Research on factors affecting knowledge sharing among lecturers in public universities. Hanoi sector

Firstly, the thesis systematized the theoretical issues of

knowledge sharing, conducted an overview of the researches on

factors affecting knowledge sharing and divided into 5

independent factors, 2 factors. dependent factors. From there,

the thesis clarifies research gaps and proposes research

directions of the topic. In addition, the thesis also reviews

background theories related to knowledge sharing applied to

research.

Second, based on research overview, theoretical basis

and through preliminary research, the thesis proposes an

official research model by assessing the effects of factors on

two central processes of division. Knowledge sharing is the

process of collecting knowledge and donating knowledge. In

addition, the thesis has also converted, compatible, tested

reliability and used scales suitable to the conditions of

organizations such as universities in Vietnam.

Third, the thesis has conducted surveys, data collection,

qualitative and quantitative assessment to confirm the conclusions

about the hypotheses related to the factors and scales.

pdf14 trang | Chia sẻ: honganh20 | Ngày: 10/03/2022 | Lượt xem: 26 | Lượt tải: 0download
Bạn đang xem nội dung tài liệu Research on factors affecting knowledge sharing among lecturers in public universities. Hanoi sector, để tải tài liệu về máy bạn click vào nút DOWNLOAD ở trên
OF RESEARCH ON KNOWLEDGE SHARING 1.1. Theoretical basis 1.1.1. Knowledge, knowledge management and knowledge sharing 1.1.1.1. Knowledge Concept of knowledge: Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) define that "knowledge is a dynamic human process to demonstrate personal beliefs in truth". The evolution of scientific epistemology has formed a hierarchical structure of the creation of knowledge. Davenport and Prusak (1998) define knowledge as a complete approach that generates new practices and information. Knowledge is also defined as (i) facts, information and skills acquired by a person through experience or education, theoretical understanding or practice of an issue, (ii) what is known in a particular field or as a whole; events and information; or (iii) increase the awareness or understanding gained by experience of an event or situation (Tiwana, 2002). 4 Classification of knowledge: According to Nonaka (1995), there are two types of knowledge: First, present knowledge can be easily transferred and created for example a manual or knowledge store; Second, hidden knowledge is the kind of knowledge that is stored in one's mind and is "without words, intuition and without communication". Therefore, this kind of knowledge can be difficult to transfer and according to Reychav and Weisberg (2010) is considered more valuable. 1.1.1.2. Knowledge management Karl M. Wiig defines: “Knowledge management is the process of creating, developing and applying knowledge in a systematic and transparent way to maximize operational efficiency related to knowledge and business value. knowledge and intellectual property available ”. According to the American Productivity and Quality Center (APQC): “Knowledge management is a systematic process of identifying, acquiring, and conveying information and knowledge that children who can use it to create, compete, and improve ”. 1.1.1.3. Sharing knowledge 25 - Improving and renewing recruitment and selection of inputs for the faculty in the direction of considering human resources as a source of knowledge to create a distinct competitive advantage, effectively promoting team development function. - Strengthen and promote the building of organizational culture to create a favorable environment to promote donating knowledge and collecting knowledge in the organization. - Promote the rewarding to create favorable conditions for lecturers to participate in collecting knowledge process in the organization. 4.3. Some limitations of the thesis Firstly, the research scope of this topic is only limited to 13 public universities in Hanoi. Second, knowledge sharing and especially the two key processes that are the donating knowledge process and the collecting knowledge process are also influenced by many other factors besides the 5 mentioned factors. Third, some control variables affecting knowledge sharing have not been explained and analyzed specifically in this study. Fourth, the scales reflect variables that are in subjective form, based on the experiences and feelings of the surveyed people, so there will be certain errors. 24 tools. Information technology and communications (such as social networks, intranets, shared databases, applications, and ICTs utilities) for knowledge sharing. Fifthly, the thesis shows that organizational cultural factors have the strongest influence on the sharing of knowledge of lecturers, followed by recruitment and selection practices and finally commendation. Sixth, the study has adjusted a number of control variable scales (age, seniority, degree, degree, title, and specialization) to suit the organizational context of universities in Vietnam. . By the method of multi-group analysis, the thesis has shown that there are differences between age groups, working seniority and expertise when assessing the effects of factors in the research model on the donating knowledge process and the collecting knowledge process among trainers. Finally, through the research results, the thesis gives recommendations (recommendations) to educational administrators and universities to promote and enhance knowledge sharing among lecturers in universities study in Vietnam. 