Impact of technology-based knowledge

sharing on employee outcomes: moderation

effects of training, support and leadership
Mai Nguyen, Sharyn Rundle-Thiele, Ashish Malik and Pawan Budhwar

Abstract Mai Nguyen is based at

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to focus on how adopting technologies impacts employees’ job Social Marketing@Griffith,
performance and well-being. One such new job demand is the use of technology-based knowledge Griffith University,
sharing (TBKS), which has the potential to influence employees’ job performance and well-being. Brisbane, Australia and
Therefore, human resource managers must provide resources that facilitate the adoption of TBKS to Centre of Science and
improve job performance while minimising mental health effects.
Technology Research and
Design/methodology/approach – Guided by social capital theory, social exchange theory and the job
Development, Thuongmai
demands-resources model, the authors analyse survey data from 281 Vietnamese employees.
University, Hanoi, Vietnam.
Findings – The results of this paper show that TBKS influences employee mental health and directly and
Sharyn Rundle-Thiele is based
indirectly affects job performance. The authors examine the moderating effects of training,
transformational leadership and organisational resources on the relationship between the new job at Social Marketing @Griffith,
demands of TBKS on job performance and mental health outcomes. Griffith University, Brisbane,
Practical implications – TBKS platform developers should offer user-friendly interface functions and Australia. Ashish Malik is
extend critical features. HRM should communicate more with employees, care about their well-being and based at Newcastle
consider their goals and values. HRM needs to provide training to help employees adapt to organisational Business School, The
changes. Leadership also needs to make employees perceive that organisational success is closely related University of Newcastle –
to the success of TBKS. Central Coast Campus,
Originality/value – This paper draws upon the three fundamental tenets of three theories as a triangular Ourimbah, Australia.
base to examine the relationship between TBKS and its outcomes. This paper contributes to the Pawan Budhwar is based at
knowledge management literature by delivering a comprehensive understanding and demonstrating the Aston University,
how the inclusion of technology in knowledge sharing and human resource practices can impact
Birmingham, UK.
employee performance and well-being.
Keywords Technology-based knowledge sharing, Job demands and resources, COVID-19,
Digitalisation, Mental health, Vietnam, Innovative technology
Paper type Research paper

Introduction
Technological advancements, such as digitalisation of the workplace, and major crises,
such as COVID-19, have placed new demands on the way we people work and interact
with colleagues, wherein working from home, teleworking or indeed from other locations
through a technological platform is proliferating rapidly (Brynjolfsson et al., 2020; Malik
et al., 2016). Employees are increasingly using a technology-based knowledge sharing Received 18 July 2022
(TBKS) exchange in their daily work (Scuotto, 2020). The adoption of such workplace Revised 17 October 2022
2 December 2022
innovations and ongoing digitalisation has had a mixed impact on business and employee- Accepted 22 December 2022
level outcomes (Bereznoy et al., 2021; Bondarouk and Brewster, 2016; Connelly et al.,
Funding: This project was
2020; Johnson and Bharadwaj, 2005). As Connelly et al. (2020) note, a favourable impact funded by Social
Marketing@Griffith Publication
on productivity and business outcomes is often at the cost of employee alienation and Scheme, Griffith University,
deterioration of their mental health and well-being outcomes. Still, others have found high Australia.

DOI 10.1108/JKM-07-2022-0552 VOL. 27 NO. 8 2023, pp. 2283-2301, © Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 1367-3270 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j PAGE 2283
 levels of employee satisfaction and motivation at digitalised workplaces, as technologies help
organisations realise the potential of employees through personalised career development,
compensation, optimised succession planning and employee engagement practices, which
leads to improvements in employee retention (Cheng and Hackett, 2019; Küpper et al., 2019)
and in balancing work demands with family, which can help reduce work-family conflict
(Johnson et al., 2020). The impact of COVID-19 on the increased demands for technology-
enabled remote or home working has also created the need for supportive workplace
practices to balance the twin goals of agility and productivity (Verma and Gustafsson, 2020)
as well as employee’s health and well-being (Venkatesh, 2020).
From an employee’s standpoint, the new job demands posed by workplace digitalisation and
remote working is challenging, as they disrupt the existing ways of work as well as physical
interactions between co-workers (Bondarouk and Ruël, 2009). Further, digitalisation impacts
existing organisational structures, roles and strategies, thereby affecting employees’ job
performance and well-being, because of possible role conflict, job changes and increased
uncertainty (Heracleous, 2003). In times of crises, intense emotions, including anxiety, panic
and distress among employees, can arise (Cole et al., 2012). Further, psychological distress
can result in low job performance, and for some employees facing stress, it can lead to
significant mental health problems (Tubre and Collins, 2016). While technologies can enable
employees to work from home, changes to the workplace can induce loneliness and increase
social isolation, leading to stress, depression, anger, fear, irritability, frustration, insomnia,
confusion and boredom (Rimold, 2020), as noted in a recent survey on mental health issues of
employees because of COVID-19 (13.3%) (Czeisler et al., 2020). Thus, with increased job
demands placed by the external environment, HR managers must find resources to sustain
employees’ job performance while mitigating adverse effects on employees’ health and well-
being. We address through this study the Special Issue’s call to investigate the impacts of
significant disruptions – technological and the current pandemic – on employee outcomes by
examining a range of HRM processes that focus on understanding how remote working can
be viewed as an opportunity when supported through human resource practices.
This research, therefore, investigates the TBKS through online platforms such as Microsoft Teams
and Zoom – a business communication platform as an imperative to support remote working
(Nguyen, 2020). During the COVID-19 lockdowns, TBKS becomes a critical way to keep
employees connected (Nguyen, 2020); a majority of employees work remotely, thereby reducing
the traditional and impromptu forms of knowledge sharing such as hallway, water-cooler and
print room conversations, in-person formal and informal meetings, brown-bag lunches and coffee
breaks. Knowledge sharing increases employees’ cohesiveness and interaction and enables
helping one another to address work issues more commonly and overcome potential mental
health issues (Davenport et al., 2016; Wojciechowska-Dzięcielak, 2020). Recent evidence shows
that TBKS can provide further benefits, such as flexibility in knowledge sharing in multinational or
large organisations where there may be little face-to-face interaction between employees who
may not know each other and who may be geographically separated (Nguyen and Malik, 2020).
Even though employees may have the ability and are motivated, unless there is a presence of
trust and reciprocity, employees are unlikely to share knowledge (Lee et al., 2020). Thus, HRM
practices have been associated with increasing knowledge sharing and knowledge
integration (Lee et al., 2020; Malik et al., 2019) through a range of ability(A), motivation(M) and
opportunity(O), enhancing HRM practices or the AMO paradigm, thus highlighting the
importance of these practices in promoting a climate for inclusive social relations at work. This
research takes the view that investing in people and creating a climate of organisational
support and trust plays a critical role in fostering knowledge sharing and helping employees
achieve business and individual outcomes, for example, an increase in sales productivity and
job satisfaction of employees (Lee et al., 2020). It also helps to overcome work difficulties,
such as reduced stress, making employees feel less vulnerable and creating a bond with
others, as knowledge givers feel pleasure in helping others and feel good about themselves

PAGE 2284 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 27 NO. 8 2023

(Davenport et al., 2016). Further, knowledge givers may also develop a sense of belonging
and increased social interaction ties in the workplace. Besides, knowledge givers may also
develop a sense of belonging and increased social interaction ties in the workplace.
Moreover, knowledge receivers may not feel lonely and depressed with this support from
others (Davenport et al., 2016). However, the extant knowledge management literature shows
a lack of research on the influence of TBKS on job performance and employees’ mental health
outcomes, especially during a major pandemic, which has created unprecedented workplace
circumstances and challenges. The majority of research in the knowledge management
literature has focused on identifying the antecedents of TBKS behaviour. However, the
question of whether TBKS could improve employee job performance and mental health has
not been paid sufficient attention. Further, concerning TBKS in the knowledge management
literature, the role of leadership and HRM practices, such as staff training, organisational
support and transformational leadership in creating a favourable social relations climate at
work, has not been explored.
Thus, addressing the above-mentioned research gaps, the objectives of this study are
twofold:

