بررسی رابطه‌ی آوای کارکنان با تسهیم دانش

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار دانشگاه سیستان و بلوچستان

2 دانشجوی دکترای مدیریت آموزشی، دانشگاه شیراز

چکیده

تسهیم دانش مکانیزمی است که با انتشار و کمک به کاربرد دانش، کارکنان را در تحقق وظایف شغلی خود یاری می‏کند. این مکانیزم می‌تواند تحت تأثیر عوامل مختلف فردی و سازمانی باشد. از این رو مطالعه حاضر با هدف بررسی رابطه بین آوای کارکنان با تسهیم دانش انجام گرفت. روش پژوهش توصیفی از نوع همبستگی بوده و روش جمع‌آوری داده‌ها شامل بررسی پیمایشی می‌باشد. جامعه آماری شامل تمامی اعضای هیات علمی دانشگاه سیستان و بلوچستان بوده که با استفاده از روش نمونه‌گیری تصادفی طبقه‌ای (بر حسب جنسیت، مرتبه علمی و رشته آموزشی) تعداد 183  نفر انتخاب و مورد مطالعه قرار گرفتند. به منظور بررسی متغیرهای پژوهش از پرسشنامه‌های آوای کارکنان و تسهیم دانشاستفاده شد. برای تعیین پایایی از آزمون آلفا کرونباخ استفاده شد که مقدار ضریب‌ برای آوای مطیع 85/0، آوای تدافعی 81/0 و آوای نوع‌دوستانه 79/0 و برای تسهیم دانش 87/0 به دست آمد . برای تجزیه و تحلیل داده‌ها از ضریب همبستگی و رگرسیون چندگانه همزمان با کمک نرم افزارSPSS21  استفاده شد. نتایج نشان داد مقدار ضریب همبستگی آواهای: مطیع، تدافعی و نوع‌دوستانه با تسهیم دانش به ترتیب 577/0-، 409/0- و 671/0 بود (001/0p<). نتایج تحلیل رگرسیون چندگانه نیز نشان داد که آوای کارکنان 3/52 درصد از واریانس تسهیم دانش را تبیین می‌کند (001/0p<) که از بین آوای کارکنان، آوای نوع‌دوستانه با مقدار β (516/0) اثر مثبت و آوای مطیع با مقدار β (329/0-) اثر منفی بر تسهیم دانش دارد (001/0p<). بنابراین با افزایش آواهای مطیع و تدافعی از میزان تسهیم دانش کاسته می‌شود اما با افزایش آوای نوع‌دوستانه بر میزان تسهیم دانش افزوده می‌گردد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The Study of Rrelationship between Employee Voice with Knowledge Sharing

نویسندگان [English]

  • Naser Nastizaee 1
  • Reza Norouzi kohdasht 2
چکیده [English]

Extended Abstract
Sharing knowledge is considered a voluntary and optional work in which a person's knowledge is transferred to others in a comprehensive and efficient way. Accordingly, knowledge will be reachable to everyone and people can share their common experiences and targets, and also exchange their ideas and information (Ipe, 2003). Organizations need to consider how elitism and knowledge are transferred from elites to naive employees who are, in fact, in need of the knowledge. Therefore, it's not sufficient to have the knowledge in an organization, but to exchange I to others to provide them with the possibility of learning from elites which, finally, leads to a useful function (Cross & Sproull, 2004).
Organization voice means the whole tendency of an organization members to present their ideas and thoughts in the job process (Detert & Burris, 2007). Recently, it's been especially important for organizations to pay more attention to employee voice. That's because employees' ideas and thoughts, in one hand, can solve many organization problems, and on the other, it would reflect their interests and expectations to the management (Van Dyne & Le Pine, 1998).
If people are not able to talk about their ideas and information, and prefer silence, they gradually become stressed, nervous, uninterested, and disappointed which results in lack of job satisfaction and commitment. When employees find their ideas and opinions fruitful to primary changes in their job environment, they would work to benefit their organization. However, the concept of organization voice does not necessarily mean positive ideas by employees. Some aspects of this reflection might be considered as destructive and harmful. Thus, the variables to reinforce the positive aspects of organization voice and to ruin the negative ones must be taken into account (Doustar & Esmaeelzadeh, 2013).
If sharing knowledge correctly occurs in the education system, it will lead to many advantages and helpful results. Sharing knowledge among teachers in a true way guarantees the development of best teaching methods in education centers and enables them to easily solve their educational problems and difficulties (Zeinabadi & Mahmoudi, 2016). Therefore, the principals of education centers must search for identifying useful factors in sharing knowledge. In fact, the present study focuses on the employee voice. Thus, the main aim of this study is to determine a relationship between employee voice and sharing knowledge the faculty of Sistan and Balouchestan University.
Case study :
faculty members of university of Sistana and Baluchestan.
Materials and Methods
. Research method was descriptive-correlational and the data was collected through a survey. A sample of 183 faculty members were stratified random selected out of a population all faculty members of university of Sistana and Baluchestan. Research instruments included standard questionnaires employee voice and knowledge sharing. To analyze the obtained data, Pearson correlation coefficient and simultaneous regression analysis were used with SPSS21
Discussion and Results
In first step, the relationship between employee voice and sharing knowledge is considered by the Pearson correlation coefficient as it is shown in table 1.
                       
