need assistance with instructor feedback

Name: Jessica Holloway

Learner ID: 2232440

Learner Email Address: [email protected]

School: Capella University

Program/Specialization: Ph. D I/O Psychology

Type of project (e.g., dissertation, capstone, etc.): Dissertation

Methodology – Quantitative or Qualitative: Qualitative

Quarter/Year of V8927completion: Fall 2025

Project topic

Topic proposal is grounded in a problem and aligned with program of study.

Alignment to the Program of Study

Presents an introduction to a clear topic proposal grounded in a problem within the program, project, and topic. Suggested length 1 paragraph.

The dissertation topic, as proposed, is the description of the experience of trust and knowledge sharing in the workplace by the employees in healthcare organizations. This study is aimed at learning more about the effects of trust, or its absence, on the willingness of employees to share their knowledge with colleagues. The main research question that will be used in conducting this research is as follows: How do healthcare workers explain their experience of trust when it comes to knowledge sharing at work? This subject is closely related to Industrial/Organizational Psychology because it studies the behavior at the workplace, organizational culture, and organizational relationships that influence the performance and collaboration at work .

Al-Alawi et al. (2007) posit that interpersonal trust between colleagues in the workplace has a strong influence on the workplace culture and information exchange. Kacperska and Lukasiewicz (2020) discovered that mistrust lowers the competitiveness of the organization and the collaboration of the employees. The study of the influence of trust on these interactions is relevant to the profession of industrial-organizational (I/O) psychology as it is directly related to the behavior of employees, organizational culture, organizational communication, and performance.

Project Problem

Clearly stated problem aligns with program, reflects literature gap or practice issue, and identifies population of interest.

Problem to be Addressed

Describe a general and specific problem that is clearly defined and aligned with the program, including what the problem is, who is experiencing the problem, where the problem exists, and the professional/organizational context . Suggested length 1paragraph.

Knowledge-sharing is becoming an invaluable resource in organizations to ensure their competitiveness, innovation, and sustainability (Andreeva and Kianto, 2012; Heisit et al., 2016). Nevertheless, it is always shown that interpersonal and organizational trust levels play a significant role in knowledge-sharing behaviors (Casimir et al., 2012; Kmieciak, 2021). The overall issue is that the lack of trust in the organizations prevents successful knowledge sharing among the workers. Workers feel that they have been mistrusted when they suspect that someone or a group does not trust them, and they would be unwilling to give out important information, knowledge, or ideas (Serenko and Bontis, 2016). The particular issue is that those workers who lack trust in the organization can deliberately not share knowledge, which restricts cooperation, innovativeness, and the performance of the organization in general (Perotti et al., 2022). This has been a problem with the professional organizational environments in which sharing of knowledge is critical to both organizational performance and employee interaction, but the presence of psychological and relational obstacles hinders the free flow of information.

Gap

Present an analysis of a gap in alignment with the problem and placed within the program. Addresses the broader questions of “who cares” and “why now”. Suggested length 1 paragraph .

Even though previous studies have already established a postulated relationship between trust and knowledge-sharing done by quantitative design methods (Casimir et al., 2021; Nguyen et al., 2019; Serenko and Bontis, 2016), there has been little qualitative research examining how employees personally experience and characterize knowledge-sharing in low-trust settings. The existing body of literature features many of the predictors that can be measured (e.g., motivation, rewards, leadership style) instead of the live experiences and perception of the employees. This brings a gap in the inability to know the emotional, relational, and contextual aspects of knowledge-sharing, where there is a lack of trust. This gap is significant to address since organizations are yet to invest in knowledge management systems without having a full knowledge of the psychological barriers that affect the engagement of employees .

Supporting Evidence

Literature review addresses previous relevant projects and articulates theoretical (practice) orientation.

Primary Orientation

Provide an introduction to the review of scholarly literature, an argument for conducting the review, and a primary theoretical (and practice) orientation. Suggested length 1-2 paragraphs.

The current research will be based on the Social Exchange Theory (SET) (Homans, 1961). According to Social Exchange Theory, people consider the process of social interaction through the perceived costs and benefits. In the knowledge-sharing context, the employees can evaluate the likelihood of sharing information to bring about reciprocal gains, rewards, or risk (e.g., exploitation, power loss, or unfelt reciprocation).

SET has been extensively used in the field of research on knowledge sharing (Serenko and Bontis, 2016; Zhao et al., 2020). Nevertheless, the majority of the research experiments with the exchange dynamics quantitatively. This paper builds upon SET by qualitatively investigating the perceptions and language of low-trust cost-benefit assessments by employees. The framework offers a theoretical basis for the rationale behind employee disengagement in sharing knowledge due to doubted reciprocity, injustice, or relational security.

Efforts to Address the Problem

Provide a synthesized review of the scholarly literature to expose, explain, and analyze previous scholarly efforts to address the problem. Suggested length 1-2 paragraphs.

Based on empirical studies, trust is always positively related to the sharing of knowledge (Kmieciak, 2021; Kacperska and Lukasiewicz, 2020). Organizational culture, leadership style, and intrinsic motivation have been proven to affect the willingness of employees to share knowledge (Nguyen et al., 2019; We-Li and Yi-Chih, 2017). Nevertheless, the majority of the studies determine predictors of knowledge-sharing instead of how employees perceive their experiences in the situation where trust is violated.

Research like Casimir et al. (2012) emphasizes the financial ramifications of poor trust and fails to present a detailed qualitative experience of the employee. Organizational interventions could not achieve success without learning how employees make meaning around trust and knowledge-sharing, where differences in psychology and relationships could be the basis of knowledge withholding. This research paper addresses that need by making employee voice and lived experience central to it.

Synthesis of the Evidence

Provide a logically organized and synthesized review and analysis of the literature in close alignment with the topic, problem, and gap. Suggested length 1-2 paragraphs.