1. to investigate the relationships between TBKS and employee mental health and job
performance; and
2. to investigate the moderating role of organisational resources (training, leadership and
other resources) on TBKS and employee mental health and job performance.
This study contributes to the knowledge management theory by offering a fresh perspective to
integrate the theoretical lenses of social capital theory (SCT), social exchange theory (SET) and
job demands-resources (JD-R) model and developing the study’s conceptual framework for
analysing the above relationships. Expanding the knowledge management literature by
investigating the impact of TBKS on its outcomes, we provide more insights into TBKS behaviour.
The moderating effects of organisational training, support and transformational leadership in the
relationship between TBKS and mental health and job performance are also examined. This
study’s implications assist HRM in improving employee mental health and job performance,
especially during organisational crises. This paper is organised as follows. First, we review the
theoretical lens used in the study, leading to the study’s hypotheses development. The research
methodology and data analysis follow. Next, a discussion of the results with implications for
theory and practice is presented, followed by the acknowledgement of the study’s main
limitations and future research directions to conclude the paper.

Theoretical framework
TBKS refers to an exchange process wherein knowledge, in the form of information, skills
and experience, is exchanged between people via technology (Cummings, 2004). In the
knowledge sharing literature, TBKS has been captured from two dominant approaches.
First, TBKS behaviour is regarded as a holistic activity (Kwahk and Park, 2016). This
approach has been criticised because of its oversimplification of TBKS behaviour. In the
second approach, TBKS has been considered bidirectional (Chen and Hung, 2010),
consisting of donating and collecting knowledge, which involves the provision of and
demand for knowledge, respectively. The former represents the employees’ voluntary
transfer of intellectual capital, while the latter refers to the process where employees ask co-
workers to share their knowledge and vice-versa (Fait et al., 2021). Knowledge donating as
a perspective to the knowledge exchange process in a group or an organisation allows
members to share skills, techniques, experiences and ideas (Cavaliere and Lombardi,
2015). According to Chen and Hung (2010) and Akhavan and Hosseini (2016b), knowledge
donating includes the notion of knowledge transfer, which involves a systematic process of
transmitting, distributing and disseminating knowledge. Knowledge donating helps to

VOL. 27 NO. 8 2023 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j PAGE 2285

 optimise the use of existing knowledge and encourages the creation of new knowledge as a
result of learning and a combination of different forms of knowledge. However, knowledge
lurking, another dimension, refers to passive learning and, in this context, refers to the
process of accumulating knowledge that is shared on TBKS platforms (Sun et al., 2014).
Lurking is regarded as a standard behaviour in the TBKS process (Amichai-Hamburger
et al., 2016; Sun et al., 2014) because members often spend significant amounts of time
reading or accumulating but not posting or sharing any knowledge.
In the knowledge management literature, there are a number of theories applied to explain the
relationship between TBKS and its outcomes, including the theory of reasoned action, theory
of planned behaviour, SET, social cognitive theory, economic exchange theory, social rule
theory, rational action theory, motivation theory, innovation diffusion theory, fuzzy set theory,
theory of social independence, expectancy theory and self-determination theory (Nguyen,
2020). To bring more profound insights into TBKS behaviour in digitalised workplaces and its
impact on employee performance and mental health outcomes, this research uses the three
related theoretical frameworks: the SCT, the SET and the JD-R model. As TBKS is voluntary,
the SCT can explain how TBKS works and why employees participate in the TBKS process,
while the SET highlights why employee exchange their knowledge as their personal resources
to receive something in return (Blau, 1964). According to the SCT, employees in the same
organisation often know each other and have positive relationships based on trust, kindness,
respect and reciprocity (Coleman, 1988). Thus, employees are more likely to share knowledge
with co-workers because they have social bonds and often share organisational values and
goals (Bharati et al., 2015). However, prior studies drawing upon SCT have ignored the
calculation of individuals regarding the cost-benefit analysis (Chiu et al., 2006). The SET
highlights that individuals exchange their personal knowledge and resources with others with
an expectation of reciprocity or to receive something in return through their social exchange
(Blau, 1964). However, both SCT and SET lack attention to the consideration of TBKS as a job
demand in a new work condition. Technology advances in the workplace lead to TBKS as job
requirements, and organisations need to provide resources to help employees adapt to it;
thus, the JD-R model (Bakker and Demerouti, 2007) can explain the reasons that when
technologies are used for knowledge sharing, organisational resources such as training,
support or leadership are often available to guide mechanism. The conceptual framework for
this study, therefore, uses the theoretical lenses of the SET (Blau, 1964), SCT and JD-R for
organisational support systems (Malik et al., 2019; Lee et al., 2020; Le and Lei, 2019), and an
appropriate leadership style (Le and Lei, 2019; Leong and Fischer, 2010) is critical in shaping
employees job performance and other outcomes through TBKS.
These theories are deemed the most suitable theories to explain the conceptual framework.
The study’s conceptual framework to examine the relationships depicted in Figure 1. In
Figure 1, the SCT has demonstrated participation in TBKS, the relationship between TBKS
and its outcomes (job performance and mental health) illustrated the SET, whereas new job
demands, organisational resources and job and employee outcomes presented JD-R.

Hypotheses development
Technology-based knowledge sharing and job performance
Other research states that “Knowledge sharing is a human behaviour that must be examined
in the context of human performance” (Small and Sage, 2005, p. 161). A wider range of
performance indicators should also be applied in measuring the efficiency and effectiveness
of knowledge sharing behaviours (Bhatti et al., 2020). Recently, there has been a shift from
hard to soft conceptual approaches to measuring an individual’s performance (Kwahk and
Park, 2016). While the hard approaches tend to measure performance in terms of bottom-line
impact and task accomplishments, the soft approach creates an environment through
knowledge sharing to emphasise personal contributions for enhancing learning, which as

PAGE 2286 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 27 NO. 8 2023

 Figure 1 Study’s conceptual framework

previous research indicates (Kwahk and Park, 2016), TBKS stimulates a mutual learning
culture and encourages employees to improve their job performance.
TBKS, therefore, is a valuable activity that enhances employee job performance through the
sharing of individual knowledge into organisational social capital, which improves the stock
of knowledge resources available to other employees. Some scholars, such as Tseng and
Kuo (2014) and Mills and Smith (2011), have suggested that the TBKS could increase social
capital in an organisation that enhances employees’ ability to innovate in their companies
and increase employee job performance. Lin (2007) explains that the exchange of
knowledge helps employees address work issues and overcome challenges, especially in
organisational changes and crises. This is consistent with the view of Tohidinia and
Mosakhani (2010) and Luqman et al. (2022), who indicate that TMBS relates to the
opportunity to access critical knowledge inside the firm.
TBKS is also a part of the organisational learning process (Chen and Hung, 2010).
Employees can learn from colleagues, moving from a single employee to a collaborative
learning approach (Giustiniano et al., 2016). In TBKS, employees can request information,
skill and experience from colleagues and demonstrate their willingness to learn, which can
enhance their job performance (Lin, 2007). Indeed, collecting relevant knowledge from
colleagues catalyses, at the same time, an individual’s learning orientation (Park et al.,
2014). This argument echoes prior research by Van den Hooff and de Ridder (2004), which
suggests improvements in job performance through the process by which individuals
acquire new knowledge. Employees often ask for information and knowledge for individual
oriented-learning, which significantly increases job performance (Park et al., 2014;)
(Akhavan and Hosseini, 2016b; Va ta
ma nescu et al., 2020). TBKS provides a platform for
employees to voice their need for knowledge and difficulties at work (Akhavan and
Hosseini, 2016a; Lee, 2002). Similarly, improvement in job performance requires internal
communication and learning to avoid stagnation (Giustiniano et al., 2016; Scuotto et al.,
2017). For instance, TBKS among employees in hospitality firms can improve service

VOL. 27 NO. 8 2023 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j PAGE 2287

 offerings, avoid similar service failures and reduce costs (Abdullah et al., 2009). Therefore,
we hypothesise that employees’ TBKS behaviour can increase job performance as follows:
H1. Technology-based knowledge sharing is positively related to job performance.