4.2. Some recommendations - In the process of building and implementing the school development strategy, the leaders of universities need to pay attention to the training and development of knowledge resources of the organization to create a very different competitive advantage and effective through the organization's knowledge sharing process. 5 Knowledge sharing is a phase of the knowledge management cycle, especially hidden knowledge sharing (Bouthillier and Shearer, 2002). Van den Hooff and Ridder (2004) said that knowledge sharing is done through two processes: (1) donating knowledge, which is done when there is at least one participant in the transmission and distribution. knowledge, the intellectual capital of the owners themselves, while the rest of the people consult and absorb the knowledge of colleagues or (2) the process of acquiring knowledge. 1.1.2. Background theories applied in knowledge sharing - Social exchange theory (Social exchange theory) - Motivation theory (Motivation theory) - Technology Acceptance Model (Technology Acceptance Model) 1.2. Research overview on knowledge sharing 1.2.1. Overview of factors affecting knowledge sharing 6 The results of a review of domestic and international studies show that knowledge sharing is influenced by many factors, of which, focusing on factors such as: information and communication technology tools, support leadership, reward, incentives, trust, organizational structure, recruitment and selection practices, organizational culture, image, leadership style, and factors of the organizational environment. In addition to the factors that have homogeneity of research results such as: commendation, leadership support, recruitment and selection practices, other factors still do not agree on research results such as: information and communication technology tools, organizational culture. This difference can also be caused by contextual factors such as cultural differences of each country (Riege, 2005; Okamuro et al., 2011). In public universities in Eastern countries, the organizational culture is not based on trust, socialization, effective communication, rewards and recognition, and in Western countries there is culture. on the contrary (Riege, 2005). With the relationships that have agreed or have not been agreed upon, it is advisable to continue to research to find out more causes. Therefore, this study should be done to clarify scientifically to provide the most accurate argument about the factors affecting knowledge sharing among lecturers in universities, at the same time there are solutions. recommendations to promote knowledge sharing activities of teachers in the current context. 1.3. Research model and hypotheses 1.3.1. Research model 23 4.1.4. Some contributions of the thesis Firstly, the thesis systematized the theoretical issues of knowledge sharing, conducted an overview of the researches on factors affecting knowledge sharing and divided into 5 independent factors, 2 factors. dependent factors. From there, the thesis clarifies research gaps and proposes research directions of the topic. In addition, the thesis also reviews background theories related to knowledge sharing applied to research. Second, based on research overview, theoretical basis and through preliminary research, the thesis proposes an official research model by assessing the effects of factors on two central processes of division. Knowledge sharing is the process of collecting knowledge and donating knowledge. In addition, the thesis has also converted, compatible, tested reliability and used scales suitable to the conditions of organizations such as universities in Vietnam. Third, the thesis has conducted surveys, data collection, qualitative and quantitative assessment to confirm the conclusions about the hypotheses related to the factors and scales. Fourth, although the research results show that there is no statistical evidence that information and communication technology tools have a direct influence on donating knowledge and collecting knowledge as expected. At the same time, the reality of knowledge sharing in universities shows that the majority of lecturers regularly use (the level of assessment is close to 4 in the measure of regularly using from 1 to 5) ICT 22 recruitment and selection practices affect knowledge sharing, while the group over 40 years old is not statistically significant. However, the group of lecturers over 40 years old that rewarding has an impact on collecting knowledge process, while the group under 40 years old is not statistically