KNOWLEDGE WITHHOLDING WITHIN AN ORGANIZATION: THE PSYCHOLOGICAL RESISTANCE TO KNOWLEDGE SHARING LINKING WITH TERRITORIALITY

A. Das, Shimul Chakraborty
{"title":"KNOWLEDGE WITHHOLDING WITHIN AN ORGANIZATION: THE PSYCHOLOGICAL RESISTANCE TO KNOWLEDGE SHARING LINKING WITH TERRITORIALITY","authors":"A. Das, Shimul Chakraborty","doi":"10.24212/2179-3565.2018V9I3P94-108","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The world of knowledge management consists of different terms that are flying around. Some words are more significant and frequently used than others. Knowledge sharing and knowledge transfer are sometimes measured to have overlapping content and used synonymously. The transfer of knowledge between organizational members has drawn consideration from both academia and business because company competitiveness is linked directly to the dissemination of innovation through an organization. Regardless of the efforts to increase knowledge sharing in organizations, success has been subtle. It is pretty clear that in many instances, employees are not willing to share knowledge even when organizational practices are followed to facilitate transfer. As the scope of innovation within an organization depends on the efficient transfer of knowledge between members, this paper emphases on the concept of knowledge withholding, which is known to interrupt this transfer and distinguish from related concepts (knowledge barriers, knowledge hiding). The aim of this paper is to make a contribution in finding the proper demarcations between these concepts. Firstly, to prove that knowledge sharing and knowledge withholding are separate concepts, Herzberg’s twofactor theory is used which explain the difference between them. Secondly, previous studies on knowledge management are exposed to have unnoticed knowledge withholding in courtesy of knowledge sharing, leading to a lack of information on the earlier. Thirdly, knowledge withholding is defined into two separate manners: the intentional hiding and the unintentional hoarding of knowledge. Finally, characteristics of knowledge withholding are abbreviated based on four territorial behaviors associated to employees in order to advocate areas for further study.","PeriodicalId":365940,"journal":{"name":"Journal on Innovation and Sustainability. RISUS ISSN 2179-3565","volume":"83 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"19","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal on Innovation and Sustainability. RISUS ISSN 2179-3565","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24212/2179-3565.2018V9I3P94-108","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

Abstract

The world of knowledge management consists of different terms that are flying around. Some words are more significant and frequently used than others. Knowledge sharing and knowledge transfer are sometimes measured to have overlapping content and used synonymously. The transfer of knowledge between organizational members has drawn consideration from both academia and business because company competitiveness is linked directly to the dissemination of innovation through an organization. Regardless of the efforts to increase knowledge sharing in organizations, success has been subtle. It is pretty clear that in many instances, employees are not willing to share knowledge even when organizational practices are followed to facilitate transfer. As the scope of innovation within an organization depends on the efficient transfer of knowledge between members, this paper emphases on the concept of knowledge withholding, which is known to interrupt this transfer and distinguish from related concepts (knowledge barriers, knowledge hiding). The aim of this paper is to make a contribution in finding the proper demarcations between these concepts. Firstly, to prove that knowledge sharing and knowledge withholding are separate concepts, Herzberg’s twofactor theory is used which explain the difference between them. Secondly, previous studies on knowledge management are exposed to have unnoticed knowledge withholding in courtesy of knowledge sharing, leading to a lack of information on the earlier. Thirdly, knowledge withholding is defined into two separate manners: the intentional hiding and the unintentional hoarding of knowledge. Finally, characteristics of knowledge withholding are abbreviated based on four territorial behaviors associated to employees in order to advocate areas for further study.
组织内部的知识保留:与属地性相关的知识共享心理阻力
知识管理的世界由不同的术语组成,这些术语满天飞。有些词比其他词更重要,更常用。知识共享和知识转移有时被衡量为具有重叠的内容,并被同义词使用。组织成员之间的知识转移已经引起了学术界和商界的关注,因为公司的竞争力与通过组织传播创新直接相关。无论如何努力增加组织中的知识共享,成功都是微妙的。很明显,在许多情况下,即使遵循组织惯例来促进转移,员工也不愿意分享知识。由于组织内部的创新范围取决于成员之间知识的有效转移,因此本文重点研究了知识保留的概念,知识保留被认为会中断这种转移,并与相关概念(知识壁垒、知识隐藏)区分开来。本文的目的是在寻找这些概念之间的适当界限方面做出贡献。首先,为了证明知识共享和知识隐瞒是两个独立的概念,本文运用赫茨伯格的双因素理论解释了知识共享和知识隐瞒的区别。其次,以往的知识管理研究在知识共享的过程中存在知识隐藏问题,导致前人的信息缺失。第三,将知识隐瞒分为有意隐藏和无意囤积两种不同的方式。最后,根据与员工相关的四种地域行为,对知识隐瞒的特征进行了简化,以提出进一步研究的领域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信