Technology-based knowledge sharing and mental health

TBKS may influence the mental health outcomes of employees (Nguyen and Malik, 2020).
Humans need to have regular communication with others (Nguyen, 2020). Flexible work
arrangement such as working from home has become possible because TBKS can help to
connect employees (Nguyen, 2022). Some employees may want to share knowledge to
help others solve their work issues. Knowledge givers may also find enjoyment in helping
others, raising their self-esteem about their value to an organisation (Chen and Hung, 2010).
Recognition from colleagues for their contribution and communication may also make
employees feel good about themselves, leading to positive mental health (Nguyen and
Malik, 2020).
For knowledge receivers, TBKS may be helpful for mental health in reducing stress and
increasing well-being. In an organisational crisis, employees need to do many tasks that
they are not familiar with (Bai et al., 2016). Therefore, a lack of communication can lead to
role conflict because of possible contradictory information (Nguyen, 2022). Role conflict can
be resolved by asking those who have experience with the task to provide support or by
making the task requirements clearer (Nguyen and Malik, 2020). Also, employees often face
work issues, and they typically look for help to address these difficulties (Bai et al., 2016).
When employees can ask for the information they need and engage in TBKS, they feel they
are not alone and have support from others, thus increasing their mental health (Akhavan
and Hosseini, 2016b). Employees may feel relief or less stressed when they can read the
information that helps them to address work issues (Tubre and Collins, 2016). They also
may accumulate knowledge to build up self-efficacy at work (Amichai-Hamburger et al.,
2016). Knowledge sharing through transactions (exchange) or passive consumption
(reading) between colleagues may decrease loneliness because of the virtual presence of
others across shared work settings (Amichai-Hamburger et al., 2016). Therefore, we
propose the following hypothesis:
H2. Technology-based knowledge sharing is positively related to mental health.

Mental health and job performance

According to the World Health Organisation (WHO, 2001), mental health refers to a state of
well-being in which individuals can realise their abilities to cope with stresses in life, work
predictively and fruitfully and can contribute to the community. Based on this definition,
mental health is regarded as a continuum of neurophysiological and cognitive states related
to changes in emotion, thinking, mood and behaviour, ranging from negative to positive
mental health states, which are approached from two standpoints, namely, mental illness
and positive mental health or well-being (WHO, 2001). Mental illness is related to the
presence of negative psychological symptoms, such as depression or anxiety disorders,
impacting the ways individuals think about themselves and the world, interfering with work
or study and daily activities (WHO, 2001). On the other hand, positive mental health or well-
being refers to a positive attribute, complete psychological functioning and the ability to
enjoy life and cope with challenges (Montano et al., 2017; WHO, 2001). Although individuals
have mood fluctuations as a normal psychological phenomenon in everyday life, they
may connect to a negative mental health state, depending on many factors such as
organisational changes, role conflict, working culture and deficient coping skills (Montano
et al., 2017).

PAGE 2288 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 27 NO. 8 2023

Employees with a high level of mental health issues are more likely to have a reduction in job
performance (Montano et al., 2017). Mental health issues often make employees perceive
that they have insufficient ability and coping resources for their work tasks and have low
levels of a sense of work accomplishment (Bond and Flaxman, 2006). They tend to become
more cynical about whether their work contributes anything and doubt the significance of
their work in organisations (Cartwright and Holmes, 2006). Mental health issues can also
result in adverse outcomes, such as employee resistance to organisational changes, and
negative feelings, such as disappointment in or hopelessness towards their work (Cole
et al., 2006). Thus, we hypothesise that:
H3. Positive mental health is positively related to job performance.

The mediating role of mental health

Previous scholars such as Montano et al. (2017) and Bond and Flaxman (2006) have
discussed the possible impact of TBKS on mental health and the state of mental health on
improving job performance. When employees participate in TBKS, they communicate with
colleagues and those who share knowledge and help others tend to have a sense of self-
enjoyment and positive mental health (Nguyen and Malik, 2020). Knowledge receivers can
enhance mental health because of stress reduction when they are supported by colleagues
in addressing work challenges and difficulties (Nguyen and Malik, 2020). The virtual
presence of colleagues may make employees feel less lonely and isolated because,
through TBKS, they can still interact with colleagues (Nguyen, 2020). As a result, positive
mental health diffuses power and energy, making employees more motivated to enhance
their work (Montano et al., 2017). Employees are empowered to bring creativity to assigned
work and responsibilities; thus, they can work effectively and improve job performance
(Montano et al., 2017). In other words, positive mental health can be the result of the TBKS
process, leading to positive mental health, which in turn often increases job performance.
Unfortunately, the knowledge sharing literature has not yet examined the mediating role of
mental health on the impact of TBKS on job performance. Montano et al. (2017) identify that
good mental health enables employees to perform at their best and generate innovative
ideas. Therefore, the mediating role of good mental health is vital in establishing the link
between TBKS and job performance. Hence, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H4. Positive mental health mediates the impact of technology-based knowledge sharing
on job performance.

The moderation role of staff training, organisational support and transformational

leadership
In organisational change or crises, staff training is crucial to get employees used to new
conditions or situations, facilitating the adoption of new work practices and reducing
uncertainty (Alonazi, 2020). In an organisational crisis, the effectiveness and success of an
organisation often depend on employee job performance (Alonazi, 2020). Therefore,
employees need to have staff training to acquire the relevant skills and knowledge to be
able to perform their duties and make meaningful contributions to the success of the
organisational goals. If employees receive sufficient training, then they may feel the level of
care from the organisation, thus placing more effort in TBKS to help increase job
performance and mental health. According to the SET (Blau, 1964), if employees perceive
that they are supported by the organisation, then they tend to make a great effort to the
development of the organisation. During crises, the contribution of employees can be seen
through their TBKS behaviour in helping others by sharing knowledge or asking for
knowledge to complete their work tasks (Nguyen and Malik, 2020). TBKS is also regarded
as a learning process of developing themselves and contributing to the success of the
organisation (Nguyen and Malik, 2020). Hence, the following hypothesis is proposed:

VOL. 27 NO. 8 2023 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j PAGE 2289

 H5. Staff training moderates the impact of technology-based knowledge sharing on job
performance and mental health.
Organisational support refers to the degree to which employees believe that their organisation
cares about their opinions, well-being, goals and values (Le and Lei, 2019). As a catalyst,
organisational support may have interaction with TBKS to affect employee job performance
and mental health by fostering organisational learning culture (Fukui et al., 2019).
König et al. (2020) and Nguyen (2020) contend that throughout times of indecisiveness in
organisations following a crisis or change, employees need to feel that their contributions
through TBKS are carefully considered. With a high level of organisational support, a
knowledge-sharing culture can be cultivated and maintained (Halisah et al., 2021). With the
belief that the organisation will appreciate their input in the TBKS process, employees are
more inclined to participate in TBKS to share knowledge and help each other with work issues,
thereby improving mental health and job performance (Le and Lei, 2019). Several studies,
such as by Fukui et al. (2019) and Hur et al. (2013), have indicated the importance of
organisational support in moderating a range of organisational relationships. Accordingly, we
propose the following hypothesis:
H6. Organisational support moderates the relationship between technology-based
knowledge sharing on job performance and mental health.
Transformational leadership is defined as the style used by leaders to encourage and
inspire followers to be innovative and make changes (Le and Lei, 2019). The behaviour of
transformational leaders has been recognised as a factor in cultivating a high level of trust
and admiration towards the leader, thus hinting at a moderating effect on the impact of
TBKS on job performance and mental health (Scuotto et al., 2022). Furthermore, the
transformational leadership style often motivates and inspires followers to take action that
benefits the organisation. Lin (2007) stresses that transformational leadership influences
employees’ knowledge-sharing attitudes. If the leaders follow the transformational style,
then employees are more inclined to have more willingness to share their knowledge with
co-workers to support each other (Lin, 2007). Furthermore, Montano et al. (2017) argue that
transformational leadership contributes significantly to positive mental health. To support this
view, the review by Arnold (2017) shows that transformational leadership can help strengthen
the association between TBKS and mental health because employees are encouraged to
share knowledge, resulting in lower levels of stress and emotional exhaustion and higher levels
of well-being. Thus:
H7. Transformational leadership moderates the relationship between technology-based
knowledge sharing on job performance and mental health.

