【作者】 常涛；

【导师】 廖建桥；

【作者基本信息】 华中科技大学 ， 企业管理， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 团队作为现代组织中越来越普遍应用的工作方式,已成为知识管理活动过程中的重要环节,团队知识共享则是构建竞争优势的关键。但是由于知识共享的内在滞障,需要通过团队管理的干预得以加强。绩效考核以激发员工的主观能动性和潜能创造为主旨,应该在促进员工知识共享意愿上起到重要作用。但是,在研究与实践中,团队绩效考核方式是注重团队绩效还个体绩效一直以来存在争议与困惑。因此,本研究试图通过探讨团队性绩效考核对知识共享的影响及其作用机制来探寻有效促进知识共享的绩效考核方式,以解决一直以来困扰理论研究者及管理实践者的团队管理难题。本文通过三方面的研究对这一问题进行探讨。首先,研究团队性绩效考核对知识共享的影响。即,团队性绩效考核对知识共享是否有影响?有多大的影响?第二,研究团队性绩效考核对知识共享影响过程中的中介机制。即,团队性绩效考核通过哪些中介变量对知识共享产生影响。第三,研究团队性绩效考核对知识共享影响过程中的调节机制。即,有哪些变量会对团队性绩效考核与知识共享之间的关系产生影响,它们又是如何影响的。在理论分析的基础上提出了一系列研究假设,并通过实证研究进行验证,得出如下结论:(1)团队性绩效考核对知识共享有正向影响作用,但是它的影响作用并不很强烈。这一结果表明,进一步揭示团队性绩效考核对知识共享影响过程中的“黑箱”之谜,探讨团队性绩效考核对知识共享的作用机制具有必要性,以此可以为更有效地实施团队性绩效考核提供理论上的指导。(2)分配公平感、人际信任与团队承诺在团队性绩效考核对知识共享的影响机制中起到了完全中介作用。即,团队性绩效考核通过触发推进团队成员的绩效考核分配公平感、人际信任、团队承诺形成了以功利主义、互惠性、团队认同为基础的三大中介机制,从而驱动了团队成员共享知识的个人动机,最终做出知识共享的决策行为。但是,在这三大中介机制中,团队性绩效考核对分配公平感、人际信任、团队承诺的触发推动力是有限的。也正是由于团队性绩效考核在激活三大中介机制作用时显得有些乏力,从而造成了团队性绩效考核对知识共享的较弱的影响效应。因此,进一步深入探讨团队性绩效考核对知识共享影响过程中的调节作用将具有重要的理论意义和实践价值。(3)从总体上讲,任务相互依赖性、团队成员能力梯度、团队效能感等团队特征因素在团队性绩效考核与分配公平感、人际信任、团队承诺之间关系中起到了调节作用。具体来说,任务相互依赖性与团队效能感在团队性绩效考核与分配公平感、人际信任、团队承诺之间的关系中均起到正向的调节作用;团队成员能力梯度虽然在团队性绩效考核与团队承诺之间关系中的调节作用并未得到支持,但是它在团队性绩效考核与分配公平感、人际信任之间的关系中起到了负向的调节作用。此外,绩效考核程序公平感与互动公平感正向地调节了分配公平感与知识共享之间的关系。最后,系统归纳和讨论了本研究的主要结论,并指出了研究中存在的不足及后续研究方向。更多还原

【Abstract】 Team, as an increasingly prevalent work structure in modern organizations, becomes an important component in the process of knowledge management. Knowledge sharing within teams is pivotal in creating organizational competitive advantage. However, knowledge sharing within teams might not be realized spontaneously because of its inherent obstacles, which makes it necessary to explore effective team management to promote knowledge sharing. Performance appraisal, as a means of motivating individual initiative, may play an important role in developing employees’ willingness to share knowledge. Unfortunately, in the theoretical research and management practice, the disputes and puzzles whether team performance or individual performance should be stressed have been existed all the while. Therefore, by seeking greater insight into the effect and mechanism of team-based performance appraisal on knowledge sharing, we attempted to explore the effective performance appraisal method which may promote knowledge sharing in order to solve the troublesome problem.This dissertation addressed the above problem through studying the following three aspects: (1) the effect of team-based performance appraisal on knowledge sharing. That is to say, whether may team-based performance appraisal positively influence knowledge sharing? And how much is its influence? (2) the mediating mechanism of team-based performance appraisal on knowledge sharing. In other words, which variables do take the mediating roles in the relationship between team-based performance appraisal and knowledge sharing? (3) the moderating mechanism of team-based performance appraisal on knowledge sharing. That is, which variables do influence the relationship between team-based performance appraisal and knowledge sharing? And how do they influence the relationship? Then, the relevant research hypotheses were proposed based on the theoretical analysis. Moreover, relevant field study was conducted to test these hypotheses. Finally, the conclusions were made as follows:(1) Team-based performance appraisal has positive effect on knowledge sharing, but its effect is not powerful. As the result implies, it is very necessary to uncover the "black box" in the process of the influence of team-based performance appraisal on knowledge sharing by exploring the influencing mechanism of team-based performance appraisal on knowledge sharing, which can provide the specific theoretic guidelines on the more effective implementation of team-based performance appraisal. (2) Distributive justice perception, interpersonal trust and team commitment take a full mediating role all together in the relationship between team-based performance appraisal and knowledge sharing. In other words, team-based performance appraisal may push team members’ distributive justice perception, interpersonal trust and team commitment. Then, three mediating mechanisms based on utilitarian, reciprocity and team identification will be formed, which may activate team members’ personal motivation. Finally, the full decision-making of knowledge sharing with other members may be realized. However, in the three mediating mechanism, the driving power of team-based performance appraisal is not strong in pushing team members’ distributive justice perception, interpersonal trust and team commitment, which leads to the weak positive effect of team-based performance appraisal on knowledge sharing. Accordingly, it is valuable and meaningful in theory research and management practice to explore the moderating mechanism in the process of the influence of team-based performance appraisal on knowledge sharing.(3) As a whole, characteristic team factors including team task interdependence, team members’ ability gap and team efficacy moderate the relationship between team-based performance appraisal and the mediators (i.e. distributive justice perception, interpersonal trust and team commitment). Specifically, both of task interdependence and team efficacy positively take the moderating role in the relationship between team-based performance appraisal and all of the three mediators. Though the moderating role of team members’ ability gap between team-based performance appraisal and team commitment isn’t supported, it negatively moderates the relationship between team-based performance appraisal and the other two mediators (i.e. distributive justice perception and interpersonal trust). Additionally, procedural justice perception and interactive justice perception positively moderate the relationship between distributive justice perception and knowledge sharing.Finally, the main conclusions were summarized and discussed, and the research limitation and future directions were also put forward.更多还原