Bilgi Saklama, Örgütsel Adalet, İşyerinde Dostluk ve İş Bağımlılığı Arasındaki İlişkiler

Year 2025, Volume: 22 Issue: 1, 33 - 45

Erman Kılınç

https://doi.org/10.26466/opusjsr.1570909

Abstract

Bu çalışma, sosyolojinin temel konularından olan sosyal gruplar ve ilişkilerin yönetim bilimi üzerindeki etkilerini tespit etmek amacıyla tasarlanmıştır. Bu kapsamda, bilgi saklama davranışının örgütsel adalet, arkadaşlık bağları ve görev bağımlılığıyla ilişkisi araştırılmıştır. Nicel analiz tekniklerinin kullanıldığı bu araştırma, ulaştırma sektöründe faaliyet gösteren bir kamu kuruluşunda yürütülmüştür. Veriler anket formları yardımıyla toplanmış ve bu aşamada herhangi bir kısıt gözetilmeksizin basit tesadüfi örnekleme yöntemi tercih edilmiştir. TR1, TR2, TR5, TR7 ve TRB bölgelerinde görev yapan 274 işgören üzerinden elde edilen veriler geleneksel istatistik yöntemleri ve yapısal eşitlik modellemesiyle (YEM) analiz edilmiştir. Elde edilen bulgulara göre örgütsel adaletin düşük olduğu ortamlarda bilgi saklama eğilimleri artmakta, yüksek örgütsel adalet algısına sahip işgörenlerin arkadaşlık bağları daha güçlü olmakta ve bu durum bilgi saklama davranışlarını azaltmaktadır. Çalışmada ayrıca, iş deneyimi yüksek olan bireylerde örgütsel adalet algısının daha yüksek olduğu, örgütsel adalet ve bilgi saklama davranışlarının cinsiyetlere göre farklılaşmadığı, mavi yakalı işgörenlerde bilgi saklama eğilimlerinin beyaz ve gri yakalılara kıyasla çok daha düşük olduğu tespit edilmiştir.

Keywords

Bilgi saklama, örgütsel adalet, iş yeri arkadaşlığı, görev bağımlılığı, sosyal değişim teorisi

Ethical Statement

Etik Kurul raporu Niğde Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi tarafından 2 Ekim 2024 tarihinde alınmıştır. Bu çalışma, 11. Örgütsel Davranış Kongresi'ne kabul edilen "ÇALIŞANLARDA BİLGİ SAKLAMA DAVRANIŞININ ÖRGÜTSEL ADALET VE ARKADAŞLIK BAĞLARIYLA İLİŞKİSİ" başlıklı bildirinin genişletilmiş ve zenginleştirilmiş hâlidir. Kabul edilmesi hâlinde eserin Mart 2024 doçentlik başvurularına yetişmesi çok ama çok önemlidir. Saygılarımla.

The Relationships Between Knowledge Hiding, Organizational Justice, Workplace Friendship and Job Interdependence

Abstract

This study was designed to determine the effects of social groups and relationships, which are among the basic subjects of sociology, on management science. In this context, the relationship between knowledge hiding, organizational justice, workplace friendship and job interdependence was investigated. This research, using quantitative analysis techniques, was conducted in a public institution operating in the transportation sector. Data were collected with the help of survey forms and at this stage, a simple random sampling method was preferred without any restrictions. Data obtained from 274 employees working in TR1, TR2, TR5, TR7 and TRB regions were analyzed with traditional statistical methods and structural equation modeling (SEM). According to the findings, the tendency to hide knowledge increases in environments where organizational justice is low, the friendship bonds of employees with a high perception of organizational justice are stronger, and this reduces their knowledge hiding behaviors. The study also found that the perception of organizational justice is higher in individuals with higher work experience, organizational justice and knowledge hiding behaviors do not differ according to gender, and the tendency to hide information in blue-collar employees is much lower than in white and gray collar employees.

Keywords

Information Hiding, Organizational Justice, Workplace Friendship, Job Interdependence, Social Exchange Theory

Ethical Statement

Etik Kurul raporu 2 Ekim 2024 tarihinde Niğde Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi Etik Kurulu tarafından alınmıştır.

