Antecedents of organizational knowledge sharing: a meta-analysis and critique

Purpose - Knowledge is the most important component of sustainable organizational growth and economic performance. This meta-analysis aims to summarize the determinants of individuals' knowledge sharing (KS) intentions and behaviors in organizations.Design methodology approach - The authors org...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of knowledge management 2013-01, Vol.17 (2), p.250-277
Hauptverfasser: Witherspoon, Candace L, Bergner, Jason, Cockrell, Cam, Stone, Dan N
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 277
container_issue 2
container_start_page 250
container_title Journal of knowledge management
container_volume 17
creator Witherspoon, Candace L
Bergner, Jason
Cockrell, Cam
Stone, Dan N
description Purpose - Knowledge is the most important component of sustainable organizational growth and economic performance. This meta-analysis aims to summarize the determinants of individuals' knowledge sharing (KS) intentions and behaviors in organizations.Design methodology approach - The authors organize the knowledge sharing antecedents investigated in 46 studies (n 10,487, median n=172) into three categories, i.e. knowledge sharer intention and attitude (four variables); rewards for KS (three variables); and organizational culture (nine variables).Findings - Variables in all three antecedent categories positively contribute to KS intentions and behaviors; high between-study variability exists, and the fail-safe n statistic suggests the observed effects are robust against a "file drawer" (missing study) bias. Moderator results suggest that motivating KS is easier in collectivist, as opposed to individualist, cultures.Research limitations implications - In most of the studies included in this meta-analysis, participants volunteered to share knowledge with researchers. Hence, an important threat to validity in the existing research is a potential "cooperation bias" in which participants likely overestimate their willingness to share knowledge. Future KS research should investigate the dark underbelly of knowledge activities in organizations, including investigations of knowledge hoarding, withholding of knowledge to gain personal advantage, and "contributing" worthless information to gain (through gaming) personal payoffs.Originality value - The meta-analysis results herein contribute to the KS literature by identifying the determinants of KS, and an important potential limitation of much existing KS research.
doi_str_mv 10.1108/13673271311315204
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_emera</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1559647488</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1496969801</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c481t-708e601cc6a362d084af6944b8f9f0abd9a6fd641e25d786686895c40b947d193</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkU1LAzEQhoMoWKs_wNuCFw-uZjbZfHgr4hdUvOh5mSbZmrrdrckWqb_elHqqiGUGZmCe9x2YIeQU6CUAVVfAhGSFBAYpy4LyPTIAWapccsX3U5_meQLoITmKcUYpcM3FgDyN2t4ZZ13bx6yrsy5MsfVf2PuuxSZ7b7vPxtmpy-IbBt9OrzPM5q7HHNN4FX3MsLWZCb73H0t3TA5qbKI7-alD8np3-3LzkI-f7x9vRuPccAV9LqlygoIxApkoLFUca6E5n6ha1xQnVqOoreDgitJKJYQSSpeG04nm0oJmQ3K-8V2ELq2NfTX30bimwdZ1y1hBWWrBFQW2I5qupP5HuRYp1rZDcraFzrplSCdJFCtAFCCZTBRsKBO6GIOrq0XwcwyrCmi1flv1621JQzcaN3cBG7uT5OIPyTZaLWzNvgGiZ6NS</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1321621737</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Antecedents of organizational knowledge sharing: a meta-analysis and critique</title><source>Emerald A-Z Current Journals</source><source>Standard: Emerald eJournal Premier Collection</source><creator>Witherspoon, Candace L ; Bergner, Jason ; Cockrell, Cam ; Stone, Dan N</creator><creatorcontrib>Witherspoon, Candace L ; Bergner, Jason ; Cockrell, Cam ; Stone, Dan N</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose - Knowledge is the most important component of sustainable organizational growth and economic performance. This meta-analysis aims to summarize the determinants of individuals' knowledge sharing (KS) intentions and behaviors in organizations.Design methodology approach - The authors organize the knowledge sharing antecedents investigated in 46 studies (n 10,487, median n=172) into three categories, i.e. knowledge sharer intention and attitude (four variables); rewards for KS (three variables); and organizational culture (nine variables).Findings - Variables in all three antecedent categories positively contribute to KS intentions and behaviors; high between-study variability exists, and the fail-safe n statistic suggests the observed effects are robust against a "file drawer" (missing study) bias. Moderator results suggest that motivating KS is easier in collectivist, as opposed to individualist, cultures.Research limitations implications - In most of the studies included in this meta-analysis, participants volunteered to share knowledge with researchers. Hence, an important threat to validity in the existing research is a potential "cooperation bias" in which participants likely overestimate their willingness to share knowledge. Future KS research should investigate the dark underbelly of knowledge activities in organizations, including investigations of knowledge hoarding, withholding of knowledge to gain personal advantage, and "contributing" worthless information to gain (through gaming) personal payoffs.Originality value - The meta-analysis results herein contribute to the KS literature by identifying the determinants of KS, and an important potential limitation of much existing KS research.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1367-3270</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1758-7484</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1108/13673271311315204</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Kempston: Emerald Group Publishing Limited</publisher><subject>Attitudes ; Behavior ; Bias ; Categories ; Compensation plans ; Competition ; Corporate culture ; Culture ; Determinants ; Gain ; Influence ; Information systems ; Investigations ; Knowledge management ; Knowledge sharing ; Meta-analysis ; Methods ; Organizations ; Statistics ; Strategic management ; Studies ; Success ; Systematic review</subject><ispartof>Journal of knowledge management, 2013-01, Vol.17 (2), p.250-277</ispartof><rights>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</rights><rights>Copyright Emerald Group Publishing Limited 2013</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c481t-708e601cc6a362d084af6944b8f9f0abd9a6fd641e25d786686895c40b947d193</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c481t-708e601cc6a362d084af6944b8f9f0abd9a6fd641e25d786686895c40b947d193</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/13673271311315204/full/pdf$$EPDF$$P50$$Gemerald$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/13673271311315204/full/html$$EHTML$$P50$$Gemerald$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,967,11635,21695,27924,27925,52686,52689,53244,53372</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Witherspoon, Candace L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bergner, Jason</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cockrell, Cam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stone, Dan N</creatorcontrib><title>Antecedents of organizational knowledge sharing: a meta-analysis and critique</title><title>Journal of knowledge management</title><description>Purpose - Knowledge is the most important component of sustainable organizational growth and economic performance. This meta-analysis aims to summarize the determinants of individuals' knowledge sharing (KS) intentions and behaviors in organizations.Design methodology approach - The authors organize the knowledge sharing antecedents investigated in 46 studies (n 10,487, median n=172) into three categories, i.e. knowledge sharer intention and attitude (four variables); rewards for KS (three variables); and organizational culture (nine variables).Findings - Variables in all three antecedent categories positively contribute to KS intentions and behaviors; high between-study variability exists, and the fail-safe n statistic suggests the observed effects are robust against a "file drawer" (missing study) bias. Moderator results suggest that motivating KS is easier in collectivist, as opposed to individualist, cultures.Research limitations implications - In most of the studies included in this meta-analysis, participants volunteered to share knowledge with researchers. Hence, an important threat to validity in the existing research is a potential "cooperation bias" in which participants likely overestimate their willingness to share knowledge. Future KS research should investigate the dark underbelly of knowledge activities in organizations, including investigations of knowledge hoarding, withholding of knowledge to gain personal advantage, and "contributing" worthless information to gain (through gaming) personal payoffs.Originality value - The meta-analysis results herein contribute to the KS literature by identifying the determinants of KS, and an important potential limitation of much existing KS research.</description><subject>Attitudes</subject><subject>Behavior</subject><subject>Bias</subject><subject>Categories</subject><subject>Compensation plans</subject><subject>Competition</subject><subject>Corporate culture</subject><subject>Culture</subject><subject>Determinants</subject><subject>Gain</subject><subject>Influence</subject><subject>Information systems</subject><subject>Investigations</subject><subject>Knowledge management</subject><subject>Knowledge sharing</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Organizations</subject><subject>Statistics</subject><subject>Strategic management</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Success</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><issn>1367-3270</issn><issn>1758-7484</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkU1LAzEQhoMoWKs_wNuCFw-uZjbZfHgr4hdUvOh5mSbZmrrdrckWqb_elHqqiGUGZmCe9x2YIeQU6CUAVVfAhGSFBAYpy4LyPTIAWapccsX3U5_meQLoITmKcUYpcM3FgDyN2t4ZZ13bx6yrsy5MsfVf2PuuxSZ7b7vPxtmpy-IbBt9OrzPM5q7HHNN4FX3MsLWZCb73H0t3TA5qbKI7-alD8np3-3LzkI-f7x9vRuPccAV9LqlygoIxApkoLFUca6E5n6ha1xQnVqOoreDgitJKJYQSSpeG04nm0oJmQ3K-8V2ELq2NfTX30bimwdZ1y1hBWWrBFQW2I5qupP5HuRYp1rZDcraFzrplSCdJFCtAFCCZTBRsKBO6GIOrq0XwcwyrCmi1flv1621JQzcaN3cBG7uT5OIPyTZaLWzNvgGiZ6NS</recordid><startdate>20130101</startdate><enddate>20130101</enddate><creator>Witherspoon, Candace L</creator><creator>Bergner, Jason</creator><creator>Cockrell, Cam</creator><creator>Stone, Dan N</creator><general>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0U~</scope><scope>1-H</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CNYFK</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>E3H</scope><scope>F2A</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>K8~</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.0</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M1O</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20130101</creationdate><title>Antecedents of organizational knowledge sharing: a meta-analysis and critique</title><author>Witherspoon, Candace L ; Bergner, Jason ; Cockrell, Cam ; Stone, Dan