<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel rdf:about="http://dspace.cityu.edu.hk:80/handle/2031/767">
    <title>DSpace Collection:</title>
    <link>http://dspace.cityu.edu.hk:80/handle/2031/767</link>
    <description />
    <items>
      <rdf:Seq>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://dspace.cityu.edu.hk:80/handle/2031/6494" />
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://dspace.cityu.edu.hk:80/handle/2031/6493" />
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://dspace.cityu.edu.hk:80/handle/2031/6492" />
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://dspace.cityu.edu.hk:80/handle/2031/5838" />
      </rdf:Seq>
    </items>
    <dc:date>2013-04-30T16:14:41Z</dc:date>
  </channel>
  <item rdf:about="http://dspace.cityu.edu.hk:80/handle/2031/6494">
    <title>An integrative management model of knowledge sharing : case studies of knowledge-based SMEs in Hong Kong</title>
    <link>http://dspace.cityu.edu.hk:80/handle/2031/6494</link>
    <description>Title: An integrative management model of knowledge sharing : case studies of knowledge-based SMEs in Hong Kong
Authors: Law, Kuok Kei ( 羅國基)
Abstract: ﻿This dissertation provides an answer to the long-lasting question of "how to 
enhance knowledge sharing within organizations". As knowledge has become the 
major, if not only, production factor in the modern knowledge economy, the sharing 
and application of it throughout the organization is critical to the development of 
competitive advantage. However, the sharing of knowledge among organizational 
members is often 'sticky'. This stickiness is mainly caused by people's reluctance to 
disclose and share what they know. The notion of knowledge sharing dilemma is an 
important theoretical underpinning to understand people's reluctance. In such a 
dilemma situation, on the one hand, people are concerned with the potential costs and 
losses of knowledge sharing, but on the other hand, people need to share their 
knowledge in order to reveal their intellectual values and obtain rewards. Therefore, 
from the management's point of view, the critical issue to foster knowledge sharing is 
to lead the workers out of the knowledge sharing dilemma. 
Managerial interventions/governance are needed to achieve such directing effort. 
However, the extant literature has largely undermined this management perspective. 
Past studies have mostly focused on identifying the antecedents to knowledge sharing, 
that is, concentrating on the examination of the 'what' aspect. There is no concrete 
theoretical model explaining 'how' to foster knowledge sharing from the managerial 
perspective. Another major problem in the current literature is that researchers tend to 
emphasize the role of motivation in enhancing knowledge sharing behaviors but 
downplay the role of managerial controls, assuming that control mechanisms are contradictory to the discretional nature of knowledge sharing. However, extensive 
reviews of the underlying nature of the motivation and control mechanisms as well as 
the empirical evidences gathered from case studies here suggested that both types of 
mechanisms are actually complimenting the effects of one another. The simultaneous 
implementation of these two mechanisms indeed creates a synergy for fostering 
knowledge sharing behaviors of workers. 
The empirical context of the study involves six knowledge-intensive SMEs in 
Hong Kong. The six SMEs compose the case study observations that were based 
upon to develop an integrative management model for fostering knowledge sharing. 
The types of managerial practices employed in the SMEs, the rationales behind those 
managerial practices, as well as their effectiveness are analyzed. Overall, evidences 
from the case studies suggest that three types of managerial interventions are needed 
to foster knowledge sharing - initiating interventions, reinforcing interventions, 
aligning interventions. The integrative management model identifies the roles of the 
three types of managerial interventions in fostering knowledge sharing. It describes 
how these managerial interventions create extrinsic drives to the workers to engage in 
knowledge sharing and how the knowledge sharing behavior initially shaped by 
extrinsic drives will gradually be internalized as an intrinsic value of the workers. 
The integrative management model advances the extant literature in three ways. 
First, it offers concrete theoretical and practical guidance to both researchers and 
managers on how to embed knowledge sharing behaviors within KIFs. Second, it 
bridges the different theoretical viewpoints toward the managing of knowledge and 
knowledge sharing, namely the motivation perspective and control perspective. Third, it describes the processes how the fostering effect is achieved from the intended 
managerial efforts. Moreover, the model offers implications for various research 
opportunities. In conclusion, this dissertation builds a concrete theoretical foundation 
for the investigation of enhancing knowledge sharing and makes a theoretical 
contribution to the extant literature.
