1. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Knowledge Sharing in Organizations Kathryn M. Bartol Robert H. Smith Professor Of Management and Organization University of Maryland, College Park IACMR Conference, June 2006

2. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Thank you so much for inviting me to speak at your prestigious conference 非常感谢主办方给我机会在如此热烈而 隆重的会议上做演讲

3. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Overview Study 1: Social Exchange and Perceived Organizational Support perspective at individual level Study 2: Empowering leadership perspective at team level

4. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Social Exchange and Work Outcomes Among Knowledge Workers: The Moderating Role of Term of Employment Wei Liu Cheung Kong Graduate School Of Business Kathryn (Kay) M. Bartol University of Maryland Xiangquan Zeng Kelu Wu Renmin University of China

5. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Social Exchange and Support Social Exchange Theory (Blau, 1964) –Norms of reciprocity (Gouldner, 1960) in social exchanges Organizational Support Theory (Eisenberger et al., 1986; Eisenberger & Rhoades, 2001) –Perceived Organizational Support (POS): perception that the organization values employee’s contributions and cares about his/her well-being (happiness and prosperity)

6. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Reciprocity at Work Employees Receive in Workplace Perceived Organizational Support (POS) Employees Reciprocate to Organization

7. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Compatible Concepts in China Chinese Proverb: courtesy demands reciprocity Social relationships (or guanxi) play an important role in the Chinese culture. Most research on POS has been done in Western cultures, although changing rapidly (e.g., Chen, Aryee & Lee, 2005)

8. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Research Purpose 1 To test the generalizability of social exchange theory and POS theory to knowledge sharing and related outcomes in a Chinese context.

9. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland POS and Outcomes POS has been shown to be associated with organizationally desirable outcomes, such as: –Job performance –Turnover intentions Less attention has focused on: –Knowledge sharing –Normative commitment

10. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Importance of Knowledge Sharing Involves sharing task-relevant ideas, information, and suggestions with other work group members. Aids coordination, creativity, and innovation (Bartol & Srivastava, 2002)

11. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Importance of Normative Commitment Likely to develop from Internalization of normative pressures to remain loyal to the organization Fosters a sense of obligation to reciprocate the benefits received (Meyer & Allen, 1997).

12. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Research Purpose 2 Evaluate the extent to which POS is linked to important outcomes, particularly knowledge sharing and normative commitment

13. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Hypothesized Model Perceived Organizational Support Job Performance Knowledge Sharing Normative Commitment Turnover Intention + + + +

14. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Factors Influencing POS Compensation Satisfaction (Bartol & Srivastava, 2002) –One way for organizations to demonstrate that they value contributions is through compensation provided Leader-Member Exchange (LMX; Graen & Scandura, 1987) –One way for organizations to show that they care about employees well-being

15. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Research Purpose 3 Examine role of POS in mediating the effects of two antecedents, material and socio-emotional, on important organizational outcomes

16. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Hypothesized Model Compensation Satisfaction Leader-Member Exchange Perceived Organizational Support Job Performance Knowledge Sharing Normative Commitment Turnover Intention + + + + + +

17. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Term of Employment Term of employment refers to the extent to which employees perceive the organization as willing to provide short- or long-term employment. Forces of uncertainty: –Contract work –Outsourcing –Volatile, competitive environment

18. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Research Purpose 4 Evaluate the extent to which perceived term of employment moderates the relationship between POS and: –Knowledge sharing –Normative commitment –Intention to leave

19. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Hypothesized Model Compensation Satisfaction Leader-Member Exchange Perceived Organizational Support Job Performance Knowledge Sharing Normative Commitment Turnover Intention Term of Employment + + + + + +

20. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Research Purposes Summary Assess generalizability of social exchange and POS theories to knowledge sharing in China Examine the relationship between POS and several outcomes, including knowledge sharing and normative commitment Evaluate POS as a mediator between two exchange factors, material and socio-emotional, and several outcomes Test the moderating effect of perceived term of employment

21. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Hypothesized Model Compensation Satisfaction Leader-Member Exchange Perceived Organizational Support Job Performance Knowledge Sharing Normative Commitment Turnover Intention Term of Employment H1 H2 H7 H3 H4 H5 H6 H8

22. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Method Sample –Participants: IT professionals and their supervisors in 12 domestic Chinese companies –Sample size: 360->272->255 (75%x94%=71%) Measures –Mainly based on established measures –Supervisors provided performance and knowledge sharing data Analyses –Path analysis using EQS –Moderated hierarchical regression using SPSS

23. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Model Results Compensation Satisfaction Leader-Member Exchange Perceived Organizational Support Job Performance Knowledge Sharing Normative Commitment Turnover Intention.59***.54***.17*.21**.71*** -.70***

24. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Compensation Satisfaction Leader-Member Exchange Perceived Organizational Support Job Performance Knowledge Sharing Normative Commitment Turnover Intention.59***.54***.17*.21**.71*** -.70*** -.40*** Best Fitting Model

25. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Hypothesized Model Compensation Satisfaction Leader-Member Exchange Perceived Organizational Support Job Performance Knowledge Sharing Normative Commitment Turnover Intention Term of Employment H1 H2 H7 H3 H4 H5 H6 H8

26. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Interaction Effects of POS and Perceived Term of Employment on Knowledge Sharing 4.4 4.6 4.8 5 5.2 5.4 Short-Term Long-Term POS Knowledge Sharing Low High

27. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Interaction Effects of POS and Perceived Term of Employment on Normative Commitment 3 3.4 3.8 4.2 4.6 5 Short-Term Long-Term POS Normative Commitment Low High

28. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Interaction Effects of POS and Perceived Term of Employment on Turnover Intention 3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 Short-Term Long-Term POS Turnover Intention Low High

29. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Contributions Major Findings –POS was significantly related to all study outcomes, including knowledge sharing and normative commitment –POS mediated the relationship between two exchange factors and the outcomes (partially for compensation satisfaction and intention to leave)

30. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Contributions (Continued) Perceived term of employment moderated the relationship between the POS and the three hypothesized outcomes Social exchange and POS theories appear to be generalizable to China--at least based on this study

31. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Discussion Future Research –Investigate other terms of employment, such as flexible work arrangements and contingent pay –Probe what normative commitment impacts, especially for short-term employees –Evaluate contracting work and outsourcing in terms of knowledge sharing is needed

32. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Empowering Leadership in Management Teams: Effects on Knowledge Sharing, Efficacy, and Performance Abhishek Srivastava West Virginia University Kathryn M. Bartol University of Maryland Edwin A. Locke University of Maryland (Emeritus) Academy of Management Journal, in press

33. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Importance of Empowering Leadership in Organizations Innovation Quick response to environmental demands Successful performance of knowledge-intensive jobs Job satisfaction, career growth, and retention of employees

34. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Empowering Leadership in Teams: Past Research Mainly in self-managing teams –(Cohen, Chang, & Ledford, 1997; Kirkman & Rosen, 1999; Manz & Sims, 1987) Empowering leadership leads to the feeling of psychological empowerment (meaningfulness, impact, autonomy, and potency) among team members, which, in turn, leads to high performance (Kirkman & Rosen, 1999)

35. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Two Categories of Potential Mechanisms Two types of team mechanisms (Marks, Mathieu, & Zaccaro, 2001) –Team processes = “means by which members work interdependently to utilize various resources” –Emergent states = the “cognitive, motivational, and affective states of teams” In this study, we evaluate –Knowledge Sharing as a team process –Team Efficacy as an emergent state

36. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Empowering Leadership – Knowledge Sharing An empowering leader is likely to –Recognize the inputs of team members as valuable for decision-making –Provide more opportunities for team members to share their ideas –Encourage team members to solve problems together –Motivate a search for solutions both inside as well as outside the team

37. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Empowering Leadership – Team Efficacy An empowering leader is likely to –Guide subordinates on how effective performance can be achieved –Coach team members to perform autonomously –Provide access to strategic information –Reduce fear and anxiety of team members Past research supported the relationship between empowering leadership and team potency –(Kirkman & Rosen, 1999)

38. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Knowledge Sharing – Team Performance Improved decision-making (Latham et al., 1994; Scully et al., 1995) Improved coordination (Lewis, 1999; Mathieu et al., 2000)

39. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Team Efficacy – Performance Team efficacy is positively related to –Difficult goals –Effort –Persistence –Better strategies –Quicker response to competitors’ actions (Bandura, 1997; Gully et al., 2002; Yun, 1999) Little empirical research in the case of management teams –In teams performing tasks high in uncertainty, there may not be a link between team efficacy and performance (Gibson, 1999)

40. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Study Purposes Examine two categories of potential mediators that potentially link empowering leadership with performance Expand the domain of empowering leadership to management teams

41. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Conceptual Model Empowering Leadership Knowledge Sharing Team Efficacy Team Performance H1 H2 H3 H4

42. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Method Sample: 389 managers in 102 management teams of hotel properties in the U.S. Measures –Empowering leadership (Arnold et al., 2000) –Knowledge sharing (Durham, 1997; Faraj & Sproull, 2000) –Team efficacy (Edmondson, 1999) –Performance: room rate premium compared to local competitors

43. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Path Coefficients Empowering Leadership Knowledge Sharing Team Efficacy Team Performance.41.21.51.22

44. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Implications Empowering leadership had an indirect effect on organizational performance Empowering leadership was positively related to both knowledge sharing and team efficacy, which, in turn, were both positively related to performance Knowledge sharing played an important intervening role in linking empowering leadership and performance and is a critical team process Team efficacy played an important intervening role as well and is a critical emergent state Study adds to knowledge on management teams and the factors that influence organizational performance

45. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Thank you for your kind attention 对各位的热切关注深表感谢！

46. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Empowering Leadership in Teams: Past Research Mainly in self-managing teams –(Cohen, Chang, & Ledford, 1997; Kirkman & Rosen, 1999; Manz & Sims, 1987) Empowering leadership leads to the feeling of psychological empowerment (meaningfulness, impact, autonomy, and potency) among team members, which, in turn, leads to high performance (Kirkman & Rosen, 1999)

47. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Research Objectives Identify the mediating roles of knowledge sharing and team efficacy in the empowering leadership – performance relationship Extend the research on empowering leadership to management teams, which have –different nature of tasks (higher stakes, uncertainty, complexity) –potential importance for organizational performance (resource- based view of the firm) –been relatively less researched

48. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Conceptual Model Empowering Leadership Knowledge Sharing Team Efficacy Team Performance H1 H2 H3 H4

49. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Empowering Leadership – Knowledge Sharing An empowering leader is likely to –Recognize the inputs of team members as valuable for decision-making –Provide more opportunities for team members to share their ideas –Encourage team members to solve problems together –Motivate a search for solutions both inside as well as outside the team H1: Empowering leadership will be positively related to knowledge sharing in teams

50. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Empowering Leadership – Team Efficacy An empowering leader is likely to –Guide subordinates on how effective performance can be achieved –Coach team members to perform autonomously –Provide access to strategic information –Reduce fear and anxiety of team members Past research supported the relationship between empowering leadership and team potency –(Kirkman & Rosen, 1999) H2: Empowering leadership will be positively related to team efficacy.

51. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Knowledge Sharing – Team Performance Improved decision-making (Latham et al., 1994; Scully et al., 1995) Improved coordination (Lewis, 1999; Mathieu et al., 2000) H3: Knowledge sharing will be positively related to team performance

52. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Team Efficacy – Performance Team efficacy is positively related to –Difficult goals –Effort –Persistence –Better strategies –Quicker response to competitors’ actions (Bandura, 1997; Gully et al., 2002; Yun, 1999) Little empirical research in the case of management teams –In teams performing tasks high in uncertainty, there may not be a link between team efficacy and performance (Gibson, 1999) H4: Team efficacy will be positively related to team performance

53. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Conceptual Model Empowering Leadership Knowledge Sharing Team Efficacy Team Performance H1 H2 H3 H4

54. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Method Sample: 389 managers in 102 management teams of a chain of hotel properties in the U.S. Response rate of about 20%. Measures –Empowering leadership: 15 items (Arnold et al., 2000) - leading by example, participative decision-making, coaching, informing, and showing concern. –Knowledge sharing: 7 items (Durham, 1997; Faraj & Sproull, 2000) –Team efficacy: 3 items (Edmondson, 1999) Empowering leadership, knowledge sharing, and team efficacy were empirically distinct scales –Performance: room rate premium vis-à-vis local competitors

55. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Results Structural equation modeling Support for all hypotheses No direct effect of empowering leadership on performance but the total indirect effect was significant

56. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Path Coefficients Empowering Leadership Knowledge Sharing Team Efficacy Team Performance.41.21.51.22

57. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Mechanisms Linking Empowering Leadership and Performance Empowering leadership is important for performance (e.g., Cohen, Chang, & Ledford, 1997) But what are the linking mechanisms?

58. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Means, Standard Deviations, Correlations, and Reliabilities VariablesMSD12345678 1. Compensation Satisfaction 4.321.22.83 2. Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) 4.61.87.42.84 3. Perceived Organizational Support (POS) 4.58.74.61.60.79 4. Perceived Term of Employment 4.29.92.05.22.31.72 5. Job Performance 5.55.68.14.19.08.07.84 6. Knowledge-Sharing Behavior 4.97.93.15.24.16.07.56.95 7. Normative Commitment 4.00.98.55.48.60.01-.02.05.79 8. Turnover Intention 3.621.16-.19-.31-.23-.18-.21 -.36.71

59. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Model Fit Indices

60. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Discussion

61. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Discussion Major Findings

62. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Overview

63. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Interaction Effects of POS and Perceived Term of Employment on Knowledge Sharing

64. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Study Purposes To examine the role of POS in linking

65. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Research Objectives

66. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Regression Results for Interaction Effects of Affective Commitment and PCV on OCBs 4.7 4.8 4.9 5 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 Low High Affective Commitment OCBs Low PCV High PCV

67. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Regression Results for Interaction Effects of Normative Commitment and PCV on OCBs 4.7 4.8 4.9 5 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 Low High Normative Commitment OCBs Low PCV High PCV

68. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Means, Standard Deviations, Correlations, and Reliabilities a VariablesMSD12345678 1. Relational Psychological Contract 4.24.95.83 2. Power Distance 3.91.90-.13.74 3. Affective Organizational Commitment 4.16.73.49.10.61 4. Normative Organizational Commitment 4.00.98.28.23.58.80 5. Continuance Organizational Commitment 3.261.03-.29.24-.09.14.77 6. Psychological Contract Violation 2.95.99-.20-.17-.31-.39-.15.58 7. Organizational citizenship Behaviors 5.19.79.17.02.13.11-.16-.01.94 8. Turnover Intention 3.621.16-.34-.21-.47-.36.11.14-.22.71

69. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Model Fit Indices

70. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland

71. Effects of Psychological Contract and Power Distance on Important Organizational Outcomes: An Examination among Chinese Knowledge Workers Wei Liu Kathryn M. Bartol University of Maryland Xiangquan Zeng Kelu Wu Renmin University of China

72. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Research Questions  Effect of Psychological Contract on Organizational Commitment  Variance across Different Dimensions?  Impact of Organizational Commitment on Organizational Citizenship Behaviors (OCBs)  Moderating role of Psychological Contract Violation (PCV)  Implication of Power Distance  Effect on Organizational Commitment Dimensions

73. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Theoretical Model Psychological Contract Power Distance Psychological Contract Violation Continuance Commitment Normative Commitment Affective Commitment Turnover Intention Organizational Citizenship Behavior

74. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Theoretical Model Psychological Contract Violation Turnover Intention Organizational Citizenship Behavior Psychological Contract Power Distance Continuance Commitment Normative Commitment Affective Commitment

75. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Path Analyses Results Psychological Contract Power Distance Continuance Commitment Normative Commitment Affective Commitment Turnover Intention Organizational Citizenship Behavior.49 ***.18 *.21 * ns -.36 *** ns -.16 * ns.31 *** -.27 *** -.16 *.51 ***.19 *** CFI =.93, GFI =.97, SRMR =.06, RMSEA =.12

76. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Discussion  Major Findings  Positive effects of relational psychological contract on affective commitment normative commitment, negative effect on continuance commitment  Moderating effects of PCV on the relationship between affective and normative commitment and OCBs  Positive influence of power distance on normative and continuance commitment

77. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Discussion  Contributions and Practical Implications  Applicability and importance of the concept of psychological contract among Chinese employees  Detrimental effect of psychological contract violation  Importance of individual differences in power distance within a culture  Limitations and Future Research Directions  Compare the relative magnitude of effect of psychological contract among employees in Western cultures and non- Western cultures  Further investigate the interaction effects between PCV and organizational commitment

78. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Means, Standard Deviations, Correlations, and Reliabilities a VariablesMSD12345678 1. Relational Psychological Contract 4.24.95.83 2. Power Distance 3.91.90-.13.74 3. Affective Organizational Commitment 4.16.73.49.10.61 4. Normative Organizational Commitment 4.00.98.28.23.58.80 5. Continuance Organizational Commitment 3.261.03-.29.24-.09.14.77 6. Psychological Contract Violation 2.95.99-.20-.17-.31-.39-.15.58 7. Organizational citizenship Behaviors 5.19.79.17.02.13.11-.16-.01.94 8. Turnover Intention 3.621.16-.34-.21-.47-.36.11.14-.22.71

79. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Hypothesized Model Compensation Satisfaction Leader-Member Exchange Perceived Organizational Support Job Performance Knowledge Sharing Normative Commitment Turnover Intention Term of Employment + + + + + +

80. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Hypothesized Model Compensation Satisfaction Leader-Member Exchange Perceived Organizational Support Job Performance Knowledge Sharing Normative Commitment Turnover Intention Term of Employment + + + + + +

81. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Hypothesized Model Compensation Satisfaction Leader-Member Exchange Perceived Organizational Support Job Performance Knowledge Sharing Normative Commitment Turnover Intention Term of Employment + + + + + +

82. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Hypothesized Model Compensation Satisfaction Leader-Member Exchange Perceived Organizational Support Job Performance Knowledge Sharing Normative Commitment Turnover Intention Term of Employment H1 H2 H7 H3 H4 H5 H6 H8

83. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Hypothesized Model Compensation Satisfaction Leader-Member Exchange Perceived Organizational Support Job Performance Knowledge Sharing Normative Commitment Turnover Intention Term of Employment H1 H2 H7 H3 H4 H5 H6 H8

84. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland

87. Information, Technology and Human Capital Kathryn (Kay) M. Bartol Robert H. Smith Professor of Management and Organization University of Maryland, College Park IACMR Conference, June 2006

88. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland

89. Method Sample: 389 managers in 102 management teams of a chain of hotel properties in the U.S. Measures –Empowering leadership: 15 items (Arnold et al., 2000) - leading by example, participative decision-making, coaching, informing, and showing concern. –Knowledge sharing: 7 items (Durham, 1997; Faraj & Sproull, 2000) –Team efficacy: 3 items (Edmondson, 1999) Empowering leadership, knowledge sharing, and team efficacy were empirically distinct scales –Performance: room rate premium vis- à -vis local competitors

90. © 2006 Robert H. Smith School of Business University of Maryland Model Fit Indices (new Kunal)