Method
Sample and data collection procedure
The prospective respondents were those who were 18 years old or above, worked in Vietnam
companies and had participated in TBKS in their organisations. Data were collected using the
virtual snowball sampling technique in 2020. Then, based on the personal connection of the
researchers, the questionnaires were sent to some potential respondents and asked them to
distribute in their network. Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, touchless distribution was
preferred. Thus, a virtual survey was deemed the most suitable distribution method.
The questionnaire development process was gone through three stages. First, the original
English questionnaire was translated into Vietnamese using the back-translation technique
(Brislin, 2016). Second, the Vietnamese version was pilot-tested with 20 respondents to
ensure clarity and wording. Third, the questionnaire was designed on Qualtrics platforms
and created an anonymous link to distribute in the main survey.

PAGE 2290 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 27 NO. 8 2023

The survey was conducted in three months, with 281 completed and qualified questionnaires. The
majority of respondents were female (74.7%). About 40% of participants were between 26 and 35
years old, whereas 36.6% and 23.4% were between 36 and 45 years old and below 26 or above
46 years old, respectively. The percentage of respondents who had a bachelor’s degree and
master’s degree were 35.6% and 59.1%, respectively, while college certificate holders were 5.3%.

Measures
The construct measures were adapted from the extant literature, with all items being measured
on a five-point Likert scale, wherein 1 is Strongly Disagree and 5 is Strongly Agree. TBKS scale
comprised three dimensions: knowledge donating, knowledge collecting and lurking. The scale
of knowledge donating was adapted from Akhavan and Hosseini (2016a). An example of it is: “I
shared my information, skills and experiences with my colleagues in the organisational online
platform”. The knowledge collecting scale was also adapted from Akhavan and Hosseini (2016a).
Its example item is – “When I needed certain knowledge, I asked my colleagues in the
organisational online platform”. The scale for lurking was adopted from Bishop (2007) and
Dennen (2014). An example item of this scale is – “I read all the information and skills and
experiences shared in the organisational online platform”. Job performance was measured by
adopting the Chiang and Hsieh’s (2012) five-item scale. Its example is “I fulfiled my job
responsibilities”. Items used to measure mental health were adapted from McHorney and Ware
(1995). This scale consists of five items, and its example item is “How you generally feel during
the pandemic: Full of things interesting to you during COVID 19 isolation”. The staff training scale
was adopted from Vinodkumar and Bhasi (2011). It consists of four items, and an example item is
“My company gives comprehensive training to the employees in working during the pandemic”.
The scale of organisational support was adopted from Chiang and Hsieh (2012). It consists of
five items and includes items such as “My organisation strongly considers my goals and values”.
The transformational leadership five-item scale was adopted by Dai et al. (2013), containing items
such as “The supervisors can understand my situation and give me encouragement and
assistance”. The Cronbach’s alpha values for all scales were above 0.70 (Table 2).

Common method variance

Several remedies to address common method variance were applied. Before survey distribution,
the wording of all items in the questionnaire was paid attention to ensure the simplicity and
conciseness of the wording of all measurement items were undertaken to address common
method variance. The questionnaire was pilot-tested to ensure wording and clarity. The
measurement items of the same construct were spread throughout the questionnaire.
Participants were aware that their responses would be unidentifiable. After data collection,
following the recommendation of Podsakoff et al. (2003), an exploratory factor analysis was
conducted, and the results found that a single factor did not emerge, and the first factor did not
account for the majority of the variance (below 50%). A marker variable (online shopping
behaviour) was included in the model to examine a partial correlation procedure, which showed
that the relationships and significance of the correlations were not changed. The unmeasured
latent method factor technique was performed to investigate the significance of the structure
indicators with and with the method factor. The results showed that there were some insignificant
adjustments in the measurement model. The variance inflation factor was accessed to diagnose
multicollinearity, but no variance inflation factors were above 5.0 (Hair et al., 2010). Therefore, no
sign of common method variance was found in this study.

Results
IBM SPSS27 and AMOS27 were used for data analysis.

VOL. 27 NO. 8 2023 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j PAGE 2291

 Measurement model
A confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to examine the measurement model. TBKS is
a multidimensional construct with sound model fit indices in the second-order factor
structure (x2 = 49.12, df = 24, x2/df = 2.05 and p < 0.01; CFI = 0.99; TLI = 0.98; and
RMSEA = 0.06); thus, we used the aggregated scale for this second-order factor. The
confirmatory factor analysis of measurement model showed reasonable fit indices:
x2 = 635.04, df = 236, x2/df = 2.69 and p < 0.001; CFI = 0.92; TLI = 0.91; and RMSEA =
0.08 (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2013). All of the composite reliabilities and average variance
extracted exceeded the cut-off level of 0.7 and 0.5, respectively (Hair et al., 2010) (Table 1).
The average variance extracted values were higher than the squared correlations of the
according pair of constructs (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). Therefore, the data showed
adequate validity and reliability.

Hypotheses testing
Structural equation modelling was conducted to test hypotheses. The model fit of structural
equation modelling was acceptable: x2 = 114.07, df = 61, x2/df = 1.87 and p < 0.001;
CFI = 0.98; TLI = 0.97; and RMSEA = 0.06. The results shown in Model 1 in Table 2 confirm
that TBKS had a positive impact on job performance (b = 0.36 and p < 0.001) and mental
health (b = 0.36 and p < 0.001) and that mental health had a positive impact on job
performance (b = 0.31 and p < 0.001), thus supporting the three hypotheses.
The bias-corrected bootstrapping procedure was used to test the mediating role of job
performance. The results support H4 as the indirect impact of mental health on the impact
of TBKS on job performance (b = 0.003 and p < 0.01) was noted (Table 3).
To test the moderating role of staff training, organisational support and transformational
leadership, the interactions between these factors and TBKS were included in the structural
model in Models 2, 3 and 4 of Table 2 and Figure 2. The results indicated that staff training
positively moderated the relationship between TBKS and job performance (b = 0.09 and
p < 0.05) but did not moderate the relationship between TBKS and mental health
(b = 0.07 and p > 0.05). The impact of TBKS on job performance was not moderated by
organisational support (b = 0.09 and p > 0.05), but the influence of TBKS on mental health
was moderated by organisational support (b = 0.16 and p < 0.01). Transformational
support moderated the impact of TBKS on job performance (b = 0.16 and p < 0.01) but did
not moderate the influence of TBKS on mental health (b = 0.05 and p > 0.05). Therefore,
H5, H6 and H7 were partially supported.

