Effect of organizational relationship style on the level of knowledge sharing
Purpose – This study aims to examine the effect of organizational relationship style (employees' relationships with colleagues, supervisors, and the organization) on the sharing of knowledge in high-tech companies; it goes on to determine which particular relationship style is the most important in accounting for the extent of knowledge sharing in these companies. Design/methodology/approach – The study uses a quantitative approach. Research hypotheses are tested by statistical methods including Pearson Correlation and Structural Equation Modeling. A total of 300 questionnaires were distributed, of which 182 valid questionnaires were returned (a 61 percent response). Findings – An organization should establish, and maintain, relationships between employees to improve the sharing of knowledge within the organization, ensure a high interaction between employees, and create well-arranged knowledge resources for the organization. Practical implications – The research shows that managers in the high-tech industry need to pay more attention to the interaction among organizational members. The relationship of an employee with the organization, supervisor and colleagues, and thus the willingness to share knowledge, can be improved via job rotation, implementation of a mentoring system, and role-playing activities. Originality/value – The significant findings of the study relate to high-tech industry in Taiwan. The proposed model can be replicated in other industrial and country settings in order to test its generality.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 32 (2011)
Issue (Month): 5/6 (September)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.emeraldinsight.com|
|Order Information:|| Postal: Emerald Group Publishing, Howard House, Wagon Lane, Bingley, BD16 1WA, UK|
Web: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/ijm.htm Email:
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Caroline L Park, 2004. "What is the value of replicating other studies?," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(3), pages 189-195, December.
- Foxall, Gordon R. & Greenley, Gordon E., 1999. "Consumers' Emotional Responses to Service Environments," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 149-158, October.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:ijmpps:v:32:y:2011:i:5/6:p:677-686. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Virginia Chapman)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.