significant. - There is a difference in working years. For the group of lecturers with working experience of less than 10 years, there is a tendency to think that organizational culture has more influence on donating knowledge and collecting than two groups with working years from 10 to 10 years. under 20 years and over 20 years of work. The group has a working experience of more than 20 years said that commendation has a positive effect on the collecting knowledge process, while the remaining groups have no statistical significance. On the other hand, the group with working years from 10 to less than 20 years said that recruitment and selection practices have a positive influence on the process of transferring and collecting knowledge process. - There are professional differences. All three professional groups of Science and Technology - Technology, Economic Science and Social Sciences and Humanities all say that organizational cultural factors have a positive influence on both donating knowledge and the process of collecting knowledge. However, the group with expertise in Social Sciences and Humanities shows that organizational culture has the strongest influence on donating knowledge process and collecting knowledge process. 7 Based on the theoretical basis, practical basis and overview of research works on factors affecting knowledge sharing The proposed research model is shown in Figure 1.5. Figure 1.5. Research model of the thesis 1.3.2. Research hypothesis H1a,H1b H2a, H2b H3a, H3b H4a, H4b H5a, H5b ICTs Top Management support Kno wled ge shari ng Donating Knowledge Collecting Knowledge Reward H6a,H6b,H7a,H7b, Control variables gender, age, degree, degree, expertise Organization culture Recruitment and selection 8 On the basis of the proposed research model, the following research hypotheses contribute to clarify the research questions: Hypothesis 1a (H1a): Information technology and communication tools have a positive impact on donating knowledge process. Hypothesis 1b (H1b): Information and communication technology tools have a positive impact on collecting knowledge process. Hypothesis 2a (H2a): Top management support has a positive impact on donating knowledge process. Hypothesis 2b (H2b): Top management support has a positive impact on collecting knowledge process. Theory 3a (H3a): Reward has a positive impact on donating knowledge process. Hypothesis 3b (H3b): Reward has a positive impact on collecting knowledge process. Hypothesis 4a (H4a): Organizational culture has a positive impact on donating knowledge process. Theory 4b (H4b): Organizational culture has a positive impact on collecting knowledge process. Hypothesis 5a (H5a): The practice of recruiting and selection human resources has a positive impact on donating knowledge process. 21 cooperate); learning organization (lecturers always consider learning as one of their daily tasks, always updating, improving, and applying new knowledge in teaching and scientific research activities. encouragement and recognition). Aspects of organizational culture in this study have a positive impact on donating knowledge and colecting knowledge. This result is similar to previous studies such as those of Fey and Denison (2000), Goffee and Jones (1996), Goh (2002). Hypothesis 5a (H5a): Practice of recruiting and recruiting staff has a positive impact on donating knowledge process Hypothesis 5b (H5b): Practice of recruiting and recruiting human resources has a positive impact on collecting knowledge process In this study, recruitment and selection practices cover recruitment and selection processes in universities such as: how to recruit and recruit staff; transparency, impartiality in recruitment and selection process; the appointed positions have found the right people and positions; and the establishment of panels for interviews and examinations in the recruitment and selection process. Therefore, to promote knowledge sharing among lecturers in universities, it is necessary to promote recruitment and recruitment practices. 4.1.3. Differences between control variables for knowledge sharing among faculty members in universities - There are age groups. Research results show that the group of lecturers under 40 years old tended to evaluate that 20 organization to the donating knowledge process is not supported. 4.1.2. Các giả thuyết được ủng hộ Hypothesis 3b (H3b): Commendation has a positive impact on collecting knowledge process Commendation affects the process of collecting knowledge: Motivation theory says that reward affects the motivation of lecturers in universities. That dynamic creates enthusiasm, enthusiasm, excitement, responsibility in collecting new knowledge (through the process of learning, fostering, attending scientific conferences and seminars). When teachers participate in the process of collecting knowledge; Lecturers will receive financial support, salary and bonus, have the opportunity for promotion, guaranteed job. Thus, in order to increase the participation of lecturers in sharing knowledge (the process of collecting knowledge), universities should promote the