Throughout the literature examined, this same theme comes out clearly; trust is one of the pillars of an effective knowledge exchange in organizations. Research indicates that employees who feel respected tend to have better chances of sharing expertise and consulting with others, which increases the success of the organization (Dong et al., 2017; Fard & Karimi, 2015 ). Conversely, when there is mistrust or worry of being judged, it is not a conducive environment to communicate freely, and therefore innovation will not be possible. Regardless of these results, the majority of studies are based on quantitative surveys, which creates a gap in the literature review regarding the process of describing and interpreting trust and knowledge sharing experiences by healthcare employees on a personal level.

Purpose of the Project and Project Questions

Purpose and questions align with topic, problem, and supporting evidence, including definition of terms.

Purpose of the Project

Provide one-to-two sentences aligned with the topic, problem, gap in practice, and project question to state the purpose of the project.

This generic qualitative research is aimed at investigating how low organizational trust employees describe their experiences in sharing knowledge in work environments. This study aims to enhance the knowledge of the psychological and relational processes that affect knowledge-sharing behavior by studying the lived experiences of employees.

Statement of Primary Question(s)

Provide 1-3 project questions that align with the topic, problem, and supporting evidence within the program. Suggested length 1 paragraph.

The main qualitative research question used in this study aims to seek how employees explain their experiences of trust and knowledge-sharing scenarios in organizational contexts. Though the previous studies have revealed statistical correlations between trust and knowledge-sharing behaviors (Casimir et al., 2012; Nguyen et al., 2019), most of the literature is based on the quantitative approach that fails to provide a full picture of the situationalized perceptions and experiences of employees. The generic qualitative research design is suitable as it will enable exploring the worldviews of participants in depth and not follow a particular qualitative tradition (Park & Park, 2016). It is based on the Social Exchange Theory of interaction (Homans, 1961), which states that people will judge the workplace interaction using the perceived costs and benefits; therefore, in this study, the researcher will attempt to grasp how employees perceive the trust based on the dynamics in determining whether to share knowledge or not. Thus, the research question that will guide the current research is as follows:

1. How do employees who perceive low trust in their organization describe their knowledge-sharing experiences?

Definition of Terms

Present a list of terms and definitions that relate to the program, topic, problem, gap, program, and project framework. This is a working section which you will continue to update in future courses. Suggested length 1 paragraph.

Knowledge-Sharing: Refers to the process where members of an organization share task-related information, expertise, or insights on a voluntary basis to facilitate collective performance (Wang et al., 2011).

Organizational Trust: Employees’ belief in the reliability, integrity, and fairness of coworkers and leadership within the organization (Kacperska & Lukasiewicz, 2020).

Social Exchange Theory: A hypothetical model that indicates that social behavior is determined by a person considering the perceived costs and gains in a societal exchange (Homans, 1961).

Knowledge Withholding: The choice not to transfer knowledge upon request or a situation in which sharing knowledge would be more helpful than not (Perotti et al., 2022).

If you are seeking Topic Endorsement in XX-V8926 – Doctoral Project Development - Topic Approval, you only need to complete the sections above for the approval.

Proposed Project Framework

Methodological approach is clearly defined and includes constructs, phenomena, variables, and population.

Methodological Approach

Provide a description and explanation of the methodological approach. The methodological approach must align to the topic , problem, supporting evidence, and data sources . Suggested length 2-3 paragraphs.

The proposed research will apply a generic qualitative research design and obtain information on how healthcare workers explain their experiences of trust as it applies to knowledge sharing at work. The qualitative methodology should be a generic approach to this project since it will enable the researcher to investigate and analyze the views and experiences of the participants without being restricted by the strong philosophical or procedural assumptions of a particular qualitative approach like phenomenology or grounded theory (Kahlke, 2014; Percy et al., 2015). This design aims to comprehend the meanings that individuals give to their experiences and how the same determines workplace interactions and behaviors.

This paper is congruent with the objective of the study of the role of trust in knowledge sharing through the examination of subjective experiences of the participants in their natural work settings. Semi-structured interviews will be used to ensure that the participants give narrative accounts that will capture their thoughts, feelings, and actions regarding trust and exchange of information. This methodology helps to be flexible in the data collection and analysis, retaining the high focus on the interpretation and meaning-making (Caelli et al., 2003).

The qualitative approach will be generic, based on an inductive approach to analyzing and revealing shared themes and patterns in the accounts of the participants. Thematic analysis will be listed as the data coding and analysis tool that will allow the author of the research to mark, analyze, and present the common meanings associated with trust and knowledge sharing (Braun and Clarke, 2021). This method offers a realistic and rigorous model to study the process by which healthcare employees feel and perceive trust, but it also offers implications that can assist organizations in designing how to enhance communication, collaboration, and knowledge management practices.

Population and Sample (including site if necessary)

Describe the general target population (e.g., size, characteristics). Suggested length 1-2 paragraphs.

The sample will comprise workers in the healthcare sector with a minimum of two years of work experience. This period is important because it enables them to have adequate experience in their duties, which might affect their attitude towards trust and sharing of knowledge in their workplace . The healthcare industry has a very diverse workforce, encompassing doctors, nurses, allied health professionals (physical therapists and radiologists), administrative employees, and support staff. Healthcare is a very heterogeneous sector, as it involves different environments, including hospitals, clinics, long-term care facilities, and community health organizations. Depending on the organizational culture, each setting can develop varying degrees of trust and knowledge sharing. Although it is not clearly defined based on demographics like age or gender, the diversity within this population can be known, and hence, insights can be made.

Constructs, Phenomena, Variables

Present evidence and explanation for the final choice of framework. Constructs, phenomena, and/or variables must align to the topic, problem, gap, and project questions. Suggested length 2-3 paragraphs.

