Facilitating employees’ knowledge transfer to colleagues is a critical, yet challenging task. This study suggests that an individual’s social networks and motivational factors facilitate knowledge transfer based on the social capital theory and the theory of collective action. More importantly, this study also proposes that the facilitating effects of social networks and motivational factors differ depending on the different modes of knowledge transfer, namely, the closed (one-to-one) and the open (one-to-many) modes. By analysing 325 survey responses of eight research and development groups from five firms with structural equation modelling, we found that network centrality and organizational reward were influential only on open knowledge transfer while expected reciprocity was influential only on closed knowledge transfer. On the other hand, average strength of ties and intrinsic motivational factors such as group identification and self-efficacy seemed to affect both types of knowledge transfer. Additionally, the facilitating effects of social networks were found to be partially mediated by motivational factors.
G. Szulanski , Exploring internal stickness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm, Strategic Management Journal17 (1996) 27-43.
2.
A. Kankanhalli , B.C.Y. Tan and K.-K. Wei , Contributing knowledge to electronic knowledge repositories: An empirical investigation, MIS Quarterly29(1) (2005) 113-143.
3.
W. Swap, D. Leonard, M. Shields and L. Abrams, Using mentoring and storytelling to transfer knowledge in the workplace, Journal of Management Information Systems18(1) (2001) 95-114.
4.
J.A. DeVito , Human Communication: The Basic Course, 9th edn (Allyn and Bacon, Boston, 2003).
5.
G.R. Rodman and R.B. Adler, Understanding Human Communication (Oxford University Press , New York, 2003).
6.
R.M. Muller, M. Spiliopoulou and H.-J. Lenz, The influence of incentives and cultures on knowledge sharing, Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii, 2005.
7.
A. Cabrera and E.F. Cabrera, Knowledge-sharing dilemmas, Organization Studies23(5) (2002) 687-710.
8.
M. Osterloh and B.S. Frey, Motivation, knowledge transfer, and organizational forms, Organization Science11(5) (2000) 538-550.
9.
G.-W. Bock , R.W. Zmud, Y.-G. Kim and J.-N. Lee , Behavioral intention formation in knowledge sharing: Examining the roles of extrinsic motivators, social-psychological forces, and organizational climate, MIS Quarterly29(1) (2005) 87-111.
10.
D. Constant , S. Kiesler and L. Sproull, What’s mine is ours, or is it? A study of attitudes about information sharing, Information Systems Research5(4) (1994) 400-421.
11.
M.T. Hansen , M.L. Mors and B. Lovas, Knowledge sharing in organizations: Multiple networks, multiple phases, Academy of Management Journal48(5) (2005) 776-793.
12.
R. Cross and L. Sproull, More than an answer: Information relationships for actionable knowledge, Organization Science15(4) (2004) 446-462.
13.
R. Reagans and B. McEvily, Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range, Administrative Science Quarterly48(2) (2003) 240-267.
14.
B. Uzzi and R. Lancaster, Relational embeddedness and learning: The case of bank loan managers and their clients, Management Science49(4) (2003) 383-299.
15.
M.T. Hansen, The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits, Administrative Science Quarterly44(1) (1999) 82-111.
W. Tsai, Social structure of ‘coopetition’ within a multiunit organization: Coordination, competition, and intraorganizational knowledge sharing, Organization Science13(2) (2002) 179-190.
18.
M. Olson, The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups ( Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1965).
19.
A. Majchrzak , R.E. Rice, N. King and A. Malhotra, Computer-mediated inter-organizational knowledge-sharing: Insights from a virtual team innovating using a collaborative tool, Information Resources Management Journal13(1) (2000) 44-53.
20.
C. Dhanaraj , M.A. Lyles, H.K. Steensma and L. Tihanyi, Managing tacit and explicit knowledge transfer in ijvs: The role of relational embeddedness and the impact on performance , Journal of International Business Studies35 (2004) 428-442.
