1、 外文翻译 原文 A Multilevel Investigation of the Motivational Mechanisms Underlying Knowledge Sharing and Performance Material Source: Organization Science Vol. 18, No. 1, JanuaryFebruary 2007, pp. 7188 Author: Narda R. Quigley Paul E. Tesluk, Edwin A. Locke, Kathryn M. Bartol This study draws on three di
2、fferent, yet complementary, theories of motivation, which we combine in an interactive manner,to explain the mechanisms that underlie the exchange between knowledge providers and recipients and ultimately impact performance. More specifically, we use incentive, goal-setting-social cognitive, and soc
3、ial motivation theories to examine knowledge sharing within dyads and its influence on individual performance. One hundred and twenty participants functioning as interdependent manager dyads completed a strategic decision-making simulation. Hierarchical regression and random coefficient modeling tec
4、hniques were used to test hypothesized relationships. Results demonstrated that the effect of group-oriented incentive systems on the knowledge provider was enhanced when more positive norms for knowledge sharing existed among dyad members. The recipients self-efficacy had a stronger relationship wi
5、th performance goals when the recipient trusted the provider. Finally, self-set goals and knowledge sharing had both direct and interactive effects on individual performance. We argue that these findings constitute a useful advance in middle-range motivation (Landy and Becker 1987, Pinder 1984) theo
6、ry pertaining to knowledge sharing and utilization. Keywords： knowledge sharing; motivation; performance; multilevel model Introduction Scholars and practitioners alike have increasingly regarded an organizations ability to facilitate the sharing and utilization of knowledge as critical for organiza
7、tional effectiveness (cf. Bock and Kim 2002, Kogut and Zander 1996, Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995, Tsai 2001). Particularly in the emerging structure of distributed organizations,effectiveness is dependent on how well knowledge is shared between individuals, teams, and/or units (Alavi and Leidner 2001, A
8、rgote et al. 2000, Goodman and Darr 1998, Pentland 1995). Growing evidence suggests that organizations are more productive when they are able to successfully create the conditions in which knowledge is shared by potential providers and then actively put to use by the recipients of new knowledge (Arg
9、ote et al. 1990, Baum and Ingram 1998). It is not surprising, therefore, that scholars from several different fields have actively studied knowledge management and its relationships to effectiveness. For example, strategy and organizational learning researchers have considered the knowledge manageme
10、nt problem at the firm level (e.g., Cole 1998, Kogut and Zander 1996, Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995, Spender and Grant 1996), while information technology (IT) and organizational design researchers have considered organizations as systems that enable knowledge exchange (e.g., Alavi and Leidner 2001, Pent
11、land 1995). For their part, organizational behavior researchers and social psychologists have considered interpersonal issues and the role of group dynamics in knowledge management (e.g., Bartol and Srivastava 2002, Moreland and Myaskovsky 2000, Stasser and Titus 2003). In their attempts to develop
12、a clearer understanding of the knowledge sharing and utilization process between providers and recipients, researchers across these different disciplines have noted the critical role of motivation (e.g., Argote and Ingram 2000; Alavi and Leidner 2001; Hansen 1999; Goodman and Darr 1998; Spender and
13、Grant 1996; Szulanski 1996, 2000). For instance, prior work has suggested that the motivation of knowledge providers is important for engaging in the effort and time required to transfer knowledge and overcome concerns about ownership of information (Davenport and Prusak 1998, Goodman and Darr 1998,
14、 Hansen et al. 2005, Kostova 1999). Similarly, researchers have begun to examine how motivational factors influence the extent to which recipients seek out, accept, and utilize external knowledge (Hayes and Clark 1985, Katz and Allen 1982, Levin and Cross 2004, Mayer et al. 1995, Srinivas 2000, Szul