rewarding work. Hypothesis 4a (H4a): Organizational culture has a positive impact on donating knowledge process Hypothesis 4b (H4b): Organizational culture has a positive impact on the collecting knowledge process In this research, organizational culture includes different characteristics that can be classified according to aspects such as: teamwork (trainers work together, exchange, complete tasks, tasks faster. , more effective); cooperation (lecturers coordinate with each other to fulfill their tasks well, lecturers from different faculties and institutes together support and 9 Hypothesis 5b (H5b): Practice of recruiting and sellection human resources has a positive impact on collecting knowledge process. CHAPTER 2 RESEARCH METHODS 2.1. Research process The research process of the thesis includes generalized steps through the following diagram: Propose models and scales Theoretical basis, overview of research Interview, consult experts Check the model and scale Test the reliability of the scales, adjust the scale, analyze the discovery factor preliminary quantitative research Formal quantitative research Model evaluation; Hypothesis testing; Request Test scales, test models, test hypotheses, test the impact of control variables 10 Figure 2.1. Generalizing the research process 2.2. Develop scales and questionnaires - Based on the summary and synthesis of research results, the author poses a number of questions, research hypotheses and proposed research models, and at the same time determines the source and content of the scales in the tissue. suggested image. Based on the concepts and original scales of the variables in the model, the author translated into Vietnamese about the expected model, hypotheses and questionnaires. - On the basis of the original scales, the author translates forwards then asks two experts, one person, to translate, then transfer the second person to translate back. - Demographic variables such as gender, age are inherited from previous studies (in the overview of demographic variables), only variables such as seniority, age, and expertise are the authors. Adjusted based on previous studies and consulted with 02 experts to adjust to suit the context of institutions being universities in Vietnam. - Finally, the author compiles and completes the draft of the scale to serve the preliminary quantitative research. The variables in the model are measured using the Likert scale with a rating scale of 1 to 5. 2.3. Preliminary research Preliminary study in first time The author conducts the first preliminary study with 15 selected lecturers in a convenient way. The purpose of this preliminary study is to standardize the terms and questions in 19 world. However, in practice, most trainers use IT and communication tools to share knowledge. To further confirm this issue, it is necessary to carry out many other studies in different contexts to better identify the cause of the problem. Hypothesis 2a (H2a): Leadership support has a positive impact on knowledge donating process Hypothesis 2b (H2b): Leadership support has a positive impact on collecting knowledge process Knowledge sharing among faculty in universities is less dominated by leadership support as in previous studies in different institutions. The sharing of knowledge by lecturers no longer depends on encouragement, preferential policies, and recognition of leaders as other studies have confirmed. This can also be attributed to the working environment of the faculty and the change in management practices, perceptions of management, and the role of management in universities in recent years (especially the case). The university operates under the mechanism of "autonomy"). Hypothesis 3a (H3a): Commendation has a positive impact on donating knowledge process For the reward factor of the organization, there are two different views in previous studies. Some authors argue that organizational reward is related to knowledge sharing, while others reject this claim. Differences in research results can be explained by differences in research context, observations used, subjects and investigation methods. However, in this study, the hypothesis that the relationship of the reward factor of the 18 3.3.2.2. Analyzing multi-group structure by age 3.3.2.3. Analyzing multi-group structure according to seniority 3.3.2.4. Analyze the structure of multiple groups by expertise CHAPTER 4 DISCUSSION OF RESEARCH RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATION 4.1. Discuss research results The results of this research have strengthened the research overview on knowledge sharing in general and for lecturers in Hanoi public universities in particular. As follows: 4.1.1. The hypotheses have not been confirmed Hypothesis 1a (H1a): Information and communication technology tools have a positive impact on donating knowledge process. Hypothesis 1b (H1b): Information technology and communication tools have a positive impact on collecting knowledge process. By the method of linear structure analysis (SEM) with an observed sample of lecturers in Hanoi public universities, the author