Notes: CityU Call Number: HD30.2 .L386 2011; viii, 190 leaves   30 cm.; Thesis (Ph.D.)--City University of Hong Kong, 2011.; Includes bibliographical references (leaves 158-185)</description>
    <dc:date>2011-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://dspace.cityu.edu.hk:80/handle/2031/6493">
    <title>Self-regulatory focus of leaders and follower creativity and performance : the enhancement effect of regulatory fit</title>
    <link>http://dspace.cityu.edu.hk:80/handle/2031/6493</link>
    <description>Title: Self-regulatory focus of leaders and follower creativity and performance : the enhancement effect of regulatory fit
Authors: Kwok, Man Lung ( 郭文龍)
Abstract: ﻿This study examined the direct relationship between self-regulatory focus of leaders and follower creativity and performance with the mediating effects of leadership behaviors and moderating effect of follower self-regulatory focus on the relationship between leadership and follower creativity and performance (i.e., the regulatory fit hypotheses). Using path analysis and bootstrapping, data from 166 dyads from leaders and followers were collected from various companies. It was found that a leader with promotion focus was positively related to follower creativity but not performance, and related to transformational leadership and transactional leadership. Transactional leadership was found to relate to follower creativity weakly. However, neither the mediating effects of leadership behaviors between the self-regulatory focus of leaders and follower creativity and performance nor the moderating effects of follower self-regulatory focus on leadership behaviors and follower creativity and performance were supported. Additional analyses found that the regulatory nonfit reduced the follower creativity. Managerial implications based on the results were suggested to promote the application of self-regulatory focus of leaders and followers in the work setting.
Notes: CityU Call Number: HD57.7 .K869 2011; iii, 91 leaves : ill.   30 cm.; Thesis (Ph.D.)--City University of Hong Kong, 2011.; Includes bibliographical references (leaves 75-87)</description>
    <dc:date>2011-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://dspace.cityu.edu.hk:80/handle/2031/6492">
    <title>Structuring versus autocraticness : exploring a comprehensive model of authoritarian leadership</title>
    <link>http://dspace.cityu.edu.hk:80/handle/2031/6492</link>
    <description>Title: Structuring versus autocraticness : exploring a comprehensive model of authoritarian leadership
Authors: Chen, Tingting ( 陳婷婷)
Abstract: ﻿This dissertation seeks to develop a comprehensive model of authoritarian 
leadership. Specifically, this paper differentiates two types of authoritarian leadership, 
namely, structuring and autocratic leadership. This model is a major extension of the 
previous authoritarian leadership framework, and in a broader sense, the controlling 
leadership literature in that it challenges the prevailing view that authoritarian 
leadership only has negative effects. The current model proposes that authoritarian 
leadership, a typical controlling leadership style, includes both positive and negative 
elements. Autocratic leadership refers to the leadership behaviors characterized by 
domination over subordinates and the demand of unquestionable obedience, and it is 
expected to have negative effects on subordinate work outcomes. On the other hand, 
structuring leadership, a new dimension of authoritarianism proposed in the current 
model, involves leadership practices of demanding and structuring subordinates' 
efforts in a task-oriented and rational manner. I propose that this style is conducive to 
subordinates' high performance and continuous improvement. 
Two independent studies were employed to examine this two-dimensional 
authoritarian leadership model. The first study sought to establish a theoretical 
framework of differentiating the two types of authoritarian leadership. I propose that 
the difference in subordinate attributions of leader intentionality - whether it has a 
subordinate-orientation or a self-serving-orientation - accounts for the mechanisms 
that structuring and autocratic leadership have the opposite effects on subordinate 
outcomes. A questionnaire survey involving 210 employees and 80 of their 
immediate leaders supported the hypotheses. Structuring leadership was positively 
related to subordinate attributions of leader intentionality with a 
subordinate-orientation, which in turn, was positively related to employee work outcomes (job performance, helping leader, and helping coworkers). On the other 
hand, autocratic leadership was positively related subordinate attributions of leader 
intentionality with a self-serving-orientation, which in turn, was negatively related to 
employee work outcomes. In addition, it was found that achievement value and need 
for achievement strengthened the positive effects of structuring leadership on 
subordinate attributions of leader intentionality with a subordinate-orientation, 
whereas conservation value and traditionality attenuated the positive effects of 
autocratic leadership on subordinate attributions of leader intentionality with a 
self-serving-orientation. 
