Knowledge hiding as a barrier to thriving: The mediating role of psychological safety and moderating role of organizational cynicism

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/job.2358
• Author: Zhongmin Wang,Xiaowen Hu,Xuan Jiang,Zhou Jiang
• Published date: 01 September 2019
• Date: 01 September 2019

SPECIAL ISSUE ARTICLE

Knowledge hiding as a barrier to thriving: The mediating role of

psychological safety and moderating role of organizational

cynicism

Zhou Jiang

1

|Xiaowen Hu

2

|Zhongmin Wang

3

|Xuan Jiang

4

1

Department of Management, Deakin

Business School, Deakin University, Victoria,

Australia

2

School of Management, Queensland

University of Technology, Brisbane,

Queensland, Australia

3

College of Business, Law and Governance,

James Cook University, Townsville,

Queensland, Australia

4

Department of Business Administration,

Yanbian University, Yanji, China

Correspondence

Zhou Jiang, Department of Management,

Deakin Business School, Deakin University,

Locked Bag 20001, Victoria 3220, Australia.

Email: z.jiang@deakin.edu.au; dr.zhou.

jiang@gmail.com

Summary

Research demonstrates that knowledge hiding has a detrimental effect on the knowl-

edge 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 hid-

ing negatively influences employees' thriving through psychological safety, and this

influence is contingent on organizational cynicism. In Study 1a, a cross‐sectional sur-

vey of 214 Chinese participants from a general working population supported the

mediating role of psychological safety in the knowledge hiding and thriving relation-

ship. 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 pro-

vide practical implications for both the manager and the employee.

KEYWORDS

knowledge hiding,organizational cynicism, psychological safety, thriving

1|INTRODUCTION

Organizations have devoted efforts to promoting knowledge sharing

(Wang & Noe, 2010) in order to achieve organizational success (Gold,

Malhotra, & Segars, 2001). However, they also realize that, unfortu-

nately, rather than share knowledge, many employees tend to hide

knowledge (Webster et al., 2008). According to Connelly, Zweig,

Webster, and Trougakos (2012), knowledge hiding differs from a lack

of knowledge sharing, because it not only involves omission of sharing

the knowledge but also incorporates an intent to withhold knowledge

that is requested by others. Compared with the lack of knowledge

sharing, knowledge hiding may incur more serious consequences to

the organization and its employees (Bogilović,Černe, & Škerlavaj,

2017; Rhee & Choi, 2017). Empirical research has recently emerged

to suggest that knowledge hiding is a potential threat to one's own

beneficial outcomes. For instance, an employee's creativity (Černe,

Nerstad, Dysvik, & Škerlavaj, 2014; Rhee & Choi, 2017), innovative

behavior (Černe, Hernaus, Dysvik, & Škerlavaj, 2017), and relation-

ships with coworkers (Connelly & Zweig, 2015) are found to suffer

when he or she hides knowledge.

Despite these emerging findings, critical gaps in the literature

need to be addressed for this line of research to advance theoretically

and empirically. First, although previous research has mainly examined

the performance/behavioral and relationship consequences of one's

Received: 1 December 2017 Revised: 12 July 2018 Accepted: 25 January 2019

DOI: 10.1002/job.2358

800 © 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J Organ Behav. 2019;40:800–818.wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/job

own knowledge‐hiding behavior (Černe et al., 2017; Černe et al.,

2014; Connelly & Zweig, 2015), the literature has neglected the psy-

chological outcomes and thus does not offer a fuller understanding

of the negative effects of knowledge hiding on the knowledge hiders

themselves. We contend that investigating the psychological out-

comes should also be important, given that individuals' psychological

reactions or experiences always occur first following their actions

and are argued to be proximal and fundamental consequences of their

own behavior (Bem, 1972; Miller & Ross, 1975). Indeed, self‐

perception theory (Bem, 1972) has made this importance salient, indi-

cating that individuals usually enter psychological reflection processes

after they conduct a specific behavior. To advance this aspect, we

examine employees' thriving at work, defined as a positive psycholog-

ical state reflective of both vitality and learning experiences (Spreitzer,

Sutcliffe, Dutton, Sonenshein, & Grant, 2005), as an outcome of

knowledge hiding. We focus on thriving first because it is a critical

psychological indicator of personal growth and development

(Spreitzer, Porath, & Gibson, 2012; Spreitzer et al., 2005) that requires

continuous intake of knowledge resources (Day, Fleenor, Atwater,

Sturm, & McKee, 2014; London & Smither, 1999), which, however,

tends to be prevented if knowledge is hidden. Also importantly, thriv-

ing reflects a generic‐level, broad umbrella that mirrors potential pos-

itive performance/behaviors, progress, and well‐being (Spreitzer &

Porath, 2014). The focus on thriving thus may also broaden the impli-

cations of the role that knowledge hiding plays in impeding a positive

work outcome.

