تعهد سیستم دانش و قصد به اشتراک گذاری دانش
Abstract
1- Introduction
2- Theoretical foundation and hypotheses
3- Research methodology
4- Data analysis and results
5- Discussion
6- Conclusion
References
Abstract
Knowledge management systems (KMSs) provide organizations processes and tools to capture, organize, and manage knowledge. A plethora of research has investigated how technical and social aspects of KMSs impact users’ intentions and usage behavior. Recent inquiries on KMSs have begun to explore individual related factors such as individual motivation and personal information management practices. This study explores the effect of personal information management motivation (specifically information proactiveness, transparency, and formality) on users’ commitment to knowledge systems. Theoretically grounded in the three-component model of commitment, the research model tests the relationships between personal information management motivation and the affective, calculative, and normative dimensions of commitment. Survey results of 78 accounting professionals demonstrate that information formality has the strongest effect on users’ knowledge system commitment compared to information proactiveness and transparency. This study contributes to knowledge management research by incorporating and emphasizing the power of “person” in knowledge management.
Introduction
Knowledge management systems (KMSs) provide organizations with processes and tools to capture, organize, and manage knowledge. A plethora of research across different disciplines has studied various facets of KMSs (e.g., Argote, McEvily, & Reagans, 2003; Alavi, 2000) applying a rich array of theoretical foundations and methodologies (e.g., He & Wei, 2009; Lin & Fan, 2012; Qian & Bock, 2005). While early KMS research focused on information technology (IT) related topics, in recent years researchers have realized that KMSs are socio-technical systems with both technological and social components across different levels of the organization (Alavi & Leidner, 1999). As a result, much previous research has examined the technical and social aspects of KMSs and their impact on individuals’ knowledge sharing intentions and usage behaviors (e.g., He & Wei, 2009; Quian & Bock, 2005; Lin, 2007; Bringula, 2016; Savoy & Salvendy, 2016). As research on KMSs continues to evolve from multiple perspectives, recent dialogues on knowledge management have started to emphasize the importance of “the individual” and “personal knowledge management” (Pauleen, 2009; Kelly, 2006). In his editorial paper in the European Journal of Information Systems, Baskerville (2017) explained the importance of “individual” information systems (IS). He commented, Does a meaningful IS always require an organization? Such a view point overlooks the essential human progress enabled by the ICT now available to individuals. It overlooks the way in which individual IS have evolved into rather a complete and legitimate form of IS. As technological evolution has enabled more-and-more complex individual IS, it seems that these could easily become the most prevalent of all kinds of such systems. Ignoring individual IS within our discipline is an evolutionary oversight that may simply reflect our own assumption that personal, individual IS are uninteresting. (2011, p. 253)