Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Affordances of Social Media in Knowledge Sharing in Intra-Organizational Information Technology Projects

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Digital Technology and Organizational Change

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation ((LNISO,volume 23))

Abstract

This research-in-progress aims to address the complex phenomenon of knowledge sharing within the context of social media. The objective of this paper is to examine how the affordances of social media impact knowledge sharing dynamics in intra-organizational Information Technology (IT) projects. This paper adopts Design Science Research (DSR) as research paradigm and the Technical Action Research (TAR) as validation method. One social media artifact will be designed and investigated within the context of an IT project. The expected contributions of this work will be twofold: (1) The results of this research should add to the literature on empirically tested theory of social media affordances on knowledge sharing dynamics in IT projects; (2) The instantiation of the TAR study will characterize a contribution of the type ‘situated implementation of artifact’. This research should have implications for both the Project Management and Knowledge Management communities. Practitioners should be directly benefited by this work with an in-depth understanding of social media affordances on knowledge sharing dynamics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Schauer, A., Vasconcelos, A. C., & Sen, B. (2015). The ShaRInK framework: A holistic perspective on key categories of influences shaping individual perceptions of knowledge sharing. Journal of Knowledge Management, 19(4).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Shokri-Ghasabeh, M., & Chileshe, N. (2013). Knowledge management: Barriers to capturing lessons learned from Australian construction contractors perspective. Construction Innovation, 14(1), 108–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Chua, A., & Lam, W. (2005). Why KM projects fail: A multi-case analysis. Journal of Knowledge Management, 9(3), 6–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Newell, S., Bresnen, M., Edelman, L., Scarbrough, H., & Swan, J. (2006). Sharing knowledge across projects limits to ICT-led project review practices. Management Learning, 37(2), 167–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ruikar, K., Anumba, C. J., & Egbu, C. (2007). Integrated use of technologies and techniques for construction knowledge management. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 5(4), 297–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Pemsel, S., & Wiewiora, A. (2013). Project management office a knowledge broker in project-based organisations. International Journal of Project Management, 31(1), 31–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Williams, T. (2008). How do organizations learn lessons from projects—And do they? Engineering Management, IEEE Transactions on, 55(2), 248–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Treem, J., & Leonardi, P. (2012). Social media use in organizations—Exploring the affordances of visibility. Editability, Persistence, and Association, Communication Yearbook, 36, 143–189.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Majchrzak, A., Faraj, S., Kane, G. C., & Azad, B. (2013). The contradictory influence of social media affordances on online communal knowledge sharing. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(1), 38–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Fayard, A. L., & Weeks, J. (2014). Affordances for practice. Information and Organization, 24(4), 236–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Baxter, G. J., & Connolly, T. M. (2014). Implementing Web 2.0 tools in organisations: Feasibility of a systematic approach. The Learning Organization, 21(1), 6–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Yeo, M. L., & Arazy, O. (2012). What makes corporate wikis work? Wiki affordances and their suitability for corporate knowledge work. In Design science research in information systems. Advances in theory and practice (pp. 174–190). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 14–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Huber, G. P. (1991). Organizational learning: The contributing processes and the literatures. Organization Science, 2(1), 88–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001). Review: Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quarterly, 107–136.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Duffy, J. (2000). Knowledge management: To be or not to be? Information Management Journal, 34(1), 64–67.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Gomes, F., Oliveira, M., & Chaves, M. (2016). Knowledge sharing in project management process groups. In 17th European Conference on Knowledge Management (pp. 1–2). Northern Ireland, UK, September, 307–315.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., & Konno, N. (2000). SECI, Ba and leadership: A unified model of dynamic knowledge creation. Long Range Planning, 33(1), 5–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Bughin, J., Chui, M., & Miller, A. (2009). How companies are benefiting from Web 2.0. McKinsey Quarterly, 9.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Westbrook, R. N. (2012). Online management system: Wielding Web 2.0 tools to collaboratively manage and track projects. Journal of Library Innovation, 3(1), 86–100.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Murugesan, S. (2007). Understanding Web 2.0. IT professional, 9(4), 34–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Shang, S. S. C., Li, E. Y., Wu, Y.-L., & Hou, O. C. L. (2011). Understanding Web 2.0 service models: A knowledge-creating perspective. Information & Management, 48(4–5), 178–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Thomas, C., & Sheth, A. (2011). Web Wisdom: An essay on how Web 2.0 and Semantic Web can foster a global knowledge society. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(4), 1285–1293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Paroutis, S., & Al Saleh, A. (2009). Determinants of knowledge sharing using Web 2.0 technologies. Journal of Knowledge Management, 13(4), 52–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Gholami, B., & Murugesan, S. (2011). Global IT project management using Web 2.0. International Journal of Information Technology Project Management, 2(3), 30–52.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Parker, K., & Chao, J. (2007). Wiki as a Teaching Tool. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects (IJELLO), 3(1), 57–72.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Stocker, A., Richter, A., Hoefler, P., & Tochtermann, K. (2012). Exploring appropriation of enterprise wikis. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 21(2–3), 317–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Grace, T. P. L. (2009). Wikis as a knowledge management tool. Journal of Knowledge Management, 13(4), 64–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Majchrzak, A., Wagner, C., & Yates, D. (2006). Corporate wiki users: results of a survey. In Proc. of the International Symposium on Wikis (pp. 99–104). Odense, Denmark: ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Arazy, O., Gellatly, I., Soobaek, J., & Patterson, R. (2009). Wiki deployment in corporate settings. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, 28(2), 57–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Rosa, D. V., Chaves, M. S., Oliveira, M., & Pedron, C. (2016). Target: A collaborative model based on social media to support the management of lessons learned in projects. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 9(3), 654–681.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Chaves, M., Tessi, M., Winter, & Damasceno, J., Jr. (2016) Validating a Collaborative Lessons Learned Model: A Multiple Cases Analysis. XL Encontro da ANPAD—EnANPAD, Costa do Sauípe, Bahia, Brazil, September pp. 25–28.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Grudin, J. (2006). Enterprise knowledge management and emerging technologies. In Proc. of the 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 57a–57a), IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Baxter, G. J., Connolly, T. M., & Stansfield, M. H. (2010). Organisational blogs: benefits and challenges of implementation. The Learning Organization, 17(6), 515–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Noll, M. G., & Meinel, C. (2007). Web search personalization via social bookmarking and tagging (pp. 367–380). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Norman, D. A. (1988). The psychology of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Kemp, J. W., Livingstone, D., & Bloomfield, P. (2009). R: SLOODLE: Connecting VLE tools with emergent teaching practice in second life. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(3), 551–555.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Zheng, Y., & Yu, A. (2016). Affordances of social media in collective action: The case of free lunch for children in China. Information Systems Journal, 26(3), 289–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Mansour, O., Askenäs, L., & Ghazawneh, A. (2013). Social media and organizing: An empirical analysis of the role of wiki affordances in organizing practices. In Reshaping Society Through Information Systems Design (ICIS), December 15–18, Milan.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Walther, J. B. (1993). Impression development in computer-mediated interaction. Western Journal of Communication, 57, 381–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Bregman, A., & Haythornthwaite, C. (2001). Radicals of presentation in persistent conversation. In Proceedings of the 34th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Efimova, L., & Grudin, J. (2008). Crossing boundaries: Digital literacy in enterprises. In C. Lankshear & M. Knobel (Eds.), Digital literacies (pp. 203–226). New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Pan, Y. X., & Millen, D. R. (2008). Information sharing and patterns of social interaction in an enterprise social bookmarking service. In Proceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.