According to the above table, there is a negative and significant relationship between obedient and defensive voice and sharing knowledge amongst faculty. But the relationship between altruistic voice and sharing knowledge is positive and significant (p>0.001). The second step used multiple regression in order to predict sharing knowledge base on triple voices above which is shown in table 2.
 According to the regression model, the coefficient of determination (R2) equals 0.523 which means employee voice determines 52.3 % of sharing knowledge variance. Also, the findings show that among employee voice, altruistic voice with β (0.516) increases the amount of sharing knowledge among faculty members. But, obedient voice with β (-0.329) decreases the amount of sharing knowledge among faculty members (p<0.001).
Conclusion
This study with the aim of determining the relationship between employee voice and sharing knowledge amongst the faculty members of Sistan and Balouchestan University. The results of the study showed that there is a negative and significant relationship between obedient and defendant voices and sharing knowledge among faculty members, while there is a positive and significant relationship between altruistic voice and sharing knowledge among faculty members (p<0.001). This means that as the obedient and defendant voice among faculty members increases, the sharing knowledge decreases, whereas the enhancement in altruistic voice among faculty members leads to increase in sharing knowledge among them. Also, regression findings revealed that employee voice determines 52.3 % of sharing knowledge variance. In employee voice, altruistic voice increases sharing knowledge among faculty members while obedient voice decreases sharing knowledge among faculty members (p<0.001). According to the findings of this study, it is suggested to the chairpersons in universities to avoid dictator leadership, and mostly tend to moral leadership. That is bacause employees under a dictator leadership reveal worrisome on expressing their ideas and thoughts. In other word, dictator leadership controls faculty voice.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Acquiescent Voice
  • Defensive Voice
  • Prosocial Voice
  • Knowledge Sharing
1-Adli, F. (2005). Knowledge Management, Movement beyond Knowledge, Tehran: Andisheh Metacognition Publishing.  (In Persian)

3-Armstrong M. (2006). Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice (10th ed.). London: Kogan Page, Limited.

4-Boxall, P., Purcell, J. (2003). Strategy and Human Resource Management, London: Palgrave.

5-Bryson, A. (2004). Managerial Responsiveness to Union and Nonunion Worker Voice in Britain, Industrial Relations,43(1):213–241.

6-Budd JW, Gollan PJ, & Wilkinson A. (2010) .New Approaches to Employee Voice and Participation in Organizations. Human relations.63 (3):303–310.

7-Chan S. (2013). Paternalistic leadership and employee voice: does knowledge sharing matter?, Human relations,1(1):1-27.

8-Cheng J, Chang S, Kuo J,& Cheung y.(2014).Ethical leadership, work engagement and voice behavior, Industrial Management & Data Systems, 114(5):817-831.

9-Cross R, Sproull L. (2004). More Than an Answer: Information Relationships for Actionable Knowledge, Organization Science, 15(4):446–462.

10-Detert JR, Burris ER. (2007). Leadership Behavior and Employee Voice: Is The Door Really Open?, Academy of Management Journal, 50(4):869–884.

11-Donaghey J, Cullinane N, Dundon T, & Wilkinson A. (2011). Reconceptualising Employee Silence: Problems and Prognosis, Work, Employment and Society,25(1):51–67.

12-Dundon T, Gollan PJ. (2007). Re-Conceptualizing Voice in the Non-Union Workplace, International Journal of Human Resource Management,18(7):1182–1198.

13-Dundon T, Wilkinson A, Marchington M, & Ackers P. (2004). The Meanings and Purpose of Employee Voice, International Journal of Human Resource Management,15(6):1149–1170.

14-Dustar, M., Esmailzadeh M.Organizational Justice and its Effects on Employees Voice and Performance, Management Studies in Development and Evolution, 22(72):341-361. (in Persian)

15-Eisenberg EM, Goodall HL. (2001). Organizational communication: Balancing creativity and constraint. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin.

16-Fullan M. (2002). The role of leadership in the promotion of knowledge management in schools, Teachers and teaching: theory and practice, 8(3):409-419.

17-Gao L, Janssen O, Shi K. (2011). Leader trust and employee voice: the moderating role of empowering leader behaviors, The leadership qurtely,22 (4):787-798.

18-Hames KM. (2012). Employees’ voice climate perceptions and perceived importance of voice behavior: links with important work-related outcomes, Thesis of Bachelor of Psychology (Honors), Murdoch University.

19-Hansen M. (2002). Knowledge networks: explaining effective knowledge sharing in multiunit companies, Organization Science,13(3):232−248.

20-Ipe M. (2003). Knowledge sharing in organizations: A conceptual framework, Human Resource Development Review, 2(4):337- 359.

21-Kadivar A, Ebrahimpoor Arangi L. (2016). Identifying the effective factor of knowledge sharing system acceptance from knowledge workers perspective. Journal of Information Processing and Management; 31 (4) :1031-1048 (In Persian)

22-Karimi, M., Shajaee, S. (2015). Studying the relationship between paternalistic leadership and employees' voice emphasizing on moderator role of knowledge sharing of employees at branches of Saderat Bank in Golestan Province, Management of Governmental Organizations,3(10):21-41. (In Persian)

23-Kulkarni S. (2010). Sustaining the equality of employee voice, a dynamic capability, International journal of organizational analysis,18(4):442-465.

24-Li y, Sun JM. (2014). Traditional chinese leadership and employee voice bahavior:a crosss- level examination, The leadership quarterly,26(2):172-189.

25-Liu M, Liu N. (2008). Sources of knowledge acquisition and patterns of knowledge-sharing behaviors: An empirical study of Taiwanese high-tech firms, International Journal of Information Management, 28(5):423–432.

26-Liu W, Zhu R, & Yang Y. (2010). I warn you because I like you: Voice behavior, employee identifications, and transformational leadership, The Leadership Quarterly 21(1):189-202.

27-McAdam R, Moffett S, Peng J. (2012). Knowledge sharing in Chinese service organizations: a multi case cultural perspective, Journal of Knowledge Management, 16(1):129-147.

28-Morrison, E.W. & Wheeler-Smith, S.L. & Kamdar, D. (2011). Speaking up in groups: a cross-level study of group voice climate and voice, Journal of Applied Psychology, 96 (1): 183-191.

29-Musavi, M., Zand Hesami, H. (2015). Extracting Key Dimensions of Knowledge Sharing, Industrial Management Magazine, Faculty of Humanities, Islamic Azad University, Sanandaj Branch, Journal of Industrial Management Faculty of Humaities,10(44):75-80. (In Persian)

30-Nikolaou L, Vakola M, Bourantas D. (2008). Who speaks up at work?dispositional influences on employees' voice behavior, Personnel review,37(6):666-676.

31-Panahi S, Watson J, Partridge H. (2012). Social media and tacit knowledge sharing: Developing a conceptual model, Word Academy of Science; Engineering and Technology, (64):1095-1102.

32-Sanjaghi ME, Akhavan P, & Najafi S. (2013). Fostering knowledge sharing behavior: The role of organizational culture and trust. International Journal of the Academy of Organizational Behavior Management, 5 (April- June):2- 26.

33-Talebnejad, A. (2008). Designing and explaining knowledge creation strategies at universities of the Islamic Republic of Iran, PhD thesis, Shahid Beheshti University of Tehran.  (In Persian)

34-Tong C, Ip Wah T, Walder, Wong A. (2013). The impact of knowledge sharing on the relationship between organizational culture and job satisfaction: The perception of information communication and technology (ICT) practitioners in Hong Kong, International Journal of Human Resource Studies, 1(3):9-37.

35-Travis, DJ. & Gomez, J.R., & Mor B. (2011). Speaking up and stepping back: Examining the link between employee voice and job neglect, Children and Youth Services Review, 33(10): 1831-1841.

36-Van Dyne L, Le Pine J. (1998). Helping and voice extra-role behaviors: Evidence of construct and predictive validity, Academy of Management Journal, 41(1):108-119.

37-Van Dyne L, Ang S, & Botero I. (2003). Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as mulitidimensional constructs, Journal of management studies, 40 (6):1359-1392.

38-Wang R, Jiang J. (2015). How abusive supervisors influence employees voice and silence: the effects of interactional justice and organizational attribution, The journal of social psychology, 155(3):204-220.

39-Zareematin, H., Taheri, F., Sayyar, A. (2012). Organizational silence: concepts, antecedents, and consequences volume 6 (number 21), 77-104 (In Persian)

40-Zeinabad H., Mahmoudi Z. (2016). The role of principals in primary school teachers’ knowledge development and sharing: Introducing knowledge sharing leadership variable, Quarterly Journal of Educational Innovations, 15(57):85-103. (in Persian)

41-Zhao H. (2014). Relative leader-member exchange and employee voice: mediating role of affective commitment and moderating role of Chinese traditionality, Chinese Management,8(1):27-40.

42-Zhu W, He H, Treviño LK, Chao MM, & Wang W. (2015). Ethical leadership and follower voice and performance: the role of follower identifications and entity morality beliefs, Leadership Quarterly, 26(5):702–718.