Article Tools
Email this article (Login required)
Email the author (Login required)
About The Authors

Selly Dian Widyasari
Department of Psychology Universitas Brawijaya
Indonesia

Ridwan Aji Budi Prasetyo
Department of Psychology Universitas Brawijaya
Indonesia

Rahadijaya Arman Pusponegoro
Department of Psychology Universitas Brawijaya
Indonesia

Information for Reviewer
User
Journal Content

Browse
Visitor Statistics
 

Mediapsi Visitor Statistics

Notifications

Pengaruh Kepribadian Openness dan Agreeableness Terhadap Intensi Berbagi Pengetahuan pada Karyawan Perum LPPNPI (AirNav Indonesia) Cabang Madya Surabaya

Selly Dian Widyasari, Ridwan Aji Budi Prasetyo, Rahadijaya Arman Pusponegoro
  Mediapsi, Vol 3, No 2 (2017),  39-48  

Abstract


This study aims to investigate the effect of openness and agreeableness personalities to the intention of knowledge sharing. This study applied quantitative approach using multiple regression technique for hypothesis testing. Eighty-five employees of Perum LPPNPI Surabaya Branch (total sampling), particularly those who serve as air traffic controllers, participated in this study. Data necessary for this study was collected using Big-Five Inventory Scale that has been adapted to Bahasa Indonesia by Ramdhani (2012) and Knowledge Sharing Scale by Al Qeisi and Al Zagheer (2015). Simultaneous multiple regression analysis showed the significant effect of both types of personalities to the knowledge sharing intention. Meanwhile, partial regression analysis showed the significant effect only for openness personality, and not for agreeableness personality. Analysis on the psychological dynamic regarding the results was also discussed.

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui pengaruh tipe kepribadian openness dan agreeableness terhadap intensi berbagi pengetahuan. Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan kuantitatif dengan teknik regresi linier berganda untuk pengujian hipotesisnya. Sampel penelitian ini sebanyak 85 orang karyawan Perum LPPNPI Cabang Madya Surabaya (total sampling), khususnya yang bekerja sebagai pemandu lalu lintas udara (PLLU). Data yang diperlukan pada penelitian ini dikumpulkan menggunakan Skala Big-Five Inventory yang telah diadaptasi ke dalam Bahasa Indonesia oleh Ramdhani (2012) dan Skala Berbagi Pengetahuan dari Al Qeisi dan Al Zagheer (2015). Analisis regresi berganda secara simultan menunjukkan terdapat pengaruh yang signifikan antara openness dan agreeableness terhadap intensi berbagi pengetahuan. Analisis regresi secara parsial menunjukkan hasil bahwa antara openness dan intensi berbagi pengetahuan terdapat pengaruh yang signifikan, sedangkan antara agreeableness dan intensi berbagi pengetahuan tidak terdapat pengaruh. Analisis mengenai kemungkinan dinamika psikologis terkait hasil tersebut juga didiskusikan.


Keywords


agreeableness; intensi berbagi pengetahuan; openness

Full Text:

PDF

References


Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2010). Predicting and Changing Behavior: The Reasoned Action Approach. New York: Taylor & Francis Group.

Al Qeisi, K. I., & Al Zagheer, H. M. (2015). Determinats of knowledge sharing behaviour among personnel in banking industry. International Journal of Business and Management, 10(4), 49-59.

Arthur, J. B., & Huntley, C. L. (2005). Ramping up the organizational learning curve: assessing the impact of deliberate learning on organization performance under gainsharing. Academy of Management Journal, 48(6), 1159-1170.

Baharim, S. B. (2008). The influence of knowledge sharing on motivation to transfer training: a Malaysian public sector context. Disertasi. Victoria University, Australia.

Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1996). Effect on impression management and self-deception on the predictive validity of personality constructs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(3), 261-272.

Besser, A., & Shackelford, T. K. (2007). Mediation of the effects of the big five personality dimensions on negative mood and comfirmed affective expectations by perceived situational stress: a quasi-field study of vacationers. Personality and Individual Differences, 42(7), 1333-1346.

