(44.192.10.166) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/03/06 19:32
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果

詳目顯示:::

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:鄧仙達
研究生(外文):Tien-Dat Dang
論文名稱:The Impact of Trust, Personality and Psychological Contract on Knowledge Sharing Behavior in Multinational Enterprise in term of Vietnamese Employees’ Perspective
論文名稱(外文):The Impact of Trust, Personality and Psychological Contract on Knowledge Sharing Behavior in Multinational Enterprise in term of Vietnamese Employees’ Perspective
指導教授:陳怡昌陳怡昌引用關係
指導教授(外文):Yi-Chang Chen
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:崑山科技大學
系所名稱:企業管理研究所
學門:商業及管理學門
學類:企業管理學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2010
畢業學年度:98
語文別:英文
論文頁數:147
外文關鍵詞:TrustPersonalityPsychological ContractKnowledge sharing Behavior
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:767
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:20
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
Most of previous studies have been identified knowledge sharing has a positive impact on organization performance. Nowadays, organizations suppose to understand that they are standing in the knowledge age, where knowledge is playing the major role with their success if they know how to get, how to implement and how to make knowledge become their competitive advantages.
From the multinational enterprises (MNEs) point of view, the purpose of encourage employees sharing their experiences and experts for the benefit of their co-workers and the organization in related with the difference in culture, knowledge background, working style, is very important for administrators to seriously deal with.
Based on previous studies, we have already known that trust, personality and psychological contract, itself likely have influence on knowledge sharing behavior. The principal idea in this study aims to investigates the relationship between trust, personality and psychological contract and knowledge sharing behavior, analyze how they can affect knowledge sharing behavior. With those results, the organizations can apply strategies to engage their employees in contributing and seeking knowledge, in order to improve the performance of organization.
This study was conducted a survey by giving the questionnaire to Vietnamese employees who are working at MNEs in three industries parks near Ha Noi, the capital located in the north of Vietnam and three organizations in banking and insurance industry located in Ha Noi. The data obtain through conducting a survey was analyzed by various techniques such as descriptive analysis to provide the information regarding the respondent’s gender, age, education, position and department where they are working, then using Cronbach’s α, regression analysis, t-test to examine the correlation between each variable and observe the different point of view related to the respondent’s demographic profile.
The results have shown that most of hypotheses are supported, except the hypothesis about the impact of Competence-based Trust on Implicit Knowledge Sharing Behavior, it means most of all three independent variables are positively related to knowledge sharing behavior. Our findings suggest that, in order for Explicit Knowledge Sharing Behavior to be enabled, integrity-based trust must firstly consider in diffusing in the relationship between employee and employer, also among employees within the organization. Beside, when the manager propose to encourage their employees engage in sharing Implicit Knowledge, they should consider seriously to come out with the appropriate relational contract to satisfy both the benefit of two sides toward the perception of exchange knowledge, expertise and working experience.
These aspects are not only important especially to management, but also to the individuals who share knowledge, their feelings of having shared knowledge appear to be more important. With the current understanding that knowledge sharing is more of a human activity than technology, it is important that any information system should be assistive in boosting employees’ confidence that they are indeed sharing knowledge.

ABSTRACT…………………I
Acknowledgement………III
Table of contents………IV
Table of tables…………VI
Table of figures………VIII
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION………1
1.1 Research Background…………1
1.2 Research Motivation…………2
1.3 Statement of the problem……3
1.4 Importance of the study……4
1.5 Research Objective……………7
1.6 Research Question………………7
1.7 Research Structure & Research Process…………………………………7
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW……9
2.1 Knowledge sharing behavior…11
2.2 Trust………………………………18
2.3 Personality………………………28
2.4 Psychological contract…………34
2.5 The relationship between Trust, Personality, Psychological Contract and Knowledge Sharing Behavior…………………………………48
2.6 Conclusion…………………………57
CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY…………………58
3.1 Research Framework………………58
3.2 Research Hypotheses………………60
V
3.3 Measurement…………………………61
3.4 Sampling plan………………………70
3.5 Data analysis techniques…………72
3.6 Research framework and hypotheses adjustment…..………74
CHAPTER 4 DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULT…………………81
4.1 Descriptive Analysis………………81
4.2 The difference between Demographic Characteristics toward Research Variables ……………82
4.3 The relationship between independent and dependent variable…………94
4.4 Summary of Hypotheses Testing……………………………………110
CHAPTER 5 RESEARCH CONCLUSION………111
5.1 Result…………………………………111
5.2 Managerial Implication……………120
5.3 Limitation and Future Research…124
References…………………………………127
Appendix A…………………………………131
English Questionnaire……………………132
Vietnamese Questionnaire………………140

1.Usoro, A., Sharratt, W.M., Tsui, E., and Shekhar, S. (2007). Trust as an actecedent to knowledge sharing in virtual communities of practice. Knowledge Management Research and Practice.
2.Chennamaneni, A. (2006). Determinants of Knowledge Sharing Behaviors: Developing and Testing an Integrated Theoretical Model, The University of Texas, Arlington.
3.American Psychological Association (APA) : Benevolence Roget’s New Millennium Thesaurus, First Edition (v 1.3.1). Retrieved 11 December 2009, from Thesaurus.com website: http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/benevolence.
4.Argote, L., Ingram, P., Levin, J.M and Moreland, R.L (2000). Organizational Learning: Creating, Retaining, and Transferring Knowledge. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA.
5.Alavi, M., and Leidner, D.E (2001). Review : Knowledge Management and Knowledge Management Systems : Conceptual Foundations and Research Issues. MIS Quarterly, pp. 107-136.
6.Argote, L., and Ingram, P (2000). Knowledge Transfer : A Basis for Competitive Advantage in Firms. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, pp. 150-169.
7.Argote, L., P. Ingram, J.M. Levine and Moreland, R.L. (2000). Knowledge transfer in organizations, Organisational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, pp. 1–8.
8.Ajzen, I,. and Fishbein, M (1980). Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
9.Bakker M, Leenders R.T.A.J, Gabbay S.M, Kratzer J. and Van Engelen J.M.L (2006). Is trust really social capital ? Knowledge sharing in product development projects. The Learning Organization, pp. 594-607.
10.Barrick M.R, Mount M.K. and Judge, T.A. (2000). Personality and job performance at the beginning of the new millennium: What do we know and where do we go next?, International Journal of Selection and Assessment, pp. 9–30.
11.Barrick M.R, and Mount M.K (1999). The big five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis, Personnel Psychology, pp. 1–26.
12.Bock,G. W., Zmud, R. W., Kim, Y.G., and Lee, J.N (2005). Behavioral Intention Formation in Knowledge Sharing : Examining the Roles of Extrinsic Motivators, Social-Psychological Forces, and Organizational Climate. MIS Quarterly, pp. 87-111.
13.Beckman, T (1999). The current state of knowledge management. In J. Liebowitz (Ed.), Knowledge Management Handbook: CRS Press.
14.Bonnie S.O, and Adya, M. (2007). Knowledge sharing and the psychological contract : Managing knowledge workers across different stages of employment. Journal of Managerial Psychology, pp. 411-436.
15.Costa P.T.J, and McCrae, R.R. (1992). Revised NEO personality inventory and NEO five-factor inventory professional manual. Psychological Assessment Resources, Odessa, FL.
16.Davenport, T.H., and Prusak, L (1998). Working Knowledge : How Organizations Manage What They Know. Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
17.Davenport, T.H., De Long, D. W., et al (1998). Successful knowledge management Project. Sloan Management Review, pp. 43-57.
18.Clutterbuck, D. (2005). Communication and the psychological contract. Journal of Communication Mangagement, pp. 359.
19.David E.G, and Neil Conway (2002). Communicating the psychological contract: an employer perspective. Human Resource Management Journal, pp. 22.
20.Dixon, N. M (2000). Common Knowledge: How Companies Thrive by Sharing What They Know. Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
21.Drucker, P. (1959). The Landmarks of Tomorrow. Harper and Row, New York, NY.
22.Fukuyama F. (1995). Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity. The Free Press, New York.
23.Grant R.M., (1996). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm, Strategic Management Journal 17 (Winter Special Issue), pp. 109–122.
24.Kiffin-Petersen S.A, John L.C (2003). Trust, individualism and job characteristics as predictors of employee preference for teamwork. Journal of Human Resource Management, pp. 93-116.
25.Liebeskind J.P. (1996). Knowledge, strategy, and the theory of the firm, Strategic Management Journal 17, pp. 93–107.
26.Matzler K., et al., (2005) Methods and concepts in management: significance, satisfaction and suggestions for further research: perspectives from Germany, Austria and Switzerland, Strategic Change 14, pp. 1–13.
27.Mayer R.C, Davis J.H and Schoorman F.D (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, pp. 709-734.
28.Ministry of Planning and Investment (2009). www.mpi.gov.vn.
29.Ministry of Foreign Affairs (2005). www.mofa.gov.vn,
30.Polanyi M. (1983). The tacit dimension. Gloucester, Mass, Peter Smith.
31.Polanyi M. (1966). The tacit dimension. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, UK.
32.Rogers G.M, and Revelle W. (1998). Personality, mood, and the evaluation of affective and neutral word pairs, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, pp. 1592–1605.
33.Rousseau D.M, Hui, C., Lee, C. (2004). Psychological Contract and Organizational Citizenship Behavior in China : Investigating Generalizability and Instrumentality. Journal of Applied Psychology, pp. 311-321.
34.Zuckerman M. (2005). Psychobiology of personality. Cambridge University Press, New York.

QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
1. 2. 王宣曆:〈老子「正言若反」之表述方式試探〉,《鵝湖月刊》317期,2001年11月。
2. 3. 牟宗三:〈〈原始的型範〉第三部份──先秦儒學大義(七)〉,《鵝湖月刊》,第389期,2007年11月。
3. 40.黃慶榮,2006,非政府組織勸募策略分析。非政府組織學刊,第1期,頁45-86。
4. 13. 林安梧:〈「存有三態論」與「存有之治療」之建構──道家思維的一個新向度〉,《鵝湖月刊》第26卷,第6期,總號:306:2000年12月。
5. 8. 邱黃海:〈「道」的旅遊指南—《莊子‧秋水》「河伯與海若的對話」之解析〉,《玄奘學報:人文專刊》第四期,2001年10月。
6. 19.紀惠容、鄭怡世,200,非營利組織間的聯盟-以社會福利組織為例,社會工作學刊,第8期,頁97-111。
7. 19. 曾珮琦:〈論牟宗三先生對《老子》「正言若反」的解釋進路〉《鵝湖月刊》第383期,2007年5月。
8. 24.張培新,2006,臺灣宗教組織運作的社會資本考察:以慈濟功德會為例。中山人文社會科學期刊,14(1),125-163。
9. 12. 林安梧:〈「道」「德」釋義:儒道同源互補的義理闡述──以《老子「道」德經》「道生之、德蓄之」暨《論語》「志於道、據於德」為核心的展開。〉鵝湖月刊雜誌,2003年4月。
10. 18. 曾珮琦:〈論《老子》「正言若反」經典注釋的考察——以王弼《老子注》與釋德清《老子道德經解》為例〉《鵝湖月刊》第406期,2009年4月。
11. 5. 伍至學〈老子論命名之偽〉,《哲學雜誌》第十三期 臺北:業強出版社,1995 年7 月。
12. 17.洪如玉,2002,一個民間團體在全球化下終身學習的啟示:以主婦聯盟為例,社會教育學刊,31:55-78。
13. 11.周逸衡、黃毓瑩、陳華寧,2005,應用關係行銷於非營利組織之捐助者-以社會福利慈善事業基金會為例,行銷評論,第二卷第一期,1-27。
14. 15. 陳文昌:〈老子「正言若反」之語法疏解〉,《中國語文》99卷第二期,2006年8月。
15. 39.黃慶源、朱斌妤、高明瑞,2001,非營利組織典範移轉之行銷策略個案研究-以財團法人喜憨兒文教基金會為例」,樹德科技大學學報,3卷2期:45-60。
 
1. The Impact of Asset Specificity, Social Capital and Knowledge Sharing of NPD Partners on NPD Performance: The Moderating Role of Cultural Intelligence
2. 賣方表現,買方經驗與心理契約違反對於網絡購買轉換意圖的影響以河內的大學生為例
3. Factors Affecting Knowledge Sharing Intention: An Empirical Study in Organizations in Vietnam
4. 組織信任、知識分享意願、組織學習與創造力關係之研究
5. The study of relationship between salesperson behaviors, trust, customer equity and loyalty intentions.
6. 部屬知覺上下關係對組織公民行為之影響-以權力距離為調節變項
7. Impact of Trust and Social Support on Employee’s Job Satisfaction and Commitment
8. 品牌利益對於品牌忠誠度影響之研究---以品牌關係為中介變項
9. 個人差異對回饋找尋過程影響之研究
10. The Consequences of Psychological Contract: The Moderating Effects of Job Stigmatization, Interactional Justice, and Supervisor Support
11. Perceived HRM Practices and Individual Performance: The Moderating Roles of of Psychological Contract Fulfillment and Reward Orientation in Vietnam
12. 產物保險公司知識移轉之探討∼以富邦產物高雄分公司為例∼
13. 「口碑行銷」於立法委員競選應用-以南投縣為例
14. 知覺組織支持在工作壓力與工作生活平衡關係上的干擾效果-以光電產業人員為例
15. 心理契約、組織承諾對護理人員離職意圖之影響-以雲林某區域教學醫院為例
 
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