Since this project is a generic qualitative design, there is a tendency to explore phenomena instead of variables, quantifying or testing constructs. The main subject of the study is the lived experiences of employees as they pertain to knowledge sharing in healthcare organizations in terms of trust. It seeks to determine the way employees feel and define trust, the ways it affects their readiness to reveal or conceal information, and the way those experiences are conditioned by organizational or interpersonal elements (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).

The problem of trust and knowledge sharing is analyzed as a complicated social process that is developed during the interactions at the workplace. Trust is also conceptualized as a relational experience, which is perceived as the integrity, reliability, and competence of coworkers (Dirks and Ferrin, 2002). Knowledge sharing refers to the free flow of information, knowledge, or experience that leads to organizational learning (Wang and Noe, 2011). Exploring the interplay and contextual circumstances that facilitate or prevent the collaboration and learning process in healthcare institutions.

The researcher will shed light on the meaning and significance of trust as employees experience it, as opposed to its quantitative nature and meaning. This is in line with the interpretive objectives of the qualitative inquiry, which concern the description and understanding of human experiences in the context, and not quantifying the experiences (Creswell and Poth, 2018). The results will also be relevant to the larger body of literature on industrial-organizational psychology in that they will enhance the comprehension of the mechanism of trust functioning in professional settings and its influence on the behavior of knowledge sharing among healthcare professionals.

Proposed Data Sources

Instrumentation and data collection tools address project concepts; ethical threats and their mitigation are detailed.

Measures or Artifacts to be Reviewed

Present a description of instrumentation or data collection tools. Measures or artifacts must closely align with the methodological approach. Suggested length 3-4 paragraphs.

The main data collection tool will be semi-structured interviews. The semi-structured interviews give the researcher flexibility without compromising the consistency of interviews among participants, as well as an opportunity to investigate the perceptions of the participants in a more in-depth manner (Creswell and Poth, 2018; Kallio et al., 2016). The interview guide will make sure the questions are relevant to the research purpose and the central phenomenon in the study, which is trust and knowledge sharing among the healthcare employees.

Each interview shall have about 10-12 open-ended questions with probing questions to promote elaborations and clarifications. Before the actual data collection, the interview guide will be pilot-tested with one to two healthcare professionals to clarify and determine the language sustainability (Doody & Noonan, 2013).

Guiding Interview Questions

1. How would you describe the level of trust among employees in your organization?

2. What factors contribute to building or reducing trust in your workplace?

3. Can you describe a situation where trust affected your willingness to share or withhold information?

4. How does organizational culture What do you feel influences how people share knowledge at work?

5. What types of knowledge (e.g., clinical, procedural, administrative) do you typically share with colleagues?

6. What makes you feel comfortable or uncomfortable sharing knowledge with others?

7. In what ways do leaders or supervisors Who or what influences trust and knowledge sharing?

8. How do you perceive the relationship between trust and teamwork knowledge sharing in your department?

9. What challenges do you face when attempting to share knowledge?

10. How could healthcare organizations improve trust to promote better knowledge sharing?

11. Is there anything else about trust or knowledge sharing you would like to add ?

These questions are designed to elicit rich, descriptive responses that capture participants’ lived experiences related to the research phenomenon (Braun & Clarke, 2021).

Detailed Procedures

Present a description of the processes needed to complete the instruments by the participants or observers. Suggested length 3-4 paragraphs.

The data collection process will be organized but open to various best practices of qualitative research (Merriam and Tisdell, 2016). Professional healthcare networks will be used as the starting point of recruitment after obtaining the Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval at Capella University . Participants interested will be sent a sheet of information through email stating the purpose of the study, the voluntary aspect, the confidentiality, and the protection of information.

Those willing to participate will arrange an interview using Zoom, which will last a span of 45 and 60 minutes. The consent form will be given to the participants prior to an interview, and they will have a chance to pose questions. The recording of each session will be done via the built-in recording feature on the Zoom platform (audio only) to ensure the accuracy of the data collection. I will also keep a field note to record nonverbal expressions and situational information, which can be used to give more interpretations and improvement (DeJonckheere & Vaughn, 2019).

The transcription of the audio files will be done using transcription software and verified to track the accuracy of these files following the interview. All personal data will be anonymized, and pseudonyms (e.g., P 1 – P 15) will be employed. To check the accuracy of the transcript, each participant will receive their transcript through email (member checking). The transcripts will then be stored in an encrypted flash disk in a locked cabinet in my home office. The data will be accessible to me only.

After the interviews are reviewed and confirmed, the data will be coded into NVivo software coding and thematic analysis by adhering to a six-phase framework advanced by Braun and Clarke (2021): familiarization, coding, theme development, reviewing, defining, and reporting. In the analysis, transparency will be preserved by keeping an audit trail where the coding choices and reflection notes will be documented (Nowell et al., 2017).

Validity/Reliability/Credibility/Dependability

Identify and present the potential threats to reliability and validity (quantitative techniques) or trustworthiness (qualitative techniques). Include a proposed plan to mitigate the noted threats. Suggested length 1-2 paragraphs.

In order to achieve credibility and reliability of this qualitative study, a number of strategies will be used during data collection and analysis. Member checking will be utilized to address the issue of credibility by allowing the participants to review and verify the authenticity of the interview transcripts and other initial interpretation content to ensure that their experiences are treated authentically (Nowell et al., 2017). The credibility of the findings will also be enhanced by triangulation of data sources, i.e., comparing the answers of different professional roles in healthcare. Keeping field notes and an audit trail during the research process will record methodological choices and considerations, which facilitates openness and enables other individuals to trace the decision-making processes of the researcher (Merriam and Tisdell, 2016).

