Journal of Organizational Behavior

Publisher:: Wiley
Publication date:: 2021-02-01

ISBN:: 0894-3796

Issue Number

Latest documents

Different motivations for knowledge sharing and hiding: The role of motivating work design
Summary Little research to date has focused on understanding employee motivation to share and hide knowledge. Using self‐determination theory, we tested the premise that knowledge sharing and hiding might be differentially motivated and that work design characteristics might influence the motivation to share knowledge with colleagues. In a panel survey of Australian knowledge workers and in a Chinese knowledge‐intensive organization, we asked knowledge workers, using time‐lagged designs, about perceptions of work design, motivation to share knowledge, and self‐reported knowledge sharing and hiding behaviors. Results, largely replicated across both samples, indicated that cognitive job demands and job autonomy were positively related to future reports of knowledge‐sharing frequency and usefulness via autonomous motivation to share knowledge. Unexpectedly, task interdependence was positively related to the three forms of knowledge hiding (evasive and rationalized hiding, and playing dumb) via external regulation to share knowledge. Implications for the design of jobs that motivate knowledge sharing and demotivate knowledge hiding are discussed.
Issue Information Page
No abstract is available for this article.
Rivals or allies: How performance‐prove goal orientation influences knowledge hiding
Summary Previous research suggests that performance‐prove goal orientation is positively related to knowledge hiding. However, we argue that this effect depends on the focus of performance feedback (i.e., individual‐ and group‐focused feedback), which shapes the nature of the competitive expression of performance‐prove goal orientation (i.e., intragroup and intergroup oriented). We conducted three studies to test our theoretical model. The results of Study 1 with time‐lagged data from 128 part‐time MBA students showed that performance‐prove goal orientation was positively related to knowledge hiding when performance feedback focused more (vs. less) on individual performance but was negatively related to knowledge hiding when performance feedback focused more (vs. less) on group performance. Study 2 replicated these moderation findings in an experimental study of 210 undergraduate students. Study 3 again replicated the moderation effects using multisource data from 317 employees and their supervisors. It also included creativity as an outcome of knowledge hiding and illustrated the distal consequence of the moderation effects of individual‐ and group‐focused performance feedback. We then discussed the implications for the theory and practice of performance‐prove goal orientation and knowledge hiding.
Knowledge hiding as a barrier to thriving: The mediating role of psychological safety and moderating role of organizational cynicism
Summary Research demonstrates that knowledge hiding has a detrimental effect on the knowledge hider himself or herself. Extending this area, the present research examines how and when knowledge hiders struggle to thrive at work. Integrating self‐perception theory and the socially embedded model of thriving, we propose that knowledge hiding negatively influences employees' thriving through psychological safety, and this influence is contingent on organizational cynicism. In Study 1a, a cross‐sectional survey of 214 Chinese participants from a general working population supported the mediating role of psychological safety in the knowledge hiding and thriving relationship. Study 1b verified this result using two‐wave data collected from 392 working adults in a panel that recruited participants mainly in Europe and North America. In addition to confirming the mediation with a two‐wave field survey conducted among 205 employees in three Chinese organizations, Study 2 supported the moderating role of organizational cynicism. Specifically, the negative effect of knowledge hiding on psychological safety was greater under higher levels of organizational cynicism, as was the indirect effect of knowledge hiding on thriving via psychological safety. These findings contribute to both the knowledge hiding and the thriving literature and provide practical implications for both the manager and the employee.
Understanding knowledge hiding in organizations
Summary In our introduction to this special issue on understanding knowledge hiding in organizations, we provide some context to how and why this phenomenon should be studied. We then describe the five articles that comprise the special issue, and we note some common themes and divergences in this collection. Our introduction concludes with some suggestions for future research on knowledge hiding in organizations.
Leader‐signaled knowledge hiding: Effects on employees' job attitudes and empowerment
