Rod iguez, Indi a A ias; Muniz, Jo ge; Munyon, Timo hy P.
A icle
Au hen ic leade ship and mo i a ion as mode a o s o he
o ganiza ional poli ics-knowledge sha ing ela ionship: A
es amids c isis
BRQ Business Resea ch Qua e ly
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
Asociación Cien í ica de Economía y Di ección de Emp esas (ACEDE), Mad id
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Rod iguez, Indi a A ias; Muniz, Jo ge; Munyon, Timo hy P. (2024) : Au hen ic
leade ship and mo i a ion as mode a o s o he o ganiza ional poli ics-knowledge sha ing
ela ionship: A es amids c isis, BRQ Business Resea ch Qua e ly, ISSN 2340-9444, Sage
Publishing, London, Vol. 27, Iss. 1, pp. 91-102,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/23409444231222504
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/327035
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/23409444231222504
Business Resea ch Qua e ly
2024, Vol. 27(1) 91 –102
© The Au ho (s) 2024
A icle euse guidelines:
sagepub.com/jou nals-pe missions
DOI: 10.1177/23409444231222504
jou nals.sagepub.com/home/b q
C ea i e Commons Non Comme cial CC BY-NC: This a icle is dis ibu ed unde he e ms o he C ea i e Commons
A ibu ion-NonComme cial 4.0 License (h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which pe mi s non-comme cial use,
ep oduc ion and dis ibu ion o he wo k wi hou u he pe mission p o ided he o iginal wo k is a ibu ed as speci ied on he SAGE and
Open Access page (h ps://uk.sagepub.com/abou us/openaccess.h m).
In oduc ion
Knowledge sha ing (KS) is widely iewed as a c i ical
o m o coo dina ion inside o ganiza ions, enhancing com-
pe i i e ad an age by acili a ing social lea ning (G an ,
1996; Ma ínez-Noya & Na ula, 2018). KS is de ined as
he p ocess whe e indi iduals mu ually exchange hei
knowledge and join ly c ea e new knowledge, ans o m-
ing indi idual knowledge o o ganiza ional knowledge
(Muniz e al., 2021; Rod iguez e al., 2021; an Den Hoo
& De Ridde , 2004). Howe e , KS is also a disc e iona y
employee beha io , and i is impo an o unde s and he
ac o s ha inhibi o enable he KS o indi iduals and he
wo kg oups in which hey unc ion (Cabello-Medina e al.,
2020; Muniz e al., 2022; Ribei o e al., 2022).
Resea ch sugges s ha o ganiza ional poli ics a e a ubiq-
ui ous nega i e in luence in o ganiza ions (De Cle cq e al.,
2016; Hochwa e e al., 2010). O ganiza ional poli ics a e
cha ac e ized as beha io s no sanc ioned by he o ganiza-
ion (B eaux e al., 2009), which employees use s a egically
o achie e hei own sel -in e es s (Fe is e al., 2002, 2019).
As such, hey ep esen a po en ially impo an culp i
a ec ing how indi iduals and g oups engage in KS.
Au hen ic leade ship and mo i a ion
as mode a o s o he o ganiza ional
poli ics–knowledge sha ing ela ionship:
A es amids c isis
Indi a A ias Rod iguez1, Jo ge Muniz J .1
and Timo hy P Munyon2
Abs ac
O ganiza ional poli ics a e ecognized as a ubiqui ous and nega i e h ea o knowledge sha ing in o ganiza ions, ye less
esea ch has examined he bounda y condi ions ha a ec his ela ionship, pa icula ly in in e dependen manu ac u ing
con ex s. This a icle aims o explo e how au hen ic leade ship, in insic mo i a ion, and p osocial mo i a ion bound he
e ec s o o ganiza ional poli ics on he knowledge sha ing ac i i ies o indi iduals and wo kg oups in he shop loo o
he B azilian au omo i e conso ium du ing a poli ical and economic c isis con ex (2015–2017). This c isis con ex was
ma ked by p esiden ial impeachmen , high in la ion, economic ins abili y, and massi e plan layo s. We sampled 144 shop
loo wo ke s using a ques ionnai e-based su ey and es ablished scales, and employed mul i a ia e eg ession analyses
o es ou hypo heses. Con a y o expec a ions, we ound ha o ganiza ional poli ics inc ease, a he han dec ease,
knowledge sha ing o indi iduals and g oups. Mode a ion analyses sugges ha wo ke in insic mo i a ion and p osocial
mo i a ion signi ican ly mode a e he posi i e ela ionships be ween o ganiza ional poli ics and knowledge sha ing o
indi iduals and g oups, while au hen ic leade ship had no signi ican e ec on his ela ionship.
JEL CLASSIFICATION: D2: P oduc ion and O ganiza ions
Keywo ds
O ganiza ional poli ics, knowledge sha ing, au hen ic leade ship, in insic mo i a ion, p osocial mo i a ion
1 Depa men o P oduc ion, São Paulo S a e Uni e si y (UNESP),
Gua a ingue á, B azil
2 Depa men o Managemen , The Uni e si y o Tennessee, Knox ille,
Knox ille, TN, USA
Co esponding au ho :
Indi a A ias Rod iguez, Depa men o P oduc ion, São Paulo S a e
Uni e si y (UNESP), A . D . A ibe o Pe ei a da Cunha, 333—Po al
das Colinas, Gua a ingue á 12516-410, B azil.