References

• Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 2, 267-299.
• Bachrach, D. G., Powell, B. C., Bendoly, E., & Richey, R. G. (2006). Organizational citizenship behavior and performance evaluations: Exploring the impact of task interdependence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(1), 193.
• Bandera, C., Keshtkar, F., Bartolacci, M. R., Neerudu, S., & Passerini, K. (2017). Knowledge management and the entrepreneur: Insights from Ikujiro Nonaka's Dynamic Knowledge Creation model (SECI). International Journal of Innovation Studies, 1(3), 163-174.
• Bies, R. J., & Moag, J. S. (1986). Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. In Research on negotiation in organizations (pp. 43-55). Greenwich: JAI Press. Blau, P. M. (1964). Justice in social exchange. Sociological Inquiry, 34(2), 193-206.
• Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. New York: Routledge.
• Campion, M. A., Medsker, G. J., & Higgs, A. C. (1993). Relations between work group characteristics and effectiveness: implications for designing effective work groups. Personnel Psychology, 46(4), 823-847.
• Chen, C. Y., Mao, H. Y., Hsieh, A. T., Liu, L. L., & Yen, C. H. (2013). The relationship among interactive justice, leader–member exchange, and workplace friendship. The Social Science Journal, 50(1), 89-95.
• Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O., & Ng, K. Y. (2001). Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 425-445.
• Connelly, C. E., Zweig, D., Webster, J., & Trougakos, J. P. (2012). Knowledge hiding in organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(1), 64-88.
• Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874-900.
• Donglong, Z., Taejun, C., Julie, A., & Sanghun, L. (2020). The structural relationship between organizational justice and organizational citizenship behavior in university faculty in China: the mediating effect of organizational commitment. Asia Pacific Education Review, 21, 167-179.
• Dunn, T. J., Baguley, T., & Brunsden, V. (2014). From alpha to omega: A practical solution to the pervasive problem of internal consistency estimation. British Journal of Psychology, 105(3), 399-412.
• Eberlin, R. J., & Tatum, B. C. (2008). Making just decisions: Organizational justice, decision making, and leadership. Management Decision, 46(2), 310-329.
• Fong, P. S., Men, C., Luo, J., & Jia, R. (2018). Knowledge hiding and team creativity: the contingent role of task interdependence. Management Decision, 56(2), 329-343.
• Ghani, U., Zhai, X., Spector, J. M., Chen, N. S., Lin, L., Ding, D., & Usman, M. (2020). Knowledge hiding in higher education: role of interactional justice and professional commitment. Higher Education, 79, 325-344.
• Graham, J. M. (2006). Congeneric and (essentially) tau-equivalent estimates of score reliability – What they are and how to use them. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 930-944.
• Greenberg, J. (1987). A taxonomy of organizational justice theories. Academy of Management Review, 12(1), 9-22. Greenberg, J. (1990). Organizational justice: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Journal of Management, 16(2), 399-432.
• Hair, J., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J. & Anderson, R. E. (2010) Multivariate data analysis. New Jersey: Pearson Educational International.
• Hair, J., Hult G. T. M., Ringle, C., Sarstedt, M. (2014). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.
• Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach, New York: The Guilford Press.
• He, P., Jiang, C., Xu, Z., & Shen, C. (2021). Knowledge hiding: current research status and future research directions. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 748237.
• He, P., Wang, J., Zhou, H., Zhang, C., Liu, Q., & Xie, X. (2022). Workplace friendship, employee well-being and knowledge hiding: The moderating role of the perception of Chaxu climate. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1036579.
• He, Y., & Wei, X. (2022). Preventing knowledge hiding behaviors through workplace friendship and altruistic leadership, and mediating role of positive emotions. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 905890.
• Hsu, F. S., Liu, Y. A., & Tsaur, S. H. (2019). The impact of workplace bullying on hotel employees’ well-being: do organizational justice and friendship matter?. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 31(4), 1702-1719.
• Iqbal, O., Ali, Z., & Azam, A. (2022). Exploring the underlying mechanism between fear of losing power and knowledge hiding. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1069012.