    Google Scholar 

  46. DiMicco, J., Millen, D. R., Geyer, W., Dugan, C., Brownholtz, B., & Muller, M. (2008). Motivations for social networking at work. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (pp. 711–720).

    Google Scholar 

  47. Zhao, D. & Rosson, M. B. (2009). How and why people Twitter: the role that micro-blogging plays in informal communication at work. In Proceedings of the ACM 2009 International Conference on Supporting Group Work (pp. 243–252).

    Google Scholar 

  48. Yardi, S., Golder, S. A., & Brzozowski, M. J. (2009). Blogging at work and the corporate attention economy. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 2071–2080). ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E. (1991). Grounding in communication. Perspectives on socially shared cognition, 13, 127–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Hancock, J. T., Toma, C., & Ellison, N. (2007). The truth about lying in online dating profiles. In Proc. of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 449–452). ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Whittaker, S. (2003). Theories and methods in mediated communication. In A. C. Graesser, M. A. Gernsbacher & S. R. Goldman (Eds.), Handbook of discourse processes (pp. 243–286). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Donath, J., Karahalios, K., & Viegas, F. (1999). Visualizing conversation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 4(4).

    Google Scholar 

  53. Erickson, T., & Kellogg, W. (2000). Social translucence: An approach to designing systems that support social processes. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 7, 59–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Gregor, S., & Hevner, A. R. (2013). Positioning and presenting design science research for maximum impact. MIS Quarterly, 37(2), 337–355.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75–105.

    Google Scholar 

  56. March, S. T., & Smith, G. F. (1995). Design and natural science research on information technology. Decision Support Systems, 15(4), 251–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Goes, P. B.: Design science research in top information systems journals. MIS Quarterly 38(1), iii-viii/March (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  58. Baskerville, R. (2008). What design science is not. European Journal of Information Systems, 17(5), 441–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Wieringa, R. J.: Technical Action Research. In Design Science Methodology for Information Systems and Software Engineering (pp. 269–293). Berlin: Springer (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  60. Tremblay, M. C., Hevner, A. R., Berndt, D. J. (2010). Focus Groups for Artifact Refinement and Evaluation in Design Research, Communications of the Association for Information Systems: Vol. 26, Article 27.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Bardin, L. (1977). L’analyse de contenu (Vol. 69). Paris: Presses universitaires de France.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Business School, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil

    Marcirio Silveira Chaves

  2. Merrick School of Business, University of Baltimore, Maryland, MD, USA

    Eusébio Scornavacca & Danielle Fowler

Authors
  1. Marcirio Silveira Chaves
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Eusébio Scornavacca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Danielle Fowler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marcirio Silveira Chaves .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Business Administration, University of Verona, Verona, Italy

    Cecilia Rossignoli

  2. Department of Economics and Management, University of Sassari, Sassari, Italy

    Francesco Virili

  3. Department of Business and Management, LUISS University, Rome, Italy

    Stefano Za

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Chaves, M.S., Scornavacca, E., Fowler, D. (2018). Affordances of Social Media in Knowledge Sharing in Intra-Organizational Information Technology Projects. In: Rossignoli, C., Virili, F., Za, S. (eds) Digital Technology and Organizational Change. Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation, vol 23. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62051-0_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation