-

Öz

It has been many studies on social capital, knowledge sharing attitude and motivation in the literature, which is illustrated the importance of the concepts for organization. Hence, this study aims to research into the mediating role of motivation in the effect of social capital on knowledge sharing attitude. This study also aims whether there is a difference in social capital, knowledge sharing attitude and motivation, in terms of the employee’s demographic characteristics. Based on the data collection from 400 white-collar employee of the firms in Telecommunication sector in Turkey, altruism, one of the internal motivation factor, is a partial mediator factor in the effect of social capital on knowledge sharing attitude. Reciprocity, an external motivation factor, is also partial mediator factor in the effect of social capital on knowledge sharing attitude.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• social capital, knowledge sharing attitude, motivation, reciprocity, altruism

SOSYAL SERMAYENİN BİLGİ PAYLAŞMA TUTUMUNA ETKİSİNDE MOTİVASYONUN ROLÜ: TELEKOMÜNİKASYON SEKTÖRÜNDE BİR ARAŞTIRMA

Öz

Literatürde sosyal sermaye, bilgi paylaşımı ve motivasyon kavramları konusunda yapılan çalışmaların sayıca fazla olması, bu kavramların organizasyonlar için ne kadar önemli olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır.  Çalışanların bilgi paylaşma davranışlarının organizasyonlar için ne kadar kıymetli olduğu noktasından hareketle; bu çalışmada, bilgi paylaşma davranışı ortaya çıkmadan oluşan bilgi paylaşma tutumu incelenmiş ve tutumların yönlendirilmesiyle davranış değişikliğinin gerçekleştirilebileceği varsayımına dayanarak sosyal sermaye ile bilgi paylaşma tutumu arasındaki ilişkide motivasyonun aracılık rolünü araştırmak amaçlanmıştır. Ayrıca çalışanların demografik özellikleri açısından sosyal sermaye, bilgi paylaşma tutumu ve motivasyonlarında bir farklılık olup olmadığının araştırılması, bu çalışmanın bir diğer amacıdır. Araştırmanın kapsamını Türkiye’deki Telekomünikasyon sektöründe çalışan beyaz yakalı çalışanlar oluşturmaktadır. Bu kapsam dahilinde 400 çalışandan alınan verilerle yapılan analiz sonuçları; içsel motivasyon boyutlarından özgeciliğin sosyal sermaye ile bilgi paylaşma tutumu arasındaki ilişkide aracılık rolü üstlendiğini ve dışsal motivasyon boyutlarından karşılıklı fayda bekleme boyutunun da sosyal sermaye ile bilgi paylaşma tutumu arasındaki ilişkide aracılık rolü üstlendiğini göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sosyal Sermaye, Bilgi Paylaşma Tutumu, Motivasyon, Karşılıklı Fayda Bekleme, Özgecilik

Kaynakça

1. ADLER, P. S., KWON, S. (2002). Social Capital: Prospects for a New Concept.
2. Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 17-40. AJZEN, I., FISHBEIN, M. (1980). Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social
3. Behavior. New Jersey, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri: Prentice Hall. BAGOZZI, R. P., DHOLAKIA, U. M. (2002). Intentional Social Action in Virtual
4. Communities. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 16(12), 1-20. BAKER, W. (1990). Market Networks and Corporate Behavior. American Journal of Sociology, 96(3), 589-625.
5. BANDURA, A. (1982). Self-efficacy Mechanism in Human Agency. American Psychologist, 37(2), 122-147.
6. BANDURA, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social
7. Cognitive Theory. New Jersey, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri: Pentice Hall. BANDURA, A. (2001). Social Cognitive Theory, An Agentic Perspective. Annual
8. Review of Psychology, 52(1), 1-26. BARON, R. M., KENNY , D. A. (1986). The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical

9. Considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.
10. BERKOWITZ, L., LUTTERMAN, K. G. (1968). The Traditional Socially Responsible Personality. Public Opinion Quarterly, 32(2), 169-185.
11. BLAU, P. M. (1967). Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York, Amerika
12. Birleşik Devletleri: Willey. BOCK, G., KIM, Y. (2002). Breaking the Myths of Rewards: An Exploratory Study of Attitudes about Knowledge Sharing. Information Resources Management Journal, 15(2), 1112-1125.
13. BOCK, G. W., ZMUD, R. W., KIM, Y. G., LEE, J. (2005). Behavioral Intention
14. Formation in Knoweldge Sharing: Examining the Roles of Extrinsic Motivators,Social–Psychological Forces and Organizational Climate. MISQuarterly, 24(1), 87-111. BOLAND, R. J., TENKASI, R. V. (1995). Perspective Making and Perspective
15. Taking in Communities of Knowing. Organization Science, 6(4), 350-372. BOURDIEU, P. (1985). Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of
16. Education. New York, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri: Greenwood Press.In Richardson, J. G. (Eds.), The Forms of Capital (p. 240-287). BREHM, J., RAHN, W. (1997). Individual-Level of Evidence for the Causes and Consequences of Social Capital. American Journal of Political Science, 41, 99910
17. BRIEF, A. P., MOTOWIDLO, S. J. (1986). Prosocial Organizational Behaviors.
18. The Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 710-725. BURT, R. S. (1992). Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition.
19. Harvard, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri: Harvard University Press. BURT, R. S. (1997). The Contingent Value of Social Capital. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 339-365.
20. CHANG, H. H., CHUANG, S. S. (2011). Social Capital and Individual Motivations on Knowledge Sharing: Participant Involvement as a Moderator. Information & Management, 48(1), 9-18.
21. CHIU, C. M., HSU, M. H., WANG , E. T. (2006). Understanding Knowledge
22. Sharing in Virtual Communities: An integration of Social Capital and Social Cognitive Theories. Decision Support System, 42(1), 1872-1888.
23. CHOW W. S., CHAN L. S. (2008) Social Network, Social Trust and Shared Goals in
24. Organizational Knowledge Sharing, Information & Management, 40 (1),.458-465. COLEMAN, J. S. (1988). Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital.
25. American Journal of Sociology , 94, 95-120. COLEMAN, J. S. (1990). Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge, Amerika
26. Birleşik Devletleri: Harvard University Press. CONNELLY, C. E., KELLOWAY, K. E. (2003). Predictors of Employees’ Perceptions of Knowledge Sharing Cultures. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 24(5), 294-301.
27. CONSTANT, D., SPROULL, L., KIESLER, S. (1996). The Kindness of Strangers: The Usefulness of Electronic Weak Ties for Technical Advice. Organization Science, 7(2), 119-135.
28. DAVENPORT, T. H., PRUSAK, L. (2001). İş Dünyasında Bilgi Yönetimi
29. [Working Knowledge]. İstanbul, Türkiye: Rota Yayıncılık. DÖĞERLİOĞLU, Ö. (2005). Sosyal Ağlar ve Örgütsel Başarı: Yerleşiklik Teorisi.
30. İktisat, İşletme ve Finans, 20(235), 36-41. ERDOĞAN, İ. (2007). İşletmelerde Davranış. İstanbul, Türkiye: MİAD Yayınları.
31. EREN, E. (2001). Örgütsel Davranış: Yönetim Psikolojisi. İstanbul, Türkiye: Beta Yayınları.
32. FEHR, E., GACHTER, S. (2000). Fairness and Retaliation:The Economics of
33. Reciprocity. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 14(3), 159-181. FUKUYAMA, F. (1995). The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity. New
34. York, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri: Free Press. GÖKSEL, A., AYDINLATAN, B., BİNGÖL, D. (2010). Örgütlerde Bilgi Paylaşım
35. Davranışı: Sosyal Sermaye Boyutundan Bir Bakış. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 65( 4), 87-109. GRANOVETTER, M. S. (1973). The Strength of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380.
36. GROOTAERT, C. (2002). Understanding and Measuring Social Capital: A
37. Multidisciplinary Tool for Practitioners. Washington, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri: World Bank Publications. HANSEN, M. T. (1999). The Search-Transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in
38. Sharing Knowledge across Organization Subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 82-111. HARGADON, A. B. (1998). Firms as Knowledge Brokers: Lesson in Pursuing
39. Continuous Innovation. California Management Review, 40(3), 209-227. HAU Y.S., KIM B., LEE H., KIM Y.G., The Effects of Individual Motivations and Social Capital on Employees’ Tacit and Explicit Knowledge Sharing Intentions, International Journal of Information Management, 33 (2), 2012, s. 243-418.
40. HODSON, R. (1996). Dignity in the Workplace Under Participative Management: Alienation and Freedom Revisited. American Sociological Review, 60, 719-738.
41. HOLT, D. H. (1993). Productivity through People, Management Principles and Practices (2. ed.). New Jersey, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri: Prentice-Hall.
42. HUNG, S., DURCIKOVA, A., LAI, H., LIN, W. (2011). The Influence of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation on Individuals’ Knowledge Sharing Behavior.
43. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 69(1), 415-427. IGLEHART, R. (1997). Modernization and Post-Modernization: Cultural, Economic, and Political Change in 43 Societies. Princeton, Amerika Birleşik
