조직공정성이 구성원의 지식공유에 미치는 영향

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Knowledge Management is the most important issue in the operation of an organization and it has been widely applied in various types of organization. The essential factor to ensure successful Knowledge Management is knowledge sharing. Knowledge sharing is defined in different ways, in general it means the delivery of knowledge (tacit and explicit), and most studies on knowledge sharing focus on How to motivate subordinates of an organization to share knowledge with others. However, relatively few has been on the organization justice that affects the behavior and attitude of subordinates. Organizational justice can be theoretically considered as an important factor of knowledge sharing. According to the social exchange theory, subordinates who recognize organizational justice tend to exhibit cooperative behavior as a reward. In the respect that knowledge sharing is a kind of cooperative behavior for coworkers, the employees who recognize organizational justice is likely to share knowledge in more effective manners. However, the theory set a limitation for us to explain how subordinates who recognize justice from organization or supervisors share their knowledge to coworkers. So we adopted justice heuristic theory to explain the limitation. According to the justice heuristic theory, knowledge sharing is a social dilemma arising in an organization and being decreased by trust. The theory also says that recognition of organizational justice works as a proxy for trust. Therefore organizational justice as the antecedent to promote knowledge sharing has an important meaning when knowledge sharing is observed from the viewpoint of social dilemma. The purpose of this research is to examine the relationships between organizational justice and knowledge sharing based on this theoretical background. Generally, organization justice was studied in terms of distribution, procedures, and interaction (interpersonal and information). Thus, the first goal of this research is to reveal the relationship between distributional, procedural, and interactional justice (interpersonal justice, informational justice) and knowledge sharing. The second goal is to study the moderating effect of interactional justice (interpersonal justice, informational justice) in the relationships between distributional, procedural justice and knowledge sharing. Therefore we hypothesize: H 1: There is positive relationship between distributional justice and knowledge sharing. H 2: There is positive relationship between procedural justice and knowledge sharing. H 3: There is positive relationship between interactional justice (a: interpersonal justice, b: informational justice) and knowledge sharing. H 4: The interactional justice (a: interpersonal justice, b: informational justice) moderates the positive relationship between distributional justice and knowledge sharing such that the relationship will be stronger when the interactional justice (a: interpersonal justice, b: informational justice) is high than interactional justice (a: interpersonal justice, b: informational justice) is low. H 5: The interactional justice (a: interpersonal justice, b: informational justice) moderates the positive relationship between procedural justice and knowledge sharing such that the relationship will be stronger when the interactional justice (a: interpersonal justice, b: informational justice) is high than interactional justice (a: interpersonal justice, b: informational justice) is low. Data was collected by giving questionnaire to 435 pairs of a supervisor and his/her immediate employee. 360 questionnaires were collected. Among those, 322 dyadic data were used for analysis. The results indicated that distributional justice and interpersonal justice were significantly and positively related to knowledge sharing, but procedural justice and informational justice was not. Besides, there was a significant interaction effect of interactional justice (interpersonal justice, informational

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 박문수, "지식공유의 영향요인:연구동향과 과제" 2 (2): 1-23, 2001

2 김동영, "지식공유에 미치는 개인적·조직적 영향요인에 관한 연구 - 대덕연구단지 연구개발조직을 중심으로 -" 한국지식경영학회 5 (5): 83-99, 2004

3 박호환, "인사고과제도의 특성과 공정성 지각 간의 관계" 8 : 299-322, 1998

4 이진규, "성과평가의 절차공정성에 대한 영향요인:상황적 요인 및 평가시스템 특성을 중심으로" 9 (9): 109-136, 2001

5 채서일, "사회과학 조사 방법론" 학현사 2002

6 김희철, "분배 및 절차공정성의 차별적 효과와 상호작용공정성의 조절효과" 한국인사관리학회 29 (29): 71-97, 2005

7 박세홍, "리더십 성향이 임금의 공정성과 조직몰입도에 미치는 영향" 대한경영학회 15 (15): 299-322, 2002

8 한동효, "구조방정식모형(SEM)을 이용한 지방공무원의 지식공유 영향요인 분석" 한국거버넌스학회 14 (14): 1-30, 2007

9 윤정구, "공정성이 조직효과성에 미치는 영향력에 관한 연구:사기업과 공기업의 사례를 중심으로" 32 (32): 55-72, 1998

10 성지영, "개인-환경(조직, 상사, 동료) 적합성이 조직시민행동 및개인성과에 미치는 영향과 공정성의 매개효과 검증" 한국인사·조직학회 16 (16): 1-62, 2008

11 Hendriks,P, "Why Share Knowledge? The Influence of ICT on the Motivation for Knowledge Sharing" 6 : 91-100, 1999

12 Simons, A, "Why Managers Should Care about Fairness:the Effects of Aggregate Justice Perceptions on Organizational Outcomes" 88 : 432-443, 2003