Cabrera, A., Collins, W. C., & Salgado, J. F. (2006). Determinant of individual engagement in knowledge sharing. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 17(2), 245-264.

Collins, C. J., & Smith, K. G. (2006). Knowledge exchange and combination: the role of human resource practice in the performance of high-technology firms. Academy of Management Journal, 49(3), 544-560.

Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory and NEO Five-Factor Inventory. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

Cui, X. (2017). In- and extra-role knowledge sharing among information technology professionals: the five-factor model perspective. International Journal of Information Management, 37(5), 380-389.

Cummings, J. N. (2004). Work groups, structural diversity, and knowledge sharing in a global organization. Management Science, 50(3), 352-364.

Digman, J. M. (1990) Personality structure: emergence of the Five-Factor Model. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 417-440.

Hansen, M. T. (2002). Knowledge network: explaining effective knowledge sharing in multiunit companies. Organization Science, 13(3), 232-248.

Lee, H. S., & Hong, S. A. (2014). Factors affecting hospital employees' knowledge sharing intention and behavior, and innovation behavior. Osong Public Health and Research Perspectives, 5(3), 148-155.

Liao, H., & Chuang, A. (2004). A multilevel investigation of factors influencing employee service performance and customer outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 47(1), 41-58.

McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1996). Toward a new generation of personality theories: theoretical contexts for The Five-Factor Model. Dalam J. S. Wiggins (Ed.), The Five-Factor Model of personality: Theoretical perspectives (hal. 51-87). New York: Guilford Press.

Mesmer-Magnus, J. R., & Dechurch, L. A. (2009). Information sharing and team performance: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 535-546.

Nanda, A. (1996). Resources, capabilities, and competencies. Dalam B. Moingeon & A. Edmonson (Eds.), Organizational learning and competitive advantage (hal. 93–120). London: Sage.

Orlikowski, W. J. (2002). Knowing in practice: enacting a collective capability in distributed organizing. Organization Science, 13(3), 249–273.

Park, J., & Gabbard, J. L. (2018). Factors that affect scientists' knowledge sharing behavior in health and life sciences research communities: differences between explicit and implicit knowledge. Computers in Human Behavior, 78, 326-335.

Ramdhani, N. (2012). Adaptasi Bahasa dan Budaya Inventori Big Five. Jurnal Psikologi, 39(2), 189-207.

Shabrina, V., & Silvianita, A. (2015). Factors analysis on knowledge sharing at Telkom Economic and Business School (TEBS) Telkom University Bandung. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 169, 198-206.

Siregar, S. (2013). Statistik Parametrik untuk Penelitian Kuantitatif. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.

Sugiyono. (2011). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D. Bandung: Afabeta.

Thoms, P., Moore, K. S., & Scott, K. S. (1996). The relationship between self-efficacy for participating in self-managed work groups and the big personality dimensions. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 17(4), 349-362.

Tsoukas, H., & Vladimirou, E. (2001). What is organizational knowledge? Journal of Management Studies, 38(7), 973–993.

Tupes, E. C., & Christal, R. E. (1992). Recurrent personality factors based on trait ratings. Journal of Personality, 60(2), 225-251.

Wann-Yih, W., & Badri, M. (2010). Why should I share? examining consumers’ motives and trust on knowledge sharing. Journal of Computer Systems, 50(4), 11-19.

Wasko, M. M., & Faraj, S. (2000). “It is what one does”: why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9(2–3), 155–173.

Wasko, M. M., & Faraj, S. (2005). Why should I share? examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 35–57.

Zaim, H., Gurcan, O. F., Tarim, M., Zaim, S., & Alpkan, L. Determining the critical factors of tacit knowledge in service industry in Turkey. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 207, 759-767.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21776/ub.mps.2017.003.02.5

Copyright (c) 2017 Rahadijaya Arman Pusponegoro

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.