EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 388 (2023) E3S Web of Conf., 388 (2023) 04056 References
Open Access
Issue
E3S Web of Conf.
Volume 388, 2023
The 4th International Conference of Biospheric Harmony Advanced Research (ICOBAR 2022)
Article Number 04056
Number of page(s) 7
Section Technological Influence on Society and Applied Social Sciences to Support Sustainable Society
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202338804056
Published online 17 May 2023
  1. J. Jia and L. Fan, “Research Framework of Human Resource Development Based on Competency about Knowledge Enterprise,“ Int. J. Bus. Manag., vol. 3, no. 11, pp. 107–111, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  2. E. T. R. Pasher, Knowledge Management, 10th ed. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2011. [Google Scholar]
  3. H. K. Mohajan, “Knowledge Sharing among Employees in Organizations,” J. Econ. Dev. Environ. People, vol. 8, no. 1, p. 52, 2019. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. D. I. Castaneda and S. Cuellar, “Knowledge sharing and innovation: A systematic review,” Knowl. Process Manag., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 159–173, 2020. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  5. B. Ibragimova, S. D. Ryan, J. C. Windsor, and V. R. Prybutok, “Understanding the Antecedents of Knowledge Sharing: An Organizational Justice Perspective,” Informing Sci. Int. J. an Emerg. Transdiscipl., vol. 15, no. January, pp. 183–205, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  6. M. Rehman, A. Kamil, B. Mahmood, R. Salleh, and A. Amin, “Review of Factors Affecting Knowledge Sharing Behavior,” 2010 Int. Conf. E-business, Manag. Econ., no. January 2015, pp. 223–227, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  7. M. Personal and R. Archive, “Munich Personal RePEc Archive The Roles of Knowledge Management for the Development of Organizations,” no. 83038, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  8. R. Ogulin, G. Guzman, and S. M. Nuwangi, “Knowledge capabilities in supply chain networks: a taxonomy,” J. Knowl. Manag., vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 655–674, 2020. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. G. Nagamani et al., “Knowledge sharing practice among academicians􀯗: Assessing the role of demographic variables,” Int. J. Bus. Manag. Res., vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 113–124, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  10. M. M. Habib, V. Tewari, and V. V. R. Raman, “An exploratory research on educational supply chain management,” IEEE Int. Conf. Ind. Eng. Eng. Manag., pp. 242–246, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  11. P. Songsangyos, “The Knowledge Management in Higher Education in Chiang Mai: A Comparative Review,” Procedia – Soc. Behav. Sci., vol. 69, no. Iceepsy, pp. 399–403, 2012. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  12. B. Demchig, “Knowledge Management Capability Level Assessment of the Higher Education Institutions: Case Study from Mongolia,” Procedia – Soc. Behav. Sci., vol. 174, pp. 3633–3640, 2015. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  13. K. Sharma and N. Jaiswal, “Human Capital Management: An Emerging Human Resource Management Practice,” Int. J. Econ. Manag. Stud., vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 37–42, 2018. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  14. D. Basten and T. Haamann, “Approaches for Organizational Learning: A Literature Review,” SAGE Open, vol. 8, no. 3, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  15. F. Alghamdi, “Ambidextrous leadership, ambidextrous employee, and the interaction between ambidextrous leadership and employee innovative performance,” J. Innov. Entrep., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–14, 2018. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  16. K. Rosing and H. Zacher, “Individual ambidexterity: the duality of exploration and exploitation and its relationship with innovative performance,” Eur. J. Work Organ. Psychol., vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 694–709, 2017. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  17. M. Y. P. Peng, K. H. Lin, D. L. Peng, and P. Chen, “Linking organizational ambidexterity and performance: The drivers of sustainability in high-tech firms,” Sustain., vol. 11, no. 14, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  18. S. Stevanin, A. Voutilainen, V. Bressan, K. Vehviläinen-Julkunen, V. Rosolen, and T. Kvist, “Nurses’ Generational Differences Related to Workplace and Leadership in Two European Countries,” West. J. Nurs. Res., vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 14–23, 2020. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. G. Statincke, A. Savaneviciene, and I. Sakys,“The relationship between work engagement of different generations and mobile learning,” Acta Univ. Agric. Silvic. Mendelianae Brun., vol. 67, no. 6, pp. 1627–1642, 2019. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  20. M. A. Islam, T. W. Cheong, D. H. M. Yusuf, and H. Desa, “A study on ‘Generation Y’ behaviours at workplace in Penang,” Aust. J. Basic Appl. Sci., vol. 5, no. 11, pp. 1802–1812, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  21. A. Reza and A. Sarraf, “Managing Multigenerational Organizations,” Econ. Altern., no. 1, pp. 93–105, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  22. T. A. Sprinkle and M. J. Urick, “Three generational issues in organizational learning: Knowledge management, perspectives on training and ‘low-stakes’ development,” Learn. Organ., vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 102–112, 2018. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  23. F. H. Gerpott, N. Lehmann-Willenbrock, and S. C. Voelpel, “A phase model of intergenerational learning in organizations,” Acad. Manag. Learn. Educ., vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 193–216, 2017. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  24. F. H. Gerpott, F. Ulrike, and B. Anne, “Respectful leadership and followers’ knowledge sharing: A social mindfulness lens,” Hum. Relations, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  25. J. Nurhas, I., Aditya, B. R., Geisler, S., Ojala, A., & Pawlowski, “We are ‘not’ too (young/old) to collaborate􀯗: Prominent Key Barriers to Intergenerational Innovation,” Barriers to Intergenerational Innov. Glob. Context, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  26. N. Rupcic, “ Intergenerational learning and knowledge transfer – challenges and opportunities,” Learn. Organ., vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 135–142, 2018. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  27. S. Salicru and D. B. A. Candidate, “Intellectual Capital and Company Performance – Literature Review and Research Opportunities in Australia This paper was presented at the 21st annual Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management Conference – ANZAM 2007 (Managing Our Intellectual and S,” Business, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  28. Y. Zhang, F. Wei, and C. Van Horne, “INDIVIDUAL AMBIDEXTERITY and ANTECEDENTS in A CHANGING CONTEXT,” Int. J. Innov. Manag., vol. 23, no. 3, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  29. B. Schnellbächer and S. Heidenreich, “The role of individual ambidexterity for organizational performance: examining effects of ambidextrous knowledge seeking and offering,” J. Technol. Transf., vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 1535–1561, 2020. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  30. A. Papachroni and L. Heracleous, “Ambidexterity as Practice: Individual Ambidexterity Through Paradoxical Practices,” J. Appl. Behav. Sci., vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 143– 165, 2020. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  31. T. Mu, A. van Riel, and R. Schouteten, “Individual ambidexterity in SMEs: Towards atypology aligning the concept, antecedents and outcomes,” J. Small Bus. Manag., vol. 00, no. 00, pp. 1–32, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  32. L. Tuan Trong, C. Rowley, and D. C. Khai, “Enhancing the effect of frontline public employees’ individual ambidexterity on customer value co-creation: Joint effects of ambidextrous leadership and public service motivation,” J. Bus. Ind. Mark., vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 506–522, 2018. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  33. Z. Veingerl Cic, and S. Sarotar Zizek, “Intergenerational Cooperation at the Workplace from the Management Perspective,” Naše Gospod. Econ., vol. 63, no. 3, pp. 47–59, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  34. O. Novianto and D. Puspasari, “Knowledge Management System’s Implementation in a Company with Different Generations: A Case Study,” Procedia – Soc. Behav. Sci., vol. 65, no. ICIBSoS, pp. 942–947, 2012. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  35. J. Whitney Gibson, R. A. Greenwood, and E. F. Murphy, Jr., “Generational Differences In The Workplace: Personal Values, Behaviors, And Popular Beliefs,” J. Divers. Manag., vol.4, no. 3, pp. 1–8, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  36. I. S. De Toro, J. Labrador-Fernández, and V. L. De Nicolás, “Generational diversity in the workplace: psychological empowerment and flexibility in spanish companies,” Front. Psychol., vol. 10, no. AUG, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  37. K. Saileela and S. Thiruchanuru, “Capturing the Nature of Generations at Workplace,” no. December, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  38. K. Simic, “The Impact of Generational Diversity on Organizational Culture within the Hotel Industry,” pp. 1–54, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  39. J. Goriup, and V . A. Soba “Knowledge Management for Knowledge Society and Intergenerational Education,” Int. J. Manag. nowl. Learn., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 109–126, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  40. E. Ivantsova and T. Sivén, “Intergenerational knowledge sharing Within two case studies,” 2016. [Google Scholar]
  41. X. Schmidt, “Knowledge transfer between diverse employees􀯗: Insights into intergenerational knowledge transfer,” 2018. [Google Scholar]
  42. M. Mardi, M. Arief, A. Furinto, and R. Kumaradjaja, “Sustaining Organizational Performance Through Organizational Ambidexterity by Adapting Social Technology,” J. Knowl. Econ., vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 1049–1066, 2018. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  43. J. R. Ferretti and M. da C. L. Afonso, “Tacit Knowledge Sharing: A Literature Review Applied to the Context of the Brazilian Judiciary,” Knowl. Manag. Strateg. Appl., 2017. [Google Scholar]
  44. M. KOrdab, J. Raudeliuniene, and I. Meidure-Kavaliauskiene,“Mediatinf role of knowledge management in the relationship between organizational learning and sustainable organizational performance,” Sustain., vol. 12, no. 23, pp. 1–20, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  45. W. J. Boone, M. S. Yale, and J. R. Staver, Rasch analysis in the human sciences. 2014. [Google Scholar]
  46. B. Sumintono, Model Rasch untuk Penelitian Ilmu-Ilmu Sosial. 2014. [Google Scholar]
  47. A. Miftahuddin, B. Hermanto, S. J. Raharja, and A. Chan, “City brand attractiveness on tourism using rasch model approach,” Int. J. Supply Chain Manag., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 150– 156, 2020. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.