The Impact of Knowledge Hiding on Entrepreneurial Orientation: The Mediating Role of Factual Autonomy
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
· In the introduction, point out the factors that are related to your topic, need to mention clearly the research objective as well as the research question, and organize as per the procedure by mentioning the benefits of doing this research and identifying research gaps in the literature.
· It’s also needed to highlight the most important findings in the introduction.
· Please add some more relevant references from top journals in the area of your research and mainly those published in 2022 and 2023.
· There are some new significance papers related to the topic of this paper that should be included in the references and cited in the current study. I suggest authors cite the following to enhance your paper: Paper 1: Hakala, H., Sirén, C., & Wincent, J. (2016). Entrepreneurial orientation and international new entry: The moderating role of autonomy and structures in subsidiaries. Journal of Small Business Management, 54, 90-112. Paper 2: Ed-Dafali, S., Al-Azad, M. S., Mohiuddin, M., & Reza, M. N. H. (2023). Strategic orientations, organizational ambidexterity, and sustainable competitive advantage: Mediating role of industry 4.0 readiness in emerging markets. Journal of Cleaner Production, 401, 136765.. Paper 3: Ed-Dafali, S., Mohiuddin, M., Al Azad, M. S., & Salamzadeh, A. (2023). Entrepreneurial Leadership and Designing Industry 4.0 Business Models: Towards an Innovative and Sustainable Future for India. In Indian SMEs and Start-Ups: Growth through Innovation and Leadership (pp. 333-358). Paper 4: Lumpkin, G. T., Cogliser, C. C., & Schneider, D. R. (2009). Understanding and measuring autonomy: An entrepreneurial orientation perspective. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 33(1), 47-69..
· To what extent does the paper engage in (or connect with) ongoing debates in “Sustainablity”.
· More detail about Analysis of Findings is required
§ The paper still needs some language editing and corrections.
Author Response
Answers to Reviewer #1
We would like to thank you very much for your analysis and useful recommendations.
The paper has been revised to address English errors and misspelling. The Grammarly software was used for proper English editing.
Issue #1
In the introduction, point out the factors that are related to your topic, need to mention clearly the research objective as well as the research question, and organize as per the procedure by mentioning the benefits of doing this research and identifying research gaps in the literature
Answer #1
We point out the factors that are representative of our research and clearly mention the research question and representative research gaps in the existing literature.
Furthermore, we have rewritten the abstract of the paper to better highlight the purpose, so that the study problem is more clearly:
While different factors related to job characteristics, namely, job autonomy, task interdependence, and job demands, have been studied in association with knowledge hiding, most often from the mediator effect perspective, (e.g., the effect on leadership, attitudes/motivations, working context, individual differences, and outcomes such as organizational performance, innovation, and creativity), our study attempts to show the extent to which knowledge hiding undermines the entrepreneurial orientation process (innovation, risk-taking, and proactiveness), and the effect of factual autonomy as a mediator in the relationship between knowledge hiding behavior and entrepreneurial orientation. Despite the existing research, there is a gap in the literature concerning knowledge hiding about entrepreneurial orientation and factual autonomy. In conjunction with the above arguments focusing on research directions and knowledge gaps in the study of knowledge hiding, the present study intends to explore the underlying relationships between knowledge hiding, entrepreneurial orientation, and factual autonomy. In doing so, the argumentative endeavor seeks to assess the following research question.
RQ: How does knowledge-hiding behavior impact the entrepreneurial orientation process (innovation, risk-taking, and proactiveness), and to what extent does factual autonomy mediate the relationship between knowledge-hiding behavior and entrepreneurial orientation in organizations?
Issue #2
It’s also needed to highlight the most important findings in the introduction.
Answer #2
We have reformulated and integrated the important findings of the research in accordance with your recommendations.
Issue #3
Please add some more relevant references from top journals in the area of your research and mainly those published in 2022 and 2023.
Answer #3
We thank you for pointing out the relevant references on the subject from the top journals. All four papers were integrated into our literature review.
Issue #4 & #5
To what extent does the paper engage in (or connect with) ongoing debates in “Sustainability”.