The reliability will be achieved through regular processes of data collection and the use of a well-constrained analytical scheme based on the six stages of thematic analysis that Braun and Clarke (2021) have provided. The methodological rigor is facilitated by this systematic process since every step of the research process, including coding and theme development, is systematically performed and recorded. I will also be involved in peer debriefing, seeking the opinion of academic mentors on the consistency of coding and emerging interpretations. These two practices put in place make the findings of the study credible and dependable, and this represents an accurate and reliable picture of the experiences of participants concerning trust and knowledge sharing in a healthcare setting.

Proposed Data Collection

Describe sampling, recruitment, data collection procedures, and potential ethical considerations.

Sampling Strategy, Number participants

Describe, explain, and justify the sampling strategy to be used. Suggested length 2-3 paragraphs.

In a generic qualitative study, the participants should be chosen in such a way that they can give in-depth accounts of their experiences on the subject of concern. Thus, the proposed research will be based on purposive sampling, which is one of the most popular methods of qualitative research since it will involve the deliberate identification of those individuals who have direct and relevant experience (Creswell and Poth, 2018; Palinkas et al., 2015). Purposive sampling will be applicable in this project as it guarantees that the participants in this project have significant exposure to trust and knowledge-sharing processes in healthcare environments, and consequently, they provide detailed information in line with the aim of the study. Because there is no particular qualitative tradition that generic qualitative inquiry should follow, to ensure the presence of variation in employee visions regarding their role, department, and organizational setting, drawing on information-rich cases is necessary (Kahlke, 2014; Percy et al., 2015).

This sampling will facilitate the objectives of a generic qualitative design in that the researcher will be enabled to collect descriptive narratives of individuals capable of discussing interpersonal relationships, organizational specifics, and communication behaviors at work in relation to trust and sharing of knowledge. Different roles can also be included through purposive sampling, which allows finding nurses, allied health professionals, physicians, administrative employees, and support staff, and expanding the scope of knowledge about how trust affects the process of knowledge exchange in various sections of healthcare organizations. Since generic qualitative studies are not aimed at representativeness but depth and variations, such a method is consistent with suggested practices in gathering data to determine the multiple perspectives and experiences (Caelli et al., 2003; Merriam and Tisdell, 2016).

The estimation of the sample, to be used in the given study, is about 10 to 15 participants , which is an appropriate amount to conduct any generic qualitative research, where depth over the number is prioritized (Guest et al., 2020). This is enough to identify variability among the experiences of participants, but leaves the researcher to make detailed, repeated analyses of the themes. The data gathering will be sustained until theme saturation happens, meaning when no novel themes, understandings, and patterns are elicited by further interviews (Saunders et al., 2018). A sample size at this level is conducive to a rigorous interpretation in which a study can determine the meaningful themes and procedures towards the rich, descriptive concepts of how healthcare employees perceive and experience trust concerning knowledge sharing .

Recruitment Procedures

Provide a recruitment process to identify, screen, and recruit participants as it aligns with the methodological approach. Present the inclusion and exclusion criteria for participating in the project. Suggested length 2-3 paragraphs.

This study will start by recruiting participants following the approval of Capella University’s Institutional Review Board (IRB). The purposive sampling will be used to recruit the participants, starting with a small sample of healthcare workers who fit the inclusion criteria. The initial respondents will be found with the help of professional networks, healthcare associations, and LinkedIn groups in the field of healthcare practice and management. Once the interview is conducted, every person will be requested to suggest other people who can fit the requirements and are potentially eager to take part . This method of making a referral will assist me in reaching a larger and more varied group of healthcare workers that might otherwise be inaccessible to other methods of recruitment.

Qualified candidates will be healthcare workers presently working in hospitals, clinics, or other medical institutions with a minimum of two years of work experience. The research will invite diverse roles of nurses, physicians, allied health personnel, and administrative personnel to be able to consider different points of view on trust and knowledge sharing on different levels in the organization. The participants should be over the age of 18 years and should agree to take part in a 45-60 minute virtual interview that will also be conducted through Zoom.

Interested participants will be sent an email invitation with a concise description of the study, its purpose, and the requirements of participating in the study. Interested persons will be sent an informed consent in an email containing details about the voluntary nature of the research, protection of confidentiality, and data security measures. The participants will book a virtual interview at a time that is convenient to them after giving electronic consent. The entire recruitment process will be carried out via secure email to ensure that the privacy of the participants is maintained. It will be protected by the use of pseudonyms (e.g., P1 – P15) and will not disclose any information to any other party. This method of recruitment would help to provide a reasonable ethical involvement of participants and correspond to the best practices in qualitative research involving human participants (Mozersky et al., 2020; Resnik, 2018).

Data Collection Process

Provide a logical step-by-step data collection process as it aligns with the methodological approach. Suggested length 3-4 paragraphs.

Data will be collected using semi-structured interviews with healthcare workers. The interviews will be conducted using Zoom video conferencing, which has voice recording and transcription on. An online video-conferencing tool that can record audio and generate transcripts is an interview best practice. The interviews will be conducted at a time that is convenient to the participants. The interviews will be virtual, and therefore, have no particular place.

During the interview process, the interview guide will be applied, which will be a pre-made interview guide. The length of every interview would be 45-60 minutes, split into the following parts: 10 minutes on the first welcome and greeting and rapport-building, 35-50 minutes on the interview questions asking and receiving, and 5 minutes on closing off the interview . Interviewers need to spend some minutes establishing a positive relationship with the interviewee before the interview starts (Nathan et al., 2019).

The interview process will be summarized as follows:

· Allow a certain time in each interview.

· Welcome participants – Welcome everyone who has been invited to take part in the interview, as per the guidelines of the interview.

· Get further clarification, as the interview questions the current interview, and, as may be needed, the insightful follow-up questions.

· After the interview, say goodbye to the individual one more time, with the message of thanking him/her.

· Brief the participants that a copy of the transcript will be shared with them to ensure that it is accurate.

· Download the transcript and audio recording.

· Listen to the audio recording as you go throough the transcript, and change it accordingly to fit the audio recording.

