Does intraorganizational competition prompt or hinder performance? The risks for proactive employees who hide knowledge
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This study examines whether employees' perceptions of intraorganizational competition, defined as beliefs that the organization evaluates their performance in comparison with others, result in lower supervisor ratings of their conscientiousness if the employees, particularly those with proactive personalities, respond to the resource-draining, competitive work situation with knowledge hiding behavior. Design/methodology/approach Multisource data were collected from employees and supervisors in different industries at three points in time. The research hypotheses were tested with hierarchical multiple regression analysis, in combination with PROCESS macro-based bootstrapping, to assess mediation and moderated mediation. Findings Beliefs about highly competitive organizational climates are counterproductive, in that they lead employees to conceal knowledge intentionally from other organizational members. This mediating role of knowledge concealment is particularly prominent among employees with a strong desire to take the initiative to protect themselves against the hardships created by a climate of internal competition. Research limitations/implications The research design does not allow for formal tests of causality. Practical implications For human resource managers, this research pinpoints self-protective knowledge hiding as a key, detrimental mechanism. It imposes dual harms: employees feel threatened by the strict performance-oriented climate, and their defensive reactions make them appear less conscientious to supervisors. This downward spiral is particularly likely to initiate among employees who exhibit a disposition toward action. Originality/value This research investigates novel connections between specific organizational elements and outcomes, by specifying why and when employees' beliefs about performance-oriented organizational climates might backfire, due to their negative behavioral responses, such as purposeful knowledge hiding.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".