工作场所中员工知识隐藏行为影响因素实证研究被引量：32

An Empirical Study on Workplace Knowledge Hidden Behavior

下载PDF

导出

摘要使用员工知识隐藏测量问卷对196名企事业单位员工进行施测,以验证员工知识隐藏测量问卷的结构,并探讨人际不信任、消极互惠和组织氛围对员工知识隐藏行为的影响。研究表明,知识隐藏问卷具有良好的结构效度;人际不信任、消极互惠对知识隐藏有显著正向影响;组织氛围对员工知识隐藏有显著负向影响;人际不信任在消极互惠规范和知识隐藏之间起到部分中介作用。 Knowledge hiding questionnaire is used to measure 198 employees of enterprise and institutions in order to con-firm the structure validity of knowledge hiding and explore the mechanism of interpersonal distrust, negative reciprocity norms and organizational climate on knowledge hiding. The result shows： knowledge hiding questionnaire has good construct validity; interpersonal distrust and negative reciprocity norms have positive impacts on knowledge hiding; organizational cli-mate has a negative impact on knowledge hiding; interpersonal distrust plays a considerable mediator role in the process of negative reciprocity norms impacting knowledge hiding.

作者姜荣萍何亦名

机构地区广东金融学院人口与劳动就业研究所

出处《科技管理研究》 CSSCI 北大核心 2013年第20期128-132,共5页 Science and Technology Management Research

基金教育部人文社会科学研究项目"新生代农民工人力资本成长与城镇化的交互作用机理及其路径研究"(10YJC790083) 广东金融学院哲学社会科学一般项目"新生代农民工人力资本成长促进创业的机理与路径研究"(A1102011) 广东省哲学社会科学"十二五"规划学科共建项目"智力型组织知识隐藏的内容结构及相关研究"(GD12XXL01)

关键词知识隐藏人际不信任消极互惠规范组织氛围 knowledge hiding interpersonal distrust negative reciprocity norm organizational climate

分类号 F272.92 [经济管理—企业管理] F224 [经济管理—国民经济]

引文网络
相关文献

参考文献19

1MARYLENE G. A model of Knowledge - sharing Motivation [ J ]. Human Resource Management, 2009, 48 (4) : 571 - 589.
2BOCK G W, ROBERT W Z, KIM Y G, et al. Behavioral Intention Formation in Knowledge Sharing: Examining the Roles of Extrinsic Motivators, Social- Psyehological Forces, and Organizational Climate [J]. information Technologies amt Knowledge Management, 2005, 29 (1): 87-111.
3HSU M - H, CHANG C - M. Examining Interpersonal Trust as a Fa- cilitator and Uncertainty as an Inhibitor of Intra - organizational Knowledge Sharing [ J ]. Information Systems Journal, 2012, 23 (1): 23-25.
4ZWEIG D, DAVID . Sharing Know -how Reluctantly [ J]. Industri- al Engineer: IE, 2006, 38 (5) 5:16-16. 2/3.
5MARTINE R H. Share or not to Share? Professional Norms, Refer- ence Groups, and Information Withholding among Life Scientists [ J ]. Organization Science, 2010, 21 (4) : 873 - 891.
6ASHRAF, SHWA. When Knowledge Sharing Turns into Knowledge Hiding [ J]. Strategic Communication Management, 2011, 15 (8) : 7-7. 1.
7WEBSTER J, BROWN G, ZWEIG D, et al. Beyond Knowledge Sha- ring: Withholding Knowledge at Work [ J ]. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 2008, 27:1 -37.
8HUSTED K, MICHAILOVA S, PEDERSEN T. Knowledge- sharing Hostility and Governance Meehanisms: an Empirical Test [ J]. Jonr- hal of Knowledge Management, 2012, 1 (5) : 754 -773.
9CONNELLY C, ZWEIG D, WEBSTER J. Why Workers Hide Knowl- edge. BizEd, 2011.
10CONNELLY C E, ZWEIG D, WEBSTER J, et al. Knowledge hid- ing in Organizations [ J]/ Journal of Organizational Behavior, 2012, 33 (1): 64 - 88.

二级参考文献17

1[3]MacKinnon D P, Lockwood C M, Hoffman J M, West S G, Sheets V. A Comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 2002, 7(1): 83～104
2[4]MacKinnon D P, Lockwood C M, Hoffman J M. A new method to test for mediation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Prevention Research, Park City, UT. 1998, June
3[5]Duncan O D, Featherman D L, Duncan B. Socioeconomic background and achievement. New York: Seminar Press, 1972
4[6]James L R, Brett J M. Mediators, moderators and tests for mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1984,69(2): 307～321
5[7]Judd C M, Kenny D A. Process analysis: Estimating mediation in treatment evaluations. Evaluation Review, 1981, 5(5): 602～619
6[8]Baron R M, Kenny D A. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1986, 51(6): 1173～1182
7[9]Sobel M E. Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. In: S Leinhardt (Ed.). Sociological methodology 1982. Washington, DC: American Sociological Association, 1982. 290～312
8[10]Sobel M E. Direct and indirect effects in linear structural equation models. In: J S Long (Ed.) Common problems/proper solutions. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1988. 46～64
9[11]Clogg C C, Petkova E, Shihadeh E S. Statistical methods for analyzing collapsibility in regression models. Journal of Educational Statistics, 1992, 17(1): 51～74
10[12]Freedman L S, Schatzkin A. Sample size for studying intermediate endpoints within intervention trials of observational studies. American Journal of Epidemiology, 1992, 136: 1148～1159