Graves, C J (2020) Project managers positively influence knowledge sharing processes among team members within organizations. DBA thesis, Capella University, USA.
Abstract
The business problem for this study was that project managers negatively impact knowledges haring among project team members within organizations, resulting in slowed knowledge transfer and decision-making. The purpose of this qualitative exploratory study was to explore project management experts' insights into knowledge sharing processes that enable effective knowledge transfer and decision-making. An established knowledge sharing process could help improve how project managers positively influence knowledge sharing among team members. Research Question 1 was developed to understand how project managers affect knowledge sharing processes within organizations. Research Question 2 was developed to understand the knowledge sharing methods that project team members use. The review of existing scholarly literature identified a gap in knowledge sharing regarding how specific knowledge sharing processes affect project team members' performance in the construction industry. The conceptual framework of this study included planned behavior theory, reasoned action theory, and social exchange theory. Defined knowledge sharing processes can effectively foster an open and trusting environment between project team members and recognize each team member's valuable contribution. This study included one-on-one interviews and a review of documents focusing on knowledge sharing processes. Key findings indicated that project managers could positively influence knowledge transfer and decision making by improving project team communication, active listening, exchanging and imparting knowledge, and being inclusive. The research findings also showed effective project team leadership could positively change project team dynamics through knowledge sharing processes such as structured leadership and collaboration that promote and encourage an open and transparent knowledge-sharing environment. The findings from this study could aid in improving knowledge sharing processes among project team members. These results could help project managers establish a knowledge sharing culture based on team collaboration, robust relationships, trust, and team commitment. This study's findings could also benefit the scholarly community by expanding the body of knowledge regarding knowledge sharing within project management teams.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Preiksaitis, M K |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | collaboration; communication; culture; decision making; leadership; project team; trust |
| Index terms: | dynamics, project team communication, project management, planned behaviour, project team, social exchange theory, construction industry, project manager, documents, knowledge transfer, collaboration, decision-making, conceptual framework, body of knowledge, team collaboration, interview, knowledge sharing, exploratory study, project management team, commitment |
| Subjects: | project management theory and practice, professional development, social theory, management, systems engineering, industry analysis, decision analysis, profession, data collection methods, project delivery, research methods, theoretical framing, behavioral psychology, collaborative management, research dissemination and communication, knowledge management, psychology |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Information Management, Organizational Design, Digital Applications, Risk Management, Project Management, Engineering Principles |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here