Discussion
During the COVID-19 lockdowns, the adoption of digital technologies and remote working
the COVID-19 lockdowns has increased exponentially. This study examined how the

Table 1 Correlation and validity results for this study

Variable names 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1. Knowledge donating 0.91

2. Knowledge collecting 0.67 0.91
3. Lurking 0.60 0.58 0.90
4. Job performance 0.41 0.33 0.31 0.95
5. Mental health 0.28 0.25 0.18 0.38 0.92
6. Staff training 0.45 0.38 0.38 0.30 0.13 0.96
7. Organisational support 0.15 0.22 0.20 0.03 0.08 0.07 0.95
8. Transformational leadership 0.31 0.38 0.33 0.15 0.08 0.38 0.44 0.88
 
Notes: p < 0.05; p < 0.01

PAGE 2292 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 27 NO. 8 2023

 Table 2 Structural equation model results
Path Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4

Direct effect

TBKS ! JPE 0.36 0.01 0.17 0.06

TBKS ! MHE 0.36 0.54 0.05 0.21
   
MHE ! JPE 0.31 0.27 0.25 0.25
The moderating effect of STR
STR ! JPE 0.23
STR ! MHE 0.26
TBKS  STR ! JPE 0.09
TBKS  STR ! MHE 0.07
The moderating effect of OSU
OSU ! JPE 0.47
OSU ! MHE 0.66
TBKS  OSU ! JPE 0.09
TBKS  OSU ! MHE 0.16
The moderating effect of TLE
TLE ! JPE 0.64
TLE ! MHE 0.24
TBKS  TLE ! JPE 0.15
TBKS  TLE ! MHE 0.05
R2
JPE 0.31 0.27 0.27 0.27
MHE 0.13 0.08 0.10 0.08
Notes: TBKS: technology-based knowledge sharing; JPE: job performance; MHE: mental health;
STR: staff training; OSU: organizational support; and TLE: transformational leadership.  p < 0.001;

p < 0.01;  p < 0.05

Table 3 Indirect effects using the bootstrapping method

Independent variable Dependent variable Mediator Regression weight Lower Upper p

Technology-based knowledge sharing Job performance Mental health 0.003 0.04 0.13 0.002
Note:  p < 0.01

inclusion of technology in knowledge sharing influenced employee’s mental health and job
performance. This study is one of the first that integrates all three dimensions of knowledge
donating, collecting and lurking of TBKS to provide more insights into TBKS behaviour. The
findings of this study indicate that TBKS significantly influences job performance. TBKS
pertains to online knowledge donating, collecting and lurking, which contributes to the
exchange of knowledge to address work issues, leading to improvements in job
performance. This finding goes beyond those of previous studies, such as Kwahk and Park
(2016), who found that knowledge sharing facilitates the transfer of knowledge among
employees and enhances job performance. This study found that the inclusion of
technology in knowledge sharing even better because it facilitates the exchange of
knowledge without limitation of time and space. Further, TBKS makes the knowledge
shared become available to all participants and benefits more employees to address work
tasks, leading to improvements in job performance. Interestingly, this study also found that
TBKS also increase employees’ positive mental health, which previous researchers have
underlooked.
Positive mental health positively affects job performance and mediates the impact of TBKS
on job performance. These findings imply that the inclusion of technology in knowledge
sharing can improve employee mental health and indirectly improve job performance in

VOL. 27 NO. 8 2023 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j PAGE 2293

 Figure 2 Moderation effects

organisational changes and crises. Technology plays a crucial role in connecting

employees in knowledge sharing, making them feel less lonely, isolated and vulnerable.
Technology is a tool to bridge employee strengths and weaknesses with one another to
compensate for their gaps. These findings are aligned with Montano et al. (2017), who
found that positive mental health can lead to an increase in job performance. However, this
study further indicates how job performance can be increased while ensuring human
resourcing practices promote positive mental health and supporting work practices.
TBKS has cultivated an inclusive organisational culture, which needs to be enhanced by
HRM practices. This study found that staff training and transformational leadership
moderate the impact of TBKS on job performance. These findings indicate that staff
training and transformational leadership are crucial in providing a favourable working
environment that interplays with TBKS to help employees increase job performance.
However, staff training and transformational leadership were not found to moderate the
impact of TBKS on mental health. These results can be explained that staff training and
transformational leadership provided work support, including training to work during the
pandemic or encouragement to full job tasks and the company vision. This work support
could assist employees in completing work tasks but has not yet changed or affected
employees’ perception of mental health support. These findings consociate with those by
Lei et al. (2019) and Jeon et al. (2012) but go further by providing empirical evidence that
transformational leadership built an organisational culture of collaboration, assisting in
establishing connections among employees and inspiring them to share knowledge,
while staff training contributed to a significant decrease in worries in working in the new
condition.
In this study, organisational support interacted with TBKS to impact employees’ mental
health. Organisational support is manifested in the care of employee opinions, well-being,
goals and values, as well as help and assistance from organisations. Organisational
support is symbolic of mutual assistance and investment in the relationship between
employees and the organisation. The finding of this study shows that organisational support
stimulates employees to develop feelings of attachment. Such feelings often lead to

PAGE 2294 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 27 NO. 8 2023

employee engagement with TBKS assisting in increasing communications and knowledge
transfer with others, resulting in positive mental health. Unexpectedly, organisational
support did not moderate the impact of TBKS on employee job performance. One possible
explanation was that as the manifestation of organisational support is mainly about the care
of employees’ well-being, goals and values, employees tend to feel mental support from the
organisation rather than assistance to improve job performance. These findings extend
those by Le and Lei (2019), who found that organisational support was crucial to stimulate
employees’ willingness to share knowledge. This study further reveals that organisational
support also increases organisational attachment, which motivates employees through
TBKS to increase mental health and job performance.

Conclusion
Theoretical implications
This study is the first one that draws upon the three fundamental tenets of the SCT, SET and
JD-R as a triangular base to develop our conceptual framework. Contributions to the
knowledge management literature from this study deliver a comprehensive understanding
demonstrating how the inclusion of technology in knowledge sharing and human resource
practices can impact employee performance and well-being.
First, this study investigates the impact of TBKS on mental health, showing that TBKS not
only helps to improve job performance but also can enhance employee mental health and
well-being, which earlier studies have not uncovered in the knowledge management
literature. Furthermore, this study was conducted in the context of organisational change
and crises, where remote working and use of technology to enable employees to transfer
knowledge online grew exponentially during the COVID-19 lockdowns delivering an up-to-
date understanding of the role of TBKS in remote working settings as experienced in 2020.
This study is also one of the first studies in the knowledge management literature
investigating TBKS with all three dimensions of knowledge donating, knowledge collecting
and lurking. The results of this study should encourage future researchers in the knowledge
management literature to investigate TBKS using three dimensions to deliver robust insights
into TBKS. The omission of any dimensions reduces the diagnostic capacity of TBKS
behaviour, which is beneficial for organisations and employees. Further, this study
investigates the role of inclusive organisational culture in the digitalisation process. The
moderating effect of staff training, organisational support and transformational leadership is
shown in this study, where it has been overlooked in the knowledge management literature,
indicating the importance of these human resource practices for organisations seeking to
promote TBKS.

