Organizational antecedents and multiple paths of knowledge-sharing behavior of construction project members: evidence from Chinese construction enterprises

Abstract

PurposeLack of knowledge-sharing behavior (KSB) among construction project members hinders propagation of expertise, working methods, and lessons learned within an organization, and deprives the organization of a sustainable competitive edge. The present study investigates the combined effect of organizational antecedents of construction projects on members' KSB and provides a reference for developing management initiatives to motivate KSB.Design/methodology/approachBased on organizational theory and organizational behavior literature, five organizational antecedents associated with KSB from organizational culture and structure were identified. Subsequently, the authors used survey data from 152 organization members in Chinese construction enterprises to conduct the fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) and reveal configurations of organizational antecedents influencing KSB.FindingsThis study identifies five configuration paths that are sufficient for shaping the KSB of construction project members, integrated into two types of driving modes, namely “trust-driven” and “incentive-driven”. Relevant discussions can guide managers of construction project organizations to position the driving strategies of KSB that match different organizational scenarios or constraints.Originality/valueBy analyzing the configuration effects of organizational antecedents on KSB, novel clues are provided for governing the deficiency of KSB among construction project members. This contributes to the literature on knowledge transfer and organizational behavior. The findings provide actionable insights for improving knowledge flow in construction project organizations and designing KSB guidance regimes.

Linking sustainable leadership with sustainable project performance: mediating role of knowledge integration and moderating role of top management knowledge values

“…The current research expands upon previous studies by examining the mediating role of knowledge integration between sustainable leadership and sustainable project performance. Prior research has neglected to examine how sustainable leaders integrate sustainability practices with their management style (Cheng and Yin, 2022). In large-scale construction projects, success often hinges on the team's ability to integrate and absorb knowledge and tools related to sustainable development goals (SDGs).…”

The mediating role of social dynamics in the influence of absorptive capacity and tacit knowledge sharing on project performance

“…Due to the inevitable unpredictability seen in project management, the need for knowledge governance is substantial. According to Cheng and Yin (2022), complicated projects are a challenging issue that generally includes inadequate pre-given knowledge. Carrillo et al.…”

“…Due to the inevitable unpredictability seen in project management, the need for knowledge governance is substantial. According to Cheng and Yin (2022), complicated projects are a challenging issue that generally includes inadequate pre-given knowledge. Carrillo et al (2013) also argue that complicated projects necessitate a project-wide technique for knowledge creation in which project team members take into mind their objectives and are informed by organizational decisions.…”

Critical factors influencing learning from quality failures in the construction of grid infrastructure

“…A just culture encourages employees to report unfavorable events, and the workers feel threatened and fear punishment within the blame culture (Stemn et al, 2018). Cheng and Yin (2022) found that organizational culture-associated factors, such as trust, supportive climate and incentives, motivate knowledge sharing among construction workers, while Zhou et al (2022) concluded that organizational culture is not significantly associated with knowledge dissemination. The proposed influence model for LFQF is expected to be further examined in different learning contexts.…”