شناسایی عوامل مؤثر بر رفتار به اشتراک‌گذاری دانش در میان اعضای هیئت علمی دانشگاههای گرگان

نویسندگان

1 دانشکده علوم انسانی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد گرگان

2 دانشکده علوم اقتصادی و اداری، دانشگاه مازندران

چکیده

هدف پژوهش حاضر شناسایی عوامل مؤثر بر به‌اشتراک‌گذاری دانش در میان اعضای هیئت‌علمی دانشگاههای شهر گرگان‌ و ارائه یک الگوی بومی بود. روشی کیفی برای اجرای این پژوهش انتخاب شد. جامعه آماری این پژوهش را اعضای هیئت علمی دانشگاههای آزاد اسلامی، علوم پزشکی و کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی گرگان تشکیل دادند. نخست داده‌های پژوهش به شیوه مصاحبه عمیق و نیمه‌ساختار‌یافته و از روش مقایسه مداوم اشتراوس و کوربین جمع‌آوری شدند. بدین منظور، 23 نفر از اعضای هیئت علمی دانشگاههای گرگان از طریق نمونه‌گیری هدفمند و شیوه‌ گلوله برفی انتخاب شدند. در نهایت، پس از بررسی 427 کد باز، یافته‌ها در قالب یک پارادایم ارائه شد که هسته مرکزی آن را عوامل به اشتراک-گذاری ‌دانش در میان اعضای هیئت علمی دانشگاهها تشکیل می‌داد و شامل چهار مقوله‌ پیوند عاطفی– اجتماعی، ارزش بازاری، دستیابی به رشد و ارتقای فردی و سازگاری با الزامات بود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Identifying effective factors on knowledge sharing behavior among faculty members in Gorgan universities

نویسندگان [English]

  • Jabbary Negin 1
  • Mehrdad Madhoshi 2

1 Assistant Professor, Department of Humanities Sciences, Islamic Azad University of Gorgan

2 Department of Economics & Administrative Science, Mazandaran University

چکیده [English]

The purpose of this study was to identify effective factors on knowledge sharing among faculty members in Gorgan City universities and presenting a domestic model. A qualitative method was chosen for this study. Statistical population of this research was comprised of faculty members in Gorgan Azad University, Medical Sciences University and Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources University. First, using Strauss and Corbin continuous comparison methodology, data were collected through deep and semi-structured interviews. For this purpose, 23 Gorgan universities' faculty members were selected through purposive sampling and snowball methodology. Finally, after examining 427 open cods, results were presented as a paradigm that its central core consisted of knowledge sharing among faculty members in Gorgan universities. This paradigm involves four categories of emotional-social bond, market values, achieving personal growth and development and adapting to requirements

