Does bad gossiping trigger for targets to hide knowledge in morally disengaged? New multi-level insights of team relational conflict

Abstract

Purpose

Despite the recent extending research on knowledge hiding, there is still scant research on social stressor phenomena-related contextual antecedent factors and new cognitive mechanisms of knowledge hiding behaviors. To shed new light on this unexplored gap, this research explores the multi-level moderated mediation model that examines how and when negative gossip experienced by targets in the workplace induces their knowledge hiding from coworkers drawing from the lens of social learning and cognitive theories. More specifically, this study aims to evaluate the relationship between negative workplace gossip and knowledge hiding via moral disengagement, and this mediation effect is also moderated by team relational conflict as a novel boundary condition.

Design/methodology/approach

This study collected multi-wave 338 employees’ data from 68 teams of cross-sectional industries in China, which were nested within teams. The collected nested nature data were analyzed by employing multi-level analysis based on hierarchical linear modeling.

Findings

The results suggested that negative workplace gossip first triggers moral disengagement and thereby, leads to knowledge hiding. Furthermore, the direct positive association between negative workplace gossip and moral disengagement was strengthened by increasing intra-team relational conflict. In addition, the mediation effect of moral disengagement between negative workplace gossip and knowledge hiding was also strengthened through increasing intra-team relational conflict.

Originality/value

This study first empirically examines the multi-level model using a new underlying mechanism (moral disengagement) and team-level boundary condition (relational conflict) and enriches the current literature on knowledge management and workplace gossip. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings and future research lines are also discussed, which will facilitate practitioners and academicians to curb counterproductive knowledge behavior.