· To de-identify the transcript, take out the name of the participants or the business.

· Send the transcript to the participant through email to allow him or her to verify it.

· The transcripts of all 12 interviews must be compiled to prepare a data analysis.

Ethical Considerations

Identify potential ethical issues and provide a proposed plan to adhere to strict ethical standards. Include details regarding privacy, confidentiality, and data security procedures and concerns. Suggested length 1-2 paragraphs.

Because gathering data in a qualitative project requires interviewing the participants regarding their professional activity, the utmost ethical principles should be followed (Mozersky et al., 2020). The participants of this project will be involved in semi-structured interviews. I will seek IRB approval from Capella University before I conduct the process of recruiting and data gathering, and contact any potential participants. The personally identifiable information or input of the participants that can be used to identify them will not be released to secure their privacy and confidentiality. Each participant will be identified using P1-P12. Two aspects that should be considered the most important when dealing with human subjects are privacy and confidentiality (Resnik, 2018).

The participants are free to leave the study anytime, and even during the interview, without any reason or no reason at all. As Singer and Couper (2008) suggest, providing incentives to attract participants is viewed as too much coercion and a failure of the results. The participants are not going to be given any incentives; their participation in this experiment is purely voluntary. The Belmont Report outlines three fundamental ethical concepts, including beneficence, fairness, and respect for persons (Nagai et al., 2022). These requirements are maintained by removing all coercion of the participants, reducing the risks of participation through confidentiality, and storing all the data obtained in a secure file in my home office over the period of seven years. Any electronic material that was saved in a flash drive will be erased after seven years, and the entire drive itself shall be destroyed together with all the print copy data.

Proposed Data Analysis Plan

Articulate data analysis techniques appropriate to project framework.

Present a plan to analyze and present data with techniques that are appropriate to the project, framework, data sources, and sample size. Suggested length 3-4 paragraphs.

The proposed data analysis plan will be systematic and qualitative (based on phenomenology ) to investigate how the employees talk about trust in knowledge-sharing experiences. Once all the interviews are transcribed and confirmed by the participant through member checking, the analysis will commence with repeated readings of each of the transcripts in order to gain familiarity with the data. The preliminary immersion will enable the researcher to have a holistic approach to the lived experiences of the participants before coding (Moustaka s, 1994). Memos and parties of reflection will be maintained in the process to record my impressions, first impressions, and my changing interpretations.

The thematic analysis will then be followed to identify the themes based on the six steps suggested by Braun and Clarke (2006) familiarization with the data, (2) generating initial codes, (3) searching for themes, (4) reviewing themes, (5) defining and naming themes, and (6) producing the final report. The first codes will be developed inductively, that is, they will entail statements of meaning regarding trust, knowledge sharing, the nature of interpersonal dynamics, organizational culture, and perceived costs or benefits of sharing information. Then codes will be based on larger themes, which represent commonality in the experience. This method is akin to the social exchange theory construct of this study because it shows the understanding of relational and reciprocity of trust by the participants.

In ensuring methodological rigor, I will apply strategies to promote trustworthiness such as member checking, audit trail, and concept triangulation with the existing literature (Lincoln and Guba, 1985). Data will be examined manually or with the help of qualitative analysis software like NVivo to aid in structuring and the observation of patterns. The themes will be constantly developed and made to reflect the data and answer the research question.

Lastly, the results will be communicated in the form of rich and descriptive narratives complemented by direct quotes of respondents. Such stories will show how trust determines knowledge-sharing practices and how employees view the implications of trusting or withholding information. The conclusion analysis will relate the emergent themes to the conceptual framework, showing how social exchange processes play a role in making employees decide whether to share knowledge or not. In doing so, one will be able to gain a profound, contextualized insight into trust in the context of organizational knowledge-sharing practices.

References

APA formatted reference section that includes a reference for each citation used in text.

Al -Awai, A. I, AI-Marzooqi, N., Mohammed, Y., F. (2007). Organizational culture and knowledge sharing: Critical success . Journal of Knowledge Management, 11(2), 22-42. https://www.proquest.com/docview/230309705

Andreasian, G. & Andreasian, M. (2013). Knowledge sharing and knowledge transfer barriers: A case study [Master’s thesis, Linnaeus University]. DiVA Portal. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:639925/FULLTEXT01.pdf

Andreeva, T., & Kianto, A. (2012). Does knowledge management really matter? Linking knowledge management practices, competitiveness, and economic performance. Journal of Knowledge Management, 16(4), 617-636. https://www.proquest.com/docview/1023897605 ?

Bolisani, E., & Bratianu, C. (2018). Emergent knowledge strategies: Strategic thinking in knowledge management (Vol. 4, Knowledge Management and Organizational Learning). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60657-6

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. Sage.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Cabrera, A., & Cabrera, E. R., (2002). Knowledge-sharing dilemmas. Organization Studies, 23(5), 687-710. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840602235001

Caelli, K., Ray, L., & Mill, J. (2003). ‘Clear as mud’: Toward greater clarity in generic qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2(2), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690300200201

Casimir, G., Lee, K. & Loon, M. (2012). Knowledge sharing influences trust, commitment, and cost. Journal of Knowledge Management, 16(5), 740-753. https://doi.org/10.1108/13673271211262781

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications

Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, S. M. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874-900. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206305279602

Davenport, R. (2005). Why does knowledge management still matter? T D, 59(2), 18-25. https://www.proquest.com/docview/227026978

DeJonckheere, M., & Vaughn, L.M. (2019). Semistructured interviewing in primary care research: A balance of relationship and rigour. Family Medicine and Community Health, 7(2), Article e000057. https://doi.org/10.1136/fmch-2018-000057

Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2022). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 611-628. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.611

