IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tkmrxx/v16y2018i3p366-375.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perfectionists do not like to share knowledge? Investigating the relationship between perfectionism and knowledge sharing and testing the moderation effect of coaching

Author

Listed:
  • Chih-Wei Wang
  • Yuhsuan Chang

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between perfectionism and knowledge sharing by using a structural equation modelling analysis, and the perception of coaching style was tested as a moderator. The results revealed that high personal standards and concern over mistakes, which are aspects of perfectionism, significantly relate to knowledge-sharing attitude and intention. Furthermore, managers’ coaching styles affect the relationship between perfectionism and knowledge sharing. For employees who fear making mistakes, a high level of managerial coaching can promote knowledge-sharing intention and attitude among employees. However, for perfectionistic employees who set high standards for self-performance, a high level of managerial coaching diminishes their knowledge-sharing intention. Researchers have suggested that different coaching styles are preferred according to employees’ personalities. The results of this study offer insights for implementing appropriate management interventions and provide directions for human resource managers, employees, and related professionals to promote knowledge sharing in organisations.

Suggested Citation

  • Chih-Wei Wang & Yuhsuan Chang, 2018. "Perfectionists do not like to share knowledge? Investigating the relationship between perfectionism and knowledge sharing and testing the moderation effect of coaching," Knowledge Management Research & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(3), pages 366-375, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:tkmrxx:v:16:y:2018:i:3:p:366-375
    DOI: 10.1080/14778238.2018.1493366
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14778238.2018.1493366
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14778238.2018.1493366?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.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:tkmrxx:v:16:y:2018:i:3:p:366-375. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tkmr .

    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.