Influences on knowledge processes in organizational learning: The psychosocial filter
Abstract
This paper reports a segment of broader theory‐building case study research exploring organizational learning and knowledge processes in a bio‐medical consortium. Its focus is the individual‐level factors that influence knowledge processes associated with organizational learning. As we explored how rganizational learning occurred, the underlying knowledge processes came forward as complex and idiosyncratic. In an unanticipated finding, micro‐processes emerged as highly influential, with individual perceptions of approachability, credibility and trustworthiness mediating knowledge importing and knowledge sharing activities. We introduce a model – the psychosocial filter – to describe the cluster of micro‐processes that were brought forward in the study. Firstly, scientists filtered knowledge porting by deciding whom they would approach for information and from whom they would accept input. The individual’s confidence to initiate information requests (which we termed social confidence) and the perceived credibility of knowledge suppliers both mediated knowledge importing. Secondly, scientists mediated knowledge sharing by actively deciding with whom they would share their own knowledge. Perceived trustworthiness – based on perceptions of what olleagues were likely to do with sensitive information – was the factor that influenced knowledge‐sharing decisions. Significantly, the psychosocial filter seemed to constitute a heedful process with high functionality. Its effect was not to block knowledge circulation, but instead to ensure that nowledge‐sharing decisions were made in a thoughtful and deliberate way. The psychosocial filter suggests an initial framework for conceptualizing the role that individual‐level processes play in organizational knowledge sharing. Building on this, the model provides a platform for more focused exploration of knowledge processes and social relationships in organizational learning.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Individuals intuitively adopt filtering strategies in knowledge sharing, and the psychosocial factor determines who is willing to share their own knowledge.
“Andrews and Delahaye (2000) in their study of psychosocial processes of filter creation of knowledge suggest that individuals intuitively adopt filtering strategies.In his study, the researchers describe situations where individuals did not share their own knowledge lightly.The perceived reliability was distinctly perception-based than the colleagues were likely to do, with commercially sensitive”
From Linking knowledge management, organizational learning and memory (2020) · cites this paper as Andrews & Delahaye, 2000
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Knowledge sharing in organizations: A conceptual framework
Ipe, M. (2003) · Human Resource Development Review · doi:10.1177/1534484303257985 · Cited by 1,608 · see citing works
Linking knowledge management, organizational learning and memory
Antunes, H. D. J. G., & Pinheiro, P. G. (2020) · Journal of Innovation & Knowledge · doi:10.1016/j.jik.2019.04.002 · Cited by 342 · see citing works
Buvik, M. P., & Tvedt, S. D. (2017) · Project Management Journal · doi:10.1177/875697281704800202 · Cited by 99 · see citing works
- Authors
- Andrews, K. M., & Delahaye, B. L.
- Affiliations
- Queensland University of Technology (AU)
- Venue
- Journal of Management Studies
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2000-09
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 797-810
- ISSN
- 0022-2380 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-6486
- OpenAlex
- W2121907202
- Cited by
- 501
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 40 · 2014: 27 · 2013: 25 · 2012: 22
- FWCI
- 29.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Management Studies (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Communication › Knowledge Management and Sharing
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Organizational Learning and Leadership
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Innovation and Knowledge Management
- Keywords
- organizational learning, knowledge processes, knowledge sharing, social confidence, perceived credibility, perceived trustworthiness, approachability, circulation of knowledge, interpersonal relationships
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