Dong, Y., Bartol, K. M., Zhang, Z., & Li, C. (2017). Enhancing employee creativity via individual skill development and team knowledge sharing: Influences of dual-focused transformational leadership: Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38(3), 439-458. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2134

Doody, O., & Noonan, M. (2013). Preparing and conducting interviews to collect data. Nurse Researcher, 20(5), 28-32. https://doi.org/10.7748/nr2013.05.20.5.28.e327

Elita, Y.,Moordiningsih, & Sinthia, R. (2021). Knowledge-sharing behavior reviewed from a social exchange perspective. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research Series, 532 , 440-445. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210227.087

Fard, P., & Karimi, F. (2015). The relationship between organizational trust and silence with job satisfaction and organizational commitment of the university employees. International Education Studies, 8(11), 219-227. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v8n11p219

Guest, G., Namey, E., & Chen, M. (2020). A simple method to assess and report thematic saturation in qualitative research. PLOS ONE, 15(5), Article e0232076. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232076

Heisig, P., Suraj, O. A., Kianto, A., Kemboi, C., Perez Arrau, G., & Fathi Easa, N. (2016). Knowledge management and business performance: Global experts’ views on future research needs. Journal of Knowledge Management 20(6), 1169-1198. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-12-2015-0521

Homans, G. C. (1961). Social behavior. Its elementary forms. New York: Harcourt Brace & World.

Kacperska, E., & Lukasiewicz, K. (2020). The importance of trust in knowledge sharing and the efficiency of doing business in the example of tourism. Information (Basel), 11(6), Article 311. https://doi.org/10.3390/info11060311

Kahlke, R. M. (2014). Generic qualitative approaches: Pitfalls and benefits of methodological mixology. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 13(1), 37-52. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691401300119

Kallio, H., Pietila, A. -M., Johnson, M., & Kangasniemi, M. (2016). Systematic methodological review: Developing a framework for a qualitative semi-structured interview guide. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 72(12), 2954-2965. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13031

Kmieciak, R. (2021). Trust, knowledge sharing, and innovation work behavior: Empirical evidence from Poland. European Journal of Innovation Management, 24(5), 1832-1859. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-04-2020-0134

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.1016/0147-1767(85)90062-8

Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.

Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412995658

Mozersky, J., Walsh, H., Parsons, M., McIntosh, T., Baldwin, K., & DuBois, J. M. (2020). Are we ready to share qualitative research data? Knowledge and preparedness among qualitative researchers, IRB Members, and data repository curators. IASSIST Quarterly, 43(4), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.29173/iq952

Nagai, H., Nakazawa, E., & Akabayashi, A. (2022). The creation of the Belmont Report and its effect on ethical principles: A Historical Study. Monash Bioethics Review, 40(2), 157-170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-022-00165-5

Nathan, S., Newman, C., & Lancaster, K. (2019). Qualitative interviewing. In. P. Liamputtong (Ed.), Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences (pp. 391-410). Singapore: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5251-4_77

Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M. White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847

Nguyen, T., Nham, T. P., Froese, F. J., & Malik, A. (2019). Motivation and knowledge sharing: A meta-analysis of main and moderating effects. Journal of Knowledge Management, 23(5), 996-1016. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-01-2019-0029

Nowell, L.S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847

Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42(5), 533-544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y

Park, J., & Park, M. (2016). Qualitative versus quantitative research methods: Discovery or justification? Journal of Marketing Thought, 3(1), 2-7.

Percy, W. H., Kostere, K., & Kostere, S. (2015). Generic qualitative research in psychology: The Qualitative Report, 20(2), 76-85. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2015.2097

Perotti, F. A., Ferraris, A., Candelo, E., & Busso, D. (2022). The dark side of knowledge sharing: Exploring knowledge sabotage and its antecedents. Journal of Business Research, 141, 422-432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.11.033

Resnik, D. B. (2018). Privacy and confidentiality. In D. B. Resnick (Ed.), The Ethics of Research with Human Subjects: Protecting people, advancing science, promoting trust (1st edition, pp. 149-163). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68756-8_6

Saunders, B., Sim, J., Kingstone, T., Baker, S., Waterfield, J., Bartlam, B., Burroughs, H., & Jinks, C. (2018). Saturation in qualitative research: Exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Quality & Quantity, 52(4), 1893-1907. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0574-8

Serenko, A., & Bontis, N. (2016). Negotiate, reciprocate, or cooperate? The impact of exchange modes or inter-employee knowledge sharing. Journal of Knowledge Management, 20(4), 687-712. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-10-2015-0394

Singer, E., & Couper, M. P. (2008). Do incentives exert undue influence on survey participation? Experimental Evidence. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics: JERHRE, 3(3), 49-56. https://doi.org/10.1525/jer.2008.3.3.49

Wang, S., Noe, R. A., & Wang, M. Z. (2011). Motivating knowledge sharing in knowledge management systems: A quasi-field experiment. Journal of Management, 40(4), 978-1009. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311412192

Wei-Li, W., & Yi-Chih, L. (2017). Empowering group leaders encourage knowledge sharing: Integrating the social exchange theory and positive organizational behavior perspective. Journal of Knowledge Management, 21(2), 474-491. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-08-2016-0318

Yan, Z., Wang, T., Chen, Y., & Zhang, H. (2016). Knowledge sharing in online health communities: A social exchange perspective. Information & Management, 53(5), 643-653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2016.02.001

Yeboah, A. (2023). Knowledge sharing in organization: A systematic review. Cogent Business & Management, 10(1), Article: 2195027. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2195027

Zhao, Y., Peng, X., Liu, Z., Song, S., & Hansen, P. (2020). Factors that affect asker’s pay intention in trilateral payment-based social Q&A platforms: From a benefit and cost perspective. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 7(15), 516-528. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24262

�Thank you for the Turnitin Report. It looks like a lot of material matches a previous submission to Capella. Do you think that this is matching to your previous work?

