IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rnd/arjebs/v10y2018i1p78-85.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Psychological Ownership of Knowledge Matter? Servant Leadership and Knowledge Hiding in Organizations: AProposed Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Gabriel Oyebanjo OGUNLELA

Abstract

Knowledge hiding can have many adverse effects on organizational development, and it is consequently important to look at its various causes, and also the impact such activities haveon targets, perpetrators, and organizations as a whole. Various studies investigate the effects of knowledge hiding on organizations, and the employees surveyed in these studies have identified some of the possible drivers of knowledge hiding to be: a lack of employee trust; poor employee incentives; employee retaliation; employee insecurity; the intentional withholding of knowledge; the workplace environment; a craving for competitive advantage over fellow staff members; and also, feelings of psychological ownership. This paper investigates the influence of servant leadership on knowledge hiding, and proposes a mediating variable: that of the influence of psychological ownership of knowledge on the relationship between servant leadership and knowledge hiding attitudes in staff within organizations. A model is therefore proposed to achieve this, since it could be argued that increased servant leadership, through the psychological ownership of knowledge, can have a positive effect on staff attitudes towards knowledge hiding, and can also be used to encourage them to share knowledge to improve their overall performances, and the competitive advantages of organizations. The proposed model can also be used to assist managers in developing strategies for motivating staff to become more committed to the visions of organizations, in order to improve the performances of both themselves and their organizations overall.

Suggested Citation

  • Gabriel Oyebanjo OGUNLELA, 2018. "Does Psychological Ownership of Knowledge Matter? Servant Leadership and Knowledge Hiding in Organizations: AProposed Framework," Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, AMH International, vol. 10(1), pages 78-85.
    • Handle: RePEc:rnd:arjebs:v:10:y:2018:i:1:p:78-85
    DOI: 10.22610/jebs.v10i1(J).2091
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ojs.amhinternational.com/index.php/jebs/article/view/2091/1584
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ojs.amhinternational.com/index.php/jebs/article/view/2091
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22610/jebs.v10i1(J).2091?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Constant & Sara Kiesler & Lee Sproull, 1994. "What's Mine Is Ours, or Is It? A Study of Attitudes about Information Sharing," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 400-421, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Jackie London & Siyuan Li & Heshan Sun, 2022. "Seems Legit: An Investigation of the Assessing and Sharing of Unverifiable Messages on Online Social Networks," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(3), pages 978-1001, September.
    2. Jule B. Gassenheimer & Judy A. Siguaw & Gary L. Hunter, 2013. "Exploring motivations and the capacity for business crowdsourcing," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 3(4), pages 205-216, December.
    3. Linda Argote & Sunkee Lee & Jisoo Park, 2021. "Organizational Learning Processes and Outcomes: Major Findings and Future Research Directions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(9), pages 5399-5429, September.
    4. Singh, Sanjay Kumar, 2019. "Territoriality, task performance, and workplace deviance: Empirical evidence on role of knowledge hiding," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 10-19.
    5. Uwe Matzat, 2004. "The Social Embeddedness of Academic Online Groups in Offline Networks as a Norm Generating Structure: An Empirical Test of the Coleman Model on Norm Emergence," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 205-226, November.
    6. Hadi Karimikia & Narges Safari & Harminder Singh, 2020. "Being useful: How information systems professionals influence the use of information systems in enterprises," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 429-453, April.
    7. Fawcett, Stanley E. & Magnan, Gregory M. & McCarter, Matthew W., 2005. "The Effect of People on the Supply Chain World: Some Overlooked Issues," Working Papers 05-0118, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    8. Perotti, Francesco Antonio & Ferraris, Alberto & Candelo, Elena & Busso, Donatella, 2022. "The dark side of knowledge sharing: Exploring “knowledge sabotage” and its antecedents," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 422-432.
    9. Tzu-Hsin Liu & Yung-Chang Hsiao, 2019. "Fitting cooperative mode in inter-organizational strategic alliance: a perspective from innovative and financial performances," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 73-96, February.
    10. Sarika Singh & Ashutosh Muduli, 2021. "Factors Influencing Information Sharing Intention for Human Resource Analytics," Economic Studies journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 3, pages 115-133.
    11. Ikram Bououd & Sana Rouis Skandrani & Imed Boughzala & Mohamed MAKHLOUF, 2016. "Impact of object manipulation, customization and social loafing on competencies management in 3D Virtual Worlds," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 18(6), pages 1191-1203, December.
    12. Hayes, Jameson L. & King, Karen Whitehill & Ramirez, Artemio, 2016. "Brands, Friends, & Viral Advertising: A Social Exchange Perspective on the Ad Referral Processes," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 31-45.
    13. Mujahid Ghouri, Arsalan & Mani, Venkatesh & Jiao, Zhilun & Venkatesh, V.G. & Shi, Yangyan & Kamble, Sachin S., 2021. "An empirical study of real-time information-receiving using industry 4.0 technologies in downstream operations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    14. Zhang, Yixiang & Fang, Yulin & Wei, Kwok-Kee & Chen, Huaping, 2010. "Exploring the role of psychological safety in promoting the intention to continue sharing knowledge in virtual communities," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 425-436.
    15. Seckyoung Loretta Kim & Soojung Han & Seung Yeon Son & Seokhwa Yun, 2017. "Exchange ideology in supervisor-subordinate dyads, LMX, and knowledge sharing: A social exchange perspective," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 147-172, March.
    16. Chatterjee, Sheshadri & Chaudhuri, Ranjan & Thrassou, Alkis & Vrontis, Demetris, 2021. "Antecedents and consequences of knowledge hiding: The moderating role of knowledge hiders and knowledge seekers in organizations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 303-313.
    17. Zhang Rui & Jamal El-Den & Chen Qianzhu, 2015. "Knowledge Sharing in Enterprise Business Simulative Games: An Empirical Analysis," Journal of Information & Knowledge Management (JIKM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(04), pages 1-10, December.
    18. Reimer, Thomas & Benkenstein, Martin, 2016. "Altruistic eWOM marketing: More than an alternative to monetary incentives," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 323-333.
    19. Zhang, Zaisheng & Song, Fang & Song, Zongbin, 2020. "Promoting knowledge sharing in the workplace: Punishment v. reward," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    20. Zhu, Yu-Qian, 2016. "Solving knowledge sharing disparity: The role of team identification, organizational identification, and in-group bias," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 1174-1183.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:rnd:arjebs:v:10:y:2018:i:1:p:78-85. 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: Muhammad Tayyab (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://ojs.amhinternational.com/index.php/jebs .

    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.