Social factors' influences on corporate wiki acceptance and use

JBR-08295; No of Pages 7 Journal of Business Research xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Business Research

Social factors' influences on corporate wiki acceptance and use☆ Santiago Iglesias-Pradas 1, Ángel Hernández-García ⁎, Pedro Fernández-Cardador 1 Departamento de Ingeniería de Organización, Administración de Empresas y Estadística, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Av. Complutense 30, 28040 Madrid, Spain

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 15 February 2014 Received in revised form 12 December 2014 Accepted 27 January 2015 Available online xxxx Keywords: Social influence Wikis Collaboration Knowledge acquisition Knowledge diffusion

a b s t r a c t This study investigates how social factors affect the use of corporate wikis to share knowledge in organizations. Adopting a holistic approach, the study fills the gap in research on social factors' influence on collaborative knowledge sharing. The study thereby identifies relevant factors for successful knowledge sharing using Web 2.0 tools. Building on research into knowledge sharing, technology adoption, and social theories, this study explores the following social factors: social influence (i.e., subjective norm, social identity, and group norm), social anxiety, and perceived critical mass. The research model explains how these variables affect two knowledge sharing behaviors: knowledge acquisition and knowledge creation/diffusion. Results show that social influence—mainly subjective norm—and attitude toward collaborative knowledge sharing predict intention to use corporate wikis, and that perceived critical mass affects both knowledge sharing behaviors but social anxiety does not. Perceived critical mass is the most important predictor of knowledge sharing behaviors. © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Knowledge is a valuable strategic resource for organizations and a source of sustainable competitive advantage (Kimble & Bourdon, 2008). Knowledge management studies focus on factors that influence knowledge sharing among organizations. These factors generally fall into one of three groups: technological, social, and personal (Riege, 2005). According to Davenport and Prusak (2000), organizations usually consider technological factors (i.e., technology infrastructure) as the most important element for effective knowledge sharing. Nevertheless, users share knowledge in a social context through a social process. Hence, implementing knowledge management technologies without considering social factors may cause failure in system implementation during the deployment phase (Davenport & Prusak, 2000). Web 2.0 (O'Reilly, 2005) (i.e., the social web) features rich internet applications, web-oriented architectures, and social interaction. Web 2.0 introduces new concepts that enable massive-scale interaction. Blogs, wikis, and instant messaging are Web 2.0 tools that provide new and more effective ways to interact in social contexts and communities (Razmerita, Kirchner, & Sudzina, 2009). In organizations, wikis prove effective in creating, sharing, integrating, and using knowledge (Ashton, 2011).

☆ The authors are grateful to two anonymous reviewers for the comments and suggestions on this research. ⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +34 91 3367237. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (S. Iglesias-Pradas), [email protected] (Á. Hernández-García), [email protected] (P. Fernández-Cardador). 1 Tel.: +34 91 3367237.

Few studies explore how organizations adopt and use Web 2.0 tools, especially wikis. Most of the studies that do explore this topic, however, neglect social factors, despite the complex social nature of knowledge diffusion in organizations and Web 2.0 tools' strong social component. Therefore, the present study's holistic approach covering the complex social mechanisms of adoption of Web 2.0 collaborative tools contributes to this research area. This approach must answer the following research questions: Which social factors influence the acceptance and use of corporate Web 2.0 tools for collaboration? How do social factors influence knowledge creation/diffusion and acquisition? This study responds to these questions for a particular Web 2.0 tool: the wiki. Section 2 builds the theoretical framework, research model, and hypotheses. Section 3 explains the research methods and presents results from the empirical study. Finally, Section 4 discusses main findings and implications for theory and practice. 2. Theoretical framework and hypotheses development A wiki is a set of linked pages that collaborating users create through incremental development (Leuf & Cunningham, 2001). Wikis are an example of groupware technologies that support collaborative work (Gupta & Sharma, 2004), and they enable groups to jointly create, find, and consume knowledge through collaboration (Wagner, 2004). Wikis are easy to use, and they are a suitable tool for collaborative knowledge management (Hester, 2010; Kille, 2006). Despite the lack of scholarly research about wikis in corporate settings, overall use of wikis as collaborative knowledge management tools is increasing. Employees state that wikis are an effective tool for knowledge sharing and knowledge reuse (Majchrzak, Wagner, & Yates, 2006). According to Kane and Fichman (2009), several features make wikis attractive

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.01.038 0148-2963/© 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article as: Iglesias-Pradas, S., et al., Social factors' influences on corporate wiki acceptance and use, Journal of Business Research (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.01.038