The second study explored whether the mediating mechanisms differed across 
the two types of authoritarian leadership and transformational leadership with regard 
to their influence on employee work outcomes, as well as examined the boundary 
conditions of the positive effects of structuring leadership. Two mediating variables, 
trust in leader and role clarity, were examined. A questionnaire survey was 
conducted involving 242 employees and 53 of their immediate leaders. Statistical 
results revealed that when the control variables, transformational leadership, 
structuring and autocratic leadership were all included in hierarchical linear models, 
transformational leadership was positively related to trust in leader, yet structuring 
leadership manifested no significant relationship with trust in leader, revealing that 
compared with structuring leadership, transformational leadership was a stronger 
predictor of trust in leader. On the other hand, structuring leadership was positively 
related to role clarity, yet transformational leadership displayed no significant 
relationship with role clarity, revealing that compared with transformational 
leadership, structuring leadership was a stronger predictor of role clarity. Finally, 
autocratic leadership presented a negative relation to trust in leader and no significant relationship with role clarity. The positive indirect effects of transformational leadership on employee task performance and extra effort to leader 
via trust in leader, the positive indirect effects of structuring leadership on employee 
task performance via role clarity, and the negative indirect effects of autocratic 
leadership on employee task performance and extra effort to leader via trust in leader 
were all supported. Trait conscientiousness was found to be a moderator for the 
relationship between structuring leadership and trust in leader. Theoretical and 
practical implications, as well as limitations are discussed.
Notes: CityU Call Number: HD57.7 .C45 2011; viii, 233 leaves   30 cm.; Thesis (Ph.D.)--City University of Hong Kong, 2011.; Includes bibliographical references (leaves 205-224)</description>
    <dc:date>2011-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://dspace.cityu.edu.hk:80/handle/2031/5838">
    <title>Exploring the underlying mediating processes between intragroup conflict and team outcomes : a social information processing perspective</title>
    <link>http://dspace.cityu.edu.hk:80/handle/2031/5838</link>
    <description>Title: Exploring the underlying mediating processes between intragroup conflict and team outcomes : a social information processing perspective
Authors: Chen, Zhenjiao (陳振嬌)
Abstract: ﻿This dissertation explores the underlying mediating mechanisms through 
which intragroup conflict (task conflict vs. relationship conflict) influences various 
team outcomes. This research topic is important because it introduces a new 
perspective, the social information processing theory (SIP), into conflict literature and 
contributes not only to intragroup conflict theories but also to SIP theories. Using the 
SIP perspective, an integrated mediation model of conflict is proposed. This model 
presents that the relationships between intragroup conflict (task conflict vs. 
relationship conflict) and team outcomes will be mediated by three processes: learning 
process of intragroup conflict, attribution process of intragroup conflict, and judgment 
process of intragroup conflict. 
The study also considers the transactive memory system (TMS) theory which is 
integrated into the learning process of intragroup conflict. The learning process 
presents that TMS mediates the effects of two types of conflict on three team 
outcomes (team knowledge sharing, team innovation, and team standard job 
performance). Another theory, the attribution theory, is incorporated into the 
attribution process of intragroup conflict, which states that the effects of task conflict 
on the three team outcomes are mediated by relationship conflict. Finally, 
similarity–attraction paradigm is incorporated into the judgment process of intragroup 
conflict, that is, group cohesiveness plays a mediating role in the relationships of two 
types of conflict with the three team outcomes. 
In addition, I explore the boundary conditions of the posited mediation model. 
Two team contextual variables are adopted as moderators (team task type and team 
learning orientation). It is expected that the mediating processes between relationship 
conflict and the team outcomes do not vary across levels of the moderators. However, Luo, Hefu Liu, etc., for their warm friendship and support during the past four years. 
Whatever happens in future, I will always think of you with your warm friendship 
I also would like to express our great appreciation to my qualifying panel and the 
examiners of my dissertation, for their time and their invaluable comments that will 
help me a lot to improve this dissertation. 
Special thanks should go to Prof. Vogel and Mr. Xi Zhang whose great support 
and encouragement enabled me to complete this dissertation and they gave me 
strength to get through all the hard times. At last but not least, I would like to thank 
my family members for their unselfish dedication all the way. 
It would be difficult to enumerate everyone who has supported me and enriched 
my life, but I will always remember your kindness and love. I dedicate my dissertation 
to all of you.
Notes: CityU Call Number: HD42 .C45 2009; xi, 198 p. : ill.   30 cm.; Thesis (Ph.D.)--City University of Hong Kong, 2009.; Includes bibliographical references (leaves 174-195)</description>
    <dc:date>2009-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </item>
</rdf:RDF>

