Self-efficacy and Individual Knowledge Sharing

W.W. Hu
School of Management
Zhejiang Gongshang University
Hangzhou, China
hww@mail.zjgsu.edu.cn


AbstractFirms must compete in the world economy with
superior knowledge. The ability to disperse that knowledge
throughout the firm should be a primary consideration. An
important question for managers is how to focus on the
economic and social-psychological factors that affect
knowledge sharing. Knowledge sharing is dependent on
individual cognitions, which is one of the most complex task
forms. Self-efficacy is an ideal theory to understand why
people choose to share knowledge in some contexts and not in
others. We propose three kinds of self-efficacy: knowledge self-
efficacy, knowledge creation self-efficacy and ICT self-efficacy,
and analysis how they affect the intentions and behaviors of
knowledge sharing. On this basis, we propose the specific
suggestions of how to build and raise individual self-efficacy of
knowledge sharing by referencing the classical theory of self-
efficacy.
Keywords-knowledge management; organizational culture;
idiosyncrasy point; adaptive point;relationship
I. INTRODUCTION
Firms must compete in the world economy with superior
knowledge. The ability to disperse that knowledge
throughout the firm should be a primary consideration [1]. In
the company, some knowledge (such as tacit knowledge) is
difficult to express and is often context specific, which
provides the source of potential sustainability. Therefore, an
important question for managers is how to focus on the
economic and social-psychological factors that affect
knowledge sharing.
Past knowledge sharing research focuses on causes and
impediments, but not as much on how knowledge sharing
results in individual or group performance [2]. Most
knowledge research is conducted at the organizational level
[3], but not as much on individual level. Recently, however,
a few researchers have looked specifically at knowledge
sharing as a system of influences, resulting in outcomes such
as performance, and the impacts of feedback on future
knowledge sharing [4][2][5].
All these research results left a fruitful ground for
research on knowledge sharing at the individual
level[2][5].The current paper expands on this research by
using the self-efficacy model of motivation to explain
knowledge sharing intention and behavior as a system of
influence, outcomes, and feedback.
II. LITERATURE REVIEW: KNOWLEDGE SHARING AND
SELF-EFFICACY THEORY
A. Individual knowledge sharing
Organizational knowledge is often considered as a
valuable resource and potential source of capabilities and
competencies. The formation of organizational knowledge
depends on individuals knowledge sharing. This process is
called socialization. Socialization is sharing of tacit
knowledge between individuals, by spending time, activities,
and actively working together on solving problems [6].
Knowledge sharing is a subtle concept, and is seen as a
dual process of enquiring and contributing to knowledge
through activities such as learning-by-observation, listening
and asking, sharing ideas, giving advice, recognizing cues,
and adopting patterns of behavior [7]. Hendriks states that it
takes knowledge to acquire knowledge and therefore to share
knowledge. Knowledge sharing is both an individual and
collective activity, involving explicit and tacit exchanges
between people [8]. Knowledge sharing involves the
generation and exchange of new ideas, concepts, and
insights, often with the implication of meaningful action
(e.g., solutions to a problem). In this reciprocal process,
acquirers and originators exchange knowledge via
conversations, online forums, etc., and by drawing on and
contributing to knowledge-based artifacts that are relevant to
a specific context [9][10] [11].
Apparently, unique knowledge is useful to individuals. It
can come into being individual competitive advantage.
Therefore, why and how individuals choose to share
knowledge, their motivation must be understood. Among
numerous motivation theories, self-efficacy theory is one of
the most validated and researched theory of motivation,
across subject and task types [12]. Knowledge sharing is
dependent on individual cognitions, which is one of the most
complex task forms. So self-efficacy is an ideal theory to
understand why people choose to share knowledge in some
contexts and not in others [13].
B. Self-efficacy theory and application
Self-efficacy is emerging as an important psychological
construct in understanding why people choose to pursue
particular activities and the extent of effort they devote to
these activities. It is defined as the judgments of individuals
regarding their capabilities to organize and execute courses
of action required to achieve specific levels of
performance[14].It is the central cognitive mediator of the
2010 3rd International Conference on Information Management, Innovation Management and Industrial Engineering
978-0-7695-4279-9/10 $26.00 2010 IEEE
DOI 10.1109/ICIII.2010.261
401
2010 3rd International Conference on Information Management, Innovation Management and Industrial Engineering
978-0-7695-4279-9/10 $26.00 2010 IEEE
DOI 10.1109/ICIII.2010.261
401
motivational process. Self-efficacy perceptions are formed
through a judgment process that people engage in when
deciding whether they can execute an action based on the
influence of contextual and personal factors [12]. When
people develop self-efficacy perceptions about performance
in a specific area, these perceptions are incorporated into
their belief systems. The process involves what could be
categorized as double-loop learning, or reframing central
beliefs about ones ability based on performance feedback
[15].