2

S. Iglesias-Pradas et al. / Journal of Business Research xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

knowledge management tools. With wikis, anyone can easily edit content, and administrators can retain and trace all content edits and versions and can choose different privacy settings for different users. Furthermore, in wikis, editors can group web pages with different content types into categories. Wikis also allow the embedding of links, which may be internal—between wiki pages—or external—with Intranet or other web resources.

strong relationship between group norm and knowledge contribution (Kankanhalli, Tan, & Wei, 2005). From the previous discussion, social influence—as a multidimensional factor comprising subjective norm, social identity, and group norm—positively predicts the intention to use corporate wikis for knowledge sharing. 2.3. Critical mass theory

2.1. Theory of reasoned action The theory of reasoned action (TRA) (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975) proposes that behavioral intention is the best predictor of subsequent performance of a behavior. Under the TRA, attitudes—an individual's feelings about performing the behavior—and subjective norm—the individual's perception of whether people important to him or her think that he or she should behave in a certain way—determine the intention to perform the behavior (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). In this study, intention refers to the degree to which employees believe that they will use corporate wikis for collaborative purposes (Liu, 2010). According to the TRA, subjective norm and attitude toward collaborative knowledge sharing positively predict intention to use corporate wikis for knowledge sharing. Knowledge sharing covers two different but related behaviors: knowledge acquisition and knowledge creation/diffusion. These behaviors have different natures. In addition, factors influence these behaviors differently (De Vries, Van den Hooff, & de Ridder, 2006). Because behavioral intention is an important predictor of behavior (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000), intention to use corporate wikis as a collaborative tool for knowledge sharing positively predicts knowledge acquisition behavior and knowledge creation/diffusion behavior (albeit differently for each knowledge sharing behavior). 2.2. Social influence theory Social influence (Kelman, 1958) represents the social pressure significant others exert on someone to perform a certain action or behavior (Bagozzi & Dholakia, 2002). Previous studies find that social influence affects individuals' intentions toward a certain behavior (Hsu & Lu, 2004; Rivis & Sheeran, 2003). Social influence theory identifies three elements of social influence. First, compliance refers to the normative influence of significant others' opinions on a user's behavior. Social influence's compliance component is subjective norm (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975), which comprises peers' and superiors' influence (Taylor & Todd, 1995). TRA establishes a positive relationship between subjective norm and behavioral intention. Second, identification occurs when an individual accepts social influence because that influence is congruent with his or her value system (Shen, Cheung, Lee, & Chen, 2010). This aspect corresponds to social identity, a concept with roots in social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). Identification with the community may affect the amount of knowledge shared (Chiu, Hsu, & Wang, 2006). Previous studies find empirical evidence that social identity influences intention to use technology to support virtual community activities (Dholakia, Bagozzi, & Pearo, 2004; Shen et al., 2010; Song & Kim, 2006). Therefore, social identity most likely positively predicts an individual's intention to use corporate wikis for knowledge sharing. Third, internalization happens when an individual accepts an influence because he or she wants to establish or maintain a satisfying, self-defining relationship with another person or group. For Bagozzi and Dholakia (2002), the concept of group norm—a shared agreement among participants about their shared goals and expectations (Turner, 1991)—relates directly to internalization. When group members share their values and goals with the team, those members are more likely to share their resources (Chiu et al., 2006). This attitude suggests a

