the hotel in case you need to book a room.          


The fee include participation to the workshop, lunches, morning and afternoon refreshments, workshop documents, access to the workshop web site.  The evening buffet will be offered by the Faculty of Social Sciences and the department of Public Administration and Organization Science

Fees will be posted shortly

Cancellations made before October 1, 2007 will be reimbursed minus 20% of the total fee. No reimbursement will be possible after that date.

Payments should be made by :

  • The following credit cards: Visa or Eurocard/Mastercard/Access




Ms. Graziella Michelante - EIASM Conference Manager
Tel: +32 2 226 66 62 - Fax:
Email: michelante@eiasm.be