�Paragraph Structure - What is the overall point of this paragraph? Lead with a strong first sentence that communicates the main idea and then make sure that the supporting evidence (next few sentences) support that point. All of the sentences should lead to the conclusion stated in the last sentence.

�Apply this feedback throughout and to all future writing.

�I am just putting this here as well for reference:

Think about the narrow and broad implications of your study. Below is what your study could accomplish and these ideas form the basis for conducting the study. The purpose, goal, rationale, etc. are all aligned with what is presented below. Find support for these ideas and see if you can weave them into the appropriate areas using the literature to guide what to use and where.

Your study will provide detailed insight into the perceptions and experiences of real people:

how they perceive trust,

how they interpret others’ actions,

how these perceptions shape their communication behaviors.

This provides rich, contextual understanding that quantitative methods rarely capture.

The study could help identify barriers and facilitators to trust and knowledge sharing:

Structural issues (workload, shift patterns, staffing),

Relational factors (interpersonal conflicts, leadership styles),

Cultural norms (hierarchies, team silos).

These insights help organizations pinpoint what supports or hinders trust and sharing.

Findings could reveal practical/actionable themes:

Recommendations for leadership practices,

Team-building interventions,

Improved communication processes,

Training needs (e.g., conflict resolution, psychological safety)

The study could lead to a better understanding of the Trust-Knowledge Sharing relationship and reveal why trust matters:

Trust may encourage openness, collaboration, and knowledge flow,

Distrust could lead to information witholding errors, inefficiencies, and burnout.

Insights help healthcare organizations design environments where employees feel safe sharing information.

Outcomes could enhance organizational learning and support:

Stronger learning cultures,

Cross-disciplinary collaboration,

Better patient care outcomes.

�The problem is that knowledge needs to be shared in order for organizations to function well and be successful, right? Who exactly is experiencing the problem? This needs to be tied directly to healthcare and healthcare workers if that is the context within which the problem is occurring.

�Outline the paragraph:

Knowledge sharing is a resource and integral to organizational success. In order to promote knowledge sharing, employees have to ‘trust’. Trust can be particularly challenging for ‘healthcare workers’ working in ‘specific healthcare organizations’. Studies have started to examine this problem but the problem persists so additional research/insight is needed.

�?

�Make this point more clear.

�Outline the content here and then write. We know this, and this, and this but what we don’t know is ‘the insight you will provide’ employees perspectives on trust and knowledge sharing…… And we need to know this because….. (add who cares and why now) - the organization should care because they want to be successful, those that the organization serves should care because it impacts them, and why now should address recent research indicating that we need to get a better understanding so that we can avoid any negative impacts to the company or those they serve.

�Stay away from the term ‘lived experience’. That is a phenomenological term. You will be examining the ‘perceptions and attitudes’ of employees.

�‘an employees ability to trust and willingness to share important organizational knowledge’ that could impact the overall effectiveness of the organization.

�This is not included.

�A lot of research has been done in this area. Several lines include…. And have presented findings that support several lines of thinking in this area...

�? Make sure that you can explain this and provide a clearly articulated argument that your study will provide this.

�This is supposed to present a synthesis of evidence, not what was stated in only two possibly outdated studies. 2015 was over 10 years ago. A lot of research has happened since then in this area.

�The purpose of this generic qualitative study is to explore healthcare workers’ experiences and perceptions of trust and knowledge sharing in their daily professional interactions, as well as identify factors that support or hinder effective collaboration in this setting. The goal is to understand how healthcare workers describe the role of trust in shaping their willingness to share knowledge with others within their organization.

�Think about the narrow and broad implications of your study. Below is what your study could accomplish and these idas form the basis for conducting the study. The purpose, goal, rationale, etc. are all aligned with what is presented below. Find support for these ideas and see if you can weave them into the appropriate areas using the literature to guide what to use and where.

Your study will provide detailed insight into the perceptions and experiences of real people:

how they perceive trust,

how they interpret others’ actions,

how these perceptions shape their communication behaviors.

This provides rich, contextual understanding that quantitative methods rarely capture.

The study could help identify barriers and facilitators to trust and knowledge sharing:

Structural issues (workload, shift patterns, staffing),

Relational factors (interpersonal conflicts, leadership styles),

Cultural norms (hierarchies, team silos).

These insights help organizations pinpoint what supports or hinders trust and sharing.

Findings could reveal practical/actionable themes:

Recommendations for leadership practices,

Team-building interventions,

Improved communication processes,

Training needs (e.g., conflict resolution, psychological safety)

The study could lead to a better understanding of the Trust-Knowledge Sharing relationship and reveal why trust matters:

Trust may encourage openness, collaboration, and knowledge flow,

Distrust could lead to information witholding errors, inefficiencies, and burnout.

Insights help healthcare organizations design environments where employees feel safe sharing information.

Outcomes could enhance organizational learning and support:

Stronger learning cultures,

Cross-disciplinary collaboration,

Better patient care outcomes.

�Did previous studies identify barriers and facilitators to trust. If not, then this provides support for the gap. If they did, then maybe they didn’t ask healthcare workers directly and the gap lies in going directly to the appropriate source to acquire the information instead exploring quantitatively based on a set of predetermined variables. Since you are doing a qualitative study, you will be exploring the experience holistically and allowing for any and all possibilities. Make sense?

�Maybe barriers or facilitators not previously explored will be identified. All of this is speculative and would need to be communicated tentatively but speaks to the need for the qualitative inquiry.

�No, this is not accurate. You will not be identifying low organizational trust employees. Your study will openly explore trust and knowledge sharing.

�All factors including these….. See above purpose statement comment.

�?

�I thought this was more open…..

�Above it states: How do healthcare workers explain their experience of trust when it comes to knowledge sharing at work?

�What about: How do healthcare workers perceive and experience trust and knowledge sharing in their daily professional interactions?