Critical mass is another type of social influence (Chen, Lu, Wang, Zhao, & Li, 2013). Critical mass theory postulates that a minimum number of participants or actions are necessary for a social movement to “explode” (Oliver, Marwell, & Teixeira, 1985). Critical mass develops through interaction with others and strengthens as more people participate (Chen et al., 2013). Estimating the exact critical mass for a specific collaborative technology may prove difficult (Markus, 1990), and users may perceive that the number of active users reaches the critical mass only through indirect means such as interaction with other group members. Perceived critical mass (Lou, Luo, & Strong, 2000) represents subjective evaluation of this critical mass. Upon reaching critical mass, users are more willing to use the system, even if a positive affective response toward that use is lacking (Van Slyke, Johnson, Hightower, & Elgarah, 2008). Therefore, perceived critical mass positively predicts knowledge acquisition and knowledge creation/diffusion behaviors. 2.4. Self-presentation and social anxiety Self-presentation refers to how an individual conveys his or her personal image to others (Leary & Kowalski, 1990). When people try to present themselves through social media tools and experience doubts about the results, they may experience social anxiety (Leary & Kowalski, 1995; Schlenker & Leary, 1982). Leary defines social anxiety as “a state of anxiety resulting from prospect or presence of interpersonal evaluation in real or imagined social settings” (Leary, 1983, p. 67). Knowledge sharing exposes the individual to the community, and individuals may experience social anxiety when the consequences of knowledge sharing are unclear. Therefore, if an individual believes that this process will damage his or her self-image, the likelihood that he or she will share knowledge will decrease. Previous research finds that people experience anxiety when posting content (Liu & Larose, 2008), and thus social anxiety will negatively predict knowledge creation/diffusion behaviors. However, knowledge acquisition does not involve self-presentation elements; consequently, social anxiety and knowledge acquisition behavior should not relate significantly. H1. Attitude toward collaborative knowledge sharing positively predicts intention to use corporate wikis. H2. Social influence positively predicts intention to use corporate wikis. H3. Intention to use corporate wikis positively predicts knowledge creation/diffusion (H3a) and acquisition (H3b) behaviors. H4. Perceived critical mass positively predicts knowledge creation/ diffusion (H4a) and acquisition (H4b) behaviors. H5. Social anxiety negatively predicts knowledge creation/diffusion behaviors (H5a) but not knowledge acquisition behaviors (H5b). Fig. 1 illustrates the complete research model. 3. Method and results The study sample consisted of full-time employees from the Information Systems department of a large multinational industrial company based in Spain. All participants responded to an online questionnaire, which provided the data. Following Westaby and Braithwaite (2003), the online questionnaire tool randomly ordered

Please cite this article as: Iglesias-Pradas, S., et al., Social factors' influences on corporate wiki acceptance and use, Journal of Business Research (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.01.038

S. Iglesias-Pradas et al. / Journal of Business Research xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

3

Fig. 1. Research model and hypotheses.

sets of items to mitigate order effects, reduce the negative effect of item order on theoretical testing, and reduce the potential for response sets. Of the 80 employees invited to participate in this study, 47 gave valid responses (response rate of 58.75%), 70.2% of whom were men. Respondents' ages ranged from 26 to 55. Table 1 gives details of the sample characteristics. The measurement instrument was an adaptation from previously validated scales for social influence factors and knowledge sharing in corporate wikis. A seven-point Likert scale measured the items—translated into Spanish. Appendix 1 displays the questionnaire items before translation. The structural model's empirical testing consisted of partial least squares (PLS) analysis. A key advantage of PLS is the absence of strict assumptions concerning sample size or measurement scales (Haenlein & Kaplan, 2004). With a sample size of 47, a PLS approach detects R2 values higher than 0.5 at a 5% significance level for a statistical power of 80% (Hair, Hult, Ringle, & Sarstedt, 2014). Additionally, bootstrap resampling helped assess the stability of estimates (Chin, Marcolin, & Newsted, 2003).

Subsequent analysis excluded indicators with values below the ideal cutoff level of 0.7 (Carmines & Zeller, 1979). Examination of the constructs' composite reliability and average variance extracted (AVE) ensured convergent validity, with values higher than the thresholds of 0.7 (Nunnally, 1978) and 0.5 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981), respectively. Table 2 depicts the results of item reliability and convergent validity analyses. The choice of composite reliability (ρc) as a measure of internal consistency instead of the traditional criterion (Cronbach's alpha) relates to the choice of PLS to analyze the data. Cronbach's alpha assumes that all indicators are equally reliable, whereas PLS prioritizes indicators according to individual reliability and considers the different outer loadings. In addition, Cronbach's alpha is sensitive to the number of items in the scale and generally underestimates internal consistency reliability (Hair et al., 2014). A comparison of the square root of AVE and bivariate correlations among constructs confirmed discriminant validity because the square root of AVE was greater than bivariate correlations between each construct and the rest of the constructs (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Table 3 shows the results of the discriminant validity analysis.

3.1. Measurement model assessment 3.2. Structural model assessment Observation of the latent variable indicators' standardized loadings—all indicators were reflective—confirmed scale reliability.

Table 1 Sample characteristics. Data Gender

Age

Main role

Male Female No answer b18 18–25 26–35 36–45 46–55 56–65 N65 No answer Author Reader Both No answer

Frequency

Percentage

Cumulative percentage

14 33 0 0 0 12 18 16 1 0 0 1 40 1 5

29.8% 70.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 25.5% 38.3% 34.0% 2.1% 0.0% 0.0% 2.1% 85.1% 2.1% 10.6%

29.8% 100.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 25.5% 63.8% 97.9% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 2.1% 87.2% 89.3% 100.0%

The observation of the standardized path coefficients and their significance levels (Chin, 1998) assessed whether predictors had significant effects on endogenous latent variables. In the model, social influence was a second-order reflective-formative construct, using an approach of repeated indicators in mode B and inner path-weighting scheme (Becker, Klein, & Wetzels, 2012). Table 2 Item reliability and convergent validity.a Constructs