Email: [email p o ec ed]
1222504BRQ0010.1177/23409444231222504BRQ Business Resea ch Qua e lyA ias Rod iguez e al.
esea ch-a icle2024
Regula Pape
92 Business Resea ch Qua e ly 27(1)
Ye , empi ical esea ch equi oca es ega ding he
e ec s o pe cep ion o o ganiza ional poli ics (POPS) on
KS. Fo example, some esea ch sugges s ha POPS neg-
a i ely impac KS (E ans e al., 2013; Ga dne e al.,
2021), while o he esea ch sugges s ha o ganiza ional
poli ics a e posi i ely ela ed o KS (De Cle cq &
Belaus eguigoi ia, 2017; De Cle cq e al., 2016; Eldo ,
2017; Rod iguez e al., 2021). These di e gen e ec s
sugges ha bounda y condi ions, o mode a o s, a e
ope a ing wi hin he o ganiza ional poli ics—KS ela-
ionship (As a -ul-haq & Anwa , 2016).
Au hen ic leade ship (AL) ep esen s an impo an
po en ial mode a o o he ela ionship be ween o ganiza-
ional poli ics and KS. In con as o he sel -in e es ed
na u e o o ganiza ional poli ics (Fe is e al., 2019), he
AL pa adigm is an e ec i e leade ship app oach ha p o-
mo es posi i e ollowe e ec s (Munyon e al., 2021), ep-
esen ing an impo an po en ial bounda y condi ion o he
POPS–KS ela ionship. Simila ly, in insic and p osocial
mo i a ion posi i ely impac wo k ou pu s and cowo ke
ea men o o he s (e.g., G an , 2008; Liao e al., 2022),
sugges ing hey may also a ec he ela ionship be ween
POPS and KS. Resea ch o en e alua es knowledge sha -
ing o indi iduals (KSI), which may a y om he
obse ed knowledge sha ing o he wo k g oups (KSG) in
which hey unc ion (e.g., Rod iguez e al., 2021). Finally,
he con ex o wo k may play an impo an ole di e en i-
a ing how POPS a ec KS, and we examine hese ela ion-
ships wi hin a modula mul i- i m manu ac u ing con ex .
The p esen s udy was de eloped in he con ex o a
complex economic and poli ical si ua ion in B azil.
F om he economic pe spec i e, sampled wo ke s we e
unc ioning amids he e ec s o he global economic
c isis, which peaked in La in Ame ica and B azil (2015–
2017). In e ms o poli ics, B azil was acing an impeach-
men (Mancebo, 2017). The poli ical and economic
issues p omo ed se e al demons a ions and s ikes wi h
epe cussions a he na ional and in e na ional le els.
Speci ically in he B azilian au omo i e sec o , meas-
u es we e aken o deal wi h he c isis, such as olun a y
edundancy p og ams, educed wo king hou s, layo s,
and collec i e aca ions, among o he s. These measu es
ha e led o employee ins abili y, which can consequen ly
a ec POPS (De Cle cq e al., 2016; Fe is e al., 2019),
leade ship (Fe is e al., 2019), and employee mo i a ion
(Liao e al., 2022) due o he sense o h ea o losing
hei jobs and p essu e om employees o mee p oduc-
i i y a ge s, upda e wo k p ocesses, be e sa ile, and
wo k in eams.
In sum, ou s udy aims o shed new ligh abou how AL
and mo i a ion mode a e he ela ionships be ween POPS
and KSI and KSG in a B azilian manu ac u ing conso -
ium in he poli ical and economic c isis con ex . Da a
we e collec ed om 144 shop loo wo ke s o he B azilian
Modula Conso ium using a ques ionnai e-based su ey
and es ablished scales. AL, in insic mo i a ion (IM), and
p osocial mo i a ion (PSM) a e heo e ically and p ac i-
cally impo an in luences subjec o manage ial in e en-
ion and de elopmen wi hin he wo k o ce (G an , 2008;
Ma ínez-Noya & Na ula, 2018; Souza e al., 2020). The
PROCESS mac o (Hayes, 2013) was used o examine he
mode a ing oles o use o AL, IM, and PSM in he ela ion-
ship be ween POPS and KSI and KSG.
Se e al con ibu ions a e in ended in his esea ch.
Fi s , al hough he leade ship li e a u e has long no ed i s
mo i a ional impac s, i is a e o see leade ship e ec s
modeled alongside mo i a ional in luences. A side-by-side
es o hese in luences helps cla i y and illus a e he
unique addi i e e ec s o AL and mo i a ional o ces as
hey a ec disc e iona y wo kplace beha io s and beha -
io al eac ions. Simila ly, we con ibu e o AL by es ing i
in a seldom-used con ex , and also ollowing a c isis in
which he o ganiza ion has been subjec o a declining
ma ke . This con ibu es o he eme ging s eam o c isis
leade ship esea ch (e.g., Dasbo ough & Scandu a, 2022;
Huang & Zhou, 2023; Junça-Sil a, & Cae ano, 2024). Ou
esul s also ex end he poli ical in luence pe spec i e (i.e.,
Fe is & Judge, 1991; Munyon e al., 2016) by highligh -
ing he condi ions unde which POPS impac in e pe sonal
p ocesses, including KS in c isis con ex . Nex , we con-
ibu e uniquely o he KS li e a u e by es ing wo o ms
o KS conduc ed by indi idual and g oup e e en s. In
doing so, we add much-needed g anula i y o his li e a-
u e. Finally, hese quan i a i e assessmen da a come om
a seldom- es ed empi ical con ex in B azil, ep esen ing a
use ul c oss-cul u al es o cons uc gene alizabili y.
