The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Contributing Knowledge to Electronic Knowledge Repositories: An Empirical Investigation1
Abstract
Organizations are attempting to leverage their knowledge resources by employing knowledge management (KM) systems, a key form of which are electronic knowledge repositories (EKRs). A large number of KM initiatives fail due to the reluctance of employees to share knowledge through these systems. Motivated by such concerns, this study formulates and tests a theoretical model to explain EKR usage by knowledge contributors. The model employs social exchange theory to identify cost and benefit factors affecting EKR usage, and social capital theory to account for the moderating influence of contextual factors. The model is validated through a large-scale survey of public sector organizations. The results reveal that knowledge self-efficacy and enjoyment in helping others significantly impact EKR usage by knowledge contributors. Contextual factors (generalized trust, pro-sharing norms, and identification) moderate the impact of codification effort, reciprocity, and organizational reward on EKR usage, respectively. It can be seen that extrinsic benefits (reciprocity and organizational reward) impact EKR usage contingent on particular contextual factors whereas the effects of intrinsic benefits (knowledge self-efficacy and enjoyment in helping others) on EKR usage are not moderated by contextual factors. The loss of knowledge power and image do not appear to impact EKR usage by knowledge contributors. Besides contributing to theory building in KM, the results of this study inform KM practice.
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
Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology
Davis, F. D. (1989) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249008 · Cited by 68,483
Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Structure of Tests
Cronbach, L. J. (1951) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02310555 · Cited by 43,931
Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.2.3.192 · Cited by 9,150
Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage
Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/259373 · Cited by 7,111
Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance
Goodhue, D. L., & Thompson, R. L. (1995) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249689 · Cited by 6,006
Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation
Vallerand, R. J. (1997) · Advances in experimental social psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60019-2 · Cited by 3,198 · cited 2×
“During social exchange, benefits acting as moti vators of human behavior can be extrinsic or intrinsic in nature (Deci and Ryan 1980; Vallerand 1997).”
BackgroundMarket, Hierarchy, and Trust: The Knowledge Economy and the Future of Capitalism
Adler, P. S. (2001) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.12.2.215.10117 · Cited by 1,512
Actualizing organizational memory with information systems
Stein, E. W., & Zwass, V. (1995) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.6.2.85 · Cited by 843
Krebs, D. (1975) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.32.6.1134 · Cited by 417
An Assessment of the Contingency Theory of Management Information Systems
Weill, P., & Olson, M. H. (1989) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.1989.11517849 · Cited by 351
Cited by
The sharing economy: Why people participate in collaborative consumption
Hamari, J., Sjöklint, M., & Ukkonen, A. (2016) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.23552 · Cited by 3,439
Ma, M., & Agarwal, R. (2007) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.1070.0113 · Cited by 1,143
What drives consumers to spread electronic word of mouth in online consumer-opinion platforms
Cheung, C. M. K., & Lee, M. K. O. (2012) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2012.01.015 · Cited by 1,016
Knowledge sharing in online health communities: A social exchange theory perspective
Yan, Z., Wang, T., Chen, Y., & Zhang, H. (2016) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2016.02.001 · Cited by 587
Le, P. B., & Lei, H. (2019) · Journal of Knowledge Management · doi:10.1108/jkm-09-2018-0568 · Cited by 554
Metadata
- Authors
- Kankanhalli, A., Tan, B. C. Y., & Wei, K.-K.
- Venue
- MIS Quarterly
- Publisher
- MIS Quarterly
- Published
- 2005-03-01
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 113-144
- ISSN
- 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-9730
- OpenAlex
- W2134049161
- Cited by
- 2,805
- References
- 12
- FWCI
- 259.23
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Contributing Knowledge to Electronic Knowledge Repositories: An Empirical Investigation1. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/25148670
- The paper
- Kankanhalli, A., Tan, B. C. Y., & Wei, K.-K. (2005). Contributing Knowledge to Electronic Knowledge Repositories: An Empirical Investigation1. MIS Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148670
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.