Items

Item loadings

Composite reliability (ρc)

Attitude (AT) Behavioral intention (BI) Knowledge acquisition (KA) Knowledge creation (KC) Critical mass (CM) Social anxiety (SA) Group norm (GN) Social identity (SI) Subjective norm (SN)

5 4 5 6 6 3 2 5 4

N0.79 N0.93 N0.97 N0.83 N0.94 N0.88 N0.93 N0.92 N0.73

0.91 0.96 0.99 0.96 0.95 0.93 0.93 0.97 0.93

a

Comprises only final items after depuration.

Please cite this article as: Iglesias-Pradas, S., et al., Social factors' influences on corporate wiki acceptance and use, Journal of Business Research (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.01.038

4

S. Iglesias-Pradas et al. / Journal of Business Research xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

Table 3 Discriminant validity. Constructs Attitude Behavioral intention Group norm Knowledge acquisition Knowledge creation Critical mass Social anxiety Social influence Subjective norm

AT BI GN KA KC CM SA SI SN

AT

BI

GN

KA

KC

CM

SA

SI

SN

0.81 0.73 0.34 0.42 0.36 0.26 −0.17 0.26 0.41

0.93 0.54 0.60 0.57 0.51 −0.48 0.50 0.68

0.93 0.52 0.51 0.57 −0.52 0.55 0.72

0.97 0.84 0.84 −0.60 0.56 0.66

0.88 0.77 −0.65 0.68 0.60

0.93 −0.62 0.58 0.70

0.90 −0.54 −0.58

0.92 0.65

0.89

Diagonal elements show the square root of AVE.

The quantitative analysis reveals that subjective norm almost exclusively determines social influence. Furthermore, attitude toward collaborative knowledge sharing and social influence strongly affect behavioral intention. Results thereby support H1 and H2. Perceived critical mass predicts knowledge creation/diffusion, but social anxiety and behavioral intention to use corporate wikis are not valid predictors of knowledge creation/diffusion behaviors. Results thereby support H4a but not H3a or H5a. Nonetheless, significance values for the structural paths' intention–knowledge creation/diffusion and social anxiety– knowledge creation/diffusion fall near the p b 0.05 threshold, perhaps because of the small sample. Conversely, perceived critical mass and behavioral intention to use corporate wikis predict knowledge acquisition, but social anxiety does not. Results thereby support H3b, H4b, and H5b. Fig. 2 shows the results of the research model, and Table 4 summarizes the results of the hypothesis testing. The structural model assessment requires observation of R2 values of the endogenous latent variables (Chin, 1998). Variance explained for behavioral intention to use corporate wikis is 79%. For knowledge acquisition and knowledge creation/diffusion, variance explained is 75% and 67%, respectively. In addition, the Stone–Geisser (Q2) test returns positive values. Results thereby indicate that the relationships in the model have predictive relevance. 4. Discussion This study explores social factors' influence on knowledge creation/ diffusion and knowledge acquisition behaviors regarding corporate wiki use. The strongest knowledge sharing behavior predictor is perceived critical mass, a result consistent with findings from research on collaborative technology acceptance (Prasarnphanich & Wagner, 2011) and

communication systems (Cho, 2011; Lou et al., 2000; Van Slyke, Ilie, Lou, & Stafford, 2007). If potential users perceive that the wiki has enough content and/or contributors, these potential users may begin to use the system, which may put pressure on other colleagues to adopt the system to avoid being out of the loop. Results also reveal a significant relationship between intention and knowledge acquisition, and surprisingly, a non-significant relationship between intention and knowledge creation/diffusion. Given that the firm is in the first stages of corporate wiki implementation, the results suggest that corporate wiki adoption happens in two phases. First, users check content quality and quantity with the encouragement of peers' advice. Second, employees start to accept the tool as a reliable information source for knowledge sharing. As the perception of mass participation increases, contributors progressively engage in advanced wiki usage: from non-substantive changes such as spelling correction, updating, and addition of links to more substantive changes and addition of new information (Zhao, Zhang, Wagner, & Chen, 2012). 4.1. Implications for theory and practice Building on social factors, this exploratory study explains corporate wikis' use for knowledge sharing in organizations. The study complements technology acceptance research on motivational factors. Results show that attitude and social influence predict intention to use corporate wikis for knowledge sharing. In addition, results show that the compliance component—subjective norm, mainly arising because of peers' influence—is social influence's main driver. Identification and internalization components have little or no effect on social influence. The findings also stress the key role of perceived critical mass as an enabler of actual knowledge creation and acquisition behaviors in

Fig. 2. Results from the PLS analysis.

Please cite this article as: Iglesias-Pradas, S., et al., Social factors' influences on corporate wiki acceptance and use, Journal of Business Research (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.01.038

S. Iglesias-Pradas et al. / Journal of Business Research xxx (2015) xxx–xxx Table 4 Hypotheses testing results. Hypotheses H1 H2 H3a H3b H4a H4b H5a H5b

Supported Attitude ➔ behavioral intention Social influence ➔ behavioral intention Behavioral intention ➔ knowledge creation Behavioral intention ➔ knowledge acquisition Perceived critical mass ➔ knowledge creation Perceived critical mass ➔ knowledge acquisition Social anxiety ➔ knowledge creation Social anxiety ➔ knowledge acquisition

Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No Yes

5

knowledge creation/diffusion behaviors. Distinctions between the Web 2.0 tools in the two studies may explain these differences. Iglesias-Pradas et al.'s (2013) analysis focuses on corporate blog adoption, where generally every content addition (e.g., posts and comments) includes the author's name and viewpoint. Unlike corporate blogs, however, this information is rarely available in corporate wikis—in general, access to entry history is necessary to look up that information. Furthermore, non-substantive changes blur the notion of authorship. Therefore, corporate wikis' anonymity may soothe users' social anxiety.

4.2. Limitations and further research corporate wiki use. Therefore, organizations should endeavor to reach the critical mass as soon as possible. Management should concentrate on four initiatives to achieve this goal. (1) Management should link wiki implementation to the main business processes, focusing on collaboration such as customer resource management (Wagner & Majchrzak, 2007), new online services (Ballas, 2006), and educational environments (Mindel & Verma, 2006). (2) Management should adapt content quality and quantity to users' needs. (3) Management should focus on collaborative work processes in areas where creativity and innovation is critical (Pallot, Ruland, Traykov, & Kristensen, 2006). (4) Management should establish an incentive structure together with corporate goals for knowledge sharing, including policies concerning not only monetary rewards but also social rewards (Kriplean, Beschastnikh, & McDonald, 2008). Individuals may have an interest in creating a content for corporate wikis if others appreciate those contributions. Therefore, organizations should recognize individual contributions' value. In addition, an agile access control is necessary to acknowledge value among the sharing community because people usually adapt their knowledge sharing behavior according to recognition (Holtzblatt, Damianos, & Weiss, 2010). A positive by-product is that these actions may also increase individuals' feeling of belongingness to the group. Unlike findings from prior research on social factors that influence the adoption of Web 2.0 tools for collaboration in corporate settings (Iglesias-Pradas, Hernández-García, & Fernández-Cardador, 2013), results do not support the relationship between social anxiety and

Like any research, this study has limitations. First, the sample is relatively small and homogeneous, with a predominance of knowledge consumers—as opposed to knowledge creators. Therefore, further generalization requires supplementary studies across departments, companies, and sectors. Second, the research methodology relies on quantitative statistics and data from self-report questionnaires. This procedure may introduce bias due to self-selection and common method variance. To reduce bias in future studies, researchers should include qualitative interviews, targeting relevant users, to offer a more comprehensive explanation of results. Third, this research focuses only on social factors' influence on corporate wiki acceptance and use. A complete analysis should include personal and technological variables from traditional acceptance literature (e.g., perceived usefulness, job relevance, perceived ease of use, and system quality) to give the study a more complete approach to the factors influencing knowledge acquisition and sharing behaviors in corporate wikis. Finally, the relevance of perceived critical mass in corporate wiki adoption strongly encourages further research on perceived critical mass thresholds. One possible approach to this topic is the analysis of technology diffusion patterns using the Bass Model (Bass, 1969). This model estimates the number of potential adopters—and therefore critical mass—by using innovation and imitation coefficients for the population.

Appendix 1. Questionnaire items

Social identity (adapted from Bagozzi & Lee, 2002) WIS1 WIS2 WIS3 WIS4 WIS5

I identify with the group with which I collaborate through corporate wikis I feel attached to the group with which I collaborate through corporate wikis My feeling of belongingness to the group with which I collaborate through corporate wikis is strong I consider myself a valuable member of the group with which I collaborate through corporate wikis I am an important member of the group with which I collaborate through corporate wikis