Answer #4 & #5
In the Discussion section we have included an extensive paragraph which addresses the challenges related to sustainability and how our research contributes to sustainability and also we elaborate more on the Findings of the research.
Another important aspect drawn from the results of the present research is related to the significant implications for sustainability and competitive advantage within organizations. The effects of knowledge-hiding behavior in conjunction with entrepreneurial orientation are related to reducing collaboration factors, which hinder important aspects such as innovation and problem-solving. Furthermore, it impacts the condition of job autonomy by limiting the dissemination of critical information necessary for responsible and environmentally friendly practices, creating disparities in employee performance, career growth, and decision-making power, ultimately affecting the overall well-being of employees and the organization's social sustainability. In fact, our finding suggests that under conditions of low autonomy, as a result of poor task interdependence initiated, received, or reciprocal, the effect of EO is much reduced. Employees tend to hide knowledge to limit the availability of crucial information required by others to perform tasks autonomously. Consequently, valuable insights and lessons learned from past experiences may not reach those who need them, hindering the company's ability to leverage its collective knowledge and expertise. Therefore, it hampers the organization's ability to make informed decisions, develop innovative products and services, and respond effectively to changing market conditions, which is essential for driving sustainable practices.
Sustainable development requires continuous innovation and the effective transfer of knowledge and best practices. Aspects such as risk-taking (climate), the imbalance between job demands (e.g., time pressure, work overload), and the resources the individual has to deal with these demands will make individuals conserve their resources (especially specialized knowledge, as the results of the studies show that this is particularly true in competitive environments) and thereby hide knowledge more frequently. The relationship between knowledge hiding and sustainability engages in ongoing debates by touching on essential elements such as sustainable innovation, organizational learning, CSR, stakeholder engagement, ethical considerations, and sustainable culture and leadership.
In the context of science and integrated approaches to sustainable development, analyzing knowledge hiding about entrepreneurial orientation and job autonomy can shed light on the organizational dynamics that hinder or foster innovation and sustainable practices. By understanding how knowledge hiding impacts these crucial constructs, organizations can identify barriers and opportunities for knowledge sharing and innovation, leading to more effective sustainable development initiatives.
Thank you for your review and support.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The article deals with an important topic for companies and organizations and the research aims to investigate the impact that knowledge hiding results at an organizational level, specifically on entrepreneurial orientation and autonomy. The article has a well-organized structure and the literature review is complete. Some suggestions to improve readers' understanding: 1- Some paragraphs are long and could be divided into smaller paragraphs. 2- As the theme is centered on organizations, materials and methods, the 16 companies surveyed could have their detailed information such as size, area of activity, in addition to the segment as mentioned in the abstract. 3- The questions of the research instruments could be made available in annex
Author Response
Answers to Reviewer #2
We would like to thank you very much for your analysis and useful recommendations.
Issue #1
Some paragraphs are long and could be divided into smaller paragraphs.
Answer #1
We have reconfigured the entire content into smaller paragraphs.
Issue #2
As the theme is centered on organizations, materials and methods, the 16 companies surveyed could have their detailed information such as size, area of activity, in addition to the segment as mentioned in the abstract
Answer #2
We have integrated in the Data Collection and Sample section a full description of research sample.
The research sample for this study consists of 16 companies representing diverse industries, including the telecom sector (top four players), banking sector (four major banks), two major retailers, IT&C (two multinational and one local company), and three major service companies within Romanian business sector. This study aimed to ensure the generalizability of the findings and capture the nuances of knowledge hiding and entrepreneurial orientation in various business contexts.
To achieve a comprehensive representation of different industries, a stratified sampling approach was adopted to select participating companies and their employees. Stratified sampling involves dividing a population into subgroups or strata based on relevant characteristics or factors that may influence research outcomes. In this case, subgroups were formed based on factors such as job role, department, and job title within each company.
By including organizations from diverse sectors, the researchers sought to capture a wide range of organizational cultures, structures, and practices that could potentially impact knowledge hiding and entrepreneurial orientation.
