Team personality composition, affective ties and knowledge sharing: a team-level analysis

As knowledge has become the most valuable asset for organizations in the knowledge economy age, the related issue of knowledge management has attracted increasing attention. In particular, the concept of knowledge sharing, a necessary process for organisations seeking fruitful knowledge transfer and creation can help organisations gain and sustain a competitive advantage. In this study, we investigate the issue of knowledge sharing based on the input-process-output (IPO) model at the team level. Fifty-three teams composed of 205 employees participated in this exploration of the relationships among team personality composition (based on a five-factor personality model), team process (affective ties) and team outcomes (knowledge sharing). With respect to team personality composition, higher team mean levels of conscientiousness, agreeableness, openness to experience and extroversion corresponded with higher levels of knowledge sharing. Agreeableness and extroversion also were associated with knowledge shari...

[1]  W. Graziano,et al.  Perceiving interpersonal conflict and reacting to it: the case for agreeableness. , 1996, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[2]  J. H. Gittell.  Organizing work to support relational co-ordination , 2000 .

[3]  Murray R. Barrick,et al.  Autonomy as a moderator of the relationships between the Big Five personality dimensions and job performance. , 1993 .

[4]  Chi-Sum Wong,et al.  The construct and criterion validity of emotional intelligence and its potential utility for management studies. , 2004, The Journal of applied psychology.

[5]  J. B. Quinn,et al.  Managing professional intellect: making the most of the best. , 1996, Harvard business review.

[6]  Michael J. Strube,et al.  Actual and Perceived Group Performance as a Function of Group Composition: The Moderating Role of the Type A and B Behavior Patterns1 , 1989 .

[7]  D. Mackie,et al.  Intergroup relations. , 2019, Annual Review of Psychology.

[8]  Murray R. Barrick,et al.  THE BIG FIVE PERSONALITY DIMENSIONS AND JOB PERFORMANCE: A META-ANALYSIS , 1991 .

[9]  Alan R. DeBiasio.  Problem solving in triads composed of varying numbers of field-dependent and field-independent subjects. , 1986 .

[10]  M. Diehl.  The Minimal Group Paradigm: Theoretical Explanations and Empirical Findings , 1990 .

[11]  P. Blau.  Exchange and Power in Social Life , 1964 .

[12]  G. Neuman,et al.  Team effectiveness: beyond skills and cognitive ability. , 1999, The Journal of applied psychology.

[13]  H. Liao,et al.  A MULTILEVEL INVESTIGATION OF FACTORS INFLUENCING EMPLOYEE SERVICE PERFORMANCE AND CUSTOMER OUTCOMES , 2004 .

[14]  D. Watson,et al.  Negative affectivity: the disposition to experience aversive emotional states. , 1984, Psychological bulletin.

[15]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[16]  S. G. Cohen,et al.  What Makes Teams Work: Group Effectiveness Research from the Shop Floor to the Executive Suite , 1997 .

[17]  S. Srivastava,et al.  The Big Five Trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. , 1999 .

[18]  V. Mahajan,et al.  The Effect of Reward Structures on the Performance of Cross-Functional Product Development Teams , 2001 .

[19]  J. Bonache,et al.  Assessing the team environment for knowledge sharing: an empirical analysis , 2003 .

[20]  Roderick M. Kramer,et al.  The Psychology of Intergroup Attitudes and Behavior , 1985 .

[21]  Murray R. Barrick,et al.  Relating member ability and personality to work-team processes and team effectiveness. , 1998 .

[22]  Dustin York,et al.  Sharing the knowledge , 2011, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[23]  E. Levine,et al.  Personality structure: a culture-specific examination of the five-factor model , 1995 .

[24]  Gwo-Guang Lee,et al.  Perceptions of senior managers toward knowledge‐sharing behaviour , 2004 .

[25]  Paul H. J. Hendriks,et al.  Why share knowledge? The influence of ICT on the motivation for knowledge sharing , 1999 .

[26]  Samer Faraj,et al.  Why Should I Share? Examining Social Capital and Knowledge Contribution in Electronic Networks of Practice , 2005, MIS Q..

[27]  S. Ghoshal,et al.  Social Capital and Value Creation: The Role of Intrafirm Networks , 1998 .

[28]  G. Currie,et al.  Human resource management and knowledge management: enhancing knowledge sharing in a pharmaceutical company , 2003 .

[29]  G. Stewart,et al.  Composition, process, and performance in self-managed groups: the role of personality. , 1997, The Journal of applied psychology.

[30]  Wei-Li Wu,et al.  Fostering the determinants of knowledge transfer: a team-level analysis , 2007, J. Inf. Sci..

[31]  J. Kratzer,et al.  Keeping Virtual R&D Teams Creative , 2005 .

[32]  P. Costa,et al.  Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. , 1987, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[33]  Dennis W. Organ,et al.  Dispositional and contextual determinants of organizational citizenship behavior , 1996 .

[34]  Anil K. Gupta,et al.  Knowledge flows within multinational corporations , 2000 .

[35]  I. Steiner.  Group process and productivity , 1972 .

[36]  P. Costa,et al.  Evaluating replicability of factors in the Revised NEO Personality Inventory: Confirmatory factor analysis versus Procrustes rotation. , 1996 .

[37]  Dennis W. Organ,et al.  Personality and Organizational Citizenship Behavior , 1994 .

[38]  Chih-Chien Wang,et al.  Personality and intention to share knowledge: An empirical study of scientists in an R&D Laboratory , 2007 .

[39]  Fox Butterfield,et al.  China, alive in the bitter sea = 苦海余生 , 1982 .

[40]  Daniel R. Ilgen,et al.  Effects of individual differences on the performance of hierarchical decision-making teams : Much more than g , 1997 .

[41]  Young-Gul Kim,et al.  Breaking the Myths of Rewards: An Exploratory Study of Attitudes about Knowledge Sharing , 2002, Inf. Resour. Manag. J..

[42]  Morten T. Hansen,et al.  KNOWLEDGE SHARING IN ORGANIZATIONS: MULTIPLE NETWORKS, MULTIPLE PHASES , 2005 .

[43]  D. Watson,et al.  Toward a consensual structure of mood. , 1985, Psychological bulletin.

[44]  R. McCrae,et al.  An introduction to the five-factor model and its applications. , 1992, Journal of personality.

[45]  P. Costa,et al.  Personality in adulthood: a six-year longitudinal study of self-reports and spouse ratings on the NEO Personality Inventory. , 1988, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[46]  Murray R. Barrick,et al.  Team Structure and Performance: Assessing the Mediating Role of Intrateam Process and the Moderating Role of Task Type , 2000 .

[47]  Peter F. Drucker,et al.  The Coming of the New Organization , 2001 .

[48]  Jennifer M. George,et al.  Personality, affect, and behavior in groups. , 1990 .

[49]  D. Organ,et al.  A META-ANALYTIC REVIEW OF ATTITUDINAL AND DISPOSITIONAL PREDICTORS OF ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOR , 1995 .

[50]  K. Hwang.  Face and Favor: The Chinese Power Game , 1987, American Journal of Sociology.

[51]  P. Christopher Earley,et al.  EAST MEETS WEST MEETS MIDEAST: FURTHER EXPLORATIONS OF COLLECTIVISTIC AND INDIVIDUALISTIC WORK GROUPS. , 1991 .