Theo e ical backg ound
This sec ion explo es he heo e ical mode a ion o AL, IM,
and PSM wi hin he POPS and KS ela ionship. Ou heo y
is p emised on he poli ical in luence pe spec i e (Fe is &
Judge, 1991; Munyon e al., 2016), which assumes ha
indi iduals ac wi hin o ganiza ions o gain powe and
in luence ha u he s hei objec i es and goals (Munyon
& Kane-F iede , 2015; Rod iguez e al., 2021). This pe -
spec i e p oposes ha he social in luence ac i i ies o indi-
iduals a e gene ally sel -in e es ed in na u e, and ha he
managemen o meaning is a key unde lying goal o indi-
idual ac o s (King & Vaiman, 2019).
Fu he mo e, o ganiza ional poli ics, and pe cep ions o
such poli ics a e na u al ami ica ions o hese beha io s as
indi iduals seek o gain ad an age o hemsel es (Munyon
& Kane-F iede , 2015). The sel -in e es ed na u e o poli-
ics is one eason why hey can be coun e p oduc i e
(Chang e al., 2009; Munyon e al., 2016). Howe e , such
poli ics a e also subjec o condi ions ha change he way
indi iduals in e p e poli ics, including accoun abili y
(e.g., B eaux e al., 2009), sugges ing ha leade ship (i.e.,
an ou side in luence) and indi idual mo i a ion (i.e., an
A ias Rod iguez e al. 93
in e nal in luence) may a ec how poli ics ansla e o
impac KS (see also Munyon e al., 2021). The p oposed
hypo hesis sys em is ep esen ed in Figu e 1 and will be
heo e ically and empi ically discussed.
AL
AL e lec s how leade s know onesel , a e anspa en , bal-
ance in o ma ion agains mo al impe a i es, and seek o
de elop ollowe s (Edú-Valsania e al., 2016; Ga dne e al.,
2020; Mun z e al., 2019). Au hen ic leade s le e age au hen-
ic beha io s, mo al alues, and posi i e communica ion o
shape ollowe s’ esponses (Li e al., 2017). Au hen ic lead-
e s a e anspa en , us wo hy, e hical, and u h ul
(Walumbwa e al., 2008). Fu he mo e, he e hicali y and
us wo hiness o au hen ic leade s engende s o ganiza-
ional commi men and pe o mance om ollowe s, which
is why AL helps acili a e business success (Banks e al.,
2016; Ga dne e al., 2021; Li e al., 2017; Mingyuan &
Geng, 2015; Mun z e al., 2019).
In es iga ions ha e shown ha AL p omo es he con i-
dence o employees in hei leade s (Edú-Valsania e al.,
2016; Li e al., 2017), s imula es g ea e displays o o gan-
iza ional ci izenship beha io s, and acili a es exchanges
ha imp o e wo k (Edú-Valsania e al., 2016). Since KS is
a disc e iona y beha io , like o ganiza ional ci izenship
beha io , and au hen ic leade s build us om hei ol-
lowe s, i is plausible ha his leade ship cha ac e is ic
may a ec how o he wise nega i e POPS impac KS.
AL in he o ganiza ional poli ics–KS ela ionship
The li e a u e sugges s a b oad and impo an ela ionship
be ween leade ship beha io s and KS (Ge po e al., 2020;
Muniz e al., 2023; Souza e al., 2020). Howe e , he e is
less e idence in he li e a u e ega ding he e ec s o AL
as a bounda y condi ion, e en as a hand ul o s udies ind
a di ec posi i e ela ionship wi h KS (i.e., (Edú-Valsania
e al., 2016; Kim e al., 2017; Li e al., 2017; Malik e al.,
2016; Mingyuan & Geng, 2015).
The indings sugges ha AL helps p o ide a sa e en i-
onmen in which o engage in KS wi h ellow colleagues,
who due o he same leade ship in luences, a e mo e willing
o ecei e knowledge and engage in subsequen KS hem-
sel es. The ne e ec o his p ocess is an enhancemen in
social lea ning ha is conduci e o c ea i i y, inno a ion,
and enhanced p oblem-sol ing (Cabello-Medina e al.,
2020; Edú-Valsania e al., 2016; Lee e al., 2020; Li e al.,
2017; Mingyuan & Geng, 2015). Unde au hen ic leade s,
employees may begin o see KS as an impo an means o
sel - ealiza ion, and a e no limi ed by my hs such as
“knowledge sha ing is loss o powe and con ol” o “knowl-
edge sha ing causes edundancy” (Malik e al., 2016).
Au hen ic leade s may also s imula e KS in hei employees,
de eloping a s ong sense o g oup iden i y, because he
mo e o icials iden i y wi h hei wo kg oup, he g ea e
hei endency o KS (Edú-Valsania e al., 2016). Speci ically,
as leade s show au hen ici y, i is expec ed ha subo dina es
a e mo e mo i a ed o pa icipa e in KS a indi idual and
g oup le els, seeking o ob ain in o ma ion om he o gani-
za ion, o imp o ing i s unc ions and o con ibu e wi h he
g oup wo k and o he o ganiza ion in gene al.
In sum, his e idence sugges s ha AL will ac as a
hedge agains he nega i e e ec s o POPS on KS. By
means o anspa en leade ship beha io , supe iso s a e
able o e ec i ely in e ene o dis up nega i e e ec s
om poli ics and c ea e an en i onmen mo e conduci e o
KS (Mun z e al., 2019).
