디지털융복합연구 (Journal of Digital Convergence)

  • 제19권12호
  • /
  • Pages.291-302
  • /
  • 2021
  • /
  • 2713-6434(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2713-6442(eISSN)
한국디지털정책학회 (The Society of Digital Policy and Management)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

진성 리더십이 기술스트레스를 통해 지식관리시스템 이용의도에 미치는 영향: 기술스트레스의 매개효과 및 피드백의 조절효과 분석

The Effect of Authentic Leadership on Intention to Use Knowledge Management System through Techno-stress: Analysis of the Mediating Effect of Techno-stress and the Moderating Effect of Feedback

  • Hwang, In-Ho (College of General Education, Kookmin University)
  • 투고 : 2021.10.25
  • 심사 : 2021.12.20
  • 발행 : 2021.12.28
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 연구는 조직 지식관리시스템에 의해 발생 가능한 기술스트레스를 완화하는 조건을 제시하는 것에 목적이 있다. 세부적으로, 연구는 지식관리시스템의 기술 과부하와 기술 복잡성이 지식관리시스템 이용의도에 미치는 부정적 요인임을 밝히고, 진성 리더십과 피드백이 기술스트레스를 완화하는 것을 제시한다. 연구는 지식관리시스템을 도입한 조직의 구성원에게 설문을 실시하였다. 2021년 5월 온라인 설문을 실시하였으며, 417개의 표본을 확보하였다. 가설검증은 AMOS 22.0을 활용하여 구조방정식모델링을 반영하여, 주 효과 분석과 조절 효과 분석을 실시하였다. 분석 결과, 진성리더십이 지식관리시스템 이용의도를 감소시키는 기술 과부하와 기술 복잡성의 영향을 완화 시켰다. 그리고, 피드백이 기술스트레스와 이용의도 간의 부정적 관계를 조절하였다. 연구는 조직원 관점에서 지식관리시스템 도입 및 적용 시 문제될 수 있는 기술스트레스 완화에 대한 조직 차원의 전략적 방향(진성리더십 및 피드백 활동 강화)을 제시한 관점에서 시사점을 가진다.