Second, whereas the detrimental effects of knowledge hiding on

the knowledge hider are apparent (Černe et al., 2017; Černe et al.,

2014), the literature has neglected the empirical account of the mech-

anism that explains why or how these effects are present. On the basis

of social exchange theory (Blau, 1964), Černe et al. (2014) have empir-

ically verified an interpersonal mechanism through which the knowl-

edge hider incurs distrust from the knowledge requester, who then

reciprocally withholds knowledge, which in turn does harm to the

hider's creative performance. This interpersonal mechanism, despite

being insightful, does not allow us to appreciate how the

intrapersonal/intrapsychic process may explain the effects of knowl-

edge hiding. However, the intrapersonal perspective should be at least

equally important, for ultimately it is the individual's internal reflec-

tions on the interpersonal contexts as well as on associated actions

(e.g., hiding information from coworkers) that promote or resist their

subsequent positive outcomes (e.g., Ehrhart & Naumann, 2004;

Makhija & Stewart, 2002). To explain the intrapersonal process, we

draw on self‐perception theory (Bem, 1972) and introduce psycholog-

ical safety (i.e., perceptions of risk free in showing the authentic self;

Kahn, 1990) as a mediation mechanism underlying the effects of

knowledge hiding on thriving. Psychological safety is considered

because knowledge hiding could potentially create risky or worrying

interpersonal situations (e.g., existence of worsening relationships

and reciprocation; Černe et al., 2014; Connelly & Zweig, 2015), in

which feelings of safety are undermined to prevent positive experi-

ences. As we will elaborate later, based on self‐perception theory,

our contention is that knowledge hiders, due to their self‐reflection

on and inferences about the socially undesirable nature of their own

behaviors (Bem, 1972; Miller & Ross, 1975), are less likely to perceive

psychological safety and consequently experience difficulties in thriv-

ing (Spreitzer et al., 2005).

Third, prior studies on knowledge hiding have paid exclusive

attention to contextual moderators characterized by competition, sup-

port, and job characteristics (Černe et al., 2017; Černe et al., 2014),

leaving it unknown whether and how knowledge hiders with different

personal characteristics would vary in their psychological reactions to

their own hiding behaviors. Researchers have emphasized the impor-

tance of exploring potential personal moderators, indicating that the

effects of knowledge hiding may be conditional on individual charac-

teristics such as one's attitudes (Connelly et al., 2012). This indication

is theoretically important, as self‐perception theory (Bem, 1972)

implies that whether and how individuals think about their own

behavior and consequently react to this behavior can depend on their

prior or existing attitudes or beliefs toward associated contexts. That

is, a preexisting personal belief/attitude may moderate one's self‐attri-

bution/perception process initiated by his or her behavior (Chaiken &

Baldwin, 1981). Specifically, we suggest that organizational cynicism,

defined as a global, negative attitude/belief toward the organization

on the basis of its lack of sincerity (Dean, Brandes, & Dharwadkar,

1998), moderates the detrimental effects of the knowledge‐hiding

behavior. Our focus on organizational cynicism is based on the consid-

eration that it is a complex attitude that combines cognitive, affective,

and behavioral elements to collectively reflect “beliefs of unfairness,

feelings of distrust, and related actions about and against organiza-

tions”(Bommer, Rich, & Rubin, 2005). Due to this global nature, orga-

nizational cynicism should capture one's negative attitudinal attributes

from a general view (Kanter & Mirvis, 1989; Wanous, Reichers, & Aus-

tin, 2000) and thus offers theoretical and empirical insights that tend

to be widely applicable. In line with self‐perception theory, we argue

that organizational cynicism, which involves perceptions of

untrustworthiness and a lack of integrity in the workplace, might

aggravate the possibility that knowledge hiders perceive concerns

and worries and consequently struggle with thriving.

In summary, this research investigates the relationship between

knowledge hiding and thriving, focusing on the mediating effect of

psychological safety and the moderating effect of organizational cyni-

cism (Figure 1). By addressing the aforementioned gaps, it makes sev-

eral contributions to the literature. First, we contribute to a relatively

generic and fundamental understanding of the detrimental impact of

knowledge hiding on the hiders' positive psychological experiences.

Focusing on a broad psychological umbrella (e.g., thriving) that repre-

sents diverse promising work outcomes (Spreitzer & Porath, 2014),

we complement the literature by highlighting that knowledge hiding

could backfire in terms of undermining the perpetrator's thriving expe-

riences. Relatedly, and second, this research advances the knowledge

hiding literature by demonstrating how such a backfire effect can

occur from an intrapersonal mechanism (i.e., the hider's perceived psy-

chological safety) that involves one's own inner states/mindsets,

supplementing the interpersonal, dyadic mechanisms confirmed previ-

ously (e.g., Černe et al., 2014). Third, it provides the first

JIANG ET AL.801