Group norm (adapted from Bagozzi & Lee, 2002) If we consider using wikis to collaborate as a goal of the organization … WNG1 Estimate the strength to which you hold this goal WNG2 Estimate the strength to which other people you collaborate with hold this goal Peer influence (adapted from Brown, Dennis, & Venkatesh, 2010) WPA1 My friends think I should use corporate wikis WPA2 My colleagues believe I should use corporate wikis WPA3 Those colleagues whose opinion I find valuable think I should use corporate wikis Superiors' influence (adapted from Brown et al., 2010) WSU1⁎ I believe the top management would like me to use corporate wikis WSU2 My supervisor suggests that I use corporate wikis WSU3⁎ There is pressure from the organization to use corporate wikis Perceived critical mass (adapted from Lou et al., 2000; and Van den Hooff, Groot, & de Jonge, 2005) WMC1 Most of my colleagues use corporate wikis WMC2 The majority of my superiors use corporate wikis WMC3 Wikis are a highly used collaborative tool in my organization (continued on next page)

Please cite this article as: Iglesias-Pradas, S., et al., Social factors' influences on corporate wiki acceptance and use, Journal of Business Research (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.01.038

6

S. Iglesias-Pradas et al. / Journal of Business Research xxx (2015) xxx–xxx

Appendix 1 (continued) (continued) identity(adapted (adaptedfrom fromLeary, Bagozzi & Lee, 2002) Social anxiety 1983) When I consider collaborating using corporate wikis … WCA1⁎ … I worry about what other members of the organization will think of me even when I know it doesn't make any difference … I feel free and carefree even though other members of the organization perceive my faults WCA2r WCA3⁎ … I am frequently afraid of other members of the organization noticing my shortcomings WCA4r … I rarely worry about what kind of impression I am making on other members of the organization WCA5⁎ … I am afraid other members of the organization do not approve of me r … I am not bothered by other members of the organization's opinions of me WCA6 WCA7⁎ … I often worry that I will say or do things wrong WCA8⁎ … I am concerned about members of the organization forming an unfavorable impression of me WCA9⁎ … I think that what I write might be misinterpreted WCA10⁎ … I am concerned about who will access the content I write in the wikis Attitude toward collaborative knowledge sharing (adapted from Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975) In general, I think collaborating with other members of the organization through wikis is … WAC1 … a good/bad idea WAC2 … beneficial/harmful WAC3 … a pleasant/unpleasant experience WAC4 … important/unimportant to me WAC5 … a wise/unwise decision Intention to use corporate wikis (adapted from Oum & Han, 2011; and Davis, Bagozzi, & Warshaw, 1992) WCC1 I will collaborate with other members of the organization through corporate wikis if possible WCC2 I will use corporate wikis regularly in the near future WCC3 It is worth to work with other members of the organization using corporate wikis WCC4 I will use corporate wikis to collaborate with other members of the organization when available Knowledge creation/diffusion (adapted from Chai, Das, & Rao, 2011) WPC1 I frequently visit corporate wikis to share information and my knowledge WPC2 I frequently share my experience or knowledge with other colleagues in the organization through corporate wikis WPC3 I provide my knowledge and useful information in the corporate wiki at the request of other colleagues in the organization WPC4 I post useful documentation available to other users in my organization through corporate wikis WPC5 I frequently edit corporate wiki contents that were created by other colleagues WPC6 I add new information to corporate wikis on a regular basis Knowledge acquisition (adapted from Chai et al., 2011) WOC1 I frequently visit the corporate wikis to obtain information and knowledge provided by other colleagues WOC2 I frequently get the experience and knowledge of other users through corporate wikis WOC3 I frequently obtain useful knowledge and information through corporate wikis WOC4 I frequently get useful documentation from corporate wikis WOC5 I frequently use corporate wikis to look for new information written by other members of the organization

Items with asterisk excluded from final analysis (deleted after depuration). r represents reverse-coded items.