G ea e au hen ici y om leade s may also change how
ollowe s espond o he nega i e poli ics o o he s (Cho &
Yang, 2018), and hus, hei endency o pa icipa e in he
KS indi idually and in g oups may inc ease in he p es-
ence o au hen ic leade s (E ans e al., 2013; Ga dne
e al., 2021). Speci ically, a he han ocus on he nega i e
ami ica ions o o ganiza ional poli ics, au hen ic leade s
may be able o “change he na a i e” and e ocus wo ke
a en ion on ealizing he goals o he o ganiza ion (Fe is
& Judge, 1991), wi h an icipa ed posi i e e ec s on KS.
Finally, e en in highly poli ical en i onmen s, au hen ic
leade s may be able o engende an openness among
employees ha educes he h ea s o poli ics ha would
o he wise impede KS.
E idence sugges s ha leade ship can mi iga e he neg-
a i e e ec s o POPS and enable unc ional KS, because
e en in e y poli ical en i onmen s, leade s can enhance
he mo i a ion o employees o engage in ac i i ies ha a e
no o mally equi ed (De Cle cq & Belaus eguigoi ia,
2017; Lee e al., 2020). Howe e , i is necessa y ha lead-
e s also build us , p omo e e ec i e communica ion, and
engage in pa icipa o y decision-making o ease he low
o in o ma ion in eams and communi ies o p ac ice
(Gup a, 2011). These a e also cha ac e is ics e lec i e o
In insic
Mo i a ion (IM)
H2a and H2b
Pe cep ions
O ganiza ional
Poli ics
(POPS)
Knowledge
Sha ing o
Indi iduals
(KSI)
Au hen ic
Leade ship (AL)
H1a andH1b
P o-Social
Mo i a ion (PSM)
H3a and H3b
Knowledge
Sha ing o
G oups
(KSG)
Figu e 1. Au hen ic leade ship and wo k mo i a ion, as
mode a o s o he ela ionship be ween o ganiza ional poli ics
and knowledge sha ing o indi iduals and wo kg oups.
94 Business Resea ch Qua e ly 27(1)
AL (Li e al., 2017; Mun z e al., 2019), sugges ing ha AL
will bound he e ec s o POPS on KS (Figu e 1). In pa -
icula , we an icipa e ha he p esence o au hen ic leade s
will weaken he nega i e ela ionship be ween POPS and
KS o indi iduals and g oups. Thus:
H1: AL mode a es he nega i e ela ionship be ween
POPS and KSI (H1a) and KSG (H1b), such ha he
ela ionship weakens (s eng hens) as AL inc eases
(dec eases).
Wo k mo i a ion: IM and PSM
Wo k mo i a ion is a psychological phenomenon, ep e-
sen ing an in e nal s a e ha d i es humans o ac ion (Deci
& Ryan, 1985, 2008). Wo k mo i a ion ha can ini ia e
beha io a wo k and de e mine i s o m, di ec ion, in en-
si y, and du a ion, is a subjec i e cons uc ha mani es s
i sel in he o m o obse able and he e o e measu able
beha io s (La ham & Pinde , 2005). The wo k mo i a ion
esea ch encompasses he analysis o mul iple o ms o
mo i a ion, including IM, ex insic mo i a ion, and PSM
(Akke mans e al., 2016; Bugenhagen & Ba bu o, 2012;
Ku aas e al., 2012; Llopis & Foss, 2016).
Speci ically, IM occu s when employees a e mo i a ed
o pe o m hei unc ions o engage in ce ain ypes o
beha io o pleasu e o inhe en sa is ac ion, wi h he
wo k i sel ac ing as an incen i e (Akke mans e al., 2016;
Bugenhagen & Ba bu o, 2012; Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2008).
In insically mo i a ed employees a e p ocess- ocused and
see wo k as an end in i sel , so when IM is high, employees
will app ecia e he ask’s execu ion p ocess and hei
beha io will be less de e mined by he cha ac e is ics o
he con ex and mo e by he na u e o he ac i i y o be
pe o med (Llopis & Foss, 2016).
O he s udies add ess PSM, whe e employees ha e a
s ong sense o social exchange and eel a g ea e obliga ion
o epay he o ganiza ion’s bene i s and suppo by engaging
in beha io s ha exceed minimum employmen equi e-
men s (Ku aas e al., 2012). Pa icipa ion in p osocial ac ions
will be less in luenced by con ex ual ac o s and mo e based
on in e nal alues and belie s (Llopis & Foss, 2016).
IM and PSM a e in ica ely linked and e en ampli y
one ano he ’s e ec s (e.g., G an , 2008). Employees wi h
highe p osocial alue sco es end o be mo e p oac i e in
ambiguous si ua ions and consequen ly when a ce ain
ac i i y is consis en wi h pe sonal belie s, co e alues,
and las ing sel -in e es s, IM is mo e likely o eme ge as an
ene ge ic wo k o ce (Llopis & Foss, 2016).
IM and PSM in he o ganiza ional poli ics–KS
ela ionship
Resea ch sugges s ha wo k mo i a ion may bound how
POPS mani es and a ec wo k ou comes (Cho & Yang,
2018; Randle e al., 2017). In suppo , sel -de e mina ion
heo y (SDT) pos ula es ha people a e mo i a ed o sa is y
h ee basic psychological needs, including he needs o
au onomy, compe ence, and social a achmen . Psychological
well-being is p edic ed o esul as a unc ion o sa is ying
hese needs, and wo k also impac s how hese needs a e sa -
is ied (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2008; Suwan i, 2019).
Speci ically, his esea ch sugges s wo k en i onmen s
ha enable need ul illmen engende mo i a ion, and pa -
icula ly IM, which e lec s one’s enjoymen wi h wo k
(G an , 2008). Meanwhile, PSM e lec s a desi e o help
o he s ia one’s wo k (G an , 2008). Taken oge he , bo h
IM and PSM may modi y how POPS mani es since hey
e ocus indi iduals on enjoying wo k and bene i ing o he s,
wi h he ne e ec ha poli ics become less cumbe some
and nega i e o hose wi h high le els o IM and PSM.
When IM and PSM a e low, employees a e mo e
a ec ed by he ask en i onmen a ound hem and sel -
in e es ed. This heo e ically ampli ies he e ec s o POPS
in a uni , which could nega i ely impac how indi iduals
sha e knowledge wi h colleagues and in g oups. By con-
as , high le els o IM and PSM ocus employees no on
po en ially poli ical wo k con ex s, bu on wo k and he
bene i o colleagues (c ., Ku aas e al., 2012; Llopis &
Foss, 2016; Suwan i, 2019), sugges ing ha hese ac o s
will weaken he e ec s o POPS on KS. Thus:
H2: IM mode a es he nega i e ela ionship be ween
POPS and KSI (H2a) and KSG (H2b), such ha he
ela ionship weakens (s eng hens) as IM inc eases
(dec eases).
H3: PSM mode a es he nega i e ela ionship be ween
POPS and KSI o (H3a) and g oups (H3b), such ha he
ela ionship weakens as PSM inc eases (dec eases).
Me hodology
To explo e he in e ela ionships among AL, IM, and PSM
as mode a o s o he POPS–KS ela ionship, we inco po-
a ed a quali a i e and quan i a i e s udy. The ield s udy
was app o ed by he E hics Commi ee o he B azil
Pla o m p ocess: 65500017.1.0000.5663. The esea ch
me hod adop ed was alida ed in a P e-Tes s udy h ough
da a collec ion and analysis, wi h 44 employees o a com-
pany in he au omo i e sec o (Rod iguez e al., 2016).
The esea ch me hod adop ed was alida ed in a P e-
Tes s udy h ough da a collec ion and analysis wi h 44
employees o a company in he au omo i e sec o
(Rod iguez e al., 2016). A e he pilo s udy, his esea ch
was de eloped on a la ge scale; he da a we e collec ed by
ques ionnai e du ing a B azilian economic and poli ic c i-
sis (2015–2017) con ex wi h 144 employees o he
B azilian Au omo i e Modula Conso ium selec ed by
non-p obabilis ic con enience sampling. The esea ch
ins umen used Like - ype scales (5-poin ) o e alua e
A ias Rod iguez e al. 95
he demog aphic da a o he sample (wo ke sex, age), as
well as he wo k p o iles o he in e iewees, including
o ganiza ional enu e, job enu e, and hei employe .
The sampling ame was chosen i s by he p ominence
o he au omo i e sec o . Speci ically, B azil is among he
10 la ges p oduce s o ca s and comme cial ehicles in
he wo ld (In e na ional O ganiza ion o Mo o Vehicle
Manu ac u e s, 2022). Second, al hough p io esea ch has
examined he POPS–KS ela ionship in o he na ions, we
a e awa e o no s udies examining his ela ionship in a
B azilian cul u al con ex , opening up new oppo uni ies
o c oss-cul u al compa isons. Thi d, o desc ibe a ia-
bles ele an o o ganiza ional managemen in special con-
ex s, such as poli ical and economic c isis.
In his esea ch, da a collec ion occu ed du ing he
poli ical and economic c isis aced by B azil om 2015 o
2017. Fo example, in he o ganiza ion s udied, olun a y
esigna ion p og ams we e de eloped, wo k hou s we e
educed, and wo ke s e mina ed o gi en long- e m u -
loughs. In his special con ex , he esul s ob ained om
he ins umen e lec how employees pe cei e hei wo k
en i onmen in a high-s akes c isis en i onmen . As such,
hey ep esen an impo an con as o s udies highligh ing
wo ke pe cep ions and ac ions in mo e s able and secu e
en i onmen s.
The Modula Conso ium consis s o six companies
ha wo k in assembly lines co-loca ed a a single acili y.
The acili y ep esen s a adical case o ou sou cing among
an au omake and he small numbe o di ec supplie s, in
which supplie s manage p e-assembly o he module and
subsequen moun ing in he assembly plan using i s ools
and equipmen . Meanwhile, he assemble p o ides he
plan and he inal assembly line o execu e he coo dina-
ion o he same and he inal es o ehicles (Rod iguez
e al., 2021).
A o al o 144 blue-colla wo ke s we e assessed o a
o al o 926 wo ke s, so 15.6% o he popula ion was ana-
lyzed. The pa icipan s we e imme sed in he p oduc ion
p ocess, en e ed on he shop loo , o he male sex wi h
mean indus y enu e o 9.63 yea s (SD = 5.25 yea s), wi h
a mean o ganiza ional enu e o 7.11 yea s (SD = 4.60 yea s),
and 44.7% o employees had wo ked only o hei cu en
employe .
The ins umen was applied by a eam comp ising se en
g adua e and doc o al s uden s and he supe iso (leade
and head o he esea ch g oup). The eam was p epa ed
and ained o he applica ion o he ques ionnai e, and
one eam membe pe plan was dis ibu ed. The applica-
ion o he ins umen was ca ied ou wi h he i s shi o
employees, in he p oduc ion sec o , speci ically on wha
is known as he ac o y loo , in an app op ia e oom, con-
di ioned, and wi h good ligh ing. The applica ion was done
in wo k sessions, wi h a maximum o se en employees a
a ime, o acili a e he cla i ica ion o doub s when illing
ou he ins umen .