15、anski 1996). However, despite the emphasis on and interest in motivational factors when studying the knowledge sharing and utilization process, there are several limitations of the existing literature. First, there are no coherent, integrated, theoretical frameworks of the motivational factors that
16、explain how knowledge is transferred between knowledge providers and recipients and then is utilized in ways that benefit performance. For instance, researchers interested in predicting knowledge sharing have used concepts from social motivation theory, such as trust, to help explain knowledge trans
17、fer (e.g., Levin and Cross 2004), while others have relied more on reward and incentive theory to study the impact of incentives on knowledge sharing (e.g., Kalman et al. 2002); yet no systematic attempts have been made to either compare or integrate these different potential motivational mechanisms
18、 that explain knowledge sharing. Consequently, we do not know whether knowledge sharing is better predicted when different motivational perspectives are included together, as would be the case in studying how rewards and social motivation factors, such as norms for sharing, may combine to predict kn
19、owledge transfer. Furthermore, no studies have looked at the relevance of goal setting and social cognitive theories in promoting knowledge utilization, despite research showing that utilizing relevant knowledge requires setting highperformance goals (Chesney and Locke 1991). A second limitation of
20、the existing literature is that we know very little about how motivational factors identified with knowledge providers and recipients work in conjunction with each other, because the motivational mechanisms across these domains are rarely studied together (Levin and Cross 2004, Szulanski 1996). Cons
21、equently, questions regarding how motivational variables interact and the different roles they play in affecting knowledge sharing and performance have not been systematically studied. Variables from different theoretical perspectives will not necessarily work together additively and different varia
22、bles may have effects in different parts of any integrated model. For example, incentives might affect knowledge sharing, whereas goals may affect knowledge utilization. Pinder (1984) and Landy and Becker (1987) refer to the process of considering the combined and interactive impact of multiple theo
23、ries as new “middlerange” motivational theory development. In the case of knowledge sharing, a new middle-range theory would focus on predicting a specific set of outcomes such as knowledge transfer and utilization by including multiple theoretical perspectives. A third limitation of the existing re
24、search is that although motivational mechanisms involved in knowledge transfer and utilization have been identified as stemming from factors at the individual, social, and organizational levels of analysis (Szulanski 1996, 2000), most research has focused on one level of analysis at a time. Much of
25、it has been done at the organizational level (e.g., Goodman and Darr 1998), making it difficult to directly examine specific motivational mechanisms that influence actual knowledge exchange and use (Argote and Ingram 2000). Single-level approaches potentially overlook important multilevel relationsh
26、ips, such as the influence that organizational factors (e.g., incentive practices) may have on the individual-level motivation of potential knowledge providers or the influence that emergent properties at the group level (e.g., norms) may have on the individuallevel behavior of potential knowledge p
27、roviders. In summary, prior research exploring the motivational factors that help explain the transfer and utilization of knowledge between potential providers and recipients has lacked an integrated theoretical framework, has rarely considered both providers and recipients simultaneously as they ar
28、e engaged in the process of knowledge exchange and utilization, and has generally neglected multilevel impacts. We begin to address these issues in this study by drawing upon three complementary motivational theories and examining how they interact to explain the motivational mechanisms underlying k