This study is to suggest conditions for mitigating techno-stress due to the adoption of the knowledge management system(KMS). Specifically, the study suggests that techno overload and techno complexity are negative factors on the intention to use KMS, and suggests that authentic leadership and feedback mitigate techno-stress. We conducted an online survey in May 2021 of employees in organizations that applied KMS, and obtained 417 samples. We performed the structural equation modeling of AMOS 22.0 for hypothesis testing and analyzed the main effect and the moderating effect. The result is as follows. First, techno overload and techno complexity reduced the intention to use the KMS. Second, authentic leadership increased the intention to use the KMS and mitigated techno overload and techno complexity. Third, feedback moderated the negative relationship between techno-stress and intention to use the KMS. The study has implications from the perspective of suggesting the strategic direction (authentic leadership and feedback) at the organizational level for mitigating techno-stress, which may be a problem when introducing and applying a KMS from the perspective of organization employees.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. A. Harr, J. vom Brocke & N. Urbach. (2019). Evaluating the Individual and Organizational Impact of Enterprise Content Management Systems. Business Process Management Journal, 25(7), 1413-1440. DOI: 10.1108/BPMJ-05-2017-0117.
  2. I. Han & K. Park. (2011). Effects of System and Knowledge Quality, Organizational Support and Individual Traits on Knowledge Management System (KMS) Success in Research Organizations. The Journal of the Korea Contents Association, 11(11), 364-377. DOI: 10.5392/JKCA.2011.11.11.364.
  3. Research and Markets. (2018). Knowledge Management Market by Offering; by Organization Size: Global Industry Analysis, Size, Share, Growth, Trends, and Forecast, 2016 - 2025, https://www.researchandmarkets.com.
  4. H. S. Tooranloo, A. S. Ayatollah & S. Alboghobish. (2018). Evaluating Knowledge Management Failure Factors Using Intuitionistic Fuzzy FMEA Approach, Knowledge and Information Systems, 57(1), 183-205. DOI: 10.1007/s10115-018-1172-3.
  5. S. Hullavarad, R. O'Hare & A. K. Roy. (2015). Enterprise Content Management Solutions: Roadmap Strategy and Implementation Challenges. International Journal of Information Management, 35(2), 260-265. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2014.12.008.
  6. F. D. Davis. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. DOI: 10.2307/249008.
  7. W. H. DeLone & E. R. McLean. (1992). Information Systems Success: The Quest for the Dependent Variable. Information Systems Research, 3(1), 60-95. DOI: 10.1287/isre.3.1.60.
  8. I. Arpaci, M. Al-Emran & M. A. Al-Sharafi. (2020). The Impact of Knowledge Management Practices on the Acceptance of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) by Engineering Students: A Cross-Cultural Comparison. Telematics and Informatics, 54, 101468. DOI: 10.1016/j.tele.2020.101468.
  9. M. Tarafdar, Q. Tu, B. S. Ragu-Nathan & T. S. Ragu-Nathan. (2007). The Impact of Technostress on Role Stress and Productivity. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(1), 301-328. DOI: 10.2753/MIS0742-1222240109.
  10. T. S. Ragu-Nathan, M. Tarafdar, B. S. Ragu-Nathan & Q. Tu. (2008). The Consequences of Technostress for End Users in Organizations: Conceptual Development and Empirical Validation. Information Systems Research, 19(4), 417-433. DOI: 10.1287/isre.1070.0165.
  11. I. Hwang & O. Cha. (2018). Examining Technostress Creators and Role Stress as Potential Threats to Employees' Information Security Compliance. Computers in Human Behavior, 81, 282-293. DOI : 10.1016/j.chb.2017.12.022.
  12. F. Luthans & B. J. Avolio. (2003). Authentic Leadership: A Positive Developmental Approach, K.S. Cameron, J.E. Dutton, R.E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive Organizational Scholarship, Barrett-Koehler, San Francisco (2003), 241-261.
  13. H. Leroy, M. E. Palanski & T. Simons. (2012). Authentic Leadership and Behavioral Integrity as Drivers of Follower Commitment and Performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 107(3), 255-264. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-011-1036-1.
  14. J. Lee & W. Kwak. (2015). The Moderating Role of Organizational Feedback in the Relationship between Employee's Intrinsic Motivation and Organizational Commitment. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship, 10(5), 165-173. https://doi.org/10.16972/apjbve.10.5.201510.165
  15. S. Karkoulian, G. Assaker & R. Hallak. (2016). An Empirical Study of 360-Degree Feedback, Organizational Justice, and Firm Sustainability. Journal of Business Research, 69(5), 1862-1867. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.070.
  16. C. Maican & R. Lixandroiu. (2016). A System Architecture Based on Open Source Enterprise Content Management Systems for Supporting Educational Institutions. International Journal of Information Management, 36(2), 207-214. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2015.11.003.
  17. T. Jung, H. Jung & K. Choi. (2009). An Exploratory Study of the Development of a Performance Measurement Model for Knowledge Management for use by Government Sponsored Research Institutes. Journal of Digital Convergence, 7(3), 61-74.
  18. S. Lee & S. Yi (2018). A Study on Influence of Knowledge Information Factors and Management Factors of the KMS on Business Performance: Moderating Effect of Evaluation and Compensation. Journal of Digital Convergence, 16(6), 63-73. DOI: 10.14400/JDC.2018.16.6.063
  19. A. M. Fuglseth & O. Sorebo. (2014). The Effects of Technostress within the Context of Employee Use of ICT. Computers in Human Behavior, 40, 161-170. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2014.07.040.
  20. R. K. Jena. (2015). Technostress in ICT Enabled Collaborative Learning Environment: An Empirical Study among Indian Academician. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 1116-1123. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.020.
  21. F. Rahimnia & M. S. Sharifirad. (2015). Authentic Leadership and Employee Well-being: The Mediating Role of Attachment Insecurity. Journal of Business Ethics, 132(2), 363-377. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-014-2318-1.
  22. J. Tak, J. Seo & T. Roh. (2019). Leader's Authentic Leadership and Follower's Project Performance. Journal of Digital Convergence, 17(6), 105-112. DOI: 10.14400/JDC.2019.17.6.105.
  23. L. L. Neider & C. A. Schriesheim. (2011). The Authentic Leadership Inventory (ALI): Development and Empirical Tests. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(6), 1146-1164. DOI: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.09.008.
  24. M. Weiss, S. Razinskas, J. Backmann & M. Hoegl. (2018). Authentic Leadership and Leaders' Mental Well-being: An Experience Sampling Study. The Leadership Quarterly, 29(2), 309-321. DOI: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2017.05.007.
  25. A. W. Joshi. (2009). Continuous Supplier Performance Improvement: Effects of Collaborative Communication and Control. Journal of Marketing, 73(1), 133-150. DOI: 10.1509/jmkg.73.1.133.
  26. L. A. Steelman & K. A. Rutkowski. (2004). Moderators of Employee Reactions to Negative Feedback. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 19(1), 6-18. DOI: 10.1108/02683940410520637.
  27. B. J. Jaworski & A. K. Kohli. (1991). Supervisory Feedback: Alternative Types and their Impact on Salespeople's Performance and Satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Research, 28(2), 190-201. DOI: 10.1177/002224379102800206.
  28. M. C. Andrews & K. M. Kacmar. (2001). Confirmation and Extension of the Sources of Feedback Scale in Service-Based Organizations. The Journal of Business Communication, 38(2), 206-226. DOI : 10.1177/002194360103800204.
  29. A. H. .Hon, W. W. Chan & L. Lu. (2013). Overcoming Work-Related Stress and Promoting Employee Creativity in Hotel Industry: The Role of Task Feedback from Supervisor. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 33, 416-424. DOI : 10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.11.001.
  30. C. Fornell & D. F. Larcker. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. DOI: 10.2307/3151312.
  31. P. M. Podsakoff, S. B. MacKenzie, J. Y. Lee & N. P. Podsakoff. (2003). Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903. DOI : 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879.
  32. G. C. Lin, Z. Wen, H. W. Marsh & H. S. Lin. (2010). Structural Equation Models of Latent Interactions: Clarification of Orthogonalizing and Double-mean-centering Strategies. Structural Equation Modeling, 17(3), 374-391. DOI : 10.1080/10705511.2010.488999.
  33. R. H. Hoyle & D. A. Kenny. (1999). Sample Size, Reliability, and Tests of Statistical Mediation, Statistical Strategies for Small Sample Research, 1, 195-222.
  34. S. Lee, K. Son, E. Kang & Y. Kim. (2014). A Study on the Influence of Empowering-Leadership to Creativity and Job attitude. Journal of Digital Convergence, 12(8), 85-99. DOI: 10.14400/JDC.2014.12.8.85.