The questionnaire was distributed to employees at all levels of decision-making within the 16 participating companies. This approach aimed to gather insights from a diverse set of perspectives, ranging from non-executive employees to low-level, middle-level, and top-level managers. Involving participants from different hierarchical levels enabled researchers to gain a comprehensive understanding of knowledge hiding and its effects on entrepreneurial orientation across the organizational hierarchy. The researchers enlisted the support of key facilitators within the participating companies and utilized a snowball sampling technique to expand the sample size. Specifically, employees were encouraged to share the online questionnaire with their colleagues or personal contacts working in similar medium-large companies operating in fast-paced business segments.
Overall, the study's research sample and sampling approach were designed to provide valuable insights into the relationship between knowledge hiding and entrepreneurial orientation in organizations operating in various industries and hierarchical structures. The inclusion of multiple sectors and employee levels allowed for a more holistic analysis of knowledge hiding behavior and its implications for entrepreneurial behaviors, thereby contributing to the robustness and applicability of this study's findings.
Issue #3
The questions of the research instruments could be made available in annex
Answer #3
The full research instrument scales are available in Appendix A
Thank you for your review and support.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The article aims to explore the underlying relationships between knowledge hiding, entrepreneurial orientation, and factual autonomy. The topic is interesting and the article is well structured. However, I consider that some improvements are needed.
Abstract: I consider that this section should be rewritten so that the study problem is clearly highlighted.
Introduction: I consider this section should be rewritten as it is too long. Some parts of this section consist of literature review elements and can be moved to the section Theoretical Background and Hypotheses Formulation.
Theoretical Background and Hypotheses Formulation: I consider this section should be revised. The authors focus on identifying and discussing the literature that addresses the three variables of the proposed model and superficially review the literature that addresses the relationships between these variables.
Materials and Methods: The professional profile of the respondents could be briefly discussed.
Discussion: I recommend expanding the analysis of the findings.
Conclusions: The limitations of the research are very brief.
Author Response
Answers to Reviewer #3
We would like to thank you very much for your analysis and useful recommendations.
Issue #1 & #2
Abstract: I consider that this section should be rewritten so that the study problem is clearly highlighted.
Introduction: I consider this section should be rewritten as it is too long. Some parts of this section consist of literature review elements and can be moved to the section Theoretical Background and Hypotheses Formulation.
Answer #1 & #2
We reconfigured the Abstract and Introduction of the study, pointing out the factors that are representative of our research, and clearly stated the research question and representative research gaps in the existing literature.
While different factors related to job characteristics, namely, job autonomy, task interdependence, and job demands, have been studied in association with knowledge hiding, most often from the mediator effect perspective, (e.g., the effect on leadership, attitudes/motivations, working context, individual differences, and outcomes such as organizational performance, innovation, and creativity), our study attempts to show the extent to which knowledge hiding undermines the entrepreneurial orientation process (innovation, risk-taking, and proactiveness), and the effect of factual autonomy as a mediator in the relationship between knowledge hiding behavior and entrepreneurial orientation. Despite the existing research, there is a gap in the literature concerning knowledge hiding about entrepreneurial orientation and factual autonomy. In conjunction with the above arguments focusing on research directions and knowledge gaps in the study of knowledge hiding, the present study intends to explore the underlying relationships between knowledge hiding, entrepreneurial orientation, and factual autonomy. In doing so, the argumentative endeavor seeks to assess the following research question.
RQ: How does knowledge-hiding behavior impact the entrepreneurial orientation process (innovation, risk-taking, and proactiveness), and to what extent does factual autonomy mediate the relationship between knowledge-hiding behavior and entrepreneurial orientation in organizations?
