What Drives Knowledge Collaboration? Decomposing Knowledge Contribution Assessment, Finding Antecedents
Authors: 
Ruilin Zhang, Jun WangAuthors Info & Claims
Ruilin Zhang, Jun WangAuthors Info & ClaimsPages 124 - 132
Abstract
Knowledge contribution is a positive process in knowledge collaboration. Using what approach to measure the knowledge contribution is critical for improving the efficiency of knowledge collaboration. Based on the studies of knowledge sharing barrier, this paper decomposed knowledge contribution into technological, communication and organization contribution and advocated the peer-assessment for knowledge contribution. Finding antecedents of each contribution is also crucial for accurate and effective knowledge management. Combined with the individual behavior model and IS success model, this paper proposed following antecedents: motivation, perception, ability and personality. Motivation and perception are intentional antecedents, but ability and personality are unintentional. In accordance with a field study of 250 employees, nested into 50 groups, we discover that individual learning motivation and perception of explicit knowledge heterogeneity can promote technological contribution but perception of tacit knowledge heterogeneity has an opposite effect; group motivation of social identity, acquisition ability and agreeableness traits increase communication contribution; group motivation, application ability and agreeableness enhance organization contribution.
References
[1]
José F. Molina-Azorín. 2014. Microfoundations of strategic management: Toward micro-macro research in the resource-based theory. Business Research Quarterly, 17, 2, 102-114.
[2]
Sharon Watson and Kelly Hewett. 2006. A multi-theoretical model of knowledge transfer in organizations: determinants of knowledge contribution and knowledge reuse. Journal of Management Studies, 43, 2, 141–173.
[3]
Maryam Alavi and Dorothy E. Leidner. 2001. Review: Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quarterly, 25, 1, 107-136.
[4]
Atreyi Kankanhalli, Bernard C.Y. Tan and Kwok-Kee Wei. 2005. Contributing knowledge to electronic knowledge repositories: An empirical investigation. MIS Quarterly, 29, 1,113-143.
[5]
Wei He and Kwok-Kee Wei. 2009. What drives continued knowledge sharing? An investigation of knowledge-contribution and -seeking beliefs. Decis. Support System, 46, 4 (March, 2009), 826–838.
[6]
Linjing Wu, Jing Li, Qingtang Liu, Liming He, Weiqing Yang, Yaosheng Zhang andYun Cheng. 2021. Information measuresof knowledge contribution: A new method to measure knowledge contribution in collaborative knowledge building: An information theory perspective. Journal of Educational ComputingResearch, 0, 0, 1-24.
[7]
Omaima Almatrafi and Aditya Johri. 2019. Systematic review of discussion forums in massive openonline courses (MOOCs). IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 12, 3,413–428
[8]
Luiz F.C. da Silva, Marcelo W. Barbosa and Rodrigo R. Gomes. 2019. Measuring participation indistance education online discussion forums using social network analysis. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 70, 2, 140–150.
[9]
Jan-Willem Strijbos, Rob L. Martens, Frans J. Prins and Wim M.G. Jochems.2006. Content-analysis: What are they talking about? Computers & Education, 46, 1, 29–48.
[10]
Kwan Yi, Namjoo Choi and Yung Soo Kim. 2016. A content analysis of Twitter hyperlinks and theirapplication in web resource indexing. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67, 8, 1808–1821.
[11]
Frederick Herzberg.1968. One more time: How do you motivate employees? Harvard Business Review, 46, 53–62.
[12]
Yongbeom Hur. 2017. Testing Herzberg's two-factor theory of motivation in the public sector: Is it applicable to public managers? Public Organization Review, 18, 3, 329–343.
[13]
Anol Bhattacherjee. 2001. Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation-confirmation model, MIS Quarterly, 25, 3, 351–370.
[14]
Anol Bhattacherjee. 2004. Understanding changes in belief and attitudetoward technology usage: A theoretical model and longitudinal test, MIS Quarterly, 28, 2, 229–254.
[15]
Stephen P. Robbins. 2003. Organizational Behavior. Prentice Hall. New Jersey, USA.
[16]
Kurt Lewin. 1997. Resolving Social Conflicts. American Psychological Association.
[17]
Albert Bandura. 1997. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. Freeman. New York, USA.
[18]
Marc J. Wallace. 1990. Organizational Behavior and Performance. HarperCollins Publishers. Scotland, UK.
[19]
William H. DeLone and Ephraim R. McLean. 1992. Information systems success: The quest for the dependent variable. Information SystemsResearch, 3, 1, 60-95.
[20]
William H. DeLone and Ephraim R. McLean. 2003. The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: A ten-year update. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19, 4, 9-30.
[21]
Mark Lejk and Michael Wyvill. 2001. Peer assessment of contributions to a group project: A comparison of holistic and category-based approaches. Assessment & Evaluationin Higher Education, 26, 1, 61–72.
