Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine the relationships among knowledge attributes (complexity and implicitness), interpersonal distrust, knowledge hiding (KH) and team efficacy and second, to explore a new dimension of KH. Design/methodology/approach Data for this research were collected from more than 940 employees working in manufacturing, information technology (IT), finance and the purification industry. Structural equation modeling was used to test hypothesized relationships. Findings First, the research confirmed the existence of bullying hiding behaviors in the knowledge economy era based on “knowledge power.” Second, the findings suggest that knowledge attributes are an important predictor of KH behaviors in organizations. The findings implicate the mediating effect of interpersonal distrust and the moderating role of team efficacy, while team efficacy negatively moderated the relationships between interpersonal distrust with evasive hiding and playing dumb, but positively moderated the relationship between interpersonal distrust with rationalized hiding and bullying hiding. Originality/value This is the first study to propose bullying hiding, a behavior that has emerged in organizational knowledge transfer, and it is more detrimental to knowledge sharing than other KH behaviors. The results of research on the different regulating effects of team efficacy on KH behaviors enrich the boundary conditions of KH research.

Based on the conservation of resource theory, this manuscript explores the impact mechanism of the challenge and hindrance stressors on innovation performance, introduces emotional atmosphere as a mediation variable, and on this basis, it examines the moderating role of organizational climate on emotional atmosphere and innovation performance. A two-wave survey of 263 subordinates and 29 supervisors who come from multisource field offered support for our model. Results showed that challenge stressors have a positive effect on innovation performance, positive emotional atmosphere mediates the relationship between challenge stressors and innovation performance; hindrance stressors have a negative effect on innovation performance, and negative emotional atmosphere mediates the relationship between hindrance stressors and innovation performance. Organizational climate strengthens the positive relationship between positive emotional atmosphere and innovation performance and weakens the negative relationship between negative emotional atmosphere and innovation performance. This study enriches the existing literature by identifying the impact of stressors on employee innovation performance and has certain practical significance for optimizing the management of enterprises and improving employee innovation performance.

PurposeThe aim of this study is to examine the relationships between taking charge, bootlegging innovation and innovative job performance, and to explore the moderating roles of felt responsibility for constructive change (FRCC) and creative self-efficacy (CSE).Design/methodology/approachData for this research was collected from 503 employees working in a chain company. Through a longitudinal study design, a three-wave survey with 397 valid data provided support for the proposed theoretical model.FindingsThe results maintain a positive association between taking charge, bootlegging innovation and innovative job performance, indicating the mediating effect of bootlegging innovation. Additionally, both the FRCC and CSE facilitate the indirect effect of taking charge on innovative job performance through bootlegging innovation. Furthermore, the integrated moderated mediation model analysis suggested that FRCC is more vital in improving employees' innovative job performance.Originality/valueThis research aims to break the black box between taking charge and innovative job performance, which has been relatively unexplored. Drawing from self-determination theory (SDT) and the proactive motivation model, the authors verify the bridge-building role of bootlegging innovation and the dual-facilitating effects of FRCC and CSE while employees conduct taking charge. This study’s results provide new insight for managers to foster, encourage and support employees' proactive behavior.

No abstract