Summary The authors introduce the concept of leader‐signaled knowledge hiding (LSKH) and conduct two studies observing what happens when leaders signal employees that knowledge hiding (KH) is practiced, tolerated, and expected. Social learning theory provides the basis for predicting that LSKH encourages subordinates to hide knowledge, even though they suffer from negative job attitudes in reaction. In Study 1, data measured at two time points (N = 1,162) shows that LSKH positively predicts KH among subordinates. The KH dimensions of evasive hiding and playing dumb (but not rationalized hiding) negatively relate to job satisfaction and positively affect turnover intentions. Study 2 (N = 1,169) replicates these results with cross‐sectional data. Moreover, Study 2 demonstrates that evasive hiding and playing dumb negatively affect empowerment, whereas rationalized hiding has a positive effect. Both studies reveal that subordinates will show less KH when they work under leaders who avoid LSKH and in turn have more job satisfaction, feel more empowered, and harbor fewer turnover intentions. The results in this study provide important practical implications for knowledge management activities.
Leader–member exchange, organizational identification, and knowledge hiding: The moderating role of relative leader–member exchange
Summary In this article, we sought to identify a new interpersonal antecedent of knowledge hiding, namely, leader–member exchange (LMX). Drawing on the group engagement model (an extension of social identity theory within the group/organization context), we built a theoretical model linking LMX and knowledge hiding. This model focuses on the mediating role of organizational identification and the moderating role of relative LMX in influencing the mediation. Using two time‐lagged studies (Study 1: n = 317; Study 2: n = 248) conducted in China, we examined our research model. Study 1 provided support for the proposed hypotheses for evasive hiding and playing dumb but not for rationalized hiding. Study 2 replicated and extended our findings. Results revealed that (a) LMX was negatively related to evasive hiding and playing dumb but not to rationalized hiding; (b) organizational identification mediated the influence of LMX on evasive hiding and playing dumb but not on rationalized hiding; and (c) relative LMX not only moderated the relationship between LMX and organizational identification but also reinforced the indirect effect of LMX on evasive hiding and playing dumb but not on rationalized hiding (via organizational identification). The implications, limitations, and future research directions are also discussed.
Team creativity/innovation in culturally diverse teams: A meta‐analysis
Summary This meta‐analysis investigates the direction and strength of the relationship between diversity in culturally diverse teams and team creativity/innovation. We distinguish the effects of two diversity levels (i.e., surface level vs. deep level) in culturally diverse teams and examine the moderators suggested by the socio‐technical systems framework (i.e., team virtuality and task characteristics in terms of task interdependence, complexity, and intellectiveness). Surface‐level diversity in culturally diverse teams is not related to team creativity/innovation, whereas deep‐level diversity in culturally diverse teams is positively related to team creativity/innovation. Moreover, surface‐level diversity in culturally diverse teams and team creativity/innovation are negatively related for simple tasks but unrelated for complex tasks. Deep‐level diversity in culturally diverse teams and team creativity/innovation is positively related for collocated teams and interdependent tasks but unrelated for noncollocated teams and independent tasks. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications.
Restructured frame‐of‐reference training improves rating accuracy
Summary The use of heuristic judgments is prevalent in organizations and negatively impacts accurate employee assessments. To minimize the negative impact of heuristic judgments (i.e., anchoring and adjustment), we aim to improve rating accuracy by restructuring frame‐of‐reference (FOR) training. We conducted five studies (N = 1,143) using different samples (three including participants with hiring experience), training environments (onsite and online), and rating contexts (evaluations of sales representatives, teachers, contract negotiation specialists, and retail store managers). Across the five studies, the average improvement in rating accuracy was at least twice as large for restructured FOR (vs. control) training as it was for typical FOR (vs. control) training; the difference in rating accuracy between restructured and typical FOR training was statistically significant. Furthermore, minimizing the anchoring effect rather than increasing opportunities for rating adjustments improved rating accuracy (Study 4). Finally, restructured FOR training achieved higher criterion validity (i.e., a higher strength of the association between ratings regarding a target and the target's objective performance) than did typical FOR training (Studies 3 and 5). We discuss implications for improving the effectiveness of diverse training programs and the accuracy of judgments in organizations.
Issue Information Page
No abstract is available for this article.