IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v55y2018icp92-99.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

New model for encouraging academic staff in Saudi universities to use IT for knowledge sharing to improve scholarly publication performance

Author

Listed:
  • Ghabban, Fahad
  • Selamat, Ali
  • Ibrahim, Roliana

Abstract

Research and development are central to national and civilizational advances. Research and development in any nation are measured according to research outcomes, such as publications. Publications are becoming the primary source for evaluating academic staff and academic institutions. Knowledge is the most important resource in universities. Useful knowledge can improve the performance of workers in the organization. Knowledge sharing, or the exchange of information between workers, is important for academics and practitioners. Knowledge acquisition, knowledge sharing and knowledge utilization are three types of knowledge management. Higher education in Saudi Arabia seeks to enhance scientific research as a key component of developing the nation and its universities. In recent years, higher education in Saudi Arabia has initiated multiple projects on enhancing the research productivity of academic staff in Saudi universities. Saudi higher education is seeking to automate all research activities to enhance research performance. This study examines the impact of using knowledge sharing to improve scholarly publications from academic staff in Saudi universities. In addition, this research identifies the factors that lead to enhanced levels of knowledge sharing in Saudi universities. The researchers interviewed 22 academic staff from Taibah University and reviewed papers and academic institutions' websites to identify the important indicators for measuring research productivity. Responses to an online questionnaire from 374 academic staff in Saudi universities were used to determine the relation between knowledge sharing and scholarly publication and to examine the factors that enhance knowledge sharing in Saudi universities. This study used SmartPLS to analyse the results. The results show that computer-mediated communication and nature of knowledge are the primary factors that positively affect knowledge sharing in Saudi universities, and scholarly publications are the primary indicator for measuring research productivity. In addition, knowledge sharing and computer-mediated communication significantly enhance research productivity at Saudi universities.