• Islam, T., & Chaudhary, A. (2024). Impact of workplace bullying on knowledge hiding: The mediating role of emotional exhaustion and moderating role of workplace friendship. Kybernetes, 53(1), 238-255.
• Jahanzeb, S., Clercq, D. D., & Fatima, T. (2020). Bridging the breach: using positive affectivity to overcome knowledge hiding after contract breaches. The Journal of Psychology, 154(3), 249-272.
• James, G., Witten, D., Hastie, T., & Tibshirani, R. (2013). An introduction to statistical learning. New York: Springer.
• Julious, S. A. (2019). Calculation of confidence intervals for a finite population size. Pharmaceutical Statistics, 18(1), 115-122.
• Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press.
• Mahmood, H., Rehman, A. U., Sabir, I., Rauf, A., Afthanorhan, A., & Nawal, A. (2023). Does organizational justice facet matters in knowledge hiding?. Heliyon, 9(8), e18372.
• Mao, H. Y., Hsieh, A. T., & Chen, C. Y. (2012). The relationship between workplace friendship and perceived job significance. Journal of Management & Organization, 18(2), 247-262.
• Methot, J. R., Lepine, J. A., Podsakoff, N. P., & Christian, J. S. (2016). Are workplace friendships a mixed blessing? Exploring tradeoffs of multiplex relationships and their associations with job performance. Personnel Psychology, 69(2), 311-355.
• Nguyen, T. M., Malik, A., & Budhwar, P. (2022). Knowledge hiding in organizational crisis: The moderating role of leadership. Journal of Business Research, 139, 161-172.
• Niehoff, B. P., & Moorman, R. H. (1993). Justice as a mediator of the relationship between methods of monitoring and organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 527-556.
• Oubrich, M., Hakmaoui, A., Benhayoun, L., Söilen, K. S., & Abdulkader, B. (2021). Impacts of leadership style, organizational design and HRM practices on knowledge hiding: The indirect roles of organizational justice and competitive work environment. Journal of Business Research, 137, 488-499.
• Ozbek, M. F. (2018). Do we need friendship in the workplace? the theory of workplace friendship and employee outcomes: The role of work ethics. Journal of Economy Culture and Society, (58), 153-176.
• Panopto (2018, July). Inefficient knowledge sharing costs large businesses $47 million per year. https://www.panopto.com/company/news/inefficient-knowledge-sharing-costs-large-businesses-47-million-per-year/.
• Podsakof, N. P., Whiting, S. W., Podsakof, P. M., & Blume, B. D. (2009). Individual- and organizational-level consequences of organizational citizenship behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(1), 122–141.
• Revelle, W., & Zinbarg, R. E. (2009). Coefficients alpha, beta, omega, and the glb: Comments on Sijtsma. Psychometrika, 74, 145–154.
• Shahzad, A., & Mahmood, Z. (2012). The mediating-moderating model of organizational cynicism and workplace deviant behavior: Evidence from banking sector in Pakistan. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research, 12(5), 580-588.
• Serenko, A., & Bontis, N. (2016). Understanding counterproductive knowledge behavior: antecedents and consequences of intra-organizational knowledge hiding. Journal of Knowledge Management, 20(6), 1199-1224.
• Sias, P. M., & Shin, Y. (2019). Workplace relationships. In Origins and traditions of organizational communication (pp. 187-206). United Kingdom: Routledge.
• Song, S. H. (2006). Workplace friendship and employees’ productivity: LMX theory and the case of the Seoul city government. International Review of Public Administration, 11(1), 47-58.
• Staples, D. S., & Webster, J. (2008). Exploring the effects of trust, task interdependence and virtualness on knowledge sharing in teams. Information Systems Journal, 18(6), 617-640.
• Tabachnick, B. G. & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Pearson.
• The World Bank (2024, n.d.). The World Bank in Türkiye. https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/turkey
• Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. New Jersey: Lawrance Erlbaum Associates.
• Wu, C. H., & Parker, S. K. (2017). The role of leader support in facilitating proactive work behavior: A perspective from attachment theory. Journal of Management, 43(4), 1025-1049. Xing, S. (2022). Ethical conflict and knowledge hiding in teams: Moderating role of workplace friendship in education sector. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 824485. Yang, Y., & Chae, H. (2021). The effect of the OCB gap on task performance with the moderating role of task interdependence. Sustainability, 14(1), 61.