This paper examines the relationship between perceived HRM practices and employee knowledge sharing behavior. The theoretical model proposed in earlier studies was tested on the data of a knowledge-intensive organization. The study tests hypotheses concerning the direction and strength of the relationship between HRM practices, individual characteristics of employees and knowledge sharing behavior.
KNOWLEDGE SHARING, KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY, GOVERNANCE MECHANISMS, KNOWLEDGE-INTENSIVE ORGANIZATION
1. Andreeva T. E., Sergeeva, A. V., Golubeva, A. A., Pavlov Ya. Yu. Obmen znaniyami mezhdu uchitelyami srednih shkol: faktory, vliyayuschie na ego intensivnost' //Voprosy obrazovaniya. 2013. №. 2. S. 154-187.
2. Ikonnikov Yu. A., Kravchuk B. Ya. Obmen znaniyami v upravlenii effektivnost'yu nefteservisnyh kompaniy v OAO «LUKOYL» //Burenie i neft'. 2007. №. 11. S. 52-55.
3. Nasledov A. D. IBM SPSS Statistics 20 i AMOS: professional'nyy statisticheskiy analiz dannyh. 2013.
4. Nestik T. A. Gruppovye faktory obmena znaniyami v rossiyskih organizaciyah //Privolzhskiy nauchnyy vestnik. 2014. №. 11-2. S. 158-163.
5. Sergeeva A. V., Andreeva T. E. Kak upravlencheskie praktiki vliyayut na obmen znaniyami mezhdu sotrudnikami? Rezul'taty issledovaniya v srednih shkolah //Rossiyskiy zhurnal menedzhmenta. 2014. T. 12. №. 2. S. 67-98.
6. Argote L., Ingram P. Knowledge transfer: A basis for competitive advantage in firms //Organizational behavior and human decision processes. 2000. T. 82. №. 1. P. 150-169.
7. Avey J. B., Reichard R. J., Luthans F., Mhatre K.H. Meta-analysis of the impact of positive psychological capital on employee attitudes, behaviors, and performance. Human Resource Development Quarterly 22. 2011. T. 22. №. 2. P. 127-152.
8. Blumberg M., Pringle C. D. The missing opportunity in organizational research: Some implications for a theory of work performance //Academy of Management Review. 1982. T. 7. №. 4. P. 560-569.
9. Cabrera A., Collins W. C., Salgado J. F. Determinants of individual engagement in knowledge sharing //The International Journal of Human Resource Management. 2006. T. 17. №. 2. P. 245-264
10. Cavaliere V., Lombardi S., Giustiniano L. Knowledge sharing in knowledge-intensive manufacturing firms. An empirical study of its enablers //Journal of Knowledge Management. 2015. T. 19. №. 6. P. 1124-1145.
11. Foss N. J., Husted K., Michailova S. Governing knowledge sharing in organizations: Levels of analysis, governance mechanisms, and research directions //Journal of Management studies. 2010. T. 47. №. 3. P. 455-482.
12. Kim, K.Y., Pathak, S., Werner, S. When do international human capital enhancing practices benefit the bottom line? An ability, motivation, and opportunity perspective. Journal of International Business Studies. 2015. T. 46. №. 7. P. 784-805.
13. Marin-Garcia J. A., Tomas J. M. Deconstructing AMO framework: a systematic review //Intangible Capital. 2016. T. 12. №. 4. P. 1040-1087.
14. Ryan R. M., Deci E. L. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being //American psychologist. 2000. T. 55. №. 1. P. 68-78.
15. Siemsen, E., Roth, A. V., Balasubramanian, S. How motivation, opportunity, and ability drive knowledge sharing: The constraining-factor model. Journal of Operations Management. 2008. T. 26. №. 3. P. 426-445.
16. Swart J., Kinnie N. Sharing knowledge in knowledge-intensive firms //Human resource management journal. 2003. T. 13. №. 2. P. 60-75.
17. Tannenbaum S. I., Mathieu J. E., Salas E., Can- non-Bowers J.A. Meeting trainees’ expectations: The influence of training fulfillment on the development of commitment, self-efficacy, and motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1991. T. 76. №. 6. P. 759-769.
18. Wang S., Noe R. A. Knowledge sharing: A review and directions for future research //Human resource management review. 2010. T. 20. №. 2. P. 115-131.
19. Van den Hooff B., Huysman M. Managing knowledge sharing: Emergent and engineering approaches //Information & management. 2009. T. 46. №. 1. P. 1-8.