[22]
Zhiqiang Ma, Xuejing Yan amd Qiyun Wang. 2018.Assessing individual contribution incollaborative learning through self- and peer-assessment in the context of China.Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 57, 3, 352–363.
[23]
Huang-Yao Hong and Marlene Scardamalia. 2014. Community knowledge assessment in a knowledge building environment. Computers & Education, 71, 279–288.
[24]
Jingyan Lu and Zhidong Zhang. 2012. Understanding the effectiveness of online peer assessment: A path model. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 46, 3, 313–333.
[25]
Payal Anand and Kamal K. Jain. 2014. Big five personality types and knowledge hiding behavior: A theoretical framework. Archives of Business Research, 2, 5, 47-56.
[26]
Jatinder K. Jha and Biju Varkkey. 2018. Are you a cistern or a channel? Exploring factors triggering knowledge-hiding behavior at the workplace: Evidence from the Indian R&D professionals. Journal of Knowledge Management, 22, 4, 824-849.
[27]
Weiwei Huo, Zhenyao Cai, Jinlian Luo, Chenghao Men and Ruiqian Jia. 2016. Antecedents and intervention mechanisms: A multi-level study of R&D team's knowledge hiding behavior. Journal of Knowledge Management, 20, 5, 880-897.
[28]
Andreas Riege. 2005. Three-dozen knowledge-sharing barriers managers must consider. Journal of Knowledge Management, 9, 3, 18-35.
[29]
Kamal K. Jain, Manjit S. Sandhu and Gurvinder K. Sidhu. 2007. Knowledge sharing among academic staff: A case study among business schools in Klang Valley, Malaysia. Journal for the Advancement of Arts and Science, 2, 23-29.
[30]
Sheng Wang, Raymond A. Noe and Zhong-Ming Wang. 2014. Motivating knowledge sharing in knowledge management systems:A quasi–field experiment. Journal of Management, 40, 4, 978-1009.
[31]
Kathryn M. Bartol and Abhishek Srivastava. 2002. Encouraging knowledge sharing: The role of organizational reward systems. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 9, 1, 64-76.
[32]
Dong-Gil Ko, Laurie J. Kirsch and William R. King. 2005. Antecedents of knowledge transfer from consultants to clients in enterprise system implementations. MIS Quarterly, 29, 1, 59-85.
[33]
Gee-Woo Bock, Robert W. Zmud, Young-Gul Kim and Jae-Nam Lee. 2005. Behavioral intention formation in knowledge sharing: Examining the roles of extrinsic motivators, social-psychological forces, and organizational climate. MIS Quarterly, 29, 1, 87-111.
[34]
Robert J. Vallerand. 2000. Deci and Ryan's self-determination theory: A view from the hierarchical model of intrinsicand extrinsic motivation. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 4, 312-318.
[35]
Yingying Zhou, Shuli Gao and Jianbin Chen. 2019. A study on motivations of R&D team participating in knowledge collaboration from the perspective of organizational learning. Science and Technology Management Research, 39, 2, 140-148.
[36]
Meiling Gu and Xinhua Bi. 2017. Key factors identification of open innovation community knowledge collaboration in mobile environment: Based on the knowledge ecological perspective. Library and Information Service, 13, 99-197.
[37]
Jose M. Barrutia and Carmen Echebarria.2021. Public managers' attitudes towards networks: different motivations, different attitudes. Public Management Review, 23, 7, 1006-1031.
[38]
Naomi Ellemers, Dick De Gilder and S. Alexander Haslam. 2004. Motivating individuals and groups at work: A social identity perspective on leadership and group performance. Academy of Management Review, 29, 3, 459-478.
[39]
Jun Wang, Ruilin Zhang, Jin-Xing Haoand Xuanyi Chen. 2019. Motivation factors of knowledge collaboration in virtual communities of practice: A perspective from system dynamics. Journal of Knowledge Management, 23, 3, 466-488.
[40]
Linda Argote, Sunkee Lee and Jisoo Park. 2020. Organizational learning processes and outcomes: Major findings and future research directions. Management Science, 1-31.
[41]
Carolyn D. Egelman, Dennis Epple, Linda Argote and Erica R.H. Fuchs. 2017. Learning by doing in multiproduct manufacturing: Variety, customizations, and overlapping product generations. Management Science, 63, 2, 405-423.
[42]
Jonathan R. Clark, Venkat Kuppuswamy and Bradley R. Staats. 2018. Goal relatedness and learning: Evidence from hospitals. Organization Science, 29, 1, 100-117.
[43]
Anandasivam Gopal, Manu Goyal, Serguei Netessine and Matthew Reindorp. 2013. The impact of new product introduction on plant productivity in the North American automotive industry. Management Science, 59, 10, 2217-2236.
[44]
Ikujiro Nonaka. 1994. A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5, 1, 14-37.
[45]
Jiangfeng Ye, Bin Hao and Pankaj C. Patel. 2016. Orchestrating heterogeneous knowledge: The effects of internal and external knowledge heterogeneity on innovation performance. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 63, 2,165-176.