Furthermore, we have rewritten the abstract of the paper to better highlight the purpose, so that the study problem is more clearly:
Knowledge plays a crucial role as a strategic asset for organizations seeking to enhance and sustain their competitive advantage. Organizations have implemented Knowledge Management Systems to promote knowledge sharing. However, despite the existence of policies encouraging knowledge sharing, many employees refrain from engaging in this practice in their workplace. Building upon this context, the present study aims to investigate the impact of knowledge-hiding behavior on entrepreneurial orientation (EO) within organizations. Specifically, this study aims to explore how knowledge hiding, characterized by the intentional withholding of crucial information, influences employees' propensity for entrepreneurial behaviors, such as innovation, risk-taking, and proactiveness. By examining the potential negative impact of knowledge hiding on entrepreneurial behaviors, this study seeks to identify barriers to innovation and risk taking within organizations. Additionally, this study seeks to examine the mediating role of factual autonomy in the relationship between knowledge hiding and entrepreneurial; therefore, understanding the mediating role of factual autonomy can provide insights into the mechanisms through which knowledge hiding affects entrepreneurial behavior. Investigate the impact of knowledge hiding on organizational-level outcomes, specifically entrepreneurial orientation and job autonomy. To explore this phenomenon, a cross-sectional multilevel study was conducted, involving 214 employees from 16 companies operating in various business segments such as telecom, banking, retail, services, and IT&C from the Romanian business sector. The findings indicate that the proposed model accounts for 45.9% of the variance in entrepreneurial orientation and 37.7% of the variance in job autonomy, highlighting the influence of knowledge hiding on these outcomes. These results have both theoretical and practical implications, emphasizing the need for further investigation into the effects of knowledge hiding on various aspects of organizational work design. Such an examination serves as a valuable research laboratory for understanding multidimensional idiosyncrasies within organizations
Issue #3
Theoretical Background and Hypotheses Formulation: I consider this section should be revised. The authors focus on identifying and discussing the literature that addresses the three variables of the proposed model and superficially review the literature that addresses the relationships
Answer #3
Our study is one of the very few to integrate both knowledge-hiding behavior and entrepreneurial orientation with the effect of factual autonomy as a mediator. There are few similar research papers that address these relationships, and for the actual study, we review all the representative research covering the subject.
Issue #4
Materials and Methods: The professional profile of the respondents could be briefly discussed.
Answer #4
We have integrated in the Data Collection and Sample section a full description of research sample.
The research sample for this study consists of 16 companies representing diverse industries, including the telecom sector (top four players), banking sector (four major banks), two major retailers, IT&C (two multinational and one local company), and three major service companies within Romanian business sector. This study aimed to ensure the generalizability of the findings and capture the nuances of knowledge hiding and entrepreneurial orientation in various business contexts.
To achieve a comprehensive representation of different industries, a stratified sampling approach was adopted to select participating companies and their employees. Stratified sampling involves dividing a population into subgroups or strata based on relevant characteristics or factors that may influence research outcomes. In this case, subgroups were formed based on factors such as job role, department, and job title within each company.
By including organizations from diverse sectors, the researchers sought to capture a wide range of organizational cultures, structures, and practices that could potentially impact knowledge hiding and entrepreneurial orientation.
The questionnaire was distributed to employees at all levels of decision-making within the 16 participating companies. This approach aimed to gather insights from a diverse set of perspectives, ranging from non-executive employees to low-level, middle-level, and top-level managers. Involving participants from different hierarchical levels enabled researchers to gain a comprehensive understanding of knowledge hiding and its effects on entrepreneurial orientation across the organizational hierarchy. The researchers enlisted the support of key facilitators within the participating companies and utilized a snowball sampling technique to expand the sample size. Specifically, employees were encouraged to share the online questionnaire with their colleagues or personal contacts working in similar medium-large companies operating in fast-paced business segments.
Overall, the study's research sample and sampling approach were designed to provide valuable insights into the relationship between knowledge hiding and entrepreneurial orientation in organizations operating in various industries and hierarchical structures. The inclusion of multiple sectors and employee levels allowed for a more holistic analysis of knowledge hiding behavior and its implications for entrepreneurial behaviors, thereby contributing to the robustness and applicability of this study's findings.
Issue #5
Discussion: I recommend expanding the analysis of the findings.
Answer #5
In the Discussion section we have included an extensive paragraph which addresses the challenges related to sustainability and how our research contributes to sustainability and also we elaborate more on the Findings of the research.
