The turn of the millennium saw the theory surrounding ‘the firm’ shift from a traditional product-based view to a resource-based view, inspired by epistemology and suggesting a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Sveiby argued that by having people using their competences, value can be created in two ways, transferring and converting knowledge externally from, or internally to their organisation.
Nowadays, this perspective has become widespread among the business community as well, however, despite the attempts by organisations to embrace a knowledge sharing culture, it has often resulted that employees are unwilling to share knowledge even when institutional practices are designed to facilitate such transfers. Cummings (2004) and Pulakos et al. (2003) agree that ‘knowledge sharing’ refers to the provision of task information and know-how to help and collaborate with others in solving problems, developing ideas, or implementing policies and procedures. Research has demonstrated that knowledge sharing positively related to lower production costs, higher product development rates, better team performance and firm innovation capabilities; all being linked to growth in sales and revenue. Therefore, as Jackson et al. argue in their 2006 study, knowledge sharing is the fundamental means through which employees can contribute to knowledge application, innovation, and ultimately the competitive advantage of the organisation - a critical organisational resource, key to maintaining a competitive advantage in the market.
One approach to maintaining a knowledge sharing culture is to invest in staffing and training systems that focus on selecting employees who have specific knowledge, skills, abilities, or competencies or helping employees acquire them. However, as Brown and Duguid (1991) warn, it is insufficient for an organisation to rely solely on this. In order to be competitive, emphasis needs to shift to the exploitation of the already-existing knowledge-based resources within the organisation. After all, the organisation does not and cannot ‘own’ the knowledge of employees, and (therefore) to categorise such knowledge as an ‘asset’ is fundamentally misleading.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction – Knowledge Sharing
2. Barriers to knowledge sharing
3. Knowledge hiding
4. Knowledge hoarding
5. Facilitating knowledge sharing, mitigating knowledge hiding and hoarding
6. Concluding remarks
Objectives and Core Themes
This discussion paper aims to analyze the phenomena of knowledge hiding and knowledge hoarding within organizational environments, exploring how these behaviors fundamentally antagonize and negate efforts to cultivate an effective knowledge-sharing culture. The study seeks to identify the barriers to information flow and provide a strategic overview of how organizational leadership can mitigate these negative practices to foster innovation and competitive advantage.
- The critical role of knowledge sharing in maintaining organizational competitiveness.
- Categorization of individual, organizational, and technological barriers to knowledge flow.
- Differentiating between the dimensions of knowledge hiding and knowledge hoarding.
- The impact of psychological ownership, distrust, and territoriality on employee behavior.
- Management strategies for mitigating negative knowledge behaviors through culture and incentives.
Extract from the Book
Knowledge hiding
Knowledge hiding as defined by Connelly et al. (2012) is “an intentional attempt by an individual to withhold or conceal knowledge that has been requested by another person” (p. ). This can be either deceptive, when only partial knowledge that has been requested is disclosed; or not, such as when a request is denied due to confidentiality reasons. It differs from counterproductive workplace behaviors, aggression, social undermining and workplace incivility, in that, it is not always considered as a negative behavior (Pearson, Anderson and Porath, 2004). Connelly et al. (2012) identify three dimensions of knowledge hiding, namely, playing dumb whereby the hider ”pretends to be ignorant of the relevant knowledge” (p. ; evasive hiding, which involves scenarios where “the hider provides incorrect information or a misleading promise” (p. ); and rationalised hiding where ”the hider offers justification for failing to provide requested knowledge” (p. ). In relation to these dimensions the researchers also identified what could be the respective causes of knowledge hiding among members within an organisation:
a) Distrust (being the lack of confidence in the other) among employees and management may result in hiding knowledge from one another, consequently, communication within teams may suffer.
b) Knowledge complexity may force employees to hide knowledge, since it would affect their ability to achieve their own goals given the time and effort required to explain.
c) When the knowledge being requested is not related to their daily tasks.
d) If the knowledge sharing climate in an organisation is poor, the more likely are its employees to engage in knowledge hiding behaviours.
Summary of Chapters
Introduction – Knowledge Sharing: Discusses the shift toward a resource-based view of the firm and the essential role of knowledge in achieving competitive advantage.
Barriers to knowledge sharing: Categorizes common obstacles to information flow into individual, organizational, and technological factors that inhibit collaborative practices.
Knowledge hiding: Examines the intentional concealment of requested knowledge, identifying its primary dimensions and underlying causes like distrust and complexity.
Knowledge hoarding:explores the strategic accumulation of information to increase personal bargaining power, distinguishing it from reactive knowledge hiding.
Facilitating knowledge sharing, mitigating knowledge hiding and hoarding: Recommends management strategies such as fostering trust, improving organizational culture, and aligning incentive schemes.
Concluding remarks: Summarizes the necessity of moving beyond technological solutions toward fostering a positive organizational knowledge culture to overcome hiding behaviors.
Keywords
Knowledge sharing, Knowledge hiding, Knowledge hoarding, Organizational behavior, Competitive advantage, Knowledge management, Workplace culture, Trust, Management support, Territoriality, Psychological ownership, Knowledge flow, Incentives, Collaborative environment, Organizational hierarchy.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this paper?
The paper examines how the behaviors of knowledge hiding and knowledge hoarding actively obstruct the sharing of information within organizations, undermining competitive performance.
What are the primary themes discussed?
Key themes include the organizational value of knowledge, the various obstacles to sharing it, the specific definitions and causes of hiding and hoarding, and management strategies to resolve these issues.
What is the main objective of the research?
The objective is to analyze the "why" and "when" behind employee knowledge concealment and propose methods for leadership to mitigate these behaviors.
What methodology does the author utilize?
The paper is a discussion based on a comprehensive review and synthesis of existing academic literature and research papers regarding organizational behavior and knowledge management.
What does the main body cover?
It covers theoretical frameworks regarding knowledge-based firms, detailed categorization of barriers, the specific dimensions of hiding and hoarding, and facilitators like organizational culture and incentives.
Which keywords define this work?
Essential keywords include knowledge sharing, knowledge hiding, knowledge hoarding, organizational behavior, trust, and competitive advantage.
How does knowledge hoarding differ from knowledge hiding?
Knowledge hiding involves concealing information when it has been requested by another, whereas hoarding refers to the deliberate strategic accumulation of information regardless of external requests.
What role does psychological ownership play?
Employees are more likely to hide knowledge if they perceive their expertise as personal property, often driven by a sense of territoriality or fear of job insecurity.
Why are standard knowledge management systems often insufficient?
The author argues that while technology for storage and distribution is helpful, these systems have minimal impact on human behaviors like hiding and hoarding; a supportive culture is required instead.
What incentive strategies are recommended?
The paper suggests prioritizing cooperative reward systems over competitive ones to encourage teamwork and diminish the perceived costs associated with sharing information.
- Quote paper
- Anonym (Author), 2018, 'Knowledge Hiding' and 'Knowledge Hoarding' in organisations. A discussion, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1446244