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Knowledge sharing
  • University faculty members
  • Knowledge Management
1. Arthur Andersen Business Consulting (1997). Zukai knowledge management. Tokyo:Toyo Keizai.
2. Bock, G. W., Zmud, R. W., Kim, Y. G., & Lee, J. N. (2005). Behavioral intention formation in knowledge sharing: Examining the roles of extrinsic motivators,social-psychological forces, and organizational climate. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 87-111.
3. Bazargan, A. (2012). An introduction to qualitative and combined research methods of common approaches to behavioral sciences. Tehran: Didar Publications(in Persian).
4. Bakker, M., Leenders, R. T. A. J., Gabbay, S. M., Kratzer, J., & Van Engelen, J. M. L. (2006). Is trust really social capital? Knowledge sharing in product development projects. The Learning Organization, 13(6), 594-605.
5. Bordia, P., Irmer, B. E., & Abusah, D. (2006). Differences in sharing knowledge interpersonally and via databases: The role of evaluation apprehension and perceived benefits. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 15(3), 262-280.
6. Chow, C. W., Deng, F. J., & Ho, J. L. (2000). The openness of knowledge sharing within organizations: A comparative study of the United States and the People\'s Republic of China. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 12, 65-95.
7. Chiu, C. M., Hsu, M. H., & Wang, E.(2006). Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual communities: An integration of social capital and social cognitive theories. Decision Support Systems, 42(3), 1872-1888.
8. Davenport, T.H. (1997). Some principals of knowledge management. Working paper.
9. Davenport, T. H., & Prusak, L. (1998). Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
10. Darr, E. D., & Kurtzberg, T. R. (2000). An investigation of partner similarity dimensions knowledge transfer. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1), 28-44.
11. Elliott, S., & O’Dell, C. (1999). Sharing knowledge and best practices: The hows and whys of tapping your organization’s hidden reservoirs of knowledge. Health Forum Journal, (42), 34–37.
12. Kim, S., & Lee, H. (2006). The impact of organizational context and information technology on employee knowledge-sharing capabilities. Public Administration Review, 66(3), 370-385.
13. Kankanhalli, A., Tan, B. C. Y., & Wei, K. K. (2005). Contributing knowledge to electronic knowledge repositories; An empirical investigation. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 113-114.
14. Liebowitz, J., & Beckman, T. (1998). Knowledge organizations: What every manager should know. Boca Ration, FL: St. Lucie Press.
15. Lee, J.H., Kim, Y. G., & Kim, M. Y. (2006). Effects of managerial drivers and climate maturity on knowledge-management performance: Empirical validation. Information Resources Management Journal, 19(3), 48-60.
16. Lin, H. F., & Lee, G. G. (2006). Effects of socio-technical factors on organizational intention to encourage knowledge sharing. Management Decision, 44(1), 74-88.
17. Lin, C. P. (2007a). To share or not to share: Modeling knowledge sharing using exchange ideology as a moderator. Personnel Review, 36(3), 457-475.
18. Lin, C.P. (2007b). To share or not to share: Modeling tacit knowledge sharing, its mediators and antecedents. Journal of Business Ethics, 70(4), 411-428.
19. Lin, H.F. (2007d). Knowledge sharing and firm innovation capability: An empirical study. International Journal of Manpower, 28(3/4), 315-332.
20. 20. Levitt, B., & March, J. G. (1988). Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology,(14), 319–340.
21. Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242-266.
22. Nelson, A., Sabatier, R., & Nelson, W. (2006). Toward an understanding of global entrepreneurial knowledge management (EKM) practices: A preliminaryinvestigation of EKM in France and the U.S.. Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 11(2), 70-89.
23. Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 14-37.
24. Ojha, A. K. (2005). Impact of team demography on knowledge sharing in software project teams. South Asian Journal of Management, 12(3), 67-78.
25. Purser, R.E.R., & Pasmore, W.A. (1992). Organizing for learning. In Pasmore, W.A. & Woodman, R.W.(Eds.). Research in organizational change and development. London: JAI Press.
26. Ruggles, R. (1998). The state of notion: Knowledge management in practice. California Management Review (40), 80-89.
27. Reagans, R., & McEvily, B. (2003). Network structure and knowledge transfer: The effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 240-267.
28. Sondergaard, S., Kerr, M., & Clegg, C. (2007). Sharing knowledge: Contextualising socio-technical thinking and practice. The Learning Organization, 14(5), 423-435.
29. Schepers, P., & Van Den Berg, P. T. (2007). Social factors of work-environment creativity. Journal of Business and Psychology, 21(3), 407-428.
30. Starbuck, W.H. (1992). Learning by knowledge intensive firm. Journal of Management Studies, (29), 713- 740.
31. Taylor, W. A., & Wright, G. H. (2004). Organizational readiness for successful knowledge sharing: Challenges for public sector managers. Information Resources Management Journal, 17(2), 22-37.
32. Tung-Ching, L., Sheng, W., & Chun-Tai, L. (2012). Exploring the affect factors of knowledge sharing. Behavior Quarterly, 29(1),35-57. ior: The relations model theory perspective. Expert Systems with Applications, 39, 751–764.
33. Wasko, M. M., & Faraj, S. (2005). Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS