Search results

This study investigates the role of personality disorders in the context of counterproductive knowledge behavior.

Data were collected through a survey administered to 120 full-time employees recruited from Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. Personality disorders were measured by means of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-IV.

Personality disorders play an important role in the context of counterproductive knowledge behavior: employees suffering from various personality disorders are likely to hide knowledge from their fellow coworkers and engage in knowledge sabotage. Of particular importance are dependent, narcissistic and sadistic personality disorders as well as schizophrenic and delusional severe clinical syndromes. There is a need for a paradigm shift in terms of how the research community should portray those who engage in counterproductive knowledge behavior, reconsidering the underlying assumption that all of them act deliberately, consciously and rationally. Unexpectedly, most personality disorders do not facilitate knowledge hoarding.

Organizations should provide insurance coverage for the treatment of personality disorders, assist those seeking treatment, inform employees about the existence of personality disorders in the workplace and their impact on interemployee relationships, facilitate a stress-free work environment, remove social stigma that may be associated with personality disorders and, as a last resort, reassign workers suffering from extreme forms of personality disorders to tasks that require less interemployee interaction (instead of terminating them).

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this work represents one of the first attempts to empirically investigate the notion of personality disorders in the context of knowledge management.

This study aims to examine the causal relationship of subjective incentive schemes on counterproductive knowledge behavior. Besides, this study also identifies the moderating role of cognitive orientation on the relationship between those two variables.

This study used a 2 × 2 between-subjects laboratory experiment with accounting undergraduate students as the subjects.

Subjective-based incentive schemes reduce the tendency for counterproductive knowledge behavior. Also, the collectivist cognitive orientation negatively influences the behavior. However, cognitive orientation does not act as a moderator in the causal relationship of incentive schemes and counterproductive knowledge behavior.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first that investigates and finds the effect of inclusion of subjectivity in incentive schemes and the level of individual’s collectivism on the reluctance to share knowledge in the workplace. This study has also strived to reduce an overlapping between the concept of knowledge sharing and counterproductive knowledge behavior by applying the right basic concept during the experiment.

Drawing on the microfoundations theory and rational choice sociology, this study aims to investigate knowledge-sharing microfoundations through knowledge sabotage behaviours in the workplace. As such, it aims to shed light on the adverse impact of knowledge sabotage on a knowledge-sharing climate.

As a quantitative deductive study, it is based on information collected from 329 employees of European companies by self-administered online surveys. Data validity and reliability has been assessed through a confirmatory factor analysis, and data analysis was carried out by using a covariance-based structural equation modelling technique.

The findings from the empirical investigation supported the baseline hypotheses of the multilevel conceptual model, which is the positive relationship between organizational trust and environmental knowledge sharing. Then, recurring to a microfoundational exploration, this study supports the mediating indirect effect of job satisfaction and knowledge sabotage in affecting knowledge sharing as a social outcome.

This study concurs to broaden knowledge-sharing awareness among scholars and practitioners, by focusing on knowledge sabotage as its most pernicious counterproductive behaviour. Furthermore, this research provides valuable guidance for the future development of research based on multilevel investigations.

This study builds on the need to explore the numerous factors that affect knowledge sharing in economic organizations, specifically focusing on knowledge sabotage. Adapting Coleman’s bathtub, the authors advance the first multilevel conceptual model used to unveil the knowledge-sharing microfoundations from the perspective of a counterproductive knowledge behaviour.

This study aims to explore the existence of knowledge sabotage in the contemporary organization from the perspective of the target.

This study collected and analyzed 172 critical incidents reported by 109 employees who were targets of knowledge sabotage in their organizations.

Over 50 per cent of employees experienced at least one knowledge sabotage incident. Knowledge sabotage is driven by three factors, namely, gratification, retaliation against other employees and one’s malevolent personality. Knowledge saboteurs are more likely to provide intangible than tangible knowledge. Knowledge sabotage results in extremely negative consequences for individuals, organizations and third parties. Organizations often indirectly facilitate knowledge sabotage among their employees. Both knowledge saboteurs and their targets believe in their innocence – saboteurs are certain that their action was a necessary response to targets’ inappropriate workplace behavior, whereas targets insist on their innocence and hold saboteurs solely responsible.

Organizations should recruit employees with compatible personalities and working styles, introduce inter-employee conflict prevention and resolution procedures, develop anti-knowledge sabotage policies, clearly articulate the individual and organizational consequences of knowledge sabotage and eliminate zero-sum game-based incentives and rewards.

This is the first study documenting knowledge sabotage from the target’s perspective.

This paper introduces the concept of knowledge sabotage as an extreme form of counterproductive knowledge behavior, presents its typology, and empirically demonstrates its existence in the contemporary organization.

Through the application of the critical incident technique, this study analyzes 177 knowledge sabotage incidents when employees intentionally provided others with wrong knowledge or deliberately concealed critical knowledge while clearly realizing others’ need for this knowledge and others’ ability to apply it to important work-related tasks.

Over 40% of employees engaged in knowledge sabotage, and many did so repeatedly. Knowledge saboteurs usually acted against their fellow co-workers, and one-half of all incidents were caused by interpersonal issues resulting from the target’s hostile behavior, failure to provide assistance to others, and poor performance. Knowledge sabotage was often expressed in the form of revenge against a particular individual, who, as a result, may have been reprimanded, humiliated or terminated. Knowledge saboteurs rarely regretted their behavior, which further confirmed the maliciousness of their intentions.

Even though knowledge saboteurs only rarely acted against their organizations purposely, approximately one-half of all incidents produced negative, unintentional consequences to their organizations, such as time waste, failed or delayed projects, lost clients, unnecessary expenses, hiring costs, products being out-of-stock, understaffing, or poor quality of products or services. Organizations should develop comprehensive knowledge sabotage prevention policies. The best way to reduce knowledge sabotage is to improve inter-personal relationships among employees and to foster a friendly and collaborative environment.

This is the first well-documented attempt to understand the phenomenon of knowledge sabotage.

This paper aims to explore antecedents and consequences of intra-organizational knowledge hiding.

A model was developed and tested with data collected from 691 knowledge workers from 15 North American credit unions.

Knowledge hiding and knowledge sharing belong to unique yet possibly overlapping constructs. Individual employees believe that they engage in knowledge hiding to a lesser degree than their co-workers. The availability of knowledge management systems and knowledge policies has no impact on intra-organizational knowledge hiding. The existence of a positive organizational knowledge culture has a negative effect on intra-organizational knowledge hiding. In contrast, job insecurity motivates knowledge hiding. Employees may reciprocate negative knowledge behavior, and knowledge hiding promotes voluntary turnover.

Managers should realize the uniqueness of counterproductive knowledge behavior and develop proactive measures to reduce or eliminate it.

Counterproductive knowledge behavior is dramatically under-represented in knowledge management research, and this study attempts to fill that void.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss relationships between high-performance work systems (HPWSs) and productive/counterproductive behaviours initiated and performed by employees. Using the ability, motivation and opportunities (AMO) theoretical framework, the authors described how an HPWS influences employee behaviours. The authors suggest that HPWSs could increase productive work behaviour and decrease counterproductive behaviours by mediating employees' affective commitment and moderating their self-efficacy.

This study is based on data from 563 questionnaires, which were completed using the computer-assisted telephone interview method. The respondents were knowledge workers, representing companies of various sizes in the Knowledge-Intensive Business Service (KIBS) sector in Poland. Statistical verification of the mediation and moderation analyses was conducted with macro PROCESS (ver. 3.3).

This research confirmed a significant statistical relationship between all examined variables. It has been shown that HPWSs influence productive and counterproductive behaviours both directly and indirectly through mediation of affective commitment. The statistical analysis also confirmed the study’s hypothesis that self-efficacy moderates relationships between an HPWS and employee behaviours.

This study has two limitations: its cross-sectional design and the use of self-reported questionnaire data.

This study is the first to explore mediating mechanisms between HPWSs and employee performance in the context of the KIBS companies in Poland. The results indicate that HPWSs are important antecedents of productive and counterproductive behaviours among knowledge workers.

This study empirically tests the impact of the Dark Triad personality traits (narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy) and co-worker competitiveness on knowledge sabotage.