Measu es
The ins umen collec ed in o ma ion o e alua e he
demog aphic da a o he sample (gende , age), as well as
he p o iles o he in e iewees, ega ding leng h o expe i-
ence in he indus y (yea s), ime as a collabo a o in he
company (yea s), occupa ion o unc ion wi hin he p o-
duc ion p ocess he p oduc i e p ocess, and cu en posi-
ion held wi hin he company, among o he s. The esea ch
ins umen analyzes he beha io o cons uc s based on
scales p e iously alida ed in scien i ic e idence, applied
in di e se con ex s, cul u es, and whose au ho s a e duly
ci ed. The ques ionnai e used a 5-poin Like - ype scale
anging om (1) S ongly Disag ee o (5) S ongly Ag ee
and e alua ed he pe cep ions o :
O ganiza ional Poli ics (α = .95): Based on a six-i em
scale de eloped by Hochwa e e al. (2003) o measu e
o ganiza ional poli ics. The measu e is based on he
cha ac e iza ion o he wo king en i onmen and in e -
pe sonal ela ions wi hin he company. Example i ems
include: “The e is a lo o sel -se ing beha io going
on he e” and “Indi iduals a e s abbing each o he in he
back o look good in on o o he s.”
KS (α = .88), KSI (α = .85); KSG (α = .90): We assessed
using se en esponse i ems ea u ing he sha ing o
knowledge wi hin he company and posi ion i sel in
he sha ing p ocess. Fo a mo e de ailed unde s anding
o KS in he o ganiza ions, he KSI ( ou -i em scale)
and he KSG ( h ee-i em scale) we e analyzed. Example
i ems con ain: “I spend ime in pe sonal con e sa ion
wi h o he s o help hem wi h hei wo k— ela ed p ob-
lems” (e.g., KSI); “My co-wo ke s olun ee hei
knowledge and expe iences e en wi hou being asked”
(e.g., KSG). The ull scales a e a ailable upon eques
o he i s au ho .
AL (α =.96): Was measu ed using a 16-i em scale aken
om Walumbwa e al., (2008), in which employees
gi e he pe cep ions o hei supe iso s in a ious si u-
a ions. The au hen ici y o he leade ship is analyzed
h ough i s beha io s, alues, cha ac e is ics in making-
decision, and communica ion, among o he s. Example
i ems include: “My leade clea ly exp esses wha he
means,” “My leade s admi hei mis akes when hey
occu ,” and “My leade openly sha es in o ma ion wi h
o he s.”
IM (α = .88): Was measu ed using a ou -i em scale
om G an (2008). The measu e s em asks, “The wo k
mo i a es me. . .” wi h example i ems, “Because I enjoy
he wo k i sel ” and “Because I ind he wo k
engaging.”
PSM (α = .82): Was measu ed using a ou -i em scale
om G an (2008). The measu e s em asks, “The wo k
96 Business Resea ch Qua e ly 27(1)
mo i a es me . . .” wi h example i ems, “Because I ca e
abou bene i ing o he s h ough my wo k,” and
“Because I wan o help o he s h ough my wo k.”
Analy ical app oach
A Ha man one- ac o es sugges s ha he e is no common
me hod p oblem. In addi ion, he pa e n o co ela ions
iden i ied in his a icle is consis en wi h he b oade se o
POPs and AL li e a u e. To es he hypo heses, we
employed he “PROCESS” mac o sc ip de eloped by
Hayes (2013) as a supplemen p og am o SPSS e sion
21.0. Th ee di e en mode a ion models we e es ed in
which POPS we e an independen a iable, AL, IM, and
PSM we e mode a o s, and hese e ec s co esponded o
wo ou come a iables: KSI and KSG. The company clas-
si ica ion, o ganiza ional, and indus y enu e we e en e ed
as co a iables o con ol o hei po en ially spu ious
e ec s. All p edic o s we e s anda dized and cen e ed. All
esul s wi h p < .05 we e conside ed signi ican .
Resul s
The esul s showed adequa e eliabili y based on
C onbach’s alpha es ima es (Table 1). Table 1 also epo s
desc ip i e s a is ics, in e co ela ions o a iables, and he
esul s o he co ela ion coe icien , and he le el o sig-
ni icance o all analyzed a iables.
Con a y o ou expec a ions, we ind a posi i e ela-
ionship be ween POPS and KSI ( = .56; p < .01) and KSG
( = .47; p < .01). The KSI may ein o ce he KSG, and
ice e sa ( = .72; p < .01). The co ela ion analysis indi-
ca ed a signi ican nega i e coe icien be ween POPS and
IM ( = −.28; p < .01), sugges ing ei he ha highly poli i-
cal o ganiza ional en i onmen s can diminish he IM o
wo ke s, o ha in insically mo i a ed wo ke s educe he
incidence o nega i e o ganiza ional poli ics.
The indings sugges ha he o ganiza ional and indus-
y enu e can s eng hen some o ganiza ional beha io s.
Fo example, IM showed signi ican co ela ions wi h
O ganiza ional Tenu e ( = .24; p < .01) and Indus y
Tenu e ( = .21; p = .01), indus y enu e can p omo e he
KSI ( = .27; p < .01) and o ganiza ional enu e may a o
PSM ( = .17; p < .05). IM was also posi i ely ela ed o
AL ( = .18; p = .03) and PSM ( = .47; p < .01)
Table 2 summa izes he indings o h ee mode a ion
analyses, whe e wo ypes o KS beha io s (KSI and KSG)
we e sepa a ely eg essed on he independen a iables
and on each o he mode a ing a iables. We sepa a ed he
analysis o each o he mode a ing a iables and o i s
in e ac ion wi h POPS o u he ensu e a lack o mul icol-
linea i y. The mode a ion analyses we e pe o med wi h
he Johnson–Neyman echnique, so hey a e accompanied
by hei espec i e g aph, o show mo e clea ly he e ec
o he mode a ing a iable (see Figu e 2).
