Aykut GÖKSEL, Belgin AYDINTAN, Dursun BİNGÖL

Örtülü bilgi paylaşım niyeti üzerinde sosyal sermaye ve denetim merkezi odaklılığının rolü: Hekimlikte bir alan araştırması

Örgütler sosyo-teknik sistemler olarak tanımlanmakta, örgütün gelişme ve devamını oluşturan temel unsur insan olmaktadır. İnsan örgütte diğer bireylerle iletişim ve etkileşim içinde yaşamını sürdürmektedir. Biçimsel olarak elde ettiği bilgilerden hareketle, kendi tecrübe ve entelektüel özellikleri sayesinde kendine özgü yöntem, sorun çözme yaklaşımı, davranışlar, ürünler geliştirmektedir. Bu şekillerde kendini gösteren bilgiye örtülü bilgi denmekte ve örtülü bilginin örgüt içinde paylaşılması, başkalarının da yapabileceği, kodifiye edilen açık bilgi haline getirilmesi, örgütün yaşama ve rekabet gücü açısından önem taşımaktadır. Bireyin sahip olduğu örtülü bilgiyi, örgütteki yaşamı boyunca diğer bireylerle olan ilişki ve iletişimleri yoluyla paylaşıldığı görülmektedir. Bu durum örgüt sosyal dokusu içinde var olan sosyal sermayenin önemini arttırmaktadır. Sosyal sermaye yapısal, ilişkisel ve bilişsel boyutlardan oluşmakta ve bireyler arasındaki iletişim ve etkileşimde rol oynamaktadır. Çalışmanın araştırdığı ilk ilişki, soysal sermayenin bireyin örtülü bilgi paylaşım niyeti üzerindeki ilişkisidir. Çalışma ikinci olarak bireyin sahip olduğu örtülü bilgiyi paylaşım niyetinin, paylaşım davranışına dönüşüp dönüşmediğini araştırırken, son olarak ta, bireyin içsel ve dışsal kontrol odaklı olmasının örtülü bilgi paylaşım niyeti üzerindeki etkisini incelemektedir. Tıp, örtülü bilginin üretildiği, paylaşıldığı ve aktarıldığı çalışma alanlarından birisi olması sebebiyle uygulama merkezi olarak seçilmiştir. Çalışma, sosyal sermayenin ve içsel denetimin örtülü bilgi paylaşım niyetini pozitif olarak arttırdığı ve bireylerin örtülü bilgi paylaşım niyetlerinin, örtülü bilgiyi paylaşma davranışına dönüştüğünü göstermektedir

The role of social capital and locus of control on tacıt knowledge sharing intention: A field study in medicine

Organizations are defined as socio-technical systems, people is essential for the development and existence of the organizations. People live in the organizations by communicating and interacting with others. They develop their own methods of problem-solving approach, behaviors and products depending on their personal experience, intellectual property, and the explicit knowledge has been learned. This kind of knowledge is called tacit knowledge and the transformation of tacit knowledge in explicit knowledge by sharing, teaching and codifying it is crucial for the competition power and the survival of the organizations. It is observed that individual who has tacit knowledge; shares it with the other actors of the organization by means of relationship, communication and interaction, throughout his organizational life. This situation increases the importance of social capital existing in the social structure and tissue of the organization. Social capital consists of structural, relational and cognitive dimensions and plays an important role in communication and interaction among people. Structural social capital dimension is conceptualized as a encompassing network ties, network configuration and network appropriability. Network ties connect between members of organization these connections influence on information transfer, organizational learning, and the execution of organizational activities. For example transformation of information of knowledge occurs when employees are interconnected. A network configuration factors revolve around such characteristics as structural holes for example the absence of connections between employees, centralization for example connections are concentrated among a few employees, and density, for example total number of potential connections among all employees. Network appropriability affects the flow of information and assistance between a network. It relates to the ease with which different types of relationships in a network. For example, an employee can transfer his or her knowledge to his or her friend that makes his friend executes his own job easily. Connections established between individuals relevant both formal and informal contexts. Relational social capital is characterized by trust, shared norms and perceived obligations, and a sense of mutual identification. It is similar to connections between individuals that are characterized by trust, reciprocity, and emotional intensity. The relational dimension of social capital concerns affective relationships between employees (i.e. like, trust, and identify). Interpersonal trust includes good intentions, openness, competence, and reliability of an other party. Trust facilitates social and resources exchange, increases communication, and enhances cooperation between individuals. Also trust may increase innovation enhance team work, and improve organizational functioning. Cognitive social capital consists of shared language, shared narratives, and collective mind. Existence of shared language and shared narratives facilitates transferring ideas, discussing problems, sharing knowledge, and helping to one an other. Shared language provides effective communication among organizational members. Common language provides exchange information and assistance to other employees and enables them to perceive and interpret events in similar ways. Shared narratives are the myths stories, and the metaphors that enable communications among organizational members. Collective mind provides shared perspectives and develops similar organizational behaviors against the same kind of organizational problems. Theory of planned behavior investigates the roles of attitudes, norms over behavior and behavior’s intentions. Also theory of planned behavior is interested in transformation of behavior intention to behavior action. Locus of control is a main part of planned behavior theory effecting personnel behaviors. Components of locus of control are internal and external control which influences the behavior intention and behavior action. In this context, it is assumed that internal and external control influence also tacit knowledge sharing intention. This paper investigates firstly the effect of social capital on the tacit knowledge sharing intention, secondly the relation of locus of control and tacit knowledge sharing intention and finally paper aims to find out if the tacit knowledge sharing intention results in tacit knowledge sharing behavior? Medicine, being the widely produced, shared and transferred area of tacit knowledge, is chosen as the research field.The multi variable regression analysis is used to explore the relations hypnotized among social capital, locus of control and tacit knowledge sharing intention. The results of the paper exhibit the positive relation between social capital and internal control with tacit knowledge sharing intention and expose that tacit knowledge intention is resulting in tacit knowledge behavior.

