Purpose
The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation on knowledge sharing and the moderating effects of individual demographics, organizational context and cultural context in that relationship.
Design/methodology/approach
This study conducted a meta-analysis of 44 studies involving 14,023 participants to examine the direct and moderating effects of motivation on knowledge sharing.
Findings
Results revealed that both extrinsic and intrinsic motivational factors were associated with higher levels of knowledge sharing, while the effect was stronger for intrinsic motivation. Moreover, results revealed that substantial variance was explained by moderating variables. Further investigation revealed that individual characteristics (age, gender), organizational context (organizational setting vs. open system, IT infrastructure) and cultural context (collectivism, uncertainty avoidance, performance orientation, power distance) moderated the motivation and knowledge sharing relationship.
Research limitations/implications
As a meta-analysis, this study is confined to variables that have been frequently analyzed in prior research. Future research could further increase our understanding of different types of knowledge sharing and various boundary conditions.
Practical implications
Organizations should provide customized incentive systems to specific target groups to align motivation and knowledge sharing. Multinational organizations may consider different motivation schemes across countries to better suit cultural differences.
Originality/value
Despite a growing number of studies highlighting the important role of motivation in predicting knowledge sharing, the evidence is mixed. Based on a meta-analysis, this study identified true relationships and identified moderating effects that help explain prior mixed results.
PurposeOnline knowledge sharing is a critical process for maintaining organisational competitive advantage. This paper aims to develop a new conceptual framework that investigates the moderating impacts of innovation on self-efficacy, extrinsic and intrinsic rewards on employees’ online knowledge sharing behaviour in public and private sector companies.Design/methodology/approachThis research analysed 200 responses to test the moderating effects of organisational innovation on the relationship between self-efficacy and rewards and online knowledge sharing behviours. The analysis was carried out using component-based partial least squares (PLS) approach and SmartPLS 3 software.FindingsThe results reveal that self-efficacy significantly affects online knowledge sharing behaviour in firms, regardless of the organisation type. Extrinsic rewards encourage employees in private companies to share knowledge online, whereas intrinsic rewards work effectively in public companies. Additionally, the study found the moderating role of organisational innovation in examining the relationship between rewards and online knowledge sharing behaviour.Research limitations/implicationsFuture research may consider different dimensions such as knowledge donating and collecting behaviours as well as motives, such as self-enjoyment, reciprocity or social interaction ties, which may be investigated to get a deeper understanding of online knowledge sharing behaviour.Practical implicationsFirms must tailor training and rewards to suit employees’ abilities and needs so as to align with organisation type and innovation.Originality/valueThe study’s distinctive contribution is the under-researched context of Vietnamese public and private sector banks for investigating the moderating effects of organisational innovation on micro and meso factors on online knowledge sharing behaviour.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.