We p oposed ha he ela ionship be ween POPS and
KSI and KSG would be al e ed in in ensi y by mode a ing
a iables ha included AL, IM, and PSM. The mode a ion
analyses (Table 2) indica ed ha he a iables included in
he model a e p edic o s o KSI and KSG, because he in e -
ac ion e m R² was signi ican o all models; he signi ican
R² also indica es he quali y o he eg ession models.
As shown in Table 2, speci ically in mode a ion analysis
o he ela ionship be ween o ganiza ional poli ics–KSI and
o ganiza ional poli ics–KSG, wi h IM as mode a o . A main
e ec is he signi ica i e in e ac ion o ganiza ional poli ics–
IM on KSI (β = .19; p < .01), which sugges s ha wo ke IM
mode a es he posi i e ela ionship be ween POPS and KSI,
such ha he ela ionship s eng hens as IM inc eases, and
weakens as IM dec eases. The esul s o he analysis o he
o ganiza ional poli ics–KSG ela ionship wi h IM as mode -
a o can be conside ed no signi ican because i has a p- alue
highe han he es ablished signi icance alue and he 95%
con idence in e al includes ze o. The esul s allow us o
accep he H2a hypo hesis and ejec he H2b hypo hesis.
Con a y o expec a ions, PSM did no mode a e he
ela ionships be ween POPS and KSI and KSG, e en as
he end showed ma ginal signi icance (i.e., p ≈ .10.
Thus, we conclude ha he e is only pa ial and limi ed
suppo o H3a and H3b.
Table 1. Means, s anda d de ia ions, and in e co ela ions among s udy a iables.
Va iables αM SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. O ganiza ional enu e – 7.11 4.60
2. Indus y enu e – 9.63 5.25 0.69**
3. Au hen ic leade ship .96 3.57 0.89 0.12 0.17*
4. In insic mo i a ion .88 3.91 0.85 0.24** 0.21* 0.18*
5. P osocial mo i a ion .82 4.03 0.68 0.17* 0.11 0.10 0.47**
6. O ganiza ional poli ics (POPS) .95 3.29 1.17 −0.14 −0.04 −0.16 −0.28** −0.14
7. Knowledge sha ing o indi idual .85 3.26 1.08 0.11 0.27** 0.07 0.09 0.04 0.56**
8. Knowledge sha ing o g oups .90 3.51 1.08 0.06 0.10 0.13 0.01 0.07 0.47** 0.72**
α: C onbach’s alpha; M: mean; SD: s anda d de ia ion; POPS: pe cep ion o o ganiza ional poli ics.
No e: Pea son’s ( ) wo- ailed co ela ions, wi h p: signi icance:
*The co ela ion is signi ican a p < .05; ** he co ela ion is signi ican a he p < .01 signi icance le el.
A ias Rod iguez e al. 97
In mode a ed hie a chical eg ession analysis o he
ela ionship be ween o ganiza ional poli ics–KSI and
o ganiza ional poli ics–KSG, wi h AL as mode a o , POPS
has a posi i e main e ec on KSI and KSG (β = .59; p < .01
and β = .47; p < .05, espec i ely). Ano he main e ec is
he posi i e ela ionship o AL wi h KSG (β = .23; p < .05);
howe e , he in e ac ion e ec be ween POPS and AL on
KSI was no signi ican . The e o e, we do no ind suppo
o H1a and H1b.
To de e mine he o m o he in e ac ions, we plo ed
hese e ec s g aphically. IM and PSM bo h exhibi a simi-
la pa e n o mode a ion wi h POPS o a ec KSI.
Speci ically, a high le els o o ganiza ional poli ics, IM
and PSM di e en ia e KS, while he e is no signi ican di -
e en ia ion in KSI a low le els o o ganiza ional poli ics.
Discussion
This esea ch p o ides new insigh s in o bounda y condi-
ions ha a ec he ela ionships be ween POPS and KSI
and KSG, con en a eas ye o be in eg a ed in he o gani-
za ional sciences o da e using he indus ial au omo i e
con ex o B azil. In pa icula , we explo ed how AL and
mo i a ional in luences a ec ed he poli ics o KS ela-
ionships o indi iduals and g oups. This esea ch was
u he s eng hened by explo a ion in a ime o economic
and poli ical c isis, shedding new ligh in o he e ec s o
o ganiza ional poli ics.
The di ec e ec s sugges ha POPS inc ease, a he
han dec ease, KSI and KSG. This inding is consis en
wi h Fedo e al. (2008), who sugges ha POPS may ha e
unc ional e ec s a wo k, sugges ing ha con ex ual ac-
o s may a ec hei ul ima e u ili y. These indings also
acco d wi h hose o Eldo (2017) and Rod iguez e al.
(2021). Thus, highly poli ical en i onmen s may d i e
employees o seek ou addi ional knowledge esou ces
hey desi e as indi iduals and wo k g oups (Fe is &
Judge, 1991).
The mode a o analyses sugges ha mo i a ional in lu-
ences (i.e., IM and PSM), bu no AL, mode a e he
Table 2. Reg ession analysis o mode a ion.
