IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i13p7749-d847476.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of Risk Perception Difference of Members of a Scientific Research Project Team on Information Adoption: The Moderating Effect of Knowledge Inertia

Author

Listed:
  • Haoyang Song

    (School of Information Management, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510275, China)

  • Jianhua Hou

    (School of Information Management, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510275, China)

  • Xiucai Yang

    (School of Information Management, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510275, China)

  • Yang Zhang

    (School of Information Management, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510275, China)

Abstract

A scientific research project is always full of uncertainties and risks. In this condition, full exchange and complementarity of information resources among project team members are necessary and important to meet the information needs for project risk management and even affect the success of the project. The differentiated risk perception of members with various professional backgrounds can contribute to the communication and complementary of the necessary information within the team. However, too much difference in perceptions of project risks may cause members’ information conflicts, which may hinder the adoption of various information and do harm to the risk management. Considering the limited research on this “contradictory” relationship, especially for the scientific research project team, a special group, this study explores the impact of the risk perception differences of the scientific research project team members on information adoption behavior through the large sample empirical statistical method. The results show the hat risk perception difference of members positively affects the learning willingness and information adoption behavior but does not show a negative effect, and there is no inverted U-shaped relationship. Further, learning willingness plays a mediating role between both, while learning inertia and experience inertia positively and negatively moderate the positive effects of risk perception differences on learning willingness, respectively. From the cognitive perspective, this study further reveals the internal influence mechanism of risk perception difference of scientific research project team members on information behavior and provides a theoretical reference for improving the efficiency of information communication and optimizing collaborative team management.

