Search results

The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether and how knowledge hoarding, functions as antecedent and consequent of work related negative acts, as a measure of bullying. The authors investigate the relation as mediated by trust and justice.

Data stem from a longitudinal study in which questionnaire responses were collected twice from 1,650 employees in 52 workplaces. Structural equation modelling was used to analyse the two models. Design-based corrections were made to accommodate the multi-level structure of data.

The analyses showed that knowledge hoarding was both an antecedent and a consequent of negative acts. First, over time, knowledge hoarding was indirectly related to negative acts mediated by trust and justice. Second, negative acts were both directly and indirectly related to knowledge hoarding over time. The study thus points to the existence of a vicious circle of negative acts, psychological states of trust and justice, and knowledge hoarding behaviours, which presumably will affect both individual and organizational outcomes negatively.

The use of already collected, self-report data, single-item measures, and the two-year time lag could pose potential limitations to the study.

Preventive and repair actions could potentially impact both negative acts and knowledge hoarding by focusing on increasing the social exchange quality at work unit level.

This paper combines two strands of research, that of bullying at work and that of knowledge management, within which research on knowledge hoarding has been an under-researched area.

This paper aims tp prevent bullying and conflicts at work and to identify process factors associated with the implementation and effects of such interventions.

The paper presents process evaluation data from an intervention study in two organizations. A quasi‐experimental, process‐oriented research design was used. The following interventions were implemented: lectures on bullying, courses in conflict prevention and management, dialogue meetings, the distribution of pamphlets, newsletters and posters as well as steering group meetings.

Results indicate that participants benefited from the interventions, in particular the dialogue meetings and the courses in conflict prevention and management. Moreover, various factors stimulating or obstructing the implementation and effects of interventions were identified.

The use of process evaluation to document the phases of the study and relevant process factors is a major strength. However, the study only included two public sector workplaces and no control groups.

The use of qualitative process‐evaluation helped identify important process factors affecting the implementation of interventions and their perceived effects. The paper thus yields valuable knowledge to researchers and practitioners.