Knowledge Sharing in Virtual Teams a Perspective View of Social Capital

  • Ying Chieh Liu
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 157)


Although research on virtual teams is becoming more popular, there is a gap in the understanding of how social capital affects the processes of knowledge sharing and creating, and their impacts on virtual team performance. To fill in this gap, this study formed a framework by incorporating social capital and SECI model [7] and examined it by an experiment with 65 virtual teams collaborating in a Wiki platform. The results showed that social capital was positively related to the four SECI modes (socialization, internalization, combination and externalization) and three SECI modes (internalization, combination and externalization) were found to be positively related to virtual team performance. The contributions of this study were twofold. Firstly the framework brought a broader view of researching knowledge management in a virtual team context. Secondly leaders and managers of virtual teams should be made aware of enhancing the effects of social capital to encourage internalization, combination and externalization to substitute the role of socialization.


Social Capital Knowledge Sharing Tacit Knowledge Explicit Knowledge SECI Model 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Chiu, C.-M., Hsu, M.-H., Wang, E.T.G.: Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual communities: An integration of social capital and social cognitive theories. Decision Support Systems 42(3), 1872–1888 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F.: Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research in Organizational Behavior 18, 39–50 (1981)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., Black, W.C.: Multivariate data analysis, 5th edn. Prentice Hall, New York (1998)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hendriks, P.: Why share knowledge? The influence of ICT on the motivation for knowledge sharing. Knowledge and Process Management 6(2), 91–100 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lurey, J.S., Raisinghani, M.S.: An empirical study of best practices in virtual teams. Information and Management 38(8), 523–544 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nandhakumar, J., Baskerville, R.: Durability of online teamworking: Patterns of trust. Information Technology and People 19(4), 371–389 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nonaka, I.: A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science 5(1), 14–37 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schulze, A., Hoegl, M.: Organizational knowledge creation and the generation of new product ideas: A behavioral approach. Research Policy 37(10), 1742–1750 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tsai, W., Ghoshal, S.: Social capital and value creation: The role of intrafirm networks. Academy of Management Journal 41(4), 464–476 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    White, L.: Connection matters: Exploring the implications of social capital and social networks for social policy. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 19(3), 255–296 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zolin, R., Hinds, P.J., Fruchter, R., Levitt, R.E.: Interpersonal trust in cross-functional, geographically distributed work: A longitudinal study. Information and Organization 14, 1–26 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ying Chieh Liu
    • 1
  1. 1.Data Engineering and Internet TechnologyBaliIndonesia

Personalised recommendations