PDF

___

ARGYRIS, C. (1991), “Teaching Smart People How To Learn”, Harvard Business Review, 69(3), 99–109.
ARGYRIS, C. (1994), On Organizational Learning, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.
AJZEN, I. (1985), From Intention To Behavior: A Theory of Planned Behavior. In J.
Kunl & J. Beckman (Eds.), Action Control: From Cognitions To Behaviors (S. 11–39), New York: Springer.
AJZEN, I. (1991), “The Theory of Planned Behavior”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.
AJZEN, I. (2002), “Perceived Behavior Control, Self-Efficacy, Locus of Control, and The Theory of Planned Behavior”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 665–683.
ALAVI, M. (2000),"Managing Organizational Knowledge," In Framing The Domains of IT Management Research: Glimpsing The Future Through The Past, R. W. Zmud (Ed.), Pinnaflex Educational Resources, Cincinnati, OH,
ALAVI, M. and LEIDNER, D. E. (2001), “Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems: Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues”, MIS Quarterly, 25(1), 107–136.
ALBRECHT, K. (2003), The Power of Minds At Work: Organizational Intelligence In Action, American Management Association.
ARMITAGE, C. J., CONNER, M., LOACH, J. and WILLETTS, D. (1999), “Different Perceptions of Control: Applying An Extended Theory of Planned Behavior To Legal and Illegal Drug Use”, Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 21(4), 301–316.
ARMITAGE, C. J. and CONNER, M. (2001), “Efficacy of The Theory of Planned Behavior: A meta-Analytic Review”, British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 471–499.
BERGER, P. L. and Luckman, T. (1966), The Social Construction of Reality. Penguin Press, London.
BERMAN, S. L., DOWN, J. and HILL, C.W. L. (2002), “Tacit Knowledge As A Source of Competitive Advantage In The National Basketball Association”, Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 13–31.
BOCK, G. W., ZMUD, R. W., KIM, Y. G. and LEE, J. N. (2005), “Behavioral Intention Formation In Knowledge Sharing: Examining The Roles of Extrinsic Motivators, Social–Psychological Forces, and Organizational Climate”, MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 1–26
BOLINO, M. C., TURNLEY, W. H. and BLOODGOOD, J. M. (2002), “Citizenship Behavior and The Creation of Social Capital in Organizations”, Academy of Management Review, 27(4), 505-522.
BURT, R. S. (1992), Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition, MA: Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
BURT, R. S. (1997), “The Contingent Value of Social Capital”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 339–365.
CHOI, B. and LEE, H. (2003), “An Empirical Investigation of KM Styles and Their Effect on Corporate Performance”, Information & Management, 40, 403–417.
COLEMAN, J. S. (1988), “Social Capital In The Creation of Human Capital”, American Journal of Sociology, 94: S95-S120.
COLEMAN, J. S. (1990), Foundations of Social Theory, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
CONNER, M. and ARMITAGE, C. J. (1998), “Extending The Theory of Planned Behavior: A Review For Further Research”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1429–1464.
DAVENPORT, H. T. ve PRUSAK, L. (2001), İş Dünyasında Bilgi Yönetimi, Rota Yayınları, İstanbul.
FITCH, J. L. and RAVLIN, E. C. (2005), “Willpower and Perceived Behavioral Control: Influences on The Intention Behavior Relationship and Postbehavior Attributions”, Social Behavior and Personality, 33(2), 105–124.
GRANOVETTER, M. S. (1973), “The Strength of Weak Ties”, American Journal of Sociology, 78: 1360-1380.
HOEGL, M. and SCHULZE A. (2005), “Hoe To Support Knowledge Creation In New Product Development: An Investigation of Knowledge Management Methods”, European Management Journal, 23(3),262-273.
KOLB, D. A. (1984), Experiential Learning: Experience As The Source of Learning and Development, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
KOSKINEN, K,.U and PIHLANTO, P,. (2006), “Competence Tarnsfer from Old Timers to Newcomers Analysed With the Help of the Holistic Concept of Man”, Knowledge and Process Management, 13(1),3-12.
KRACKHARDT, D. (1989), “Graph Theoretical Dimensions of Informal Organization. Paper Presented At”, The Annual Meeting of The Academy of Management, Washington, DC.
LEANA, C. R. and VAN BUREN, H. J. III (1999), “Organizational Social Capital and Employement Practices”, Academy of Management Review, 24, 538-555.
LEIDNER, E. D. and ELAM, J. J. (1995), “The Impact of Executive Information Systems on Organizational Design, Intelligence, and Decision Making”, Organization Science, Vol.6, No.6, November-December, S. 645-664.
