지방공무원의 지식공유행위에 관한 연구 : 구조방정식모형에 의한 분석을 중심으로

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Many administrators and managers understand the importance of knowledge sharing among their employees and introduce the knowledge management paradigm in their organizations. However little is known about the determinants of the individual's knowledge sharing behavior. The purpose of this study is to develop an understanding of the factors affecting the individual's knowledge sharing behavior and to apply the Fishbein and Ajzen's(1975) model as well as economic exchange theory, social exchange theory, social cognitive theory, and self-theory in the knowledge sharing context to understand how these factors affect the knowledge sharing behavior. The research model of the theory of reasoned action(TRA) includes various constructs based on learning theory, expected-value theory, consistency theory, and attribution theory.
On the ground of TRA and other social psychological theories, this research suggests the research model and twelve hypotheses to explain knowledge sharing behaviors. In order to test the proposed hypotheses, this research developed measurements for each variable. Research constructs are operationalized based on the related literature review and various theories. Items for expectancy of reward, expectancy of association, and expectancy of contribution were newly developed based on the relevant theories and prior studies. Questions to measure the four dimensions of the organizational climate were adopted from the previous organizational studies. Items to measure attitudes, organizational climate, and behavioral intentions were modified from Fishein and Ajzen's previous works to make them relevant to the knowledge sharing context. Items for knowledge sharing behaviors and the level of IT usage were adopted from the previous MIS studies. The final questionnaire used in the main survey(68 items in total) are shown in Appendix. The questionnaire is carefully ordered to prevent the respondents' common method variance. In the questionnaire, the multiple-item method is used and each item is measured based on a 7 point Likert scale from 'very rarely' to 'very frequently.' To assess the measurement, the data for pretest were gathered from a questionnaire answered in July in 2002. The sample consisted of 60 public employees from the Gwangju and Chonnam local administrative organizations. Of the 60 questionnaire distributed, 53 survey were received and 47 were usable. The final items were decided based on the test of construct validity which is analysed by convergent validity and discriminant validity and on the test of reliability which is investigated through the usage of Cronbach's alpha.
The main sample consisted of 467 public employees in Gwangju and Chonnam local administrative organizations. The data was gathered by means of a quota sampling in July of 2002. Overall, 540 questionnaire were distributed, 502 questionnaire were received and 467 were usable. The unit of analysis, for this study, was the individual. The hypothesized relationships were tested by the structural equation model.
The result of this study suggests that the reward for knowledge management may need to be reexamined. Incentives as a extrinsic motivators did not seem to alter the attitude that underlies out knowledge sharing behavior. They did not create an enduring commitment to any action. Rather, incentives temporarily changed what they did. It is no more than a trigger or facilitating condition. When it comes to producing lasting changes in attitude, however, rewards, like punishment, are strikingly ineffective.
However, since social benefits have no exact price, the marginal utility function does not apply to the expectancy of association and contribution. Therefore, the frequent rendering of OCB like knowledge sharing would seem to mainly foster a sense of social exchange relationship. Public employees who think knowledge sharing would increase the scope and depth of associations among organizational members tend to have a positive attitude toward knowledge sharing. Their positive attitudes toward knowledge sharing are formed by the expectancies of reciprocation on knowledge sharing. Public employees who believe in their ability to contribute to improvements of organizational performance have a positive attitude toward knowledge sharing. Therefore, we should pay more attention to enhancing the positive mood state for social associations. It precedes knowledge sharing behaviors and provide useful feedback to improve the individual's self-efficacy instead of designing an elaborate evaluation and incentive system.
Fair process turned out to be a powerful management tool for organizations struggling to make the transition from a traditional way of administration to knowledge-based public administration, in which the creation of administrative value depends increasingly on ideas and innovation. Fair process profoundly influenced attitude, organizational climate, and behaviors which are critical to high performance. It builds trust and unlocks ideas, too. While innovation is the key challenge in the knowledge-based administration, innovation requires the exchange of ideas, which in turn depends on trust.
In terms of theoretical suggestion, this research empirically tested the Fishbein and Ajzen's TRA model in the context of knowledge sharing in public organizations, for the first time. It is very encouraging that newly introduced construct and relationship-organizational climate and relationship between organizational climate and attitude-were supported. Because the new construct and relationship is drawn from solid social psychological theories, we expect that it can provide the basis of a new social psychological model in predicting the individual's specified behavior.
