11.03.2014 Views

thesis_Daniela Noethen_print final - Jacobs University

thesis_Daniela Noethen_print final - Jacobs University

thesis_Daniela Noethen_print final - Jacobs University

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Preventing Knowledge Loss When Employees Expect to Leave<br />

In contrast to turnover intention, expected involuntary turnover does seem to have very<br />

negative consequences for knowledge sharing and might, thus, put the organization at a risk<br />

of losing knowledge. But, again in contrast to voluntary turnover, involuntary turnover is<br />

decided on by the organization, and is therefore very predictable. Accordingly, measures can<br />

be taken to counteract employees’ withdrawal from knowledge transfer processes, and the risk<br />

of knowledge loss can be reduced. As the results of this study show, one measure against<br />

withdrawal from knowledge sharing is PSS, specifically PSS for knowledge sharing. Losing<br />

one’s job can constitute a threat to a person’s sense of value and worth (Schneer, 1993). But<br />

when supervisors assure that the employees’ knowledge is needed and valued, they can<br />

counteract this impression. Thus, although involuntary turnover can have negative<br />

consequences (and this even before it takes place), these consequences can be prevented<br />

through positive involvement of the supervisor.<br />

4.6.3. Limitations<br />

There are certain limitations to the present study that should be noted when interpreting the<br />

results. First of all, we only studied knowledge sharing within teams. Of course, it might well<br />

be that employees who intend or expect to leave the organization are sharing their knowledge<br />

with other people outside their team, or they might try to document it in writing and thereby<br />

retain it for the organization. In these cases, knowledge sharing within the team, which is<br />

what we measured, might still be the same or even lower, but this would not necessarily mean<br />

that the employees’ knowledge is at risk of being lost. Furthermore, we only measure the<br />

frequency, i.e., quantity of knowledge sharing, but not the quality or different types of<br />

knowledge, such as tacit and explicit knowledge (Nonaka, 1994; Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995;<br />

Nonaka & von Krogh, 2009). When employees are expecting to leave the organization, they<br />

can withdraw from knowledge sharing either by reducing the quantity or the quality of<br />

158

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!