21.
K.C. Desouza , Facilitating tacit knowledge exchange, Communications of the ACM46(6) (2003) 85-88.
22.
L. Argote , B. McEvily and R. Reagans, Managing knowledge in organizations: An integrative framework and review of emerging themes, Management Science49(4) (2003) 571-582.
23.
D.Z. Levin and R. Cross, The strength of weak ties you can trust: The mediating role of trust in effective knowledge transfer, Management Science50(11) (2004) 1477-1490.
24.
G. Widen-Wulff and M. Ginman, Explaining knowledge sharing in organizations through the dimensions of social capital, Journal of Information Science30(5) (2004) 448-458.
25.
M.M. Wasko and S. Faraj, Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice, MIS Quarterly29(1) (2005) 35-57.
26.
D.-G. Ko , L.J. Kirsch and W.R. King, Antecedents of knowledge transfer from consultants to clients in enterprise system implementations, MIS Quarterly29(1) ( 2005) 59-85.
27.
J. Nahapiet and S. Ghoshal, Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage, Academy of Management Review23(2) ( 1998) 242-266.
28.
D. Constant , L. Sproull and S. Kiesler, The kindness of strangers: The usefulness of electronic weak ties for technical advice, Organization Science7(2) (1996) 119-135.
29.
B.E. Ashforth and F. Mael, Social identity theory and the organization , The Academy of Management Review14(1) (1989) 20-39.
30.
A. Bandura, Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory ( Prentice-Hall, Eaglewood Cliffs, 1986).
31.
M.M. Wasko and S. Faraj, ‘It is what one does’: Why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice, Journal of Strategic Information Systems9(2-3) (2000) 155-173.
32.
E.L. Lesser (ed.) Knowledge and Social Capital: Foundations and Applications (Butterworth-Heinemann , Woburn, 2000).
33.
M. Bhandar , S.L. Pan and B.C.Y. Tan , Towards understanding the roles of social capital in knowledge integration: A case study of a collaborative information systems project, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology58(2) (2007) 263-274.
34.
S.L. Pan , S. Newell, J. Huang and R.D. Galliers, Overcoming knowledge management challenges during erp implementation: The need to integrate and share different types of knowledge, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology58(3) (2007) 404-419.
35.
P.S. Adler and S.-W. Kwon, Social capital: Prospects for a new concept , Academy of Management Review27(1) (2002) 17-40.
36.
J.S. Coleman , Social capital in the creation of human capital , American Journal of Sociology94 (1988) S95-S120.
37.
R. Burt, Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1992).
38.
H. Oh , M. Chung and G. Labianca, Group social capital and group effectiveness: The role of informal socializing ties, Academy of Management Journal47(6) (2004) 860-875.
39.
M. Gargiulo and M. Benassi, Trapped in your own net? Network cohesion, structural holes, and the adaptation of social capital, Organization Science11(2) (2000) 183-196.
40.
P. Ingram and P.W. Roberts, Friendships among competitors in the Sydney hotel industry, American Journal of Sociology106(2) (2000) 387-423.
41.
M.K. Ahuja, D.F. Galletta and K.M. Carley, Individual centrality and performance in virtual r&d groups: An empirical study, Management Science49(1) (2003) 21-38.
42.
R. Reagans and E.W. Zuckerman, Networks, diversity, and productivity: The social capital of corporate r&d teams, Organization Science12(4) (2001) 502-517.
43.
W. Tsai and S. Ghoshal, Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks, Academy of Management Journal41(4) (1998) 464-476.
44.
W. Tsai, Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks: Effects of network position and absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance, Academy of Management Journal44(5) (2001) 996-1004.
45.
M.S. Granovetter , The srength of weak ties: A network theory revisited . In: P.V. Marsden and N. Lin (eds) Social Structure and Network Analysis (Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, 1982).
46.