It has been found that self-efficacy application varies
across activities and situational circumstance. For example,
Joo et al. found that internet self-efficacy is able to predict
students performance on search task in web-based
instruction [16]. Thompson et al. concluded that task-specific
internet self-efficacy has a significant effect on online search
performance [17]. Marakas et al. indicated that task-specific
computer self-efficacy is an individual perception of efficacy
in performing specific computer-related tasks within the
domain of general computing [18]. Wasko and Faraj found
that it can help motivate employees to share knowledge with
colleagues. And employees with high confidence in their
ability to provide valuable knowledge are more likely to
accomplish specific tasks [19]. Therefore, it can be assumed
that self-efficacy in the ability to share knowledge would
predict actual knowledge sharing activities. The process of
self-efficacy formation provides useful information into how
people may decide to share knowledge.

III. APPLY SELF-EFFICACY THEORY TO INDIVIDUAL
KNOWLEDGE SHARING
Based on the main line of self-efficacy theory, self-
efficacy consists of two parts: outcome expectancy and
efficacy-expectancy. Outcome expectancy is individual
expectancy for some behavior lead to some result. Efficacy-
expectancy is judgments of individuals regarding their
capabilities to organize and execute courses of action
required to some result. [12]

Figure 1. The relationship of efficacy expectancy and outcome
expectancy
Obviously, only when individuals perceive that
participating in knowledge sharing activities will bring to
them expected earnings, and judge their own ability to
achieve these expected revenues, they will make a
knowledge sharing decision and behavior.
To knowledge provider, knowledge sharing outcome
expectancy maybe include promote,obtain others knowledge,
gain material award and a reputation as an expert. Better
outcome expectancy will enhance individual knowledge
intention. Efficacy expectancy in knowledge sharing refers to
individual judgments of their capabilities to provide effective
knowledge to help others and achieve tangible and intangible
returns. Better efficacy expectancy will enhance individual
knowledge sharing intention and behavior. We try to use
knowledge self-efficacy (KSE) to describe individual self
expectancy and outcome expectancy. Kankanhalli et al. once
proposed knowledge self-efficacy (KSE), which can be
manifested in the form of people believing that their
knowledge can help to solve job-related problems, improve
work efficiency, or make a difference to their organization
[20]. They found that KSE is positively related to EKR
(electronic knowledge repositories) usage by knowledge
contributors. Hsiu-Fen Lin indicate that both enjoyment in
helping others and knowledge self-efficacy were strongly
associated with employee willingness to share knowledge
[21]. That is, employees who believe in their ability to share
organizationally useful knowledge tend to have stronger
motivation to share knowledge with their colleagues.
As mentioned earlier, knowledge sharing is a subtle
concept, and is seen as a dual process of enquiring and
contributing to knowledge. Individuals will participate in
knowledge sharing in a large extent because of their
considering potential benefits. The transformation process
from potential benefits to real income needs individual
integrates knowledge processing ability. The process
involves capturing existing knowledge and transferring and
deploying knowledge in other similar situations, synthesizing
existing knowledge, and creating new knowledge. These
processes are defined by Nonaka as the methods of
knowledge creation [22]. Knowledge creation self-efficacy
(KCSE) is defined as an individuals beliefs about his or her
capabilities to articulate the ideas and experiences,
synthesize knowledge from different sources, and learning
from others by embodying explicit knowledge into tacit
knowledge [23]. To knowledge recipients, better knowledge
creation capabilities help individuals benefit more from the
knowledge sharing, which can enhance individuals outcome
expectancy. Thus,knowledge creation self-efficacy (KCSE)
affect knowledge sharing. High KCSE individual will have
strong knowledge sharing intention and behavior because of
higher outcome expectancy.
