The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Multilevel Investigation of the Motivational Mechanisms Underlying Knowledge Sharing and Performance
Abstract
This study draws on three different, yet complementary, theories of motivation, which we combine in an interactive manner, to explain the mechanisms that underlie the exchange between knowledge providers and recipients and ultimately impact performance. More specifically, we use incentive, goal-setting-social cognitive, and social motivation theories to examine knowledge sharing within dyads and its influence on individual performance. One hundred and twenty participants functioning as interdependent manager dyads completed a strategic decision-making simulation. Hierarchical regression and random coefficient modeling techniques were used to test hypothesized relationships. Results demonstrated that the effect of group-oriented incentive systems on the knowledge provider was enhanced when more positive norms for knowledge sharing existed among dyad members. The recipient’s self-efficacy had a stronger relationship with performance goals when the recipient trusted the provider. Finally, self-set goals and knowledge sharing had both direct and interactive effects on individual performance. We argue that these findings constitute a useful advance in middle-range motivation (Landy and Becker 1987, Pinder 1984) theory pertaining to knowledge sharing and utilization.
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
Self-efficacy: The exercise of control
Bandura, A., Freeman, W. H., & Lightsey, R. (1999) · Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy · doi:10.1891/0889-8391.13.2.158 · Cited by 46,835
Mixed-Effects Models in S and S-PLUS
(2001) · Technometrics · doi:10.1198/tech.2001.s574 · Cited by 9,278
Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm
Szulanski, G. (1996) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250171105 · Cited by 7,839
Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.57.9.705 · Cited by 7,766
Self-citationAffect and Cognition Based Trust as Foundations for Interpersonal Cooperation in Organizations
McAllister, D. J. (1995) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/256727 · Cited by 7,346
The Search-Transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge across Organization Subunits
Hansen, M. T. (1999) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2667032 · Cited by 5,809 · cited 1×
“In their attempts to develop a clearer understanding of the knowledge sharing and utilization process between providers and recipients, researchers across these different disciplines have noted the critical role of motivation (e.g., Argote and Ingram 2000; Alavi and Leidner 2001; Hansen 1999; Goodman and Darr 1998; Sp…”
BackgroundKnowledge Transfer: A Basis for Competitive Advantage in Firms
Argote, L., & Ingram, P. (2000) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1006/obhd.2000.2893 · Cited by 4,164
What Firms Do? Coordination, Identity, and Learning
Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1996) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.7.5.502 · Cited by 3,078
Observing Interaction: An Introduction to Sequential Analysis
Bakeman, R., & Gottman, J. M. (1997) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511527685 · Cited by 1,439
Katz, R., & Allen, T. J. (1982) · R&D Management · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9310.1982.tb00478.x · Cited by 1,410
Toward Contextualized Theories of Trust: The Role of Trust in Global Virtual Teams
Jarvenpaa, S. L., Shaw, T. R., & Staples, D. S. (2004) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.1040.0028 · Cited by 773
Majchrzak, A., Malhotra, A., & John, R. (2005) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.1050.0044 · Cited by 350
Cited by
Information sharing and team performance: A meta-analysis
Mesmer-Magnus, J. R., & DeChurch, L. A. (2009) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0013773 · Cited by 1,273
Virtual Teams Research: 10 Years, 10 Themes, and 10 Opportunities
Gilson, L. L., Maynard, M. T., Jones Young, N. C., Vartiainen, M., & Hakonen, M. (2015) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206314559946 · Cited by 825
A model of knowledge‐sharing motivation
Gagné, M. (2009) · Human Resource Management · doi:10.1002/hrm.20298 · Cited by 608
New Developments in and Directions for Goal-Setting Research
Latham, G. P., & Locke, E. A. (2007) · European Psychologist · doi:10.1027/1016-9040.12.4.290 · Cited by 596
Self-citationMarlow, S. L., Lacerenza, C. N., Paoletti, J., Burke, C. S., & Salas, E. (2018) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2017.08.001 · Cited by 346
Metadata
- Authors
- Quigley, N. R., Tesluk, P. E., Locke, E. A., & Bartol, K. M.
- Venue
- Organization Science
- Published
- 2007-02
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 71-88
- ISSN
- 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5455
- OpenAlex
- W2125164900
- Cited by
- 576
- References
- 12
- FWCI
- 92.91
- 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.
