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.

Multilevel Investigation of Antecedents of Knowledge Sharing and Seeking in Teams<br />

disagree” to “strongly agree”. In the process of translating and adapting the scales to the<br />

context of the present study, one of the items for intrinsic motivation had to be dropped.<br />

Cronbach’s alpha for intrinsic motivation from the two remaining items was 0.66 and for<br />

extrinsic motivation, based on three items, 0.67. For team mean intrinsic motivation,<br />

individual ratings were aggregated to the team level (ICC(1) = 0.08).<br />

Job autonomy was measured with four items developed by Thomson and Prottas (2005).<br />

This scale was chosen with respect to our sample of employees. The items from this scale<br />

describe a reasonable degree of autonomy, for example, “I decide when I take breaks.” Items<br />

were rated on a four-point Likert scale ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”,<br />

and Cronbach’s alpha was 0.69. For team mean job autonomy, individual ratings were<br />

aggregated to the team level (ICC(1) = 0.22).<br />

Dependent variables. In accordance with previous measurements of knowledge transfer as a<br />

frequency (Cummings, 2004; Kankanhalli et al., 2005), we measured knowledge sharing and<br />

knowledge seeking with two items each, asking participants how often they had recently<br />

shared or sought a) factual knowledge and b) experience with / from their colleagues within<br />

the team. Ratings were given on a six-point Likert scale ranging from “never” to “very often”.<br />

Cronbach’s alpha for both knowledge sharing and knowledge seeking was 0.86. ICC(1), as a<br />

measure of non-independence (Bliese, 2000), amounted to 0.04 for knowledge sharing and<br />

0.10 for knowledge seeking, showing that the dependent variables were influenced to a certain<br />

degree by group membership, were therefore non-independent and needed to be analyzed by<br />

means of a multilevel approach.<br />

Control variables. To rule out alternative explanations, we included several control<br />

variables in our analyses. Effects of independent variables were controlled for a company<br />

dummy, blue collar versus white collar work, part-time versus full-time employment, years of<br />

job experience in the current position, and a climate supporting innovativeness. The latter was<br />

57

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!