In addition to KSE and KCSE, actionable knowledge
systems can impact knowledge sharing. Now information
and communication technology (ICT) use and knowledge
sharing are closely linked, because ICT can enable rapid
search, access and retrieval of information, and can support
communication and collaboration among organizational
employees [24]. Moreover, according to Yeh et al., effective
knowledge management requires employees sharing their
knowledge through ICT facilities, because ICT can provide
communication channels for obtaining knowledge,
correcting flow processes, and identifying the location of
knowledge carriers and requesters [25].So we propose the
ICT self-efficacy (ICTSE) ,which refers to a learners beliefs
about his or her capabilities in using the functions of the
knowledge systems. Only when they have enough ICTSE,
Knowledge sharing behavior can carry out. So ICTSE is
obviously affect individual knowledge sharing behavior.
Behavior Outcome
Efficacy expectancy Outcome expectancy
Individual
402 402

Figure 2. The relationship of self-efficacy in KS and individual
knowledge sharing intention and behavior
IV. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
Knowledge sharing self-efficacy which includes KSE,
KCSE and ICTSE affect knowledge sharing intention and
behavior. We can promote knowledge sharing by raising
individual self-efficacy. According Banduras theory,
individual self-efficacy is from the past mastery experiences,
vicarious experience, verbal persuasion and physical and
emotional states [12].
The first way to raise self-efficacy to share knowledge is
a persons di1rect past experiences. If individual have been
benefited from sharing knowledge with others or gained a
reputation as an expert for supplying useful knowledge, or
successfully synthesized knowledge from different sources,
he(or she) will like to participate in the knowledge sharing
activities in the future. So organizations should facilitate
individuals drawing on their own past experiences to harness
and share knowledge. Effective training may promote
sharing past successful knowledge sharing experiences or
uncovering related skills that can enhance knowledge
sharing, such as emotional intelligence, empathy, and active
listening skills. And timely feedback is more helpful to build
and raise self-efficacy.
In addition, organizations should make efforts to form
subjective norm of knowledge sharing,which reflects
participant perceptions of whether the knowledge sharing
behavior is accepted, encouraged, and implemented by the
participants circle of influence. Individuals can sense the
good results of knowledge sharing at such atmosphere,
which will raise KSB.
Then, Specific task help individuals to estimate all the
information needed, and they can purposefully collect the
needed information and knowledge. Accurate information
Increased the likelihood of knowledge creation and task
completed, which will raise individual KCSE and KSE.
The second way to raise self-efficacy to share knowledge
is viewing others like oneself successfully share knowledge
(vicarious experience).At this point, organization should
publicity examples successful experiences in sharing
knowledge.
Third, a persuasive environmental stimulus may be
senior managements support of knowledge sharing activities
[26], which is more convincing for raising KSE and KCSE.
Support may be through praise, recognition, performance
appraisals that include measures of knowledge sharing
behaviors, or goals that are motivating.
Last, a convenient knowledge system can raise individual
ICTSE. So providing appropriate knowledge system
operation training is necessary.
High self-efficacy in ones ability to share knowledge
then may result in challenging personal goals, as well as
higher effort, persistence, satisfaction, and performance [12].
These positive outcomes fuel the self-beliefs that one can
perform even better when self-efficacy is estimated again.
This double-loop learning process that appears in the self-
efficacy model has been found to occur in individual
knowledge sharing activities [27].
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
It is a project supported by the national Natural Science
Foundation of China(70972135).
REFERENCES
[1] Thurm, S., Companies struggle to pass on knowledge that workers
acquire, Wall Street Journal (January 23): B1. 2006.
[2] Haas, M.R. and Hansen, M.T., When using knowledge can hurt
performance: the value of organizational capabilities in a
management consulting company, Strategic Management
Journal,vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 1-24,2005.
[3] Chen, A.N.K. and Edgington, T.M., Assessing value in
organizational knowledge creation: considerations for knowledge
workers, MIS Quarterly, vol.29, no.2, pp. 279-99.2005.
[4] Bock, G., Zmud, R.W., Kim, Y. and Lee, J., Behavioral intention
formation in knowledge sharing: examining the roles of extrinsic
motivators, social-psychological forces, and organizational climate,
MIS Quarterly, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 87-111,2005.
[5] Tsai, M. and Tsai, L., An empirical student of the knowledge
transfer methods used by clinical instructors, International Journal of
Management, vol.22, no.2, pp. 273-84, 2005.
[6] Nonaka, I., A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge
creation,Organization Science, vol.5, no.1, pp.14-36,1994.
