The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Employee participation in decision making, psychological ownership and knowledge sharing: mediating role of organizational commitment in Taiwanese high-tech organizations
Abstract
This study aims to investigate the effect of employee participation in decision making (EPDM) on employees’ positive cognition and attitudes which can lead to their knowledge-sharing behaviour. Consistent with the philanthropic and justice principles of Confucianism, such participation emphasizes the sharing of power with employees, which can satisfy employees’ humanistic needs, give employees a fundamental right to extend a degree of control and psychologically experience ownership of the organization. Employees who perceive they have ownership of the organization regard themselves as important organizational members and then commit to the organization. Knowledge-sharing behaviour contributes to the creation and utilization of knowledge; therefore, high-tech organizations always carefully negotiate with internal power relations in order to make tacit knowledge shared and produce innovation. Psychological ownership makes employees produce organizational commitment which can evoke altruistic spirit, contributing to knowledge-sharing behaviour. However, researchers have not yet investigated the relationships among EPDM, psychological ownership, organizational commitment, and knowledge-sharing behaviour, revealing an important research gap. Statistical analysis of 260 samples involving high technical and knowledge-intensive companies in Taiwan was undertaken. Theory-driven approach and structural equation modeling were the main methodologies employed. Results showed that employee participation in decision making was a positive association with psychological ownership. Psychological ownership was positively related to organizational commitment. A positive relationship existed between organizational commitment and knowledge sharing. Organizational commitment mediated the relationship between psychological ownership and knowledge-sharing behaviour. Important implications for academics and practitioners were discussed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 · Cited by 82,194
Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm
Grant, R. M. (1996) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250171110 · Cited by 16,157
A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment
Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991) · Human Resource Management Review · doi:10.1016/1053-4822(91)90011-z · Cited by 11,049
Possessions and the Extended Self
Belk, R. W. (1988) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209154 · Cited by 9,064
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, D. G. (2000) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920630002600307 · Cited by 5,897
Cited by
Kaur, S., & Kaur, G. (2021) · Employee Relations: The International Journal · doi:10.1108/er-05-2020-0216 · Cited by 25
Inheriting Versus Developing Data Analytic Tests and Auditors’ Professional Skepticism
LI, X., BRAZEL, J. F., GOLD, A., & LEIBY, J. (2026) · Journal of Accounting Research · doi:10.1111/1475-679x.70014 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Han, T.-S., Chiang, H.-H., & Chang, A.
- Venue
- The International Journal of Human Resource Management
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2010-10
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 2218-2233
- ISSN
- 0958-5192 (ISSN-L)
- 1466-4399
- OpenAlex
- W2095548521
- Cited by
- 290
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 32.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.