D. Krackhardt , The strength of strong ties: The importance of philos in organizations. In: N. Nohria and R. Eccles (eds) Networks and Organizations (Harvard Business School Press , Boston, 1992).
47.
B. McEvily , V. Perrone and A. Zaheer, Trust as an organizing principle, Organization Science14(1) (2003) 91-103.
48.
M.S. Granovetter , The strength of weak ties, American Journal of Sociology78(6) (1973) 1360-1380.
49.
L.C. Freeman , Centrality in social networks: Conceptual clarification , Social Networks1 ( 1979) 215-239.
50.
N. Hayashi , E. Ostrom, J. Walker and T. Yamagishi, Reciprocity, trust, and the sense of control: A crosssocietal study, Rationality and Society11(1) (1999) 27-46.
51.
A. Rindfleisch and C. Moorman, The acquisition and utilization of information in new product alliances: A strength-of-ties perspective, Journal of Marketing65(2) (2001) 1-18.
52.
P.V. Marsden and K.E. Campbell, Measuring tie strength, Social Forces63(2) (1984) 482-501.
53.
E.W. Morrison , Newcomers’ relationships: The role of social network ties during socialization, Academy of Management Journal45(6) (2002) 1149-1160.
54.
T. Gautam , R.V. Dick and U. Wagner, Organizational identification and organizational commitment: Distinct aspects of two related concepts, Asian Journal of Social Psychology7 ( 2004) 301-315.
55.
K.S. Cook and R.M. Emerson, Power, equity and commitment in exchange networks, American Sociological Review43(5) (1978) 721-739.
56.
R.M. Emerson , Social exchange theory, Annual Review of Sociology2 (1976) 335-362.
57.
D. Brass , Being in the right place: A structural analysis of individual influence in an organization, Administrative Science Quarterly29(4) (1984) 518-539.
58.
S. Wasserman and K. Faust, Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications (Cambridge University Press, New York, 1994).
59.
M. Irwin and H. Hughes, Centrality and the structure of urban interaction: Measures, concepts, and applications, Social Forces71(1) (1992) 17-51.
60.
C. Fornell, A Second Generation of Multivariate Analysis: Methods ( Praeger, New York, 1982).
61.
D. Gefen , D. Straub and M. Boudreau, Structural equation modeling and regression: Guidelines for research practice, Communications of the Association for Information Systems4 (2000 ) 1-77.
62.
C. Fornell and D.F. Larcker, Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement errors, Journal of Marketing Research18(2) ( 1981) 39-50.
63.
W.W. Chin, The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In: G.A. Marcoulides (ed.) Modern Methods for Business Research (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates , Mahwah, NJ, 1998).
64.
D. Gefen and D. Straub, A practical guide to factorial validity using pls-graph: Tutorial and annotated example, Communications of the AIS16 (2005) 91-109.
65.
P.M. Podsakoff , S.B. MacKenzie, J.Y. Lee and N.P. Podsakoff, Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies, Journal of Applied Psychology88(5) (2003), 879-903.
66.
P.M. Podsakoff and D.W. Organ, Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects, Journal of Management12 (1986) 531-544.
67.
P. Podsakoff , S. MacKenzie, J. Lee and N. Podsakoff, Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies, Journal of Applied Psychology88(5) (2003) 879-903.
68.
S.-H. Yu , Y.-G. Kim and M.-Y. Kim , Linking organizational knowledge management drivers to knowledge management performance: An exploratory study, In: Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2004) 237-246.
69.
G. Hofstede, Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-related Values (Sage, London, 1984).
70.
E.C. Wenger and W.M. Snyder, Communities of practice: The organizational frontier, Harvard Business Review78(1) (2000) 139-145.
71.
A. Cox, What are communities of practice? A comparative review of four seminal works , Journal of Information Science31(6) (2005) 527-540.
72.
T. Yamagishi and K.S. Cook, Generalized exchange and social dilemmas , Social Psychology Quarterly56(4) (1993) 235-248.
