The relationship between knowledge sharing and workplace innovation in a transnational corporation: a behavioral perspective
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
There is a paucity of literature addressing the relationship between knowledge sharing and workplace innovation within the context of a knowledge-intensive transnational corporation. This is more so when a behavioural perspective is taken.<br><br>Thus the key question driving this thesis is: What is the relationship between knowledge sharing and workplace innovation in the context of a transnational corporation, from a behavioural perspective?<br><br>A survey of 2723 (2695 random + 28 non-random corporate) transnational corporation employees was conducted in seven geographic operating entities (Africa, Asia, Australasia, Canada, Europe, South America, USA) and Corporate (across all geographies). Of these, 853 surveys were completed. Data was analysed using correlation, regression and structural equation modelling. The findings show that the six factors of Subjective Norm, Attitude, Intention, Behaviour, Self-Worth, Perceived Behavioural Control and Knowledge Sharing Activity influence employees’ individual Knowledge Sharing Behaviour. While the factors of Knowledge Absorptive Capability and Organization Citizenship Behaviour influence Knowledge Sharing Behaviour at a team or workgroup level, also directly influence workplace innovation. Overall, Knowledge Sharing Behaviour was shown to be a significant antecedent of Workplace Innovation.<br><br>This thesis makes four significant contributions to the literature. First, the factors selected appear significantly related to Knowledge Sharing Behaviour. Second, this thesis reveals that Knowledge Sharing Behaviour directly affects Workplace Innovation. Thirdly, an extended model based on the Theory of Planned Behaviour has been supported. Finally, a new scale, Knowledge Sharing Innovation Behaviour, has been developed to support further research into this important area.<br><br>Practical implications: Given the importance of knowledge sharing as an enabler of workplace innovation in today’s competitive business world, this thesis provides a broader understanding of different dimensions of employees’ Knowledge Sharing Behaviour in relation to Workplace Innovation. These findings suggest that organizational administrators and managers should look into ways of improving the levels of knowledge sharing behaviour in order to facilitate workplace innovation. The composition of work teams, in terms of the behavioural aspects of members, and how their performance is measured is another opportunity for research.<br>
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle