농촌지도와개발 (Journal of Agricultural Extension & Community Development)

  • 제16권1호
  • /
  • Pages.153-180
  • /
  • 2009
  • /
  • 1976-3107(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2384-3705(eISSN)
한국농촌지도학회 (Korean Society of Agricultural Extension)
권호 표지

인터넷 지식공유에 영향을 미치는 요인 연구: 사회적 자본 이론과 자기표현욕구를 중심으로

The Factors to Promote Internet Knowledge Sharing: Based on Social Capital Theory and Self-Expression Concept

  • 투고 : 2009.02.05
  • 심사 : 2009.03.14
  • 발행 : 2009.03.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

The previous researches about knowledge sharing were proceeded in terms of KMS (Knowledge Management System) in center. However, knowledge sharing is recently applied to Internet space, which is open to every users, as well as KMS, which is qualified for restricted people. For example, some portal sites, such as Naver, the most popular portal in Korea, have virtual spaces to share users' knowledges and it is common that many users use the spaces. Knowledge sharing online, compared with KMS, will be more advanced to promote intention for knowledge sharing because of the character of Internet space that is open to all users. Nevertheless, there are few researches about knowledge sharing in the Internet. Considering this situation, this study is attempted to figure out the factors to promote Internet knowledge sharing, based on social capital theory and self-expression concept. A survey of experienced Internet user and PLS (Partial Least Square) were utilized for analysis. The test of this study reveals that social capital and self-expression are significant factors to influence knowledge sharing intention, and that also personal innovation and self-efficacy are significantly related to the self-expression. However, personal innovation does not have significant impact on social capital. According to the result, self-expression, as well as trust and system itself, has significantly effect on knowledge sharing intention in order to promote knowledge sharing in the Internet.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. 김경규, 김범수, 송세정 & 신호경. (2005). 지식공유 의도와 지식관리시스템의 사용. 경영정보학연구, 15(3), 65-90.
  2. 김도현 & 신민수. (2007). 전자적 네트워크에서 지식공유에 기여하는 요인에 관한 연구. 한국경영정보학회 춘계학술대회, 서울.
  3. 김명준. (2007.6). "자기표현"의 출구로서 사이버공간에 관한 연구. 사이버커뮤니케이션학회, 22, 5-38.
  4. 김민철 & 강경범. (2004). 지식공유 요인에 관한 실증 분석. 명지대학교 금융지식연구소, 지식연구, 2(2), 176-200
  5. 김진완, 이경진 & 김유일. (2004). 지식공유 영향요인들이 형식지와 잠재지의 공유에 미치는 영향의 차이에 관한 연구. 인터넷전자상거래연구, 4(3), 133-160
  6. 김재전, 유일 & 공희경. (2003). 지식공유 영향요인이 지식관리시스템 성과에 미치는 영향. 한국정보전략학회지, 6(2), 33-67.
  7. 고준, 신선진 & 김희웅. (2008). 온라인 커뮤니티에서 자기표현욕구의 영향요인과 디지털 아이템 구매의도에 미치는 효과. 한국경영정보학회 춘계학술대회, 서울
  8. 권정미 & 최만기. (2004). 하이퍼텍스트형 조직구조가 지식의 창조와 공유에 미치는 영향. 인사.조직연구학회 춘계학술연구발표대회, 서울.
  9. 박찬웅. (2000). 기업의 사회적 자본. 한국사회학회 심포지엄, 93-111.
  10. 배 영. (2005). 사이버 공간의 사회적 관계: 개인미디어를 이용한 관계의 형성과 유지를 중심으로. 한국사회학, 39(5), 55-82.
  11. 장용선 & 김성진. (2006). 지식경영 분야의 용어사용 실태 분석과 개선방안. 명지대학교 금융지식연구소, 지식연구, 4(1), 279-309.
  12. 장용선 & 김재구. (2006). 사회적 자본의 지각이 지식활동에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구: 금융기관을 중심으로. 한국인사관리학회, 30(1), 59-91.
  13. 조진현, 김정군, 최병구 & 이희석. (2002). 조직구성원 신뢰의 지식공유에 대한 영향 연구. 지식경영연구, 3(1), 19-38.
  14. Aaron, V. C. (1973). Cognitive sociology: Language and meaning in social interaction. Penguin Education (Harmondsworth).
  15. Agarwal, R., & Karahanna. E. (2000). Time flies when your having fun: Cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Quarterly, 24(4), 665-694. https://doi.org/10.2307/3250951
  16. Agarwal, R., & Prasad. J. (1998). A conceptual and operational definition of personal innovativeness in the domain of information technology. Information systems research, 9(2), 204-205. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.9.2.204
  17. Ahuja, G. (2000). Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(3), 425-455. https://doi.org/10.2307/2667105
  18. Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of applied social psychology, 32(4), 665-683. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb00236.x
  19. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice hall, Englewood cliffs, NJ.
  20. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Prenticeh hall, Englewood cliffs, NJ.
  21. Bhattacharya, C. B., Rao, H., & Glynn, M. A. (1995). Understanding the bond of identification: An investigation of its correlates among art museum members. Journal of marketing, 59(4), 46-57. https://doi.org/10.2307/1252327
  22. Brief, A. P., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1986. 10). Prosocial organizational behaviors. Academy of management review, 11(4), 710-725.
  23. Schlenker, B. R., Britt, T. W., & Pennington. J. (1996). Impression regulation and management: Highlights of a theory of self-identification. In R. M. Sorrentino & E. T. Higgins(Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition. The interpersonal context. (3), 118-147.
  24. Castells, M., & Ince, M. (2003). Conversations with Manuel Castells. MA: Polity
  25. Chin, W. W. (1998). Issue and opinion on structural Equation Modeling. MIS Quaterly, 22(1), 7-16.
  26. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. The american journal of sociology, 94(1), 95-120. https://doi.org/10.1086/228943
  27. Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and Initial test. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 189-211. https://doi.org/10.2307/249688
  28. Dominick, J. R. (1999). Who do you think you are? personal home pages and self-presentation on the world wide web. Journalism and mass communication quarterly, 76(4), 646-658. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769909907600403
  29. Dutton, J. E. & Dukerich, J. M. (1991). Keeping an eye on the mirror: Image and identity in organizational adaptation. Academy of management journal, 34(3), 517-554. https://doi.org/10.2307/256405
  30. Elangovan, A. R., & Shapiro, D. L. (1998). Betrayal of trust in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 547-566.
  31. Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: The social virtues & the creation of prosperity. New York: A free press paperbacks book.
  32. Gefen, D., Straub, D., & Boudreau, M. (2000). Structural equation modeling and regression: Guidelines for research practice. Communications of the AIS, 4(7), 1-77.
  33. Gist, M. E., Schwoerer, C., & Rosen, B. (1989). Effects of alternative training methods on self-efficacy and performance in computer software training. Journal of applied psychology, 74(6), 884-891. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.74.6.884
  34. Marakas, G. M., Yi, M. Y., & Johnson. R. D. (1998). The multilevel and multifaceted character of computer self-efficacy: Toward clarification of the construct and an integrative framework for research. Information systems research, 9(2), 126-163. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.9.2.126
  35. Groth, M. (2005). Customers as good soldiers: Examining citizenship behaviors in Internet service deliveries. Journal of management, 31(1), 7-27.
  36. Hilts, S. R., & Tufoff. M. (1993). The network nation: Human communication via computer. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  37. Ibarra, H. (1992). Homophily and differential returns: Sex differences in network structure and access in an advertising firm. Administrative science quarterly, 37(3), 422-447. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393451
  38. Ibarra, H. (1995). Race, opportunity, and diversity of social circles in managerial networks. Academy of management journal, 38(3), 673-703. https://doi.org/10.2307/256742
  39. Inkpen, A., & Tsang. E. (2005). Social capital, networks, and knowledge transfer. Academy of management review, 30(1), 146-165. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2005.15281445
  40. Joseph, B., & Vyas, S. (1984). Concurrent validity of a measure of innovative cognitive style. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 12(2), 159-175. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02729494
  41. Leary, M. R. (1995). Self-presentation: Impression management and interpersonal behavior. Boulder, CO: Westview press.
  42. Leary, M. R., & Kowalski, R. M. (1990). Impression management: A literature review and two-component model. Psychological bulletin, 107(1), 34-47. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.1.34
  43. Lesser, E. L. (2000). Knowledge and social capital: Foundation and applications. Boston: Butterworth heinemann.
  44. Mael, F., & Ashforth, B. E. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of organizational behavior, 13(2), 103 - 123. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030130202
  45. Marsden, P. V., & Campbell, K. E. (1984). Measuring tie strength. Social forces, 63(2), 482-501. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/63.2.482
  46. Midgely, D. F., & Dowling. G. R. (1978). Innovativeness: The concept and measurement. Journal of consumer research, 4(2), 229-242. https://doi.org/10.1086/208701
  47. Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal. S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of management review, 23(2), 242-266.
  48. Pickering, J. M., & John L. K. (1995). Hardwiring weak ties: Interorgnizational change. Organization science, 6(4), 479-486. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.6.4.479
  49. Baumeister, R. F. (1982). Self-esteem, self-presentation, and future Interaction: A dilemma of reputation. Journal of personality, 50(1), 29-45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1982.tb00743.x
  50. Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations. New York, Free press.
  51. Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-Discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 393-404. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1998.926617
  52. Schau, H. J., & Gilly, M. C. (2003). We are what we post? Self-presentation in personal web space. Journal of consumer research, 30(3), 385-404. https://doi.org/10.1086/378616
  53. Schlenker, B. R., Britt, T. W, Pennington, J, Murphy R., & Doherty, K. (1994). The triangle model of responsibility. Psychological review, 101(4), 632-652. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.101.4.632
  54. Schlenker, B. R. (1980). Impression management: The self-concept, social identity, and interpersonal relations. monterey, CA.
  55. Taylor, S., & Todd. P. (1995). Decomposition and crossover effects in the theory of planned behavior: A study of consumer adoption intentions. International journal of research in marketing, 12(2), 137-155. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-8116(94)00019-K
  56. Tsai, W., & Ghoshal. S. (1998). Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks. Academy of management journal, 41(4), 464-476. https://doi.org/10.2307/257085
  57. Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S., (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford, England: Basil Blackwell.
  58. Venkatesh, V., & Davis. F. D. (1996). A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: Development and test. Decision sciences, 27(3), 451-481. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1996.tb01822.x
  59. Verkuyten, M., & Hagendoorn, L. (1998). Prejudice and self-categorization: The variable role of authoritarianism and in-group stereotypes. Personality and social psychology bulletin, 24(1), 99-110. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167298241008
  60. Wasko, M., & Faraj. S. (2005). Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 35-57. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148667
  61. Werts, C. E., Lin, R. L., & Joreskog, K. G. (1974). Intraclass reliability estimates: Testing structural assumption. Educational and psychological measurement, 34(1), 25-33. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447403400104
  62. White, R. W. (1959). Motivation reconsidered: The concept of competence. Psychological review, (66), 297-333.