29、nowledge transfer and utilization. In doing so, we incorporate variables that reside at multiple levels of analysis. Theoretical Model The theoretical model we develop reflects a multilevel view of the process of knowledge exchange between providers and recipients and is derived from a review of the
30、 motivation and knowledgesharing literatures. Our review suggests that there are at least three motivational perspectives that are useful when considering knowledge sharing by providers and use of shared knowledge by recipients. Further, we argue that there are several places where these theories ca
31、n be combined in an interactive form to better explain knowledge transfer and utilization. This approach has the potential to more effectively account for variance in motivational outcomes than if the theories were simply combined in an additive fashion. 译文 基于知识共享与行为分析的激励机制多样化研究 资料来源 : Organization
32、Science Vol. 18, No. 1, January February 2007, pp. 71 88 作者： Narda R. Quigley Paul E. Tesluk, Edwin A. Locke, Kathryn M. Bartol 摘要 这次研究借鉴三个不同但是互补的激励理论，我们以互动的方式结合起来，解释强调在知识提供者和接收者和终于冲击 表现之间的交换的机制。更具体的说，我们使用的激励，目标设置社会认知，并且社会刺激理论审查分享在二和它的对个人成绩的影响之内的知识。 120 位参与者参加者起作用，相互依赖的经理完成了一个战略战略决策模拟。等级制度的退化和塑造技术的任
33、意系数被用于测试被假设的关系。结果表明当知识共享更积极的规范的存在于两个成员之间时，集团化的激励制度对知识提供者的效果是被提高了。当接收者信任提供者时，接收者的自我效力与业绩目标有着更加牢固的关系。最终，自定目标和知识共享对个人绩效有直接和相互的影响。我们认为，这些研究结果构成了在中 等范围非常有用前进的动力（ Landy and Becker 1987,Pinder 1984）有关理论对于知识的共享和使用。 关键词 ：知识共享；动机；绩效；多层次模型 概述 学者和业内人士逐渐地利用知识的关键性对组织的效能来注视一个组织的能力来促进交流（ cf. Bock and Kim 2002, Kogu
34、t and Zander 1996, Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995, Tsai 2001）。特别是在新兴的分布式组织结构，效力依赖于多么恰当的知识分享在个人，团队，和 /或单位之 间（ Alavi and Leidner 2001, Argote et al. 2000, Goodman and Darr 1998,Pentland 1995）。越来越多的证据暗示组织更有效率，当他们能够成功地创造条件，其中知识被潜在的提供者分享，然后新知识的接受者积极地投入使用（ Argote et al. 1990, Baum and Ingram 1998）。这并不奇怪，因此，来自几个
35、不同领域的学者积极地去学习知识管理，它关系到效力。例如，战略与组织学习的研究人员已经考虑到企业层面的知识管理问题（ e.g., Cole 1998, Kogut and Zander 1996,Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995, Spender and Grant 1996），而信息技术（ IT）和组织设计研究人员认为组织系统能够使知识交流（ e.g., Alavi and Leidner 2001, Pentland 1995）。对他们来说，组织行为学研究人员和社会心理学家已经考虑人际关系问题和知识管理中的知识群体动力的作用（ e.g., Bartol and Srivast
36、ava 2002, Moreland and Myaskovsky 2000,Stasser and Titus 2003）。 在他们试图建立一个更清楚地了解的知识共享和在接受者和提供者之间的使用过程，跨学科的研究人员已经注意到了这些动机的关键作用（ e.g., Argote and Ingram 2000; Alavi and Leidner 2001;Hansen 1999; Goodman and Darr 1998; Spender and Grant 1996; Szulanski 1996, 2000）。例如，以前的工作建议，知识提供者的动力最重要是，在努力从事，所需的时间进行知识
37、转让，克服信息涉及有关所有权（ Davenport and Prusak 1998, Goodman and Darr 1998, Hansen et al.2005, Kostova 1999）。同样，研究人员已开始研究激励因素如何影响接受者寻求和接收的范围，和利用外部知识（ Hayes and Clark 1985, Katz and Allen 1982, Levin and Cross 2004, Mayer et al. 1995, Srinivas 2000, Szulanski 1996）。 然而，当学习知识的共享和利用过程中尽管强调对激励因素感兴趣，那些在现有的文献中还是有一些
38、局限性。首先，他没有连贯性和完整性。激励因素的理论框架解释知识是如何被转移的在提供者和接收者之间，然后被利用于许多方式有益于表现。例如，对预言的知识分享感兴趣的研究员使用了从社会刺激理论的概念，比如信任，帮助解释知识的转移（ e.g., Levin and Cross 2004），而另一些则 更多地依赖于奖励和激励理论去学习激励对知识共享的影响 (e.g., Kalman et al. 2002); 但没有系统的尝试已作出任何比较或整合这些不同的潜在的激励机制来解释知识共享。因此，我们不知道知识共享会不会更好的预测，当不同的激励观点被包括在一起的时候，将会在学习案件中如何奖励和社会动机因素，比
39、如分享的范围，可以结合预测知识转移。此外，研究未看相关性目标设置和在促进知识运用的社会认知理论，尽管研究显示，运用相关的知识需要高性能的目标设定（ Chesney and Locke 1991）。 对现有的文献 第 2 个限制是，我们知道极少的有关于如何确定激励因素与知识提供者和接受者一起的相互工作，因为在这些领域的激励机制很少研究在一起（ Levin and Cross 2004, Szulanski 1996）。因此，关于激励机制之间如何相互作用和他们对于知识共享和表现所扮演的角色，没有系统的被学习。不同的理论观点因素将不一定与附加地工作在一起，不同的因素可能对任何综合模型的不同部位有效果
40、。例如，奖励可能会影响知识分享，而目标可能会影响知识的运用。 Pinder (1984) and Landy and Becker (1987)指出考虑合并的过程和多种理论相互影响作为新的“中等范围” 激励理论的发展。就知识共享来说，一项新的中等范围的理论将集中的预测一组特定的结果如知识转移和利用被包括了多重理论观点的。 对现有研究的第三个限制是，虽然激励机制所涉及的知识转移和利用已经被确认为缘于个人和社会的因素，和组织层次的分析（ Szulanski 1996, 2000），大多数研究都集中在一个层次分析一次。他的大部分以后被完成了在组织水平（ e.g., Goodman and Darr
41、1998），使它很难直接审查具体的激励机制，影响实际知识交流和使用（ Argote and Ingram 2000）。单级的方法可能忽略重要的多层次关系，比如说组织因素的影响（例如，激励措施）可能有对潜在的知识提供者个体层次的动机或对集团层面有着突发性的影响（例如，规范）可能有潜在的知识提供者的个体水平表现。 总的说来，以前的研究探索的动机因素是帮助解释知识的转让和利用在潜在的提供者和接受者之间的，已经缺乏一个完整的理论框架，很少同时考虑提供者和接受者因为他们从事知识交流和利用的过程，普遍的忽视多层次的影响。我们借鉴三个互补的激励理论来开始解决本研究中的这 些问题，检查他们如何相互影响去解释激励机制的基本知识转移和利用。这样做，我们加入的因素存在于多层次的分析。 理论模型 我们开发的理论模型反映了人们对知识交流的过程中多级视图在接受者和提供者之间，是源于一个动机的审查和知识共享文献。我们的审查表明，至少有三个动机观点是有用的当考虑提供者和使用知识的分享者的知识共享。另外，我们认为有几个地方，这些理论的形式可以在一个互动相结合，以更好地解释和运用知识转移。这种方法有潜力更有效地说明不同在动机成果比如果理论是简单地合并在一个附加的方式。