affirms that information technology and communication tools do not see any impact knowledge sharing. This conclusion is drawn from quantitative research that the author has done as well as proved by many scholars around the 11 the scale, the ordering of questions and the easy-to-understand terminology to ensure the reliability and validity of the scale. Make sure the respondents do not misunderstand the author's question. Preliminary study in second time The second preliminary study is conducted for the purpose of pilot investigation to detect weaknesses in the design and structure of the question, and to minimize problems in the process of answering questions and entering data. . In such a sense, before conducting the official survey, the author has conducted a test survey to test 100 representatives of the surveyed object groups. The results of the 2nd preliminary study showed that the basic survey was accepted, only adjusting some issues related to professional terminology and design. 2.4. Formal quantitative research Formal quantitative research is done through the following steps: - Design questionnaire - Determination of investigation sample - Expected analysis of data Thus, in the thesis, the author has followed the research process built from the beginning, and at the same time used quantitative research methods in combination with consulting experts to achieve research purposes, especially explore factors influencing knowledge sharing among lecturers in universities in Vietnam. 12 CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH RESULTS 3.1. Current status and sample description statistics Knowledge sharing through the evaluation opinions of 447 managers and lecturers of 13 public universities under the Ministry of Education and Training in Hanoi, the thesis has synthesized and analyzed the current knowledge sharing through two central processes of knowledge sharing is the process of donating knowledge (KSO) and process of collecting knowledge (KSI). Accordingly, the overall evaluation of 13 universities by each observed variable and monetary policy factor shows that the average value is greater than 3.0 (the largest is 4.11 and the smallest is 3, 80) means that the managers, lecturers all think that the process of donating knowledge and the process of collecting knowledge between trainers is basically good. In which, the average value of the factor in the process of donating knowledge is 4.0438 and the process of collecting knowledge is 3.85. This result clearly shows that the monetary policy characteristics of lecturers in universities are inclined to the transfer of knowledge, this is a very good feature and very prominent due to the specific teaching work of lecturers and administrators. physical. Besides, the average assessment result of the process of collecting knowledge is 3.85 also shows that in addition to teaching, university lecturers are also very interested in participating in training courses. improve professional qualifications and skills; Lecturers actively participate in seminars, conferences, seminars, the university's 17 Estima te S.E. C.R. P Conclude KSO <--- TOP .105 .073 1.449 .147 KSI <--- TOP .053 .074 .714 .475 KSO <--- RW -.038 .052 -.728 .467 KSI <--- SC .234 .064 3.666 *** Statistical significance KSI <--- RW .101 .052 1.917 .055 Statistical significance (level 90%) KSO <--- SC .184 .062 2.966 .003 Statistical significance The non-standardized weight table (Table 3.21) shows that the factors ICTs, TOP, RW (not statistically significant), factor RW are not statistically significant for KSO but impact on KSI is statistically significant. at 90% confidence because P- value 0.055 <0.1. The OC factor affects KSO and KSI (P = 0.000 <0.05); SC factor affects KSO and KSI (P = 0.000 and P 0 0.003 respectively <0.05); The RW factor affecting KSI statistically had 90% confidence (P = 0.055 <0.1). The non-normalized weights (the Estimate column) all bearing positive signs also show that the above factors affect proportionally to KSO and KSI. 3.3.2. Analyzing multi-group structure model 3.3.2.1. Analysis of the structure of multiple groups by gender 16 significant, can be used to analyze the relationship between the factors. Figure 3.6. Structure model analysis - standardized form Table 3.21. Weighing tables are not standardized for research model Estima te S.E. C.R. P Conclude KSO <--- ICTs .050 .068 .727 .467 KSI <--- ICTs .030 .069 .433 .665 KSO <--- OC .363 .067 5.409 *** Statistical significance KSI <--- OC .282 .067 4.203 *** Statistical significance 13 common database for them to ask, absorb and update new knowledge, new technologies, new teaching methods, and research. Lecturers very often and constantly use IT and communication applications mainly for activities: collecting information for personal needs, finding information from other websites and exchanging information with others. other (total frequency and continuity are both greater than 60%). However, lec

Các file đính kèm theo tài liệu này:

  • pdfresearch_on_factors_affecting_knowledge_sharing_among_lectur.pdf
Tài liệu liên quan