References Ashton, D. (2011). Awarding the self in Wikipedia: Identity work and the disclosure of knowledge. First Monday, 16(3) (Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/article/ view/3156/2747). Bagozzi, R. P., & Dholakia, U. M. (2002). Intentional social action in virtual communities. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 16(2), 2–21. Bagozzi, R. P., & Lee, K. (2002). Multiple routes for social influence: the role of compliance, internalization, and social identity. Social Psychology Quarterly, 65(3), 226–247. Ballas, A. (2006). WikiNews: A world flattener? The Information Systems Student Journal, 1, 7–10. Bass, F. (1969). A new product growth model for consumer durables. Management Science, 15(5), 215–227. Becker, J. M., Klein, K., & Wetzels, M. (2012). Hierarchical latent variable models in PLS-SEM: Guidelines for using reflective-formative type models. Long Range Planning, 45(5–6), 359–394. Brown, S. A., Dennis, A. R., & Venkatesh, V. (2010). Predicting collaboration technology use: Integrating technology adoption and collaboration research. Journal of Management Information Systems, 27(2), 9–54. Carmines, E. G., & Zeller, R. A. (1979). Reliability and validity assessment. California: SAGE Publications. Chai, S., Das, S., & Rao, H. R. (2011). Factors affecting bloggers' knowledge sharing: An investigation across gender. Journal of Management Information Systems, 28(3), 309–342. Chen, A., Lu, Y., Wang, B., Zhao, L., & Li, M. (2013). What drives content creation behavior on SNSs? A commitment perspective. Journal of Business Research, 66(12), 2529–2535. Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach for structural equation modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern methods for business research (pp. 295–336). Hillsdale, New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Chin, W. W., Marcolin, B. L., & Newsted, P. R. (2003). A partial least squares latent variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: Results from a Monte Carlo simulation study and an electronic mail emotion/adoption study. Information Systems Research, 14(2), 189–217.

Chiu, C. M., Hsu, M. H., & Wang, E. T. G. (2006). Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual communities: An integration of social capital and social cognitive theories. Decision Support Systems, 42(3), 1872–1888. Cho, H. (2011). Theoretical intersections among social influences, beliefs, and intentions in the context of 3G mobile services in Singapore: Decomposing perceived critical mass and subjective norms. Journal of Communication, 61(2), 283–306. Davenport, T. H., & Prusak, L. (2000). Working knowledge: How organizations manage what they know. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22(14), 1111–1132. De Vries, R. E., Van den Hooff, B., & de Ridder, J. A. (2006). Explaining knowledge sharing: The role of team communication styles, job satisfaction, and performance beliefs. Communication Research, 33(2), 115–135. Dholakia, U. M., Bagozzi, R. P., & Pearo, L. K. (2004). A social influence model of consumer participation in network and small-group based virtual communities. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21(3), 241–263. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. Gupta, J. D., & Sharma, S. K. (2004). Creating knowledge based organizations. Hershey, PA: IDEA GROUP Publishing. Haenlein, M., & Kaplan, A. M. (2004). A beginner's guide to partial least squares analysis. Understanding Statistics, 3(4), 283–297. Hair, J. F., Jr., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Los Angeles: Sage Publications, Inc. Hester, A. (2010). Increasing collaborative knowledge management in your organization: Characteristics of wiki technology and wiki users. Proceedings of the 2010 Special Interest Group on Management Information System's 48th Annual Conference on Computer Personnel Research (pp. 158–164). New York: NY: ACM. Holtzblatt, L. J., Damianos, L. E., & Weiss, D. (2010). Factors impeding wiki use in the enterprise: A case study. CHI'10 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems, 4661–4675. Hsu, C. L., & Lu, H. P. (2004). Why do people play online games? An extended TAM with social influences and flow experience. Information & Management, 41(7), 853–868.

Please cite this article as: Iglesias-Pradas, S., et al., Social factors' influences on corporate wiki acceptance and use, Journal of Business Research (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.01.038

