Initiating knowledge management activities has proved challenging in many organizations as focus on wrong activities and not providing adequate leadership cause many failures. Leadership style significantly determines success of knowledge management activities, specifically activities related to knowledge infrastructure that consist of organizational culture, organizational structure and information technology.
OBJECTIVE:
The purpose of this study is to analyse how transformational and transactional leadership styles influence knowledge infrastructure which provides organizations a platform on which knowledge management can be developed.
METHODS:
PLS-SEM was used to analyse data obtained from 135 valid questionnaires.
RESULTS:
Transformational and transactional leadership styles both positively influence all three factors of knowledge infrastructure (organizational culture, organizational structure and information technology). The influence of transformational leadership style is, however, statistically significantly stronger.
CONCLUSIONS:
Based on research findings managers should use more transformational leadership elements when promoting knowledge management initiatives in organizations. Nevertheless transactional leadership style should be also used especially contingency reward as its dominant factor.
BelinskajaL, PaulienėR. Overview of the Current Leadership Theories: What it Means to Lead?2012, pp. 321–8.
8.
AllioRJ. Leaders and leadership – many theories, but what advice is reliable?Strategy Leadersh. 2012;41:4–14.
9.
BurkeCS, StaglKC, KleinC, et al. What type of leadership behaviors are functional in teams? A meta-analysis. Leadersh Q. 2006;17:288–307.
10.
AvolioBJ, BassBM, BassBM. Developing Potential Across a Full Range of Leadership TM: Cases on Transactional and Transformational Leadership. Psychology Press, 2001.
11.
AvolioBJ, BassBM, JungDI. Re-examining the components of transformational and transactional leadership using the Multifactor Leadership. J Occup Organ Psychol. 1999;72:441–62.
12.
NovakA, ČeparŽ, TrunkA. The role of expected years of schooling among life expectancy determinants. Int J Innov Learn. 2016;20:85–99.
13.
PillaniaRK. Demystifying knowledge management. Bus Strategy Ser. 2009;10:96–9.
14.
ShahzadK, BajwaSU, SiddiqiAFI, et al. Integrating knowledge management (KM) strategies and processes to enhance organizational creativity and performance: An empirical investigation. J Model Manag. 2016;11:154–79.
15.
DaviesNJ. Knowledge management. BT Technol J. 2000;18:62–3.
16.
KhalidA, Wahid, NumprasertchaiH, et al. Assessing perceived knowledge creation: The role of organizational knowledge and market environment. Int J Manag Knowl Learn. 2016;5:57–79.
17.
KroghG von. Care in knowledge creation. Calif Manage Rev. 1998;40:133–53.
18.
ChawlaD, JoshiH. Knowledge management practices in Indian industries – a comparative study. J Knowl Manag. 2010;14:708–25.
19.
BagnoliC, VedovatoM. The impact of knowledge management and strategy configuration coherence on SME performance. J Manag Gov. 2014;18:615–47.
20.
SanjayKS. Role of leadership in knowledge management: A study. J Knowl Manag. 2008;12:3–15.
21.
HayatA, HasanvandMM, NikakhlagS, et al. The role of leadership styles in knowledge management processes. J Health Manag Inform. 2015;2:41–6.
22.
AgaDA, NoorderhavenN, VallejoB. Transformational leadership and project success: The mediating role of team-building. Int J Proj Manag. 2016;34:806–18.
23.
ArabrahmatipourM, Mohammad-AlipourN. Transformational leadership style and knowledge management relationship among tehran hospital libraries managers. J Humanit Soc Sci. 2015;20:63–71.
24.
LinK-J, HsiehY-H, LianW-S. Knowledge sharing and personality traits moderated by transformational leadership. Hum Syst Manag. 2018;37:67–80.
25.
BirasnavM. Knowledge management and organizational performance in the service industry: The role of transformational leadership beyond the effects of transactional leadership. J Bus Res. 2014;67:1622–9.
KhanMS. Role of tranormational leadership in effective knowledge management. Inf Knowl Manag. 2015;5:125–9.
28.
ZiębaM, SchivinskiB. Knowledge management driven leadership, culture and innovation success – an integrative model. In: Proceedings of IFKAD 2015: 10th International Forum on Knowledge Asset Dynamics: Culture, Innovation and Entrepreneurship: Connecting the Knowledge Dots, Bari, Italy, Institute of Knowledge Asset Management, 2015, pp. 1193–1202.
29.
MillsAM, SmithTA. Knowledge management and organizational performance: A decomposed view. J Knowl Manag. 2011;15:156–71.
30.
