The role of social capital in selecting interpersonal information sources

Abstract

Although the information-seeking literature has tended to focus upon the selection and use of inanimate objects as information sources, this research follows the more recent trend of investigating how individuals evaluate and use interpersonal information sources. By drawing from the structural, relational, and cognitive elements of social capital theory to inform antecedents to information quality and source accessibility, a research model is developed and tested. For interpersonal information sources, information quality is the key determinant of source use. Perceptions of information quality and accessibility of an interpersonal source are shown to be influenced by boundary spanning, transactive memory, and content type. Implications and prescriptions for future research are discussed. IntroductionOrganizations are social communities that facilitate the creation and transfer of knowledge (Kogut & Zander, 1996). To a large extent the field of knowledge management has arisen based on the premise that organizations should manage their information and knowledge resources in order for them to be effective (King, 2009). As important as formal knowledge management systems are for the effectiveness of retaining organizational learning, it is just as important to understand how individuals source information or knowledge from each other in the workplace (Gray & Meister, 2004). This research builds on a growing body of work looking at how individuals choose the interpersonal sources they use (Woudstra & Van den Hooff, 2008;Xu, Kim, & Kankanhalli, 2011;Yuan, Monge, & Fulk, 2005).At its most basic level, searching for information is a response to a need (Case, 2012). An individual chooses to go to an external source when they perceive that they lack necessary information or experience (Levitt & March, 1988). Within organizational settings, information or knowledge can reside in any number of different sources, including a variety of documents, systems, or people. Some organizational knowledge is even embedded within organizational policies or culture (Alavi & Leidner, 2001;Grant, 1991;Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995). With these resources being so widely distributed throughout the organization, a major challenge for information and knowledge management is getting the necessary resources to individuals when they are needed (Huber, 1991). This makes it important to understand the factors that influence how individuals make decisions in choosing the sources use.Knowledge and information are often conceptualized as related but distinct concepts. Information is typically defined as contextualized data whereas knowledge is seen as more personal and the result of interpretation and experience (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995). From an organizational perspective the management of both information and knowledge is often subsumed under knowledge management. As noted by Grover and Davenport (2001), "what companies actually manage under the banner of KM is a mix of knowledge, information, and unrefined data" (p. 7). Although the differences between ...

Modeling Academic Research Collaborator Selection Using an Integrated Model

“…This result is consistent with previous studies [62,105]. According to Zimmer and Henry [150], individuals place a high level of trust in reliable information when they exchange knowledge. Thus, reliability is an essential factor for knowledge exchange.…”

Encouraging people to embrace feedback-seeking in online learning

“…Therefore, both information acquisition and relationship development are important in practice. Nevertheless, existing feedback-seeking literature overemphasized informational value and ignored the role of relational value (Zimmer and Henry, 2017).…”

Cultural Patterns of Information Source Use: A Global Study of 47 Countries

“…Case & Given, ). For example, demographic, psychological, socio‐cultural, and source‐, system‐ and content‐related aspects have been found to explain individuals' information seeking and use in a number of quantitative investigations (e.g., Al‐Samarraie, Eldenfria, & Dawoud, ; Khosrowjerdi & Sundqvist, ; Niu & Hemminger, ; Rowley, Johnson, & Sbaffi, ; Zimmer & Henry, ). Several studies bring forth culture as an antecedent of information related activities (Catellier & Yang, ; Jemielniak & Wilamowski, ; Neumark, Lopez‐Quintero, Feldman, Hirsch Allen, & Shtarkshall, ; Oh & Kim, ; Yoon & Kim, ).…”