13 Leventhal,G.S, "What Should be Done with Equity Theory? In Social Exchange: Advances in Theory and Research" Plenum 27-55, 1980

14 Cropanzano, R., "Using Social Exchange Theory to Distinguish Procedural From Interactional Justice" 27 : 324-351, 2002

15 Tepper,B.J, "Upward Maintenance Tactics in Supervisory Mentoring and Nonmentoring Relationships" 38 (38): 1191-1206, 1995

16 Fey, C. F, "Top Management Incentive Compensation and Knowledge Sharing in Multinational Corporations" 29 : 1301-1323, 2008

17 Lin,C.-P, "To Share or not to Share:Modeling Tacit Knowledge Sharing,Its Mediators and Antecedents" 70 : 411-428, 2007

18 Lind, E. A, "The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice" Plenum Press 1988

19 Ambrose, M, "The Role of Overall Justice Judgements in Organizational Justice Research:A Test of Mediation" 94 (94): 491-500, 2009

20 Davenport, T, "The Rise of Knowledge towards Attention Management" 5 : 212-221, 2001

21 Rupp, D. E, "The Mediating Effects of Social Exchange Relationships in Predicting Workplace Outcomes from Multifoci Organizational Justice" 89 (89): 925-946, 2002

22 Luo,Y, "The Independent and Interactive Roles of Procedural,Distributive,and Interactional Justice in Strategic Alliances" 50 (50): 644-664, 2007

23 Martinez,M.N, "The Collective Power of Employee Knowledge" 88-94, 1988

24 French, J. R. P., Jr., "The Bases of Social Power In Studies in Social Power" Institute for Social Research 150-167, 1959

25 Schepers, P, "Social Factors of Work Environment Creativity" 21 (21): 407-428, 2007

26 Kollock,P, "Social Dilemmas:The Anatomy of Cooperation" 24 : 183-214, 1998

27 Nahapiet, J, "Social Capital,Intellectual Capital,and the Organizational Advantage" 23 : 242-266, 1998

28 Folger,R, "Rethinking Equity Theory: A Referent Cognitions Model In Justice in Social Relations" Plenum Press 145-162, 1986

29 De Cremer,D, "Respect and Cooperation in Social Dilemmas:The Importance of Feeling included" 28 (28): 1335-1341, 2002

30 Moorman,R.H, "Relationship Between Organizational Justice and Organizational Citizenship Behaviors: Do Fairness Perceptions Influence Employee Citizenship" 76 : 845-855, 1991

31 Lee,C, "Prosocial Organizational Behaviors:The Roles of Workplace Justice,Achievement Striving,and Pay Satisfaction" 10 (10): 197-206, 1995

32 Thibaut, J. W, "Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis" Erlbaum 1975

33 Eisenberger, R., "Perceived Supervisor Support:Contributions to Perceived Organizational Support and Employee Retention" 87 (87): 565-573, 2002

34 Kang,D, "Perceived Organisational Justice as a Predictor of Employees’ Motivation to Participate in Training" 15 (15): 89-107, 2007

35 Lawler III,E.E, "Pay and Organizational Development" Addison-Wesley 1981

36 Schminke, M., "Organizational Structure and Fairness Perceptions:The Moderating Effects of Organizational Level" 89 (89): 881-905, 2002

37 Roch, S. G, "Organizational Justice in an Exchange Framework:Clarifying Organizational Justice Distinctions" 32 (32): 299-322, 2006

38 Judge, T. A, "Organizational Justice and Stress:The Mediating Role of Work-Family Conflict" 89 (89): 395-404, 2004

39 Folger, R, "Organizational Justice and Human Resource Management" Sage 1998

40 Ambrose, M, "Oragnization Structure as a Moderator of the Relationship between Procedural Justice,Interactional Justice,Perceived Organizational Support,and Supervisory Trust" 88 (88): 295-305, 2003

41 Colquitt,J.A, "On the Dimensionality of Organizational Justice:A Construct Validation of a Measure" 86 : 386-400, 2001

42 Aiken, L. S, "Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions" Sage 1991

43 Cropanzano, R., "Moral Virtues,Fairness Heuristics,Social Entities,and Other Denizens of Organizational Justice" 58 : 164-209, 2001

44 Fassina, N. E., "Meta-Analytic Tests of Relationships Between Organizational Justice and Citizenship Behavior:Testing Agent-System and Shared-Variance Models" 29 (29): 805-828, 2007

45 Richard, O. C., "Mentoring in Supervisor-Subordinate Dyads:Antecedents,Consequences,and Test of a Mediation Model of Mentorship" 62 (62): 1110-1118, 2009

46 Cabrera, E. F, "Knowledge-Sharing Dilemmas" 23 (23): 687-710, 2002

47 Small, C. T, "Knowledge Management and Knowledge Sharing:A Review" 5 : 153-169, 2005

48 Collins, C. J, "Knowledge Exchange and Combination:The Role of Human Resource Practices in the Performance of High-Technology Firms" 49 (49): 544-560, 2006