A model was constructed and tested by means of Partial Least Squares with data from 150 participants recruited via Amazon’s Mechanical Turk.

The individual personality traits of narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy are significant predictors of individual knowledge sabotage behavior, whereas co-worker Machiavellianism and psychopathy trigger co-worker knowledge sabotage. Out of the three Dark Triad traits, individual and co-worker psychopathy emerged as the strongest knowledge sabotage predictor. Co-worker competitiveness has a positive effect on co-workers’ knowledge sabotage behavior. There is a relatively strong relationship between co-worker and individual knowledge sabotage which suggests that knowledge sabotage is a form of contagious workplace behavior. Individuals underestimate their negative behavior and traits and/or overestimate those of their fellow co-workers.

Managers should realize that the Dark Triad personality traits could predispose certain individuals to engage in extremely harmful counterproductive knowledge behavior. They need to ensure that individuals with these traits are not hired or are identified during their probation periods. It is recommended that organizations include knowledge sabotage measures in their periodic employee surveys. Organizations should help their employees objectively re-evaluate their own traits and knowledge behavior as well as those of their colleagues to ensure that their reciprocating knowledge behavior is more aligned with the reality in their organization.

This study offers a reliable and valid quantitative survey instrument to measure the presence of knowledge sabotage.

This study aims to propose and test a model explicating the antecedents and consequences of knowledge sabotage.

Data obtained from 330 employees working in the Turkish retail and telecommunication sectors were analyzed by means of the Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling technique.

Co-worker knowledge sabotage is the key factor driving knowledge sabotage behavior of individual employees, followed by co-worker incivility. Interactional justice suppresses individual knowledge sabotage, while supervisor incivility does not affect it. Co-worker knowledge sabotage reduces job satisfaction of other employees, which, in turn, triggers their voluntary turnover intention. Contrary to a popular belief that perpetrators generally benefit from their organizational misbehavior, the findings indicate that knowledge saboteurs suffer from the consequences of their action because they find it mentally difficult to stay in their current organization. Employees understate their own knowledge sabotage engagement and/or overstate that of others.

Managers should realize that interactional justice is an important mechanism that can thwart knowledge sabotage behavior, promote a civil organizational culture, develop proactive approaches to reduce co-worker incivility and strive towards a zero rate of knowledge sabotage incidents in their organizations. Co-worker incivility and co-worker knowledge sabotage in the workplace are possible inhibitors of intraorganizational knowledge flows and are starting points for job dissatisfaction, which may increase workers’ turnover intention.

This study is among the first to further our knowledge on the cognitive mechanisms linking interactional justice and uncivil organizational behavior with knowledge sabotage and employee outcomes.

In recent years, counterproductive knowledge behavior (CKB) and its types have received increasing interest in knowledge management as the degree of knowledge sharing and innovation in enterprises continues to increase. A rapidly growing number of studies have shed light on the important antecedents and consequences of employees’ CKB. However, the various labels, conceptualizations and operationalizations of CKB have fragmented this body of research. This study aims to systematically integrate the effects of the six types of organizational characteristics on CKB and further draws more general conclusions based on the results of previous studies.

Based on a survey of 103 effect values responsible for 52 CKB samples, the authors use the ABC theory to explore the effects of the six types of organizational characteristics on CKB. Moderator analysis were performed to resolve inconsistencies in empirical studies and understand the contexts under which CKB has the strongest or weakest effect.

The results showed that task interdependence and a positive organizational atmosphere, in general, negatively affect employees’ CKB in the moderation analysis. In contrast, workplace discomfort, negative organizational atmosphere, internal competition and time pressure positively and partly affect employees’ CKB. The direction and magnitude of these effects were affected by emotional factors, knowledge personnel types and sample sources. Discussing the theoretical, methodological and practical implications of these findings can offer a guiding framework for future research.

Better control of employees’ CKB is not achieved by adjusting organizational characteristics alone but by combining personal characteristics and mood changes with it to balance organizational characteristics and CKB. Furthermore, the large-sample joint study integrated the conceptual definition of CKB. The multivariate data study provided more reliable conclusions and a solid theoretical foundation for CKB research areas.