Suggested Citation

  • Ghabban, Fahad & Selamat, Ali & Ibrahim, Roliana, 2018. "New model for encouraging academic staff in Saudi universities to use IT for knowledge sharing to improve scholarly publication performance," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 92-99.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:55:y:2018:i:c:p:92-99
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2018.07.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X17302993
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2018.07.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. D'Este, P. & Patel, P., 2007. "University-industry linkages in the UK: What are the factors underlying the variety of interactions with industry?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1295-1313, November.
    2. Dhillon, Sharanjit Kaur & Ibrahim, Roliana & Selamat, Ali, 2015. "Factors associated with scholarly publication productivity among academic staff: Case of a Malaysian public university," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 160-166.
    3. Shibayama, Sotaro & Baba, Yasunori, 2015. "Impact-oriented science policies and scientific publication practices: The case of life sciences in Japan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 936-950.
    4. Maaike Verbree & Edwin Horlings & Peter Groenewegen & Inge Weijden & Peter Besselaar, 2015. "Organizational factors influencing scholarly performance: a multivariate study of biomedical research groups," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 25-49, January.
    5. Claire McInerney, 2002. "Knowledge management and the dynamic nature of knowledge," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 53(12), pages 1009-1018, October.
    6. S. Alonso & F. J. Cabrerizo & E. Herrera-Viedma & F. Herrera, 2010. "hg-index: a new index to characterize the scientific output of researchers based on the h- and g-indices," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(2), pages 391-400, February.
    7. Wilkinson, Brett R. & Durden, Chris H., 2015. "Inducing structural change in academic accounting research," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 23-36.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Abdullah Almuqrin & Ibrahim Mutambik, 2021. "The explanatory power of social cognitive theory in determining knowledge sharing among Saudi faculty," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(3), pages 1-24, March.
    2. Jonek-Kowalska, Izabela & Musioł-Urbańczyk, Anna & Podgórska, Marzena & Wolny, Maciej, 2021. "Does motivation matter in evaluation of research institutions? Evidence from Polish public universities," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fahad Ghabban & Ali Selamat & Roliana Ibrahim & Ondrej Krejcar & Petra Maresova & Enrique Herrera-Viedma, 2019. "The Influence of Personal and Organizational Factors on Researchers’ Attitudes towards Sustainable Research Productivity in Saudi Universities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-28, September.
    2. Sara Alonzo, 2022. "Organizational Values and Knowledge Sharing in Public Institution: Economic-Public Sector in Guatemala," Digital Transformation: The Harmonic Convergence of People, Culture, Process, and Technology in the New Normal,, ToKnowPress.
    3. Simplice A Asongu, 2013. "On the Obituary of Scientific Knowledge Monopoly," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 33(4), pages 2718-2731.
    4. Roberto Iorio & Sandrine Labory & Francesco Rentocchini, 2014. "Academics’ Motivations and Depth and Breadth of Knowledge Transfer Activities," Working Papers 1401, c.MET-05 - Centro Interuniversitario di Economia Applicata alle Politiche per L'industria, lo Sviluppo locale e l'Internazionalizzazione.
    5. Iwona Dudek & Jean-Yves Blaise, 2017. "What Comes before a Digital Output? Eliciting and Documenting Cultural Heritage Research Processes," Post-Print halshs-01673865, HAL.
    6. Yue Wu & Yue Yang & Weishun Xu & Qiuxiao Chen, 2020. "The Influence of Innovation Resources in Higher Education Institutions on the Development of Sci-Tech Parks’ Enterprises in the Urban Innovative Districts at the Stage of Urbanization Transformation," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-36, October.
    7. Wu, Jiang & Ou, Guiyan & Liu, Xiaohui & Dong, Ke, 2022. "How does academic education background affect top researchers’ performance? Evidence from the field of artificial intelligence," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    8. Federico Caviggioli & Alessandra Colombelli & Antonio De Marco & Giuseppe Scellato & Elisa Ughetto, 2023. "Co-evolution patterns of university patenting and technological specialization in European regions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 216-239, February.
    9. Aschhoff, Birgit & Sofka, Wolfgang, 2008. "Successful Patterns of Scientific Knowledge Sourcing: Mix and Match," ZEW Discussion Papers 08-033 [rev.], ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    10. Crespi, Gustavo & D'Este, Pablo & Fontana, Roberto & Geuna, Aldo, 2011. "The impact of academic patenting on university research and its transfer," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 55-68, February.
    11. Marina van Geenhuizen, 2013. "From Ivory Tower to Living Lab: Accelerating the Use of University Knowledge," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 31(6), pages 1115-1132, December.
    12. Bodas Freitas , Isabel Maria & Geuna, Aldo & Lawson, Cornelia & Rossi, Federica, 2014. "How Industry Inventors Collaborate with Academic Researchers: The choice between shared and unilateral governance forms," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 201401, University of Turin.
    13. Svein Kyvik & Ingvild Reymert, 2017. "Research collaboration in groups and networks: differences across academic fields," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(2), pages 951-967, November.
    14. Véronique Schaeffer & Sıla Öcalan-Özel & Julien Pénin, 2020. "The complementarities between formal and informal channels of university–industry knowledge transfer: a longitudinal approach," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 31-55, February.
    15. Mohajan, Haradhan, 2016. "Sharing of Tacit Knowledge in Organizations: A Review," MPRA Paper 82958, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 15 Jun 2016.
    16. Dimitris Tsintsaris & Milan Tsompanoglou & Evangelos Ioannidis, 2024. "Dynamics of Social Influence and Knowledge in Networks: Sociophysics Models and Applications in Social Trading, Behavioral Finance and Business," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-27, April.
    17. Zhenbin Yan & Qiang Wu & Xingchen Li, 2016. "Do Hirsch-type indices behave the same in assessing single publications? An empirical study of 29 bibliometric indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1815-1833, December.
    18. Munari, Federico & Sobrero, Maurizio & Toschi, Laura, 2018. "The university as a venture capitalist? Gap funding instruments for technology transfer," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 70-84.
    19. Mehdi Rhaiem & Nabil Amara, 2020. "Determinants of research efficiency in Canadian business schools: evidence from scholar-level data," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 53-99, October.
    20. Federica Rossi & Ainurul Rosli, 2013. "Indicators of university-industry knowledge transfer performance and their implications for universities: Evidence from the UK’s HE-BCI survey," Working Papers 13, Birkbeck Centre for Innovation Management Research, revised Aug 2013.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:55:y:2018:i:c:p:92-99. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.