Practical implications
The findings of this study show that the inclusion of technology in TBKS is crucial to
improving employee mental health and job performance; therefore, an effort needs to be
made to facilitate the use of technology in knowledge sharing. TBKS platform should be
designed to be user-friendly and extend critical frequently required features. For example,
animated assistant icons could be helpful to provide as they tie into social functioning and
make knowledge sharing become relaxing, fun and less formal (Papadopoulos et al., 2012).
Also, ease of use should be considered when developing a TBKS system with stable and
fast connectivity. Furthermore, using technology for knowledge sharing must be
approached with caution, given that information security may be an issue for many
organisations.
Staff training, organisational support and transformational leadership to facilitate TBKS are
shown to be critical factors in creating a favourable environment. The study identifies that
organisational support can enhance the influence of TBKS on mental health. HRM should

VOL. 27 NO. 8 2023 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j PAGE 2295

 communicate more with employees, listen to their voices, care about their well-being and
consider their goals and values. HRM also needs to establish a set of resources that can be
deployed to make employees feel valued in organisations by attaching greater importance
to their contributions and proactively providing help to them (Chiang and Hsieh, 2012). By
exerting external influence on employee feelings through organisational support, employees
are more inclined to be motivated to participate in TBKS to exchange knowledge, which
often enhances their mental health.
This study shows that staff training and transformational leadership are critical to
stimulating employees’ participation in TBKS and increasing the linkages between TBKS
and job performance. The finding implies that HRM needs to provide training to help
employees adapt to organisational changes. If organisations want to improve
productivity, among other things, then they need to focus on continuously enhancing the
skills of their staff via training. This is particularly relevant when technological
advancements having an impact on workplace practices are extremely fast, like what
happened during the pandemic, followed by considerable changes in working methods
and approaches. Investment in employee training enhances employee skills and
competencies necessary for them to function effectively and perform adequately on a
task and has been linked to formal and informal knowledge sharing. Staff training needs
to be regularly conducted because employees are dynamic in nature, and they are
expected to keep up with current events and methods. Staff training is indispensable for
employee development to increase production capacity. Staff training is a process that
does not coax or persuade employees to learn but rather creates organisational
conditions and cultures that will motivate them to strive for better performance. For
example, the inclusion of technology in online knowledge sharing to replace face-to-face
communication needs to go along with a high priority of providing adequate training. The
absence of staff training often manifests tripartite issues of incompetence, inefficiency
and ineffectiveness. HRM also needs to encourage employees to attend staff training
programmes for working with the inclusion of technology. Guidance, tutorial videos and
frequently asked questions should be proposed. When employees are familiar with TBKS
platforms, they will be more likely to participate in the knowledge exchange process to
improve their job performance.
In addition, if leadership provides encouragement, necessary help and assistance, then
they will actively participate in TBKS. Leadership also needs to make employees perceive
that the success in their goals and careers and company visions are closely related to the
success of TBKS. By doing that, employees tend to be more motivated to participate in
TBKS to improve job performance.

Study limitations and future research directions

This paper has several limitations that may be considered for future research. First, the data
were collected in one country. Nevertheless, it helped empirically examine the two research
objectives and test the proposed hypotheses. Future scholars may want to validate the
model in other countries and compare the results across different cultures. Second, a self-
reported questionnaire was used as a way to collect data.
Given that the data was collected during the pandemic’s peak, only this was achievable.
Third, future research should evaluate the outcomes of TBKS over time by conducting a
longitudinal or cross-lagged study. A more objective measure form may be considered to
track the behaviours in this study. Finally, this study examined mental health and job
performance as the outcomes of TBKS. Other outcomes such as organisational resilience
should be further investigated. Given the digitalisation within an organisation and across the
ecosystem with suppliers and customers, TBKS could be examined from different contexts
in the knowledge sharing ecosystem.

PAGE 2296 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 27 NO. 8 2023

References
Abdullah, F., Ingram, A. and Welsh, R. (2009), “Managers’ perceptions of tacit knowledge in Edinburgh’s
Indian restaurants”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 21 No. 1,
pp. 118-127, doi: 10.1108/09596110910930223.
Akhavan, P. and Hosseini, M.S. (2016a), “Social capital, knowledge sharing and innovation capability: an
empirical study of R&D teams in Iran”, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, Vol. 28 No. 1,
pp. 96-113.
Akhavan, P. and Hosseini, S.M. (2016b), “Social capital, knowledge sharing, and innovation capability:
an empirical study of R&D teams in Iran”, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, Vol. 28 No. 1,
pp. 96-113, doi: 10.1080/09537325.2015.1072622.
Alonazi, W.B. (2020), “The impact of emotional intelligence on job performance during COVID-19 crisis: a
cross-sectional analysis”, Psychology Research and Behavior Management, Vol. 13, p. 749.

Amichai-Hamburger, Y., Gazit, T., Bar-Ilan, J., Perez, O., Aharony, N., Bronstein, J. and Dyne, T.S.
(2016), “Psychological factors behind the lack of participation in online discussions”, Computers in
Human Behavior, Vol. 55 No. Part A, pp. 268-277, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.09.009.
Arnold, K.A. (2017), “Transformational leadership and employee psychological wellbeing: a review and
directions for future research”, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 381-393,
doi: 10.1037/ocp0000062.
Bai, Y., Lin, L. and Li, P.P. (2016), “How to enable employee creativity in a team context: a cross-level
mediating process of transformational leadership”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69 No. 9,
pp. 3240-3250, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.02.025.

Bakker, A.B. and Demerouti, E. (2007), “The job demands-resources model: state of the art”, Journal of
Managerial Psychology, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 309-328, doi: 10.1108/02683940710733115.
Bereznoy, A., Meissner, D. and Scuotto, V. (2021), “The intertwining of knowledge sharing and creation in
the digital platform based ecosystem. A conceptual study on the lens of the open innovation approach”,
Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 25 No. 8, pp. 2022-2042.
Bharati, P., Zhang, W. and Chaudhury, A. (2015), “Better knowledge with social media? Exploring the
roles of social capital and organisational knowledge management”, Journal of Knowledge Management,
Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 456-475, doi: 10.1108/JKM-11-2014-0467.

Bhatti, S.H., Vorobyev, D., Zakariya, R. and Christofi, M. (2020), “Social capital, knowledge sharing, work
meaningfulness and creativity: evidence from the Pakistani pharmaceutical industry”, Journal of
Intellectual Capital, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 243-259.
Blau, P.M. (1964), Exchange and Power in Social Life, Transaction Publishers, New York.
Bond, F.W. and Flaxman, P.E. (2006), “The ability of psychological flexibility and job control to predict
learning, job performance, and mental health”, Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, Vol. 26
Nos 1/2, pp. 113-130, doi: 10.1300/J075v26n01_05.

Bondarouk, T. and Brewster, C. (2016), “Conceptualising the future of HRM and technology research”,
The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 27 No. 21, pp. 2652-2671, doi: 10.1080/
09585192.2016.1232296.
Bondarouk, T.V. and Ruël, H.J.M. (2009), “Electronic human resource management: challenges in the
digital era”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 505-514, doi:
10.1080/09585190802707235.
Brislin, R.W. (2016), “Back-translation for cross-cultural research”, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,
Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 185-216, doi: 10.1177/135910457000100301.

Brynjolfsson, E., Horton, J.J., Ozimek, A., Rock, D., Sharma, G. and TuYe, H.Y. (2020), “COVID-19 and
remote work: an early look at US data (no. w27344)”, National Bureau of Economic Research.
Cartwright, S. and Holmes, N. (2006), “The meaning of work: the challenge of regaining employee engagement
and reducing cynicism”, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 199-208, doi: 10.1016/j.
hrmr.2006.03.012.
Cavaliere, V. and Lombardi, S. (2015), “Exploring different cultural configurations: how do they affect
subsidiaries’ knowledge sharing behaviors?”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 19 No. 2,
pp. 141-163, doi: 10.1108/JKM-04-2014-0167.

VOL. 27 NO. 8 2023 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j PAGE 2297

 Chen, C.J. and Hung, S.W. (2010), “To give or to receive? Factors influencing members’ knowledge
sharing and community promotion in professional virtual communities”, Information & Management,
Vol. 47 No. 4, pp. 226-236, doi: 10.1016/j.im.2010.03.001.
Cheng, M.M. and Hackett, R.D. (2019), “A critical review of algorithms in HRM: definition, theory, and
practice”, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 31 No. 1, p. 100698.
Chiang, C.F. and Hsieh, T.S. (2012), “The impacts of perceived organisational support and psychological
empowerment on job performance: the mediating effects of organisational citizenship behavior”, International
Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 180-190, doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.04.011.
Chiu, C.M., Hsu, M.H. and Wang, E.T.G. (2006), “Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual
communities: an integration of social capital and social cognitive theories”, Decision Support Systems,
Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 1872-1888, doi: 10.1016/j.dss.2006.04.001.
Cole, M.S., Bruch, H. and Vogel, B. (2006), “Emotion as mediators of the relations between perceived
supervisor support and psychological hardiness on employee cynicism”, Journal of Organizational
Behavior, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 463-484, doi: 10.1002/job.381.
Cole, M.S., Walter, F., Bedeian, A.G. and O’Boyle, E.H. (2012), “Job burnout and employee engagement:
a meta-analytic examination of construct proliferation”, Journal of Management, Vol. 38 No. 5,
pp. 1550-1581, doi: 10.1177/0149206311415252.

Coleman, J.S. (1988), “Social capital in the creation of human capital”, American Journal of Sociology,
Vol. 94, pp. 95-120.

Connelly, C.E., Fieseler, C., Cerne, M., Giessner, S.R. and Wong, S.I. (2020), “Working in the digitised
economy: HRM theory & practice”, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 31 No. 1, p. 100762.
Cummings, J.N. (2004), “Work groups, structural diversity, and knowledge sharing in a global
organisation”, Management Science, Vol. 50 No. 3, pp. 352-364, doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1030.0134.
 Lane, R.I., Petrosky, E., Wiley, J.F., Christensen, A., Njai, R., Weaver, M.D., Robbins, R.,
Czeisler, M.E.,
Facer-Childs, E.R., Barger, L.K., Czeisler, C.A., Howard, M.E. and Rajaratnam, S.M.W. (2020), “Mental
health, substance use, and suicidal ideation during the COVID-19 Pandemic – United States, June 24-30,
2020”, MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, Vol. 69 No. 32, pp. 1049-1057, doi: 10.15585/
mmwr.mm6932a1.
Dai, Y.D., Dai, Y.Y., Chen, K.Y. and Wu, H.C. (2013), “Transformational vs transactional leadership: which
is better?”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 760-778,
doi: 10.1108/ijchm-dec-2011-0223.

Davenport, L.J., Allisey, A.F., Page, K.M., LaMontagne, A.D. and Reavley, N.J. (2016), “How can
organisations help employees thrive? The development of guidelines for promoting positive mental health
at work”, International Journal of Workplace Health Management, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 411-427, doi: 10.1108/
IJWHM-01-2016-0001.
Fait, M., Cillo, V., Papa, A., Meissner, D. and Scorrano, P. (2021), “The roots of ‘volunteer’ employees’
engagement: the silent role of intellectual capital in knowledge-sharing intentions”, Journal of Intellectual
Capital.

Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables
and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50, doi: 10.2307/3151312.
Fukui, S., Wu, W. and Salyers, M.P. (2019), “Impact of supervisory support on turnover intention: the
mediating role of burnout and job satisfaction in a longitudinal study”, Administration and Policy in Mental
Health and Mental Health Services Research, Vol. 46 No. 4, pp. 488-497, doi: 10.1007/s10488-019-
00927-0.
Giustiniano, L., Lombardi, S. and Cavaliere, V. (2016), “How knowledge collecting fosters organisational
creativity”, Management Decision, Vol. 54 No. 6, pp. 1464-1496, doi: 10.1108/md-04-2015-0111.
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. and Anderson, R.E. (2010), Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global
Perspective, 7th ed., Pearson Prentice Hall, USA.
Halisah, A., Jayasingam, S., Ramayah, T. and Popa, S. (2021), “Social dilemmas in knowledge sharing:
an examination of the interplay between knowledge sharing culture and performance climate”, Journal of
Knowledge Management, Vol. 25 No. 7, pp. 1708-1725.
Heracleous, L. (2003), Strategy and Organisation: Realising Strategic Management, Cambridge
University Press, UK.

PAGE 2298 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 27 NO. 8 2023

Hur, W.M., Won Moon, T. and Jun, J.K. (2013), “The role of perceived organisational support on emotional
labor in the airline industry”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 25
No. 1, pp. 105-123, doi: 10.1108/09596111311290246.
Jeon, Y.-H., Luscombe, G., Chenoweth, L., Stein-Parbury, J., Brodaty, H., King, M. and Haas, M. (2012), “Staff
outcomes from the caring for aged dementia care resident study (CADRES): a cluster randomised trial”,
International Journal of Nursing Studies, Vol. 49 No. 5, pp. 508-518, doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2011.10.020.

Johnson, D.S. and Bharadwaj, S. (2005), “Digitisation of selling activity and sales force performance: an
empirical investigation”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 3-18.
Johnson, A., Dey, S., Nguyen, H., Groth, M., Joyce, S., Tan, L., Glozier, N. and Harvey, S.B. (2020), “A
review and agenda for examining how technology-driven changes at work will impact workplace mental
health and employee wellbeing”, Australian Journal of Management, Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 402-424, doi:
10.1177/0312896220922292.
König, A., Graf-Vlachy, L., Bundy, J. and Little, L.M. (2020), “A blessing and a curse: how CEOs’ trait
empathy affects their management of organisational crises”, The Academy of Management Review,
Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 130-153, doi: 10.5465/amr.2017.0387.
Küpper, D.M., Klein, K. and Völckner, F. (2019), “Gamifying employer branding: an integrating framework
and research propositions for a new HRM approach in the digitised economy”, Human Resource
Management Review, Vol. 31 No. 1, p. 100686.
Kwahk, K.Y. and Park, D.H. (2016), “The effects of network sharing on knowledge-sharing activities and
job performance in enterprise social media environments”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 55
No. Part B, pp. 826-839, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.09.044.
Le, P.B. and Lei, H. (2019), “Determinants of innovation capability: the roles of transformational
leadership, knowledge sharing and perceived organisational support”, Journal of Knowledge
Management, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 527-547.

Lee, F. (2002), “The social costs of seeking help”, The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Vol. 38 No. 1,
pp. 17-35.
Lee, Y.L.A., Malik, A., Rosenberger Iii, P.J. and Sharma, P. (2020), “Demystifying the differences in the impact
of training and incentives on employee performance: mediating roles of trust and knowledge sharing”, Journal
of Knowledge Management, Vol. 24 No. 8, pp. 1987-2006, doi: 10.1108/JKM-04-2020-0309.
Lei, H., Nguyen, T.T. and Le, P.B. (2019), “How knowledge sharing connects interpersonal trust and innovation
capability”, Chinese Management Studies, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 276-298, doi: 10.1108/CMS-06-2018-0554.

Leong, L.Y.C. and Fischer, R. (2010), “Is transformational leadership universal? A meta-analytical
investigation of multifactor leadership questionnaire means across cultures”, Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 164-174, doi: 10.1177/1548051810385003.
Lin, H.F. (2007), “Knowledge sharing and firm innovation capability: an empirical study”, International
Journal of Manpower, Vol. 28 Nos 3/4, pp. 315-332, doi: 10.1108/01437720710755272.
Luqman, A., Zhang, Q., Kaur, P., Papa, A. and Dhir, A. (2022), “Untangling the role of power in knowledge
sharing and job performance: the mediating role of discrete emotions”, Journal of Knowledge
Management.
McHorney, C.A. and Ware, J.E. (1995), “Construction and validation of an alternate form general mental
health scale for the medical outcomes study short-form 36-item health survey”, Medical Care, Vol. 33
No. 1, pp. 15-28, doi: 10.1097/00005650-199501000-00002.

Malik, A., Froese, F.J. and Sharma, P. (2019), “Role of HRM in knowledge integration: towards a
conceptual framework”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 109, pp. 524-535, doi: 10.1016/j.
jbusres.2019.01.029.
Malik, A., Rosenberger, P.J., Fitzgerald, M. and Houlcroft, L. (2016), “Factors affecting smart working:
evidence from Australia”, International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 37 No. 6, pp. 1042-1066.
Mills, A.M. and Smith, T.A. (2011), “Knowledge management and organisational performance: a
decomposed view”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 156-171, doi: 10.1108/
13673271111108756.
Montano, D., Reeske, A., Franke, F. and Hüffmeier, J. (2017), “Leadership, followers’ mental health and
job performance in organisations: a comprehensive meta-analysis from an occupational health
perspective”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 327-350, doi: 10.1002/job.2124.