[46]
XingyuanWang and Zhiheng Ji. 2013. The relationship between knowledge heterogeneity and innovation performance of the interdisciplinary teams. Science Research Management, 34, 3, 14-22.
[47]
Glenn E. Littlepage, Andrea B. Hollingshead, Laurie R. Drake and Anna M. Littlepage. 2008. Transactive memory and performance in work groups: Specificity, communication, ability differences, and work allocation. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice,12, 3,223-241.
[48]
Ruilin Zhang, Jun Wang and Jin-Xing Hao. 2020. How does knowledge heterogeneity affect transactive memory system in innovation? Evidence from a field study. Journal of Knowledge Management, 24. 8, 1965-1985.
[49]
M. Max Evans. 2013. Is trust the most important human factor influencing knowledge sharing in organisations? Journal of Information & Knowledge Management, 12, 4.
[50]
Lejla T. and Nijaz B. 2018. Knowledge acquisition, knowledge application, and innovation towards the ability to adapt to change. International Journal of Knowledge Management, 14. 2, 1-15.
[51]
Ming-zhu Liu, Yang Hu, and Xiao-dong Zhang. 2011. Experiment study on influence of knowledge acquisition ability on product innovation quality. Advanced Materials Research, 295-297, 2011, 2451-2455.
[52]
Eric Wang, Gary Klein and James J. Jiang. IT support in manufacturing firms for a knowledge management dynamic capability link to performance. International Journal of Production Research, 45, 11, 2419-2434.
[53]
Ye Tao, Jian Yu, Shilong Zhang. 2009. How does a firms's knowledge–application ability affect its innovation ability? IEEE Computer Society, 403-405
[54]
Muhammad S. Iqbal, Muhammad A. Ishaq and Ammara Akram. 2020. Personality traits predicting knowledge hiding behavior: Empirical evidence from academic institutions of Pakistan. Business Information Review, 38, 4.
[55]
Colin M. Gill and Gerard P. Hodgkinson. 2007. Development and validation of the five-factor model questionnaire (FFMQ): An adjectival-based personality inventory for use in occupational settings. Personnel Psychology, 60, 3, 731-766.
[56]
Avi Besser and Todd K. Shackelford. 2007. Mediation of the effects of the big five personality dimensions on negative mood and confirmed affective expectations by perceived situational stress: A quasi-field study of vacationers. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 1333-1346.
[57]
Teresa M. Amabile, Karl G. Hill, Beth A. Hennessey and Elizabeth M. Tighe. 1994. The work preference inventory: Assessing intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 5, 950-967.
[58]
P.J. Howard, P.L. Medina and J.M. Howard. 1996. The big five locator: A quick assessment tool for consultants andtrainers. The 1996 Annual: Volume 1 Training. Pfeiffer & Company. San Diego, USA.
[59]
Joop Hox. 2010. Multilevel Analysis: Techniques and Applications. Routledge. New York, USA.
[60]
Paul D. Bliese and Carl A. Castro. 2000. Role clarity, work overload and organizational support: Multilevel evidence of the importance of support. Work and Stress, 14, 1, 65-73.
[61]
Pankaj Setia, Balaji Rajagopalan, Vallabh Sambamurthy and Roger Calantone. 2012. How peripheral developers contribute to open-source software development. Information Systems Research, 23, 1, 144-163.
[62]
Lianying Zhang and Haiyan Guo. 2019. Enabling knowledge diversity to benefit cross-functional project teams: Joint roles of knowledge leadership and transactive memory system. Information and Management, 56, 8, 1-13.
Recommendations
Understanding knowledge contribution in online knowledge communities
Social exchange theory and organizational support theory are used to explain knowledge contribution.Perceived community support and perceived leader support positively affect knowledge contribution.Pro-sharing norm and information need fulfillment ...
A model for consumer knowledge contribution behavior: the roles of host firm management practices, technology effectiveness, and social capital
This study examines the effects of host firm management practices, social capital, and technological factors on consumer knowledge contribution behavior. Results from 403 respondents in a large firm-hosted virtual community showed that two host firm ...
Duration, frequency, and diversity of knowledge contribution
A job knowledge contribution model is proposed.Job characteristics influence the duration, frequency, and diversity of contribution.Job characteristics' influence is mediated by different knowledge characteristics.Job autonomy moderates the influences ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
August 2022
457 pages
ISBN:9781450396721
DOI:10.1145/3564858
Copyright © 2022 ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 08 December 2022
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
- Research
- Refereed limited
Funding Sources
- National Natural Science Foundation of China
- National Natural Science Foundation of China
Conference
IMMS 2022
IMMS 2022: 2022 the 5th International Conference on Information Management and Management Science
August 26 - 28, 2022
Chengdu, China
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 40Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)11
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 24 Jan 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign inFull Access
View options
View or Download as a PDF file.
PDFeReader
View online with eReader.
eReaderHTML Format
View this article in HTML Format.
HTML Format