2012
DOI: 10.1080/09585192.2011.654234
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Examining the mechanisms linking guanxi, norms and knowledge sharing: the mediating roles of trust in Taiwan's high-tech firms

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

5
35
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 43 publications
(40 citation statements)
references
References 81 publications
5
35
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Furthermore, the results highlight the role of trust as a contextual factor in the Chinese culture, where trustful relationship leads to strong ties (Tortoriello et al, 2012), so there will be less concerns for knowledge being misused (Krackhardt, 1999;McEvily, 2003, 2008). This finding captures the relationship aspect of knowledge transformation, and further contributes to the literature on mechanism of knowledge transformation, as trustful relationship facilitates shared values and understanding of interests among knowledge actors so they are able to engage in knowledge transform at pragmatic boundaries (Wang et al, 2012;Qian et al, 2019).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 59%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Furthermore, the results highlight the role of trust as a contextual factor in the Chinese culture, where trustful relationship leads to strong ties (Tortoriello et al, 2012), so there will be less concerns for knowledge being misused (Krackhardt, 1999;McEvily, 2003, 2008). This finding captures the relationship aspect of knowledge transformation, and further contributes to the literature on mechanism of knowledge transformation, as trustful relationship facilitates shared values and understanding of interests among knowledge actors so they are able to engage in knowledge transform at pragmatic boundaries (Wang et al, 2012;Qian et al, 2019).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 59%
“…In the context of China, they are crucial as it is a country where guanxi is embedded in the culture. Guanxi is viewed as interpersonal bonds that are cultivated through long-term relationship building to create certain expectations and duties in daily interactions, business activities and organizational behaviors (Wang et al, 2012). Existing literature about Chinese firms has found that in situations where there is a highly trustful relationship or there is perceived shared understanding of interests and common values, parties are more willing to engage in social exchange and cooperative interactions such as knowledge transfer (Wang et al, 2012;Qian et al, 2019).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although we tried to minimize the common method bias and enhance the objectivity of the data by measuring KSB using a different source (i.e., supervisors), these problems still cannot be entirely ruled out. For example, in the Chinese culture, guanxi is an important factor affects how followers exchange with their leaders (Wang et al, 2012). Many Chinese workers may focus more on developing "upward" relationships with their leaders and be less willing to invest in "downward" associations with their subordinates (Kim et al, 2015).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Particularly, in China, there is a special form of interpersonal relationship between leaders and followers called workplace guanxi, referring to interpersonal bonds that can create specific expectations and duties (Law et al, 2000). Guanxi plays an important role in affecting the exchange of personal resources and information in China (Wang et al, 2012).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…EEIN is likely to be associated with attempts to develop high trust relations and to maximize employee voice, shown to assist in retaining staff in developed country contexts (Croucher et al, 2011). A knowledge-sharing strategy may be fostered by high-trust relations, which tend to reduce employees' propensity to hoard knowledge as a source of perceived individual advantage within organizations (Wang et al, 2012).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%