PandeySC, DuttaA, NayakAK. Organizational capabilities and knowledge management success: A quartet of case studies. Kybernetes. 2018;47:222–38.
31.
ChoT, KorteR. Managing knowledge performance: Testing the components of a knowledge management system on organizational performance. Asia Pac Educ Rev. 2014;15:313–27.
32.
ScheinEH. The Corporate Culture Survival Guide: Sense and Nonsense About Culture Change. Wiley, 1999.
33.
ChangCL, LinT-C. The role of organizational culture in the knowledge management process. J Knowl Manag. 2015;19:433–55.
34.
PyöriäP. Informal organizational culture: The foundation of knowledge workers’ performance. J Knowl Manag. 2007;11:16–30.
35.
ParkH, RibièreV, SchulteWD. Critical attributes of organizational culture that promote knowledge management technology implementation success. J Knowl Manag. 2004;8:106–17.
36.
TsengS. The correlation between organizational culture and knowledge conversion on corporate performance. J Knowl Manag. 2010;14:269–84.
OliverS, Reddy KandadiK. How to develop knowledge culture in organizations? A multiple case study of large distributed organizations. J Knowl Manag. 2006;10:6–24.
39.
BassBM. Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press, 1985.
40.
Nam NguyenH, MohamedS. Leadership behaviors, organizational culture and knowledge management practices: An empirical investigation. J Manag Dev. 2011;30:206–21.
41.
MahmoudsalehiM, MoradkhannejadR, SafariK. How knowledge management is affected by organizational structure. Learn Organ. 2012;19:518–28.
42.
AcharyaA, MishraB. Exploring the relationship between organizational structure and knowledge retention: A study of the Indian infrastructure consulting sector. J Knowl Manag. 2017;21:961–85.
43.
PinhoI, RegoA, Pina e CunhaM. Improving knowledge management processes: A hybrid positive approach. J Knowl Manag. 2012;16:215–42.
44.
AhmadiA, AbzariM, Nasr IsfahaniA, et al. High-performance, knowledge sharing and ICT skills. Hum Syst Manag. 2018;37:271–80.
45.
SabriH. Knowledge management in its context: Adapting structure to a knowledge creating culture. Int J Commer Manag. 2005;15:113–28.
46.
GolitsinaOL, KupriyanovVM, MaksimovNV. Information and technological solutions applied for knowledge-management tasks. Sci Tech Inf Process. 2015;42:150–61.
47.
Masa’dehR, ObeidatBY, TarhiniA. A Jordanian empirical study of the associations among transformational leadership, transactional leadership, knowledge sharing, job performance, and firm performance: A structural equation modelling approach. J Manag Dev. 2016;35:681–705.
48.
NoruzyA, DalfardVM, AzhdariB, et al. Relations between transformational leadership, organizational learning, knowledge management, organizational innovation, and organizational performance: An empirical investigation of manufacturing firms. Int J Adv Manuf Technol. 2013;64:1073–85.
49.
ArshadAS, FeiGoh C, RasliA. A Hierarchical Latent Variable Model of Leadership Styles using PLS-SEM. J Teknol. 69. Epub ahead of print 8 July 2014. DOI: 10.11113/jt.v69.3245
50.
AntonakisJ. The validity of the transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership model as measured by the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ 5X). Walden Univ.
51.
VinziVE, ChinWW, HenselerJ, et al. Handbook of Partial Least Squares: Concepts, Methods and Applications. 1st ed. Springer Publishing Company, Incorporated, 2010.
52.
TenenhausM, VinziVE, ChatelinY-M, et al. PLS path modeling. Comput Stat Data Anal. 2005;48:159–205.
53.
RoldánJ, Sánchez-FrancoMJ. Variance-Based Structural Equation Modeling: Guidelines for Using Partial Least Squares in Information Systems Research. In: Research Methodologies, Innovations and Philosophies in Software Systems Engineering and Information Systems. 2012, pp. 193–221.
54.
BeckerJ-M, KleinK, WetzelsM. Hierarchical latent variable models in PLS-SEM: Guidelines for using reflective-formative type models. Long Range Plann. 2012;45:359–94.
55.
HairJF, RingleCM, SarstedtM. Editorial - Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling: Rigorous Applications, Better Results and Higher Acceptance. SSRN Scholarly Paper, Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network, https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2233795 (14 March accessed 9 September 2017).
56.
FornellC, LarckerDF. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res. 1981;18:39–50.
57.
FalkRF, MillerNB. A primer for soft modeling. Akron, OH, US: University of Akron Press, 1992.
58.
HuL, BentlerPM. Fit Indices in Covariance Structure Modeling: Sensitivity to Underparameterized Model Misspecification. 30.