S. Iglesias-Pradas et al. / Journal of Business Research xxx (2015) xxx–xxx Iglesias-Pradas, S., Hernández-García, Á., & Fernández-Cardador, P. (2013). Corporate weblogs: Social determinants of knowledge sharing behaviors. Paper presented at the Third Conference of the International Network of Business and Management Journals (INBAM 2013), Lisbon. Kane, G. C., & Fichman, R. G. (2009). The shoemaker's children: Using wikis for information systems teaching, research, and publication. MIS Quarterly, 33(1), 1–17. Kankanhalli, A., Tan, B. C. Y., & Wei, K. K. (2005). Contributing knowledge to electronic knowledge repositories: An empirical investigation. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 113–143. Kelman, H. C. (1958). Compliance, identification, and internalization: Three processes of attitude change. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2(1), 51–60. Kille, A. (2006). Wikis in the workplace: How wikis can help manage knowledge in library reference services. LIBRES, 16(1), 1–19. Kimble, C., & Bourdon, I. (2008). Some success factors for the communal management of knowledge. International Journal of Information Management, 28(6), 461–467. Kriplean, T., Beschastnikh, I., & McDonald, D. W. (2008). Articulations of wikiwork: Uncovering valued work in Wikipedia through barnstars. Proceedings CSCW, 47–56. Leary, M. R. (1983). Social anxiousness: The construct and its measurement. Journal of Personality Assessment, 47(1), 66–75. Leary, M. R., & Kowalski, R. M. (1990). Impression management: A literature review and two-component model. Psychological Bulletin, 107(1), 34–47. Leary, M. R., & Kowalski, R. M. (1995). Social anxiety. New York: Guilford Press. Leuf, B., & Cunningham, W. (2001). The wiki way: Collaboration and sharing on the Internet. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Liu, X. (2010). Empirical testing of a theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: An exploratory study of educational wikis. Communication Education, 59(1), 52–69. Liu, X., & Larose, R. (2008). A social cognitive perspective of blogging: Comparing the U.S. and China. International Communication Association Annual Conference, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Lou, H., Luo, W., & Strong, D. (2000). Perceived critical mass effect on groupware acceptance. European Journal of Information Systems, 9(2), 91–103. Majchrzak, A., Wagner, C., & Yates, D. (2006). Corporate wiki users: Results of a survey. Proceedings of the 2006 International Symposium on Wikis (WikiSym'06) (pp. 99–104). Markus, M. L. (1990). Toward a “critical mass” theory of interactive media. In J. Fulk, & C. W. Steinfield (Eds.), Organizations and communication technology (pp. 194–218). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Mindel, J. L., & Verma, S. (2006). Wikis for teaching and learning. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 18(1), 1–23. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company. O'Reilly, T. (2005). What is Web 2.0. Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. (Retrieved from http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/ tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html). Oliver, P., Marwell, G., & Teixeira, R. (1985). A theory of critical mass. Interdependence, group heterogeneity and the production of collective action. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 522–556. Oum, S., & Han, D. (2011). An empirical study of the determinants of the intention to participate in user-created contents (UCC) services. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(12), 15110–15121. Pallot, M., Ruland, R., Traykov, S., & Kristensen, K. (2006). Integrating shared workspace, wiki and blog technologies to support interpersonal knowledge connection. 12th International Conference on Concurrent Enterprising (pp. 1–8).

7

Prasarnphanich, P., & Wagner, C. (2011). Explaining the sustainability of digital ecosystems based on the wiki model through critical-mass theory. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 58(6), 2065–2072. Razmerita, L., Kirchner, K., & Sudzina, F. (2009). Personal knowledge management: The role of Web 2.0 tools for managing knowledge at individual and organizational levels. Online Information Review, 33(6), 1021–1039. Riege, A. (2005). Three-dozen knowledge-sharing barriers managers must consider. Journal of Knowledge Management, 9(3), 18–35. Rivis, A., & Sheeran, P. (2003). Social influences and the theory of planned behavior: Evidence for a direct relationship between prototypes and young people's exercise behavior. Psychology and Health, 18(5), 567–583. Schlenker, B. R., & Leary, M. R. (1982). Social anxiety and self-presentation: A conceptualization and model. Psychological Bulletin, 92(3), 641–669. Shen, A. X. L., Cheung, C. M. K., Lee, M. K. O., & Chen, H. (2010). How social influence affects we-intention to use instant messaging: The moderating effect of usage experience. Information Systems Frontiers, 13(2), 157–169. Song, J., & Kim, Y. J. (2006). Social influence process in the acceptance of a virtual community service. Information Systems Frontiers, 8(3), 241–252. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin, & S. Worchel (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. Taylor, S., & Todd, P. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research, 6(2), 144–176. Turner, J. C. (1991). Social influence. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing. Van den Hooff, B., Groot, J., & de Jonge, S. (2005). Situational influences on the use of communication technologies: A meta-analysis and exploratory study. Journal of Business Communication, 42(1), 4–27. Van Slyke, C., Ilie, V., Lou, H., & Stafford, T. (2007). Perceived critical mass and the adoption of a communication technology. European Journal of Information Systems, 16(3), 270–283. Van Slyke, C., Johnson, R. D., Hightower, R., & Elgarah, W. (2008). Implications of researcher assumptions about perceived relative advantage and compatibility. Database For Advances In Information Systems, 39(2), 50–66. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204. Wagner, C. (2004). Wiki: A technology for conversational knowledge management and group collaboration. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 13(1), 265–289. Wagner, C., & Majchrzak, A. (2007). Enabling customer-centricity using wikis and the wiki way. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23(3), 17–43. Westaby, J., & Braithwaite, K. (2003). Specific factors underlying reemployment selfefficacy: Comparing control belief and motivational reason methods for the recently unemployed. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 39(4), 415–437. Zhao, S. J., Zhang, K. Z. K., Wagner, C., & Chen, H. (2012). Investigating the determinants of contribution value in Wikipedia. International Journal of Information Management, 33(1), 83–92.

Please cite this article as: Iglesias-Pradas, S., et al., Social factors' influences on corporate wiki acceptance and use, Journal of Business Research (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.01.038