49 Colquitt, J. A., "Justice at the Millenium:A Meta-Analytic Review of 25 years of Organizational Justice Research" 86 : 425-445, 2001

50 Niehoff, B. P, "Justice as a Mediator of the Relationship between Methods of Monitoring and Organizational Citizenship Behavior" 36 (36): 527-556, 1993

51 Wiesenfeld, B. M., "Is More Fairness always Preferred? Self-esteem Moderates Reactions to Procedural Justice" 50 (50): 1235-1253, 2007

52 Berry, C. M., "Interpersonal Deviance,Organizational Deviance,and Their Common Correlates:A Review and Meta-Analysis" 92 (92): 410-424, 2007

53 Bies, R. J, "Interactional Justice: Communications Criteria of Fairness In Research on Negotiation in Organizations" JAI Press 43-55, 1986

54 Masterson, S. S., "Integrating Justice and Social Exchange:The Differing Effects of Fair Procedures and Treatment on Work Relationships" 43 : 738-749, 2000

55 Mesmer-Magnus, J. R, "Information Sharing and Team Performance:A Meta-Analysis" 94 : 535-546, 2009

56 Adams,J, "Inequity in Social Exchange In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology" Academic Press 267-299, 1965

57 Siemsen, E., "Incentives that Induce Task-Related Effort,Helping,and Knowledge Sharing in Workgroups" 53 : 1533-1550, 2007

58 Davenport, T., "Improving Knowledge Work Processes" 37 (37): 53-65, 1996

59 Farh, J. L., "Impetus for Action:A Cultural Analysis of Justice and Organizational Citizenship Behavior in Chinese Society" 42 : 421-444, 1997

60 Spitzmüller, C., "If you Treat Me Right,I Reciprocate:Examining the Role of Exchange in Organizational Survey Response" 27 : 19-35, 2006

61 Bagozzi,R.P, "Further Thoughts on the Validity of Measures of Elation,Gladness,and Joy" 61 : 98-104, 1991

62 Lind,E.A, "Fairness Heuristic Theory: Justice Judgments as Pivotal Cognitions in Organizational Relations In Advances in Organizational Justice" Stanford University Press 6-88, 2001

63 Tekleab, A. G., "Extending the Chain of Relationships among Organizational Justice,Social Exchange,and Employee Reactions:The Role of Contract Violations" 48 (48): 146-157, 2005

64 Fornell, C, "Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error" 18 (18): 39-50, 1981

65 Srivastava, A, "Empowering Leadership in Management Teams:Effects on Knowledge Sharing,Efficacy,and Performance" 49 (49): 1239-1251, 2006

66 Durham,C.C, "Effects of Interdependence on Motivation, Inter-team Interaction Processes, and Performance" University of Maryland 1997

67 Connolly, T, "Discretionary Databases: Theory, Data, and Implications In Organizations and Communication Technology" Sage 219-233, 1990

68 Faraj, S, "Coordinating Expertise in Software Development Teams" 46 : 2000

69 De Dreu,C.K.W, "Cooperative Outcome Interdependence,Task Reflexivity,and Team Effectiveness:A Motivated Information Processing Perspective" 92 : 628-638, 2007

70 Preacher, K. J., "Computational Tools for Probing Interaction Effects in Multiple Linear Regression,Multilevel Modeling,and Latent Curve Analysis" 31 : 437-448, 2006

71 Bonacich, P, "Communication Networks and Collective Action In Social Dilemmas: Theoretical Issues and Research Findings" Pergammon 225-245, 1992

72 De Cremer,D, "Charismatic Leadership and Cooperation in Social Dilemmas:A Matter of Transforming Motives" 32 (32): 997-1016, 2002

73 Bock, G.-W., "Behavioral Intention Formation in Knowledge Sharing:Examining the Roles of Extrinsic Motivators,Social-Psychological Forces,and Organizational Climate" 29 (29): 87-111, 2005

74 Bies,R.J, "Are Procedural Justice and Interactional Justice Conceptually Distinct? In Handbook of Organizational Justice" Lawrence Erlbaum Associates 85-112, 2005

75 Crossan, M. M., "An Organizational Learning Framework:From Intuition to Institution" 24 (24): 522-537, 1999

76 Solomon, R. L, "An Opponent-process Theory of Motivation:I.Temporal Dynamics of Affect" 81 (81): 119-145, 1974

77 Brockner, J, "An Integrative Framework for Explaining Reactions to Decisions:Interactive Effects of Outcomes and Procedures" 31 : 189-208, 1996

78 Tyler, T. R, "A Relational Model of Authority in Groups In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology" Academic Press 115-192, 1992

79 Quigley, N. D., "A Multilevel Investigation of the Motivational Mechanisms Underlying Knowledge Sharing and Performance" 18 (18): 71-88, 2007

80 Nonaka,I, "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation" 5 : 14-37, 1994