Another important aspect drawn from the results of the present research is related to the significant implications for sustainability and competitive advantage within organizations. The effects of knowledge-hiding behavior in conjunction with entrepreneurial orientation are related to reducing collaboration factors, which hinder important aspects such as innovation and problem-solving. Furthermore, it impacts the condition of job autonomy by limiting the dissemination of critical information necessary for responsible and environmentally friendly practices, creating disparities in employee performance, career growth, and decision-making power, ultimately affecting the overall well-being of employees and the organization's social sustainability. In fact, our finding suggests that under conditions of low autonomy, as a result of poor task interdependence initiated, received, or reciprocal, the effect of EO is much reduced. Employees tend to hide knowledge to limit the availability of crucial information required by others to perform tasks autonomously. Consequently, valuable insights and lessons learned from past experiences may not reach those who need them, hindering the company's ability to leverage its collective knowledge and expertise. Therefore, it hampers the organization's ability to make informed decisions, develop innovative products and services, and respond effectively to changing market conditions, which is essential for driving sustainable practices.
Sustainable development requires continuous innovation and the effective transfer of knowledge and best practices. Aspects such as risk-taking (climate), the imbalance between job demands (e.g., time pressure, work overload), and the resources the individual has to deal with these demands will make individuals conserve their resources (especially specialized knowledge, as the results of the studies show that this is particularly true in competitive environments) and thereby hide knowledge more frequently. The relationship between knowledge hiding and sustainability engages in ongoing debates by touching on essential elements such as sustainable innovation, organizational learning, CSR, stakeholder engagement, ethical considerations, and sustainable culture and leadership.
In the context of science and integrated approaches to sustainable development, analyzing knowledge hiding about entrepreneurial orientation and job autonomy can shed light on the organizational dynamics that hinder or foster innovation and sustainable practices. By understanding how knowledge hiding impacts these crucial constructs, organizations can identify barriers and opportunities for knowledge sharing and innovation, leading to more effective sustainable development initiatives.
Issue #6
Conclusions: The limitations of the research are very brief.
Answer #6
We have expanded and reconsidered several aspect of the research limitations and further research directions
Despite the notable progress made in this field, this study acknowledges several research gaps and limitations that warrant further investigation.
To deepen our understanding of knowledge hiding, it is crucial to conduct in-depth comparative analyses to elucidate the connections and distinctions between knowledge hiding and related concepts, such as knowledge non-sharing, knowledge sharing hostility, knowledge contribution loafing, counterproductive knowledge behavior, knowledge hoarding, knowledge protection, and employee silence. By exploring the similarities and differences among these constructs, researchers can better comprehend the nuances of knowledge hiding and its implications.
While existing studies have explored the impact of knowledge characteristics, individual factors, team-level and interpersonal factors, and organizational-level factors on knowledge hiding, there remains a need for more comprehensive investigations into the underlying mechanisms and coping strategies associated with knowledge hiding behavior. Future research endeavors would benefit from exploring additional mediators beyond organizational performance and job characteristics to uncover other influential factors shaping knowledge-hiding behaviors.
In pursuit of a more holistic understanding of knowledge hiding, research designs must diversify beyond the current focus on individuals. Although previous studies have predominantly examined individual effects, the complex nature of knowledge hiding necessitates investigations that encompass the individual, team/interpersonal, and organizational levels. Exploring the interplay between these levels can shed light on the multifaceted dynamics of knowledge hiding within organizations.
Furthermore, future research should consider integrating cultural, sectoral, and organizational factors to enrich the findings. Taking these contextual elements into account can provide valuable insights into how knowledge hiding manifests across diverse settings, enhancing the generalizability and applicability of research findings.
In conclusion, addressing these research gaps and limitations will contribute to a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of knowledge-hiding behavior and its implications. By expanding the scope of the investigation and integrating diverse factors, future research can provide valuable insights to guide organizations in effectively managing and mitigating knowledge-hiding behaviors. In our perspective, it is through such a diverse array of approaches and exploration of various pathways, encompassing organizational-level outcomes as well as individual and team-level outcomes, that a comprehensive understanding of knowledge-hiding research can be achieved. This will enable scholars to better define research problems, innovate research theories and methodologies, and enrich field research with a robust framework.
Thank you for your review and support.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