Va iables Knowledge sha ing o indi idual Knowledge sha ing o g oup
βSE βSE
MODEL 10. 2.47 1.06 2.34* 2.46 0.27 1.94*
O ganiza ional poli ics (POPS) −.13 0.26 −.49 .10 0.32 .33
In insic mo i a ion (IM) −.43 0.25 −10.70 −.21 0.30 −.71
POPS × IM .19 0.06 2.92** .10 0.08 1.32
Co a ia es
10. Company .01 0.04 .12 .01 0.04 .16
20. Indus y enu e .05 0.02 2.80** .01 0.02 .21
30. O ganiza ional enu e .01 0.02 .12 .03 0.03 1.01
R² .51*** .29***
MODEL 20. 2.19 1.34 1.64 3.14 1.54 2.03*
O ganiza ional poli ics (POPS) .01 0.36 .02 −.07 0.42 −.16
P osocial mo i a ion (PM) −.31 0.32 −.98 −.35 0.37 −.95
POPS × PSM .14 0.09 1.61 .13 0.10 1.34
Co a ia e
10. Company −.02 0.04 −.55 −.01 0.04 −.18
20. Indus y enu e .06 0.02 3.01** .01 0.02 .33
30. O ganiza ional enu e .01 0.02 .10 .03 0.03 10.09
R² .46*** .28***
MODEL 30. .38 0.73 .53 .91 0.82 10.11
O ganiza ional poli ics (POPS) .59 0.20 2.97** .47 0.23 2.09*
Au hen ic leade ship (AL) .14 0.18 .76 .23 0.10 2.01*
POPS × AL −.01 0.05 −.04 .01 0.06 .19
Co a ia e
10. Company −.02 0.04 −.46 −.01 0.04 −.04
20. Indus y enu e .05 0.02 2.87** .01 0.02 .12
30. O ganiza ional enu e .01 0.02 .05 .02 0.02 10.00
R² . 45*** .31***
SE: s anda d e o ; POPS: pe cep ion o o ganiza ional poli ics.
No e: S anda dized coe icien o he ela ionship be ween POPS–KSI and POPS–KSG, wi h AL, IM, and PM as mode a o s. N = 140.
*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.
98 Business Resea ch Qua e ly 27(1)
ela ionships be ween POPS and KSI and KSG.
Speci ically, in wo k con ex s cha ac e ized by high le -
els o o ganiza ional poli ics, IM and PSM di e en ia e
KSI and KSG, while hese mo i a ional o ces do no di -
e en ia e KS unde condi ions o low POPS le els. This
inding sugges s ha indi idual mo i a ional di e ences
may be magni ied in poli ical en i onmen s, which a e
also sel -in e es ed en i onmen s cha ac e ized by ambi-
gui y (Munyon e al., 2016).
The absence o a signi ican mode a ing e ec o AL
also me i s discussion. Al hough AL c ea es an en i on-
men conduci e o psychological sa e y and KS (see
Banks e al., 2016, o e iew), we conjec u e ha he
c isis con ex may ha e weakened o modi ied di ec
supe iso y in e ac ions wi h subo dina es. Ano he
po en ial al e na i e is ha AL is less impac ul in high
powe dis ance con ex s such as hose ound in B azil.
Finally, he s uc u ed na u e o manu ac u ing wo k may
ha e weakened he in luence o AL in his wo k con ex ,
mi iga ing i s in luence. Rega dless, he cumula i e e i-
dence on he posi i e e idence o AL is compelling
(Banks e al., 2016), e en as i s e ec s may depend on he
si ua ional cons ain s and in e ac ion pa e ns be ween
supe iso s and subo dina es.
The co ela ional analyses also sugges ha POPS may
dec ease he IM o employees, po en ially because hey a e
associa ed wi h unce ain y abou o ganiza ional deci-
sions and ambigui y abou expec a ions, p ocedu es, and
oles (Fe is e al., 1989, 2002) Ul ima ely hen, hese
esul s sugges ha POPS nega i ely impac IM as
employees o eel indecisi e when acing he possibili y
o ac ing, and also unde mine he enjoymen de i ed
om doing a ask (Chang e al., 2009; Cho & Yang,
2018). Howe e , con e sely, he esul s also sugges ha
when he e a e in insically mo i a ed con ibu o s, hey
may mi iga e o mi iga e he nega i e e ec s o poli ical
pe cep ions, and u u e esea ch is needed o shed ligh
on his key ela ionship.
The assessmen o IM, also, indica ed signi ican co -
ela ions signi ican o he analyzed cons uc s, showing
close ela ional links wi h PSM (Fe ne e al., 2010).
Howe e , conside ing employees’ pe cep ions, IM and
PSM do no ela e o KSI and KSG, which con adic s
indings in he li e a u e ha poin ed ou a s ong ela-
ionship be ween Wo k Mo i a ion (in insic and p oso-
cial) and KS in gene al (Ku aas e al., 2012; Llopis &
Foss, 2016; Suwan i, 2019). Thus, his unique con ex may
ep esen an impo an bounda y condi ion a ec ing how
mo i a ion and leade ship in luences mani es and impac
wo k.
Meanwhile, he signi ican di ec e ec o AL on KSG
also me i s discussion. These esul s sugges ha au hen ic
leade s engende a clima e in which g oups eel ee o
engage in KS wi h one ano he (c ., Munyon e al., 2021).
The signi ican di ec e ec o AL on KSG may also occu
Figu e 2. G aphics eg ession analysis o mode a ion: (a)
Rela ionship be ween POPS and KSI wi h in insic mo i a ion
(IM) as mode a o . (b) Rela ionship be ween POPS and KSI
wi h p osocial mo i a ion (PSM) as mode a o . (c) Rela ionship
be ween POPS and KSG wi h p osocial mo i a ion (PSM) as
mode a o .