VOL. 27 NO. 8 2023 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j PAGE 2299

 Nguyen, T.-M. (2020), “Four-dimensional model: a literature review in online organisational knowledge
sharing”, VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, Vol. 51 No. 1, pp. 109-138,
doi: 10.1108/VJIKMS-05-2019-0077.
Nguyen, M. (2022), “Stay together to be strong: how online knowledge sharing matters”, Australasian
Marketing Journal.
Nguyen, T.M. and Malik, A. (2020), “Cognitive processes, rewards and online knowledge sharing
behaviour: the moderating effect of organisational innovation”, Journal of Knowledge Management,
Vol. 24 No. 6, pp. 1241-1261, doi: 10.1108/JKM-12-2019-0742.
Papadopoulos, T., Stamati, T. and Nopparuch, P. (2012), “Exploring the determinants of knowledge sharing
via employee weblogs”, International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 133-146, doi:
10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2012.08.002.
Park, J.H., Gu, B., Leung, A.C.M. and Konana, P. (2014), “An investigation of information sharing and
seeking behaviours in online investment communities”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 31, pp. 1-12,
doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.002.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.-Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in
behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”, The Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903, doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879.

Rimold, M. (2020), “6 Trends on the garner hype cycle for the digital workplace”, available at: www.
gartner.com/smarterwithgartner/6-trends-on-the-gartner-hype-cycle-for-the-digital-workplace-2020
Scuotto, V., Beatrice, O., Valentina, C., Nicotra, M., Di Gioia, L. and Briamonte, M.F. (2020),
“Uncovering the micro-foundations of knowledge sharing in open innovation partnerships: an
intention-based perspective of technology transfer”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change,
Vol. 152, p. 119906.
Scuotto, V., Del Giudice, M., Della Peruta, M.R. and Tarba, S. (2017), “The performance
implications of leveraging internal innovation through social media networks: an empirical
verification of the smart fashion industry”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 120,
pp. 184-194.

Scuotto, V., Nespoli, C., Tran, P.T. and Cappiello, G. (2022), “An alternative way to predict
knowledge hiding: the lens of transformational leadership”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 140,
pp. 76-84.
Small, C.T. and Sage, A.P. (2005), “Knowledge management and knowledge sharing: a review”,
Information Knowledge Systems Management, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 153-169.
Sun, N., Rau, P.P.L. and Ma, L. (2014), “Understanding Lurkers in online communities: a literature
review”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 38, pp. 110-117, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2014.05.022.
Tohidinia, Z. and Mosakhani, M. (2010), “Knowledge sharing behaviour and its predictors”, Industrial
Management & Data Systems, Vol. 110 No. 4, pp. 611-631, doi: 10.1108/02635571011039052.
Tseng, F.C. and Kuo, F.Y. (2014), “A study of social participation and knowledge sharing in the teachers’
online professional community of practice”, Computers & Education, Vol. 72, pp. 37-47, doi: 10.1016/j.
compedu.2013.10.005.
Tubre, T.C. and Collins, J.M. (2016), “Jackson and Schuler (1985) revisited: a meta-analysis of the
relationships between role ambiguity, role conflict, and job performance”, Journal of Management,
Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 155-169, doi: 10.1177/014920630002600104.

Van den Hooff, B. and de Ridder, J.A. (2004), “Knowledge sharing in context: the influence of
organisational commitment, communication climate and CMC use on knowledge sharing”, Journal of
Knowledge Management, Vol. 8 No. 6, pp. 117-130, doi: 10.1108/13673270410567675.
ta
Va  ma
 nescu, E.M., Cegarra-Navarro, J.G., Andrei, A.G., Dinca
, V.M. and Alexandru, V.A. (2020), “SMEs
strategic networks and innovative performance: a relational design and methodology for knowledge
sharing”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 24 No. 6, pp. 1369-1392.
Venkatesh, V. (2020), “Impacts of COVID-19: a research agenda to support people in their fight”,
International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 55, p. 102197.
Verma, S. and Gustafsson, A. (2020), “Investigating the emerging COVID-19 research trends in the field
of business and management: a bibliometric analysis approach”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 118,
pp. 253-261.

PAGE 2300 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 27 NO. 8 2023

Vinodkumar, M.N. and Bhasi, M. (2011), “A study on the impact of management system certification on
safety management”, Safety Science, Vol. 49 No. 3, pp. 498-507, doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2010.11.009.

WHO (2001), The World Health Report 2001: Mental Health: new Understanding, New Hope, World
Health Organization, Geneva.
Wojciechowska-Dzie˛cielak, D. (2020), “Knowledge sharing facilitators and barriers in the context of
group cohesion – a literature review”, International Journal of Information and Education Technology,
Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 31-36.

Further reading
Ardito, L., Petruzzelli, A.M., Dezi, L. and Castellano, S. (2018), “The influence of inbound open innovation
on ambidexterity performance: does it pay to source knowledge from Supply chain stakeholders?”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 119, pp. 321-329.
Bock, G.W., Zmud, R.W., Kim, Y.G. and Lee, J.N. (2005), “Behavioral intention formation in knowledge
sharing: examining the roles of extrinsic motivators, social-psychological forces, and organisational
climate”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 87-111.
Chang, H.H. and Chuang, S.-S. (2011), “Social capital and individual motivations on knowledge sharing:
participant involvement as a moderator”, Information & Management, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 9-18, doi: https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2010.11.001.
Erath, T.G., DiGennaro Reed, F.D., Sundermeyer, H.W., Brand, D., Novak, M.D., Harbison, M.J. and
Shears, R. (2020), “Enhancing the training integrity of human service staff using pyramidal behavioral
skills training”, Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, Vol. 53 No. 1, pp. 449-464.
Fait, M., Scorrano, P., Mastroleo, G., Cillo, V. and Scuotto, V. (2019), “A novel view on knowledge sharing
in the Agri-food sector”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 953-974.

Khan, N.A., Khan, A.N. and Gul, S. (2019), “Relationship between perception of organisational politics
and organisational citizenship behavior: testing a moderated mediation model”, Asian Business &
Management, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 122-141, doi: 10.1057/s41291-018-00057-9.
Nunnally, J.C. (1994), Psychometric Theory, 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Preece, J., Nonnecke, B. and Andrews, D. (2004), “The top five reasons for lurking: improving community
experiences for everyone”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 201-223, doi: 10.1016/j.
chb.2003.10.015.
Ridings, C., Gefen, D. and Arinze, B. (2006), “Psychological barriers: lurker and poster motivation and
behaviour in online communities”, Communications of the Association for Information Systems, Vol. 18
No. 1, pp. 329-354.
Spector, A., Revolta, C. and Orrell, M. (2016), “The impact of staff training on staff outcomes in dementia
care: a systematic review”, International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, Vol. 31 No. 11, pp. 1172-1187,
doi: 10.1002/gps.4488.
Tsai, M.T. and Cheng, N.C. (2012), “Understanding knowledge sharing between IT professionals–an
integration of social cognitive and social exchange theory”, Behaviour & Information Technology, Vol. 31
No. 11, pp. 1069-1080, doi: 10.1080/0144929X.2010.550320.
Yin, J., Ma, Z., Yu, H., Jia, M. and Liao, G. (2019), “Transformational leadership and employee knowledge
sharing: explore the mediating roles of psychological safety and team efficacy”, Journal of Knowledge
Management, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 150-171, doi: 10.1108/JKM-12-2018-0776.

Corresponding authors
Mai Nguyen can be contacted at: m.nguyen2@griffith.edu.au or maidhtm@tmu.edu.vn and
Ashish Malik can be contacted at: ashish.malik@newcastle.edu.au

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

VOL. 27 NO. 8 2023 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j PAGE 2301