44. Devletleri: Princeton University Press. JONES, C., HESTERLY, W. S., BORGATTI, S. P. (1997). A General Theory of
45. Network Governance: Exchange Conditions and Social Mechanisms. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 911-945. KNOKE, D. (1999). Corporate Social Capital and Liability. Boston, Amerika
46. Birleşik Devletleri: Kluwer Academic Publisher.In Leenders , R. T., & Gabbay, S. M. (Eds.), Organizational Networks and Corporate Social Capital (p. 17-42). KOLLOCK, P. (1999). Communities in Cyberspace. NewYork, Amerika Birleşik
47. Devletleri: Routledge.In Kollock, P., & Smith, M. (Eds.), The Economies of Online Cooperation:Gifts and Public Goods in Cyberspace (p. 3-25). KURTULUŞ, K. (2010). Araştırma Yöntemleri. İstanbul, Türkiye: Türkmen Kitapevi.
48. LEANA, C. R., VAN BURREAN, H. J. (1999). Organizational Social Capital and Employment Practices. The Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 538-555.
49. LEE, C. C., YANG, J. (2000). Knowledge Value Chain. Journal of Management Development, 19(9), 783-793.
50. LEVIN, D. Z., CROSS, R. (2004). The Strength of Weak Ties You Can Trust: The Mediating Role of Trust in Effective Knowledge Transfer. Management Science, 50(11), 1477-1490.
51. LIN, H. (2007). Effects of Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation on Employee Knowledge Sharing Intentions. Journal of Information Science, 32(2), 135-149.
52. LOURY, G. C. (1992). The Economics of Discrimination: Getting to the Core of the Problem. Harvard Journal for American Public Policy, 1, 91-110.
53. LUTHANS, F. (1973). Organizational Behavior (4. ed.). New York, Amerika
54. Birleşik Devletleri: McGraw Hill. MAYER, R. C., DAVIS, J. H. (1999). The Effect of the Performance Appraisal
55. System on Trust for Management: A Field Quasi-Experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(1), 123-136. MCPODOLNY, J., BARON, J. (1997). Resources and Relationships: Social Networks and Mobility in the Workplace. American Sociological Review, 62(1), 673--693.
56. MCALLISTER D. J. (1995) Affect and Cognition-Based Trust as Foundatitions for
57. Interpersonal Cooperation in Organizations, Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 24-60. MISZTAL, B. A. (1996). Trust in Modern Societies. Cambridge, Amerika Birleşik
58. Devletleri: Polity Press. MORGAN, R. M., HUNT, S. D. (1994). The Commitment-Trust Theory of Relationship Marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58, 20-38.
59. NAHAPIET, J., GHOSHAL, S. (1998). Social Capital, Intellectual Capital and the Organizational Advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242-286.
60. PARKHE, A. (1993). Strategic Alliance Structuring: A Game Theoretic and Transaction Cost Examination of Interfirm Cooperation. Academy of Management Journal, 36(4), 794-829.
61. PAYNE, T. G., MOORE, C. B., GRIFFIS, S. E., AUTRY , C. W. (2011). Multilevel
62. Challenges and Opportunities in Social Capital Research. Journal of Management, 37(2), 491-520. POLANYI, K. (1944) The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic
63. Origins of Our Time, Boston: Beacon Press. PORTES, A., SENSENBRENNER, J. (1993). Embeddednes and Immigration: Notes on the Social Determinants of Economic Action. American Journal of Sociology, 98(6), 1320-1350.
64. PUTNAM, R. D. (1993). Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern
65. Italy. Princeton, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri: Princeton University Press. PUTNAM, R. D. (1995). Bowling Alone: America’s Declining Social Capital.
66. Journal of Democracy, 6(1), 65-.78. RENKO, Y. H., AUTIO, E., SAPIENZA, H. (2001). Social Capital, Knowledge
67. Acquisition, And Knowledge Exploitation in Young Technology Based Firms. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6), 587-613. RING, P. S., VAN DE VEN, A. H. (1994). Developmental Processes of Cooperative
68. Interorganizational Relationships. Academy of Management Review, 19(1), 90-118. SCOTT, C. R., CORMAN, S. R., CHENEY, G. (2014). Development of a Structurational Model of Identification in The Organization. Communication Theory, 8(3), 298-336.
69. SETHI, R., COMPEAU, L. D., (2002). Social Construction Organizational Identity and Market Orientation of the Firm. American Marketing Association Proceeding, 13, 183-184.
70. TAJFEL, H. (1982). Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Annual Review of Psychology, 33, 1-39.
71. TSAI, W., GHOSHAL, S. (1998). Social Capital and Value Creation: The Role of
72. Intrafirm Networks. Academy of Management Journal, 41(4), 464-478. WASKO, M. FARAJ, S. (2000) It Is What One Does: Why People Participate and Help Others in Electronic Communities of Practice. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9(2-3), 155-173.
73. WASKO, M. M., FARAJ, S. (2005). Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 35-57.
74. WOOLCOCK, M. (1998). Social Capital and Economic Development:Toward a
75. Theoretical Synthesis and Policy Framework. Theory and Society, 27(3), 151-208. YU, Y., WILKINS, L. C., MA, W. W. K. (2004). Innovation Through Information
76. Technology. Louisiana, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri: Idea Group Inc..In Khosrowpour, M. (Eds.), Developing an Instrument for Measuring Knowledge Sharing Attitudes (p. 272-276).