MARSICK, V. J. (1988), “Learning In The Workplace: The Case For Reflectivity and Critical Reflectivity”, Adult Education Quarterly, 38(4), 187–198.
MARSICK, V. J. and Watkins, K. E. (1997), Lessons From Informal and Incidental Learning. In J. Burgoyne & M. Reynolds (Eds.), Management Learning: Integrating Perspectives In Theory and Practice (Pp. 295–311), London: Sage.
MCALLISTER, D. J. (1995), “Affect and Cognition Based Trust As Foundations For Interpersonal Cooperation In Organizations”, Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 24–59.
MORAN, P. and GHOSHAL, S. (1996), “Value Creation by Firms”. In J. B. Keys & L. N. Dosier (Eds.), Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings, 41-45.
NAHAPIET, J. and GHOSHAL, S.(1998), “Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and The Organizational Advantage”, Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242–266.
NEISSER, U. (1976), General, Academic, and Artificial Intelligence. In L. Resnick (Ed.), Human Intelligence: Perspectives on Its Theory and Measurement (Pp. 179–189), Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
NOHRIA, N. (1992), Information and Search In The Creation of New Business ventures. In N. Nohria & R. G. Eccles (Eds.), Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form and Action, 240-261, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
NONAKA, I. (1994), “A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation”, Organization Science, 5(1), 14–37.
NONAKA, I., and TAKEUCHI, H. (1995), The Knowledge Creating Company, Oxford University Press, New York.
OSTERLOH, M. and FREY, B. S. (2000), “Motivation, Knowledge Transfer, and Organizational Forms”, Organization Science, 11(5), 538–550.
POLANYI, M. (1966), The Tacit Dimension, Garden City, NY: Doubleday and Company.
POLANYI, M. (1967), The Tacit Dimension, Routledge and Keoan Paul, London.
PONDY, L. R. and MITROFF, I. I. (1979), “Beyond Open Systems Models of Organizations”, In B M. Staw (Ed.), Research In Organization Behavior, Vol. 1: 3-39, CT: JAI Press, Greenwich.
PUTNAM, R. D. (1993), “The Prosperous Community: Social Capital and Public Life”, American Prospect, 13: 35-42.
PUTNAM, R. D. (1995), “Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital”, Journal of Democracy, 6: 65-78.
RAELIN, J. A. (1997), “A Model of Work-Based Learning”, Organization Science, 8(6),563–578.
SCHÖN, D. A. (1983), The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think In Action. Basic Books, Inc.
SCOTT, J. (1991), Social Network Analysis: A Handbook, Sage, Simon, H, London.
SEIBERT, K. W. and Daudelin, M. W. (1999), The Role of Reflection In Managerial Learning: Theory, Research, and Practice, CT: Quorum, Westport.
SMEDLUND, A. (2008), “The Knowledge System of A Firm: Social Capital For Explicit and Potential Knowledge”, Journal of Knowledge Management, 12(1), 63-77.
STERNBERG, R. J. (1998), “Principles of Teaching For Successful Intelligence”, Educational Psychologist, 33: 65–72.
STERNBERG, R. J. and Horvath, J. A. (Eds.). (1999), Tacit Knowledge In Professional Practice., Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
TICHY, N. M., TUSHMAN, M. L. and FOMBRUN, C. (1979), “Social Network Analysis For Organizations”, Academy of Management Review, 4: 507-519.
TSAI. C., CHANG C. and CHEN L. (2006), “A Case Study of Knowledge Management Implementation For Information Consulting Company”, International Journal of The Computer, Vol.14 (3), 60-78.
TSAI,W., and GHOSHAL, S. (1998), “Social Capital and Value Creation: The Role of Intrafirm Networks”, Academy of Management Journal, 41(4), 464–476.
WASSERMAN, S. and FAUST, K. (1994), Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications, England: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
WEGNER, D. M. (1987), “Transactive Memory: A Contemporary Analysis of The Group Mind”, In B. Mullen & G. R. Goethasis (Eds.), Theories of Group Behavior, 185- 208, New York: Springerverlag.
WEGNER, D. M., Erber, R. and Raymond, P. (1991), “Transactive Memory In Close Relationships”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61: 923-929.
WEGNER, D. M., Giuliano and Hertel, P. T. (1985), “Cognitive Interdependence In Close Relationships”, In W. J. Ickes (Ed.), Compatible and Incompatible Relationships, 253-276, New York: Springerverlag.
WEICK, K. E. and ROBERTS, K. H. (1993), “Collective Mind In Organizations: Heedful Interrelating on Flight Decks”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 38: 357-381.