Factors affecting organizational knowledge creation and sharing in New Zealand firms

Conference Abstract:
PLS17 – Abstract – Final

Below is the Preso I prepared aims to give a quick overview of the entire thesis. Here I am trying to explain the thesis in the form of customer journey mapping, incorporated with some creative and design thinking stuff.

it touches the following domains of knowledge:

• Economics (K-economy theory)
• Knowledge management
• Organisational theory (Dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation)
• Psychology/Sociology (Social exchange theory, Social processes, Trust,intrinsic and extrinsic rewards&motivation)
• Research Design
• Survey design and pretesting
• Choropleth mapping
• Statistical modelling and analysis (PLS-SEM, Imputation, Q-sort, Content validity checks, Non-responses bias, Item validity tests, Convergent validity, Discriminant validity)
• Web scraping and other Programming

Introduction

The theory of organizational knowledge creation is arguably the most widely studied knowledge management (KM) theory [1-8]. There is a significant literature in the KM research stream grounded in this theory, and many studies have found that the knowledge creation process in the specific areas of their studies can be aligned with the SECI (Socialization, Externalization, Combination, Internalization) model of knowledge creation [9, 10]. Whilst some scholars discovered evidence supporting these social processes in facilitating organizational knowledge sharing [11-13] other studies argued that social and motivational factors suggested by the social exchange theory also play significant roles in organizational knowledge creation and sharing [14-16]. Although considerable progress has been made worldwide in studying whether or not these processes and factors account for organizational knowledge creation and sharing [17, 12], the ideal processes have not been fully explored or identified [17, 18]. This is especially true in the New Zealand context where a paucity of research exists. This study aims to extend the KM literature stream, as well as provide a broader understanding – both conceptually and statistically on the relative influence of social processes, social and motivational factors in knowledge creation and sharing in New Zealand firms. With this purpose in mind, we incorporate two theoretical views into a single conceptual model and extend the organizational knowledge creation theory [6] by considering social exchange theory [19, 20] in terms of social and motivational factors. Specifically, we link social processes, trust, rewards and IT support constructs within a nomological network that models and tests whether or not in the New Zealand context, the impact of social processes, social and motivational factors (of the social exchange theory) aligns with that suggested by the two theories and international studies.

Methods

Survey approach was used as the research strategy to collect the data. Prior to collecting the data, the survey instrument was piloted after the Q-sort, which is recommended for improving the robustness of any study [21, 22]. This is especially important as the validated scales were modified to fit the study context. Previously validated scales were adopted for the study including knowledge creation and sharing [23], trust [24], rewards [25], IT support [26], and social processes such as socialization, combination, internalization [27], and peer mentoring [28]. Data were collected from employees working in both public and private sectors and among those who have had exposure in some form of KCS. For data collection purposes, contact information for a random sample of 5,000 New Zealand organizations’ from the Yellow Pages as well as from the business directory of Kompass database were collated. The sample size was 202. Specifically, information from 21 participants aged between 20-29 years, 25 participants aged between 30-39 years, 40 participants aged between 40-49 years, 48 participants aged between 50-59 years, 34 participants aged 60 years or over, and 34 participants aged unknown or did not answer informed the findings of this study. We applied a partial least square structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) approach, variance-based SEM to examine our hypotheses. SEM based analysis are suitable for complex models with several paths [29]. PLS analysis is recommended for early-stage research model building [30]; it is free from normality assumptions, and works well with small sample sizes [31, 32]. This method can handle both measurement and structural models simultaneously.

WarpPLS Version 5.0 was used for data analysis. While analysis did not find any threat of non-response bias [33], validity and reliability tests were conducted satisfactorily before testing the measurement model. In the measurement model, 13 hypotheses were tested regarding the association between knowledge creation and sharing, trust, rewards, and IT support and social processes (see above Figure 7).

Findings

The PLS-SEM model had adequate model fit indices and the variables of the model explained a reasonable amount of the total variance in organizational knowledge creation and sharing, peer mentoring, and socialization, respectively. The findings suggest that the SECI model of Nonaka’s knowledge creation theory was not supported in the model. Of the four SECI processes tested, only the hypothesis stating that socialization is positively associated with organizational knowledge creation and sharing held true. In addition, there were positive associations between hard rewards and knowledge creation and sharing and trust and knowledge creation and sharing. Further, there were positive associations between peer mentoring and socialization, trust and socialization, trust and peer mentoring, soft rewards and peer mentoring and IT support and knowledge combination.

Implications

To the best the author’s knowledge, this is the first study to incorporate two theories into a PLS-SEM model to examine organizational knowledge creation and sharing in New Zealand. Consequently, an exploratory study of this nature not only provides an important foundation for further examination of these constructs, it’s empirical findings can also be useful for informing organizational leaders and knowledge workers about knowledge creation and sharing processes in the New Zealand context. This sheds some light on the potential social processes and reward structures that could be incorporated into the organizational working environments for facilitating knowledge creation and sharing. This is an essential prerequisite to the development of appropriate support, designing and evaluating interventions for organizational change that are both efficient and effective in leading to better outcomes for organizational knowledge creation and sharing in New Zealand firms. Finally, this unique study is also expected to stimulate the creation of newer theoretical frameworks and more comprehensive empirical literature for the study of organizational knowledge creation and sharing.