As suggested by prior studies, tacit knowledge sharing is a natural process of social interaction. The perspectives of social capital and behavioural control are thus employed in this study to investigate an employee's tacit knowledge sharing and behaviour within a workgroup. This study collects data through a multi-informant questionnaire design. Three interesting results were obtained in this study. First, results show that tacit knowledge sharing intention can be induced by affect-based trust. However, shared value is negatively related to tacit knowledge sharing intention. Second, internal control has a positive effect on tacit knowledge sharing intention, but the relationship between internal control and tacit knowledge sharing behaviour could not be confirmed. Third, external control positively moderates the relationship between tacit knowledge sharing intention and behaviour. It is interesting to note that tacit knowledge sharing intention does not necessarily lead to tacit knowledge sharing behaviour unless the moderating effect of external control is taken into account. These findings and their implications are also addressed.
The importance of knowledge within organisations has been highlighted by several researchers (e.g. Alavi & Leidner, 2001; Bock, Zmud, Kim, & Lee, 2005). It is important to note that knowledge itself cannot create significant value without utilisation (Fahey & Prusak, 1998). As argued by Alavi (2000), knowledge sharing among organisational members is the most important and challenging means to increase the value of knowledge utilisation. Based on Polanyi (1967) conceptualisation, Nonaka (1994) suggested that knowledge can be classified as tacit and explicit. Tacit knowledge—reflecting an individual's know-how and experiences from past actions—is increasingly considered as a valuable intangible resource that is difficult to imitate and acquire, and can be regarded as the most important source of competitive advantage for an individual, a group, or a firm (Berman, Down, & Hill, 2002). This is especially true in the context of innovative works, where much of the task-related knowledge is tacit in nature, and tacit knowledge sharing among members is crucial for creating higher collective performance (Käser & Miles, 2002). However, an individual may hoard rather than share his/her tacit knowledge because it is valuable and important, and the contribution of tacit knowledge cannot be easily measured and compensated accordingly (Osterloh & Frey, 2000). Thus, tacit knowledge acquisition and sharing is one of most important issues for knowledge management within organisations. For a workgroup, tacit knowledge sharing among members is also critical for task completion and group performance. Accordingly, this study intends to answer the following two research questions: (1) what are the factors that influence an individual's tacit knowledge sharing intention and behaviour within a workgroup? (2) Will an individual's tacit knowledge sharing intention necessarily lead to tacit knowledge sharing behaviour?
While explicit knowledge sharing can be facilitated by information technology, tacit knowledge sharing is subject to social interaction (Käser & Miles, 2002; Nonaka, 1994). In other words, tacit knowledge sharing among organisational members is socially driven. Moreover, knowledge sharing behaviour is inherently a type of collective action (Bock et al., 2005) and sometimes beyond an individual's volitional control. Accordingly, perspectives of social capital and behavioural control are employed in this study in order to investigate an employee's tacit knowledge sharing behaviour within a workgroup. In this study, data are collected through multi-informant questionnaires in which each respondent's social capital and tacit knowledge sharing behaviour are reported by his/her colleagues. In this manner the study avoids the perceptual bias from self-reporting and common-method bias from single informants.
This study used responses from 306 employees in 102 workgroups across 67 organisations in order to examine the roles that social capital and behavioural control play in tacit knowledge sharing and behaviour among organisational members. The results reveal that social capital may be a double-edged sword for tacit knowledge sharing intention and that external control plays a moderating role in intention–behaviour relationship. Despite its limitations, we believe that this study may be useful for future research on knowledge sharing.
