Knowledge sharing in cross‐functional teams: a coopetitive model
Journal of Knowledge Management
Article publication date: 30 March 2012
This study aims to present a model that can be used for predicting effective knowledge sharing behaviors in cross‐functional project teams.
Drawn from the extant literature, a coopetitive model of knowledge sharing is postulated. Data from 115 project managers are used to test the proposed model, using partial least squares (PLS).
The findings confirm the applicability and predictive power of the proposed model. Three dimensions of cross‐functional cooperation (cooperative task orientation, cooperative communication, and cooperative interpersonal relationships) were proved to directly drive effective knowledge sharing behaviors. The results show that competition affects effective knowledge sharing behaviors through influencing cooperative behaviors. In addition, this study shows that different dimensions of competition generate mixed impacts. Competition for tangible resources was found to positively affect cooperative communication of individuals, whereas competition for intangible resources (political competition) had negative impacts on cooperative communication and task orientations.
This study contributes to the extant literature by presenting a model that predicts effective knowledge sharing practices in cross‐functional projects. In addition, the results advance the current understanding of the concept and modeling of coopetitive knowledge sharing.
The proposed model of this study can be used by managers in order to facilitate problematic knowledge sharing processes within cross‐functional teams.
This study stands as one of the first attempts in providing a model that explains the forces behind effective knowledge sharing behaviors in cross‐functional teams. The model explores coopetition effect in a systematic way, which has not been previously studied.
Ghobadi, S. and D'Ambra, J. (2012), "Knowledge sharing in cross‐functional teams: a coopetitive model", Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 285-301. https://doi.org/10.1108/13673271211218889
Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2012, Emerald Group Publishing Limited