Suggested Citation

  • Haoyang Song & Jianhua Hou & Xiucai Yang & Yang Zhang, 2022. "The Impact of Risk Perception Difference of Members of a Scientific Research Project Team on Information Adoption: The Moderating Effect of Knowledge Inertia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-18, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:13:p:7749-:d:847476
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/13/7749/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/13/7749/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. L. Felipe Monteiro & Niklas Arvidsson & Julian Birkinshaw, 2008. "Knowledge Flows Within Multinational Corporations: Explaining Subsidiary Isolation and Its Performance Implications," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(1), pages 90-107, February.
    2. Kieran M. Findlater & Terre Satterfield & Milind Kandlikar, 2019. "Farmers’ Risk‐Based Decision Making Under Pervasive Uncertainty: Cognitive Thresholds and Hazy Hedging," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(8), pages 1755-1770, August.
    3. Wenhong Zhao & Te Yang & Karen D. Hughes & Yixin Li, 2021. "Entrepreneurial alertness and business model innovation: the role of entrepreneurial learning and risk perception," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 839-864, June.
    4. Vítor Vasata Macchi Silva & José Luis Duarte Ribeiro & Gonzalo Rubén Alvarez & Sonia Elisa Caregnato, 2019. "Competence-Based Management Research in the Web of Science and Scopus Databases: Scientific Production, Collaboration, and Impact," Publications, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-21, September.
    5. Wei Liang & Tingyi Li & Li Lu & Jaehyoung Kim & Sanggyun Na, 2020. "Influence of Implicit Followership Cognitive Differences on Innovation Behavior: An Empirical Analysis in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-15, June.
    6. Fahad, Shah & Wang, Jianling, 2018. "Farmers’ risk perception, vulnerability, and adaptation to climate change in rural Pakistan," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 301-309.
    7. Chan Young Park & Wooyong Jung & Seung H. Han, 2020. "Risk Perception Gaps Between Construction Investors and Financial Investors of International Public–Private Partnership (PPP) Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-20, October.
    8. Chester Wai-Jen Liu & Sheng-Feng Shen & Wei-Chung Liu, 2021. "On the evolution of social ties as an instrumental tool for resource competition in resource patch networks," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-18, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Terre Satterfield & Sara Nawaz & Guillaume Peterson St-Laurent, 2023. "Exploring public acceptability of direct air carbon capture with storage: climate urgency, moral hazards and perceptions of the ‘whole versus the parts’," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 176(2), pages 1-21, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zhang, Feng & Jiang, Guohua & Cantwell, John A., 2015. "Subsidiary exploration and the innovative performance of large multinational corporations," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 224-234.
    2. Mei, Maggie Qiuzhu & Wang, Le & Yan, Jie, 2023. "Maintaining product quality consistency when offshoring to emerging markets: The role of subsidiary control," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(1).
    3. Liu, Yipeng & Meyer, Klaus E., 2020. "Boundary spanners, HRM practices, and reverse knowledge transfer: The case of Chinese cross-border acquisitions," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 55(2).
    4. Sangcheol Song, 2014. "Subsidiary Divestment: The Role of Multinational Flexibility," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 54(1), pages 47-70, February.
    5. Kawai, Norifumi & Chung, Chul, 2019. "Expatriate utilization, subsidiary knowledge creation and performance: The moderating role of subsidiary strategic context," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 24-36.
    6. Qianchun Dai & Kequn Cheng, 2022. "What Drives the Adoption of Agricultural Green Production Technologies? An Extension of TAM in Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-18, November.
    7. Peltokorpi, Vesa, 2015. "Corporate Language Proficiency and Reverse Knowledge Transfer in Multinational Corporations: Interactive Effects of Communication Media Richness and Commitment to Headquarters," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 49-62.
    8. Caicedo Marulanda, Carolina & Pla-Barber, José & León Darder, Fidel & Mora, Jhon James, 2015. "A microeconometric analysis of the springboard subsidiary: The case of Spanish firms," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 9, pages 1-34.
    9. López-Sáez, Pedro & Cruz-González, Jorge & Navas-López, Jose Emilio & Perona-Alfageme, María del Mar, 2021. "Organizational integration mechanisms and knowledge transfer effectiveness in MNCs: The moderating role of cross-national distance," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(4).
    10. Christos N. Pitelis, 2011. "Foreign Direct Investment and Economic Integration," Chapters, in: Miroslav N. Jovanović (ed.), International Handbook on the Economics of Integration, Volume III, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Ghulam Raza Sargani & Yuansheng Jiang & Abbas Ali Chandio & Yun Shen & Zhao Ding & Asif Ali, 2023. "Impacts of livelihood assets on adaptation strategies in response to climate change: evidence from Pakistan," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(7), pages 6117-6140, July.
    12. Peltokorpi, Vesa, 2015. "Foreign subsidiary top manager nationality and language policy: The moderating effects of subsidiary age and size," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 739-748.
    13. Dorra Yahiaoui & Hela Chebbi, 2008. "The limits of top-down transfers within a multinational corporation: the need for knowledge hybridization," Journal of Innovation Economics, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(2), pages 85-104.
    14. Najafi-Tavani, Zhaleh & Robson, Matthew J. & Zaefarian, Ghasem & Andersson, Ulf & Yu, Chong, 2018. "Building subsidiary local responsiveness: (When) does the directionality of intrafirm knowledge transfers matter?," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 475-492.
    15. Demeter, Krisztina & Szász, Levente & Rácz, Béla-Gergely, 2016. "The impact of subsidiaries’ internal and external integration on operational performance," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 73-85.
    16. Fabian Jintae Froese & Sebastian Stoermer & B Sebastian Reiche & Sebastian Klar, 2021. "Best of both worlds: How embeddedness fit in the host unit and the headquarters improve repatriate knowledge transfer," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 52(7), pages 1331-1349, September.
    17. Fortwengel, Johann & Gutierrez Huerter O, Gabriela & Kostova, Tatiana, 2023. "Three decades of research on practice transfer in multinational firms: Past contributions and future opportunities," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 58(3).
    18. Szász, Levente & Rácz, Béla-Gergely & Scherrer, Maike & Deflorin, Patricia, 2019. "Disseminative capabilities and manufacturing plant roles in the knowledge network of MNCs," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 208(C), pages 294-304.
    19. Peltokorpi, Vesa & Yamao, Sachiko, 2017. "Corporate language proficiency in reverse knowledge transfer: A moderated mediation model of shared vision and communication frequency," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 404-416.
    20. Tippmann, Esther & Sharkey Scott, Pamela & Reilly, Marty & O’Brien, Donal, 2018. "Subsidiary coopetition competence: Navigating subsidiary evolution in the multinational corporation," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 540-554.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:13:p:7749-:d:847476. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.