[7] Rachelle Bosua and Rens Scheepers, Towards a model to explain
knowledge sharing in complex organizational environments,
Knowledge Management Research & Practice ,no.5, pp.93109,
2007.
[8] Hendriks. P., Why share knowledge? The influence of ICT on the
motivation for knowledge sharing, Knowledge and Process
Management , vol.6, no.2, pp.91100,1999.
[9] Nonaka. I and Takeuchi. H, The Knowledge-Creating Company:
How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation,
Oxford University Press, New York, 1995.
[10] Damsgaard.J and Scheepers.R, Harnessing intranet technology for
organizational knowledge creation, Australian Journal of
Information Systems 8 (Special Edition on Knowledge Management),
pp.415,2001.
[11] Lakomski, Moving knowledge: the problem of transfer and how to
reframe it, Proceedings of the Third European Conference on
Organizational Knowledge, Learning and Capabilities, Barcelona,
Spain, pp. 1213, 2003.
[12] Bandura, A., Self-efficacy: the Exercise of Control, New York,
Freeman and company,1997.
[13] Megan Lee Endres, Steven P. Endres, Sanjib K. Chowdhury and
Intakhab Alam, Tacit knowledge sharing, self-efficacy theory, and
application to the Open Source community, Journal of Knowledge
Management, vol.11, no. 32, pp. 92-103, 2007.
Self-
efficacy
in KS
Knowledge
sharing
intention
Knowledge
sharing
behavior
KSE
KCSE
ICTSE
403 403
[14] Bandura, A., Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social
Cognitive Theory, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall ,1986.
[15] Argyris, C. and Scho,n, D., Organizational Learning: A Theory of
Action Perspective, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA,1978.
[16] Joo, Y. J., Bong, M. and Choi, H. J, Self-efficacy for self-regulated
learning, academic self-efficacy, and knowledge self-efficacy in web-
based instruction, Educational Technology Research and
Development, vol.48, no.2, pp.5-17,2000.
[17] Thompson, L. F., Meriac, J. P. and Cope, J. G., Motivating online
performance: the influences of goal setting and Internet self-
efficacy, Social Science Computer Review, vol.20, no.2, pp. 149-
160, 2002.
[18] Marakas, G. M.,Yi,M.Y.andJohnson, R. D., The multilevel and
multifaceted character of computer self-efficacy: toward clarification
of the construct and an integrative framework for research,
Information Systems Research,vol.9, no.2, 126-163, 1998.
[19] Wasko, M.M. and Faraj,, Why should I share? Examining social
capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of
practice, MIS Quarterly, vol. 29, no.1, pp.35-57,2005.
[20] Kankanhalli,A.,Tan,B.C.Y.and Wei,K.K. ,Contributing knowledge
to electronic knowledge repositories: an empirical investigation,
MIS Quarterly, vol.29, no.1, pp. 113-143,2005.
[21] Hsiu-Fen Lin,Knowledge sharing and firm innovation capability:an
empirical study,International Journal of Manpower ,vol. 28, no. 3/4,
pp. 315-332, 2007.
[22] Nonaka, I., Toyama, R. and Konno, N., SECI, Ba and leadership: a
unified model of dynamic knowledge Creation, Long Range
Planning, vol.33, no.1, pp.5-34. 2000.
[23] Chen, I. Y. L, Chen, N.-S, and Kinshuk Examining the Factors
Influencing Participants Knowledge Sharing Behavior in Virtual
Learning Communities, Educational Technology & Society, vol.12,
no.1, pp.134148,2009.
[24] Huysman, M. and Wulf, V., IT to support knowledge sharing in
communities: toward a social capital analysis, Journal of
Information Technology, vol.21, no.1, pp. 40-51,2006.
[25] Yeh, Y.J., Lai, S.Q. and Ho,C.T., Knowledge management enablers:
a case study, Industrial Management & Data Systems, vol. 106, no.
6, pp. 793-810, 2006.
[26] Lin, H. and Lee, G., Perceptions of senior managers toward
knowledge-sharing behavior, Management Decision, vol. 42,
no.1/2, pp. 108-25, 2004.
[27] Jorgensen, N., Putting it all in the trunk: incremental software
development in the FreeBSD Open Source Project, Information
Systems Journal, vol.11, no.4, pp. 321-365, 2001.

404 404