thesis_Daniela Noethen_print final - Jacobs University

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Multilevel Investigation of Antecedents of Knowledge Sharing and Seeking in Teams sharing alone, this does not necessarily lead to successful knowledge transfer. Second, our findings underline that practitioners should always keep in mind that when employees are working in teams or work groups, individual knowledge transfer behavior is not just influenced by individual factors, such as the employees’ respective age or motivation, but also by the composition of their team, i.e., by the distribution of different factors throughout the team. According to our results, there are different measures practitioners can take to encourage knowledge sharing and knowledge seeking within their teams. For example, we demonstrated that although knowledge sharing behavior is partly influenced by factors that are difficult or impossible to change, for example, employee age or intrinsic motivation, there are several conducive factors that are within their control: employing more employees full-time, giving employees more freedom to decide how they structure their work and when to do it, and creating an atmosphere that values suggesting ideas, finding new methods, and taking risks. Research on leadership (Ostroff, Kinicki, & Tamkins, 2003) has shown that team leaders play an important role in influencing the climate and atmosphere within teams. On the other hand, our results suggest that, to increase knowledge seeking, managers should stress the extrinsic benefits that lie in gaining knowledge from others (e.g., as an easy and fast way to solve problems, Constant et al., 1996) or, if possible, to set extrinsic rewards (e.g., financial benefits or other bonuses) for knowledge seeking. As already noted above, giving many employees within a team more job autonomy also encourages single employees to seek more knowledge within the team. Furthermore, when composing teams, managers should not only take into account the absolute age of team members, but also the age diversity, as it is the relative age to other team members that influences the frequency of knowledge transfer behaviors. 72
Multilevel Investigation of Antecedents of Knowledge Sharing and Seeking in Teams 2.6.7. Limitations The present study has some limitations that should be noted. First of all, we only examine knowledge transfer within teams. Consequently, our results cannot be generalized to transfer across team borders. More generally, the generalizability is limited since data were collected from two German companies in a cross-sectional design. Accordingly, our sample might not be representative for all organizations, and inferences cannot be made about the direction of effects. Moreover, we did not differentiate between different kinds or characteristics of knowledge. The influences might have differed for sharing tacit versus explicit knowledge (Nonaka, 1994; Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995; Nonaka & von Krogh, 2009), more versus less ambiguous knowledge (Szulanski, 1996, 2000; Szulanski, Cappetta, & Jensen, 2004), or more versus less codifiable knowledge (Reagans & McEvily, 2003). However, these distinctions have already been well researched and are widely accepted, and introducing a third distinction in the present study would not only have complicated matters in a non-negligible manner, but would also have rendered the parsimonious approach to measurement impossible. Furthermore, limitations with respect to the operationalization of constructs have to be mentioned; independent as well as dependent variables were operationalized via self-reports, and the scales we used were very parsimonious, measuring constructs with only two to four items. First, using only one measurement source can entail common method bias that can inflate or deflate the estimations of relationships between constructs (Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003). To control common method bias, we took several steps recommended by Podsakoff and colleagues (2003) when designing the study’s procedure: we protected respondents’ anonymity and reduced evaluation apprehension as much as possible. Furthermore, we improved scale items by reducing ambiguity through the clarification of key 73
Page 1 and 2:
Knowledge Transfer in Teams and Its
Page 3 and 4:
Table of Contents Contents Acknowle
Page 5 and 6:
Acknowledgements Acknowledgements T
Page 7 and 8:
Acknowledgements Last but not least
Page 9 and 10:
General Introduction and of older w
Page 11 and 12:
General Introduction in the smooth
Page 13 and 14:
Outline Outline The core of the pre
Page 15 and 16:
Outline on knowledge sharing, as we
Page 17 and 18:
Knowledge, Knowledge Management, an
Page 19 and 20:
Knowledge, Knowledge Management, an
Page 21 and 22: Knowledge, Knowledge Management, an
Page 39 and 40: Multilevel Investigation of Anteced
Page 71: Multilevel Investigation of Anteced
Page 89 and 90: Intergenerational Knowledge Transfe
Page 123 and 124:
Intergenerational Knowledge Transfe
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Preventing Knowledge Loss When Empl
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
the demographic change. Accordingly
Page 177 and 178:
analysis was dyadic knowledge trans
Page 179 and 180:
questions. The limitations that wil
Page 181 and 182:
would be very different than for a
Page 183 and 184:
“there are situations where knowl
Page 185 and 186:
employing the distinctions recommen
Page 187 and 188:
valuable addition to the existing l
Page 189 and 190:
covers a very specific area of know
Page 191 and 192:
the importance of including lower l
Page 193 and 194:
Foss, N. J., Husted, K., & Michailo
Page 195:
Watson, S., & Hewett, K. (2006). A
show all

thesis_Daniela Noethen_print final - Jacobs University

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?