This result also suggests that rewards succeed at securing only one thing: temporary compliance, as Kelman(1958) mentioned. When it comes to producing lasting changes in attitude, rewards, like punishment, are strikingly ineffective. Once the rewards run out, people revert to their old behavior. In technical terms, the marginal utility of increasing amounts of extrinsic benefits eventually diminishes. However, since social benefits entail no exact price, the marginal utility function does not apply to expectancy of association. As many researchers have suggested, the social exchange theory concerns intrinsic rewards for the association itself. Social exchange differs from economic commodities, the benefits involved in social exchange do not have an exact price in terms of a single quantitative medium of exchange, and the nature of the return cannot be bargained about. This is why only social exchange tends to engender feelings of personal obligations, gratitude, and trust in knowledge sharing context. Therefore, the frequent rendering of cooperative behaviors, like knowledge sharing, seem to mainly foster a sense of social exchange relationship.
Sharing knowledge are intangible activities that can neither be supervised nor forced out of people. They happen only when people cooperate voluntarily. Fair process is procedural justice and is important. Fair process builds trust and commitment, trust and commitment produce voluntary cooperation, and voluntary cooperation drives performance. Therefore, leading people to go beyond the call of duty by sharing their knowledge and applying their creativity.
IT has been described as an enabler for knowledge sharing. A lot of literature suggests that an individual's level of IT usage is a facilitating condition in knowledge sharing behavior. One who is familiar to IT usage frequently shares one's knowledge more frequently through BBS, e-mail, and etc.
Even though this research has drawn theoretically and practically meaningful implications, there are a few limitations. First of all, the use of self-report scales to measure the study variables involves the possibility of common method variances for some of the results obtained. In order to pursue further investigation of the conceptual model, it would be appropriate to develop more direct measures for knowledge sharing behavior.
Data of this study was collected from regionally confined public organizations. The results may not be generalizable due to the organizational characteristics unique to those regions. In order to generalize the results from this study, we need to collect data from various regions.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 목차
• ABSTRACT = vii
• 제1장 서론 = 1
• 제1절 연구목적 = 1
• 제2절 연구대상 및 범위 = 5
• 제3절 연구방법 = 7
• 제2장 이론적 배경 = 10
• 제1절 지식, 지식관리 및 지식공유 = 10
• 1. 지식의 개념과 행정에서 지식의 의미 = 10
• 2. 지식관리와 지식공유의 개념 = 15
• 제2절 지식공유에 관한 선행연구 = 24
• 1. 조직의사소통에서 정보공유 = 25
• 2. 그룹웨어에서 정보공유 = 30
• 3. 지식공유에 영향을 미치는 요인들 = 35
• 제3절 합리적 행동이론과 지식공유행위 = 40
• 1. 합리적 행동이론의 의의 = 40
• 2. 합리적 행동이론의 적용 = 43
• 3. 합리적 행동이론에 근거한 지식공유행위의 개념모형 = 46
• 제3장 분석모형과 가설의 설정 = 56
• 제1절 분석모형의 설정 = 56
• 제2절 가설의 설정 = 59
• 1 지식공유태도 = 59
• 2. 조직풍토 = 61
• 3. 지식공유의도와 지식공유행위 = 63
• 제3절 변수의 조작적 정의와 측정 = 68
• 1. 변수의 조작적 정의와 측정 = 68
• 2. 측정 설문지의 구성 = 77
• 제4장 실증분석 = 79
• 제1절 표본의 추출과 특성 = 79
• 1. 표본의 추출 = 79
• 2. 표본의 특성 = 82
• 제2절 측정도구의 검증 = 85
• 1. 타당도 분석 = 85
• 2. 신뢰도 분석 = 89
• 제3절 특성별 차이분석 = 91
• 1. 단일변수의 분석 = 91
• 2. 특성별 차이분석 = 97
• 제4절 분석모형과 가설의 검증 = 126
• 1. 변수간의 상관관계 분석 = 126
• 2. 분석모형의 검증 = 131
• 3. 가설의 검증 = 141
• 제5절 분석결과에 대한 종합적 검토 = 150
• 1. 특성별 차이분석 결과의 검토 = 50
• 2. 분석모형 및 가설검증 결과의 검토 = 153
• 제5장 결론 = 163
• 제1절 연구결과의 요약 = 163
• 제2절 연구의 시사점 = 165
• 1. 정책적 시사점 = 165
• 2. 이론적 시사점 = 167
• 제3절 연구의 한계 및 향후 연구과제 = 169
• 참고문헌 = 171
• 설문지 = 194