N</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c481t-708e601cc6a362d084af6944b8f9f0abd9a6fd641e25d786686895c40b947d193</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Attitudes</topic><topic>Behavior</topic><topic>Bias</topic><topic>Categories</topic><topic>Compensation plans</topic><topic>Competition</topic><topic>Corporate culture</topic><topic>Culture</topic><topic>Determinants</topic><topic>Gain</topic><topic>Influence</topic><topic>Information systems</topic><topic>Investigations</topic><topic>Knowledge management</topic><topic>Knowledge sharing</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Organizations</topic><topic>Statistics</topic><topic>Strategic management</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Success</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Witherspoon, Candace L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bergner, Jason</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cockrell, Cam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stone, Dan N</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Global News &amp; ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>Trade PRO</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>Access via ABI/INFORM (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Library &amp; Information Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Library &amp; Information Sciences Abstracts (LISA)</collection><collection>Library &amp; Information Science Abstracts (LISA)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>DELNET Management Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Standard</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>Library Science Database</collection><collection>Psychology Database</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Journal of knowledge management</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Witherspoon, Candace L</au><au>Bergner, Jason</au><au>Cockrell, Cam</au><au>Stone, Dan N</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Antecedents of organizational knowledge sharing: a meta-analysis and critique</atitle><jtitle>Journal of knowledge management</jtitle><date>2013-01-01</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>17</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>250</spage><epage>277</epage><pages>250-277</pages><issn>1367-3270</issn><eissn>1758-7484</eissn><abstract>Purpose - Knowledge is the most important component of sustainable organizational growth and economic performance. This meta-analysis aims to summarize the determinants of individuals' knowledge sharing (KS) intentions and behaviors in organizations.Design methodology approach - The authors organize the knowledge sharing antecedents investigated in 46 studies (n 10,487, median n=172) into three categories, i.e. knowledge sharer intention and attitude (four variables); rewards for KS (three variables); and organizational culture (nine variables).Findings - Variables in all three antecedent categories positively contribute to KS intentions and behaviors; high between-study variability exists, and the fail-safe n statistic suggests the observed effects are robust against a "file drawer" (missing study) bias. Moderator results suggest that motivating KS is easier in collectivist, as opposed to individualist, cultures.Research limitations implications - In most of the studies included in this meta-analysis, participants volunteered to share knowledge with researchers. Hence, an important threat to validity in the existing research is a potential "cooperation bias" in which participants likely overestimate their willingness to share knowledge. Future KS research should investigate the dark underbelly of knowledge activities in organizations, including investigations of knowledge hoarding, withholding of knowledge to gain personal advantage, and "contributing" worthless information to gain (through gaming) personal payoffs.Originality value - The meta-analysis results herein contribute to the KS literature by identifying the determinants of KS, and an important potential limitation of much existing KS research.</abstract><cop>Kempston</cop><pub>Emerald Group Publishing Limited</pub><doi>10.1108/13673271311315204</doi><tpages>28</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1367-3270
ispartof Journal of knowledge management, 2013-01, Vol.17 (2), p.250-277
issn 1367-3270
1758-7484
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1559647488
source Emerald A-Z Current Journals; Standard: Emerald eJournal Premier Collection
subjects Attitudes
Behavior
Bias
Categories
Compensation plans
Competition
Corporate culture
Culture
Determinants
Gain
Influence
Information systems
Investigations
Knowledge management
Knowledge sharing
Meta-analysis
Methods
Organizations
Statistics
Strategic management
Studies
Success
Systematic review
title Antecedents of organizational knowledge sharing: a meta-analysis and critique
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T23%3A12%3A35IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_emera&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Antecedents%20of%20organizational%20knowledge%20sharing:%20a%20meta-analysis%20and%20critique&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20knowledge%20management&rft.au=Witherspoon,%20Candace%20L&rft.date=2013-01-01&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=250&rft.epage=277&rft.pages=250-277&rft.issn=1367-3270&rft.eissn=1758-7484&rft_id=info:doi/10.1108/13673271311315204&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_emera%3E1496969801%3C/proquest_emera%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1321621737&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true