�No matter what it needs to be consistently communicated throughout all documents/sections.

�Since the goal is understanding and capturing insight from experiential experts, qualitative is the way to go. Cite primary sources related to ‘method’ and potentially other works that have been used like this to produce similar results.

�People that have the knowledge and are willing to share.

�?

�& when within parentheses, the word ‘and’ when a part of the sentence.

�?

�Are there studies that show that trust in the workplace is typically acquired by year 2?

�Support?

�Here is an example of a formal interview protocol. This would start out with rapport building and end with an open ended call for anything they feel needs to be known:

1. Opening / Rapport‑Building Questions

“Tell me about your role and how long you’ve been working in this setting?”

“How would you describe communication between and among individuals at your organization during a typical workday?”

These types of questions help establish context and ease the participant into the interview.

2. Questions About Trust in the Workplace

“How do you define trust in the context of your work environment?”

“Can you describe a situation where you felt a high level of trust with a colleague or supervisor?”

“What factors contribute to or undermine trust among your team members?”

These questions provide insight into participants’ frameworks, values, and experiences.

3. Questions About Knowledge Sharing

“How do healthcare workers typically share information or expertise in your unit/department?”

“Can you describe a time when knowledge sharing was especially effective—or ineffective?”

“What makes you feel comfortable or uncomfortable sharing your knowledge with others?”

These questions encourage storytelling around processes, barriers, and motivations.

4. Questions Connecting Trust and Knowledge Sharing

“How does trust influence your willingness to share knowledge with colleagues?”

“Have you experienced situations where a lack of trust affected information flow? If so, how?”

“What conditions do you think support both trust and open knowledge sharing?”

This helps surface the interplay between the two core constructs.

5. Closing Questions

“Is there anything else you think is important for me to understand about trust or knowledge sharing in your workplace?”

“What changes would you like to see to improve trust or communication among staff?”

�For a few questions I crossed out a portion of the question because these questions could be considered leading. You, as the researcher, have determined that organizational culture is influential and the leaders or supervisors are influential. Allow the participants to make that determination by keeping the questions open. To me there are a few very important questions that need to be asked in general and then more specifically how they play out within that specific context. Here are some examples and how to go from broad to narrow with your questions keeping in mind several questions that need to be asked (this is less formal but still a good example of a workable interview protocol):

Tell me how you define trust?

What do you feel supports trust in relationships?

Tell me about the role of trust when sharing information or knowledge?

What do you feel supports or gets in the way of sharing knowledge with others?

Now tell me about trust at work.

Tell me about trust and knowledge sharing at your organization.

Tell me in detail what supports trust and knowledge sharing where you work.

Tell me what impedes or gets in the way of trust and knowledge sharing.

What do you feel influences trust and knowledge sharing within this specific organization?

Who or what do you feel influences trust and knowledge sharing at work?

What do you feel could facilitate trust and knowledge sharing in this context?

Can you give me examples……

Tell me a story about something that happened at work that is a strong example of trust and knowledge sharing in this type of organization.

Take what you feel would be beneficial and leave the rest.

�Also, consider incorporating questions aligned with Social Exchange Theory. The following questions explore the core SET constructs: trust, reciprocity, costs, benefits, and expected returns in interpersonal exchanges such as knowledge sharing. You could have these incorporated throughout where they seem to fit in with the flow of the interview or you could add them at the end as theory driven questions:

1. Reciprocity (Give/Get Expectations)

Tell about any expectations that might be involved when you share knowledge with a colleague, if there are any?

2. Perceived Costs

What do you think about or consider before making the decisions to share your knowledge with others? (Risks/Drawbacks)

Can you think of a situation where you chose not to share information? What influenced that decision?

3. Perceived Benefits

What benefits, if any, do you experience when you share knowledge with colleagues?

4. Trust as a Foundation for Exchange

How does trust or lack of trust shape your decisions about who you share knowledge with?

Can you describe an experience where trust made knowledge sharing easier or more effective?

Can you describe an experience where trust made knowledge sharing more challenging?

5. Past Interactions and Relationship History

What is your perspective of the influence of previous interactions with a colleague influence on your willingness to engage in future knowledge exchanges?

6. Perceived Fairness and Balance

How does it affect you when you feel you are giving more information or support than you receive?

7. Exchange Rules and Workplace Norms

If there are any, tell me about any unwritten rules or expectations that might guide how people share knowledge in your organization.

Adding SET‑aligned questions:

Deepens theoretical grounding, ensuring participants speak directly to SET constructs.

Provides richer data about motivations, perceptions, and interpersonal judgments behind knowledge sharing.

Creates strong alignment between your purpose statement, research question, and conceptual framework.

Helps you identify exchange patterns, such as balanced reciprocity, withholding, or social risk‑management.

With all of this in mind, remain focused on the ‘inductive’ side of this study. The theory may frame how you look at the topic and sensitize you to potential concepts but you will remain open to whatever the findings support. You may find support for SET but you will also most likely have findings that don’t fit. Make sense?

�Create an outline step by step and then use it anytime you discuss methods.

�how

�Purposive and Snowball

�Use past studies using this method to support the sample size or an article that actually states that this size is appropriate.

�Move this to the beginning of the sentence because this author does not support all that is stated here.

�Since depth is prioritized over the actual number of participants (Guest et al., 2020), this study will consist of a goal of smaller sample size, possibly 10 to 15 participants, with data saturation as the actual goal.

�Pull and read an article about data saturation and qualitative research.

�Data Saturation

�How will you advertise? Let’s work on a process outline.

�How?

�They need to see and read a recruitment ad and then reach out to you, how?

�They need to review the consent form and they need to be provided with the opportunity to ask questions.

�Debrief and allow for questions or elaboration.

�Potential follow up or probes should be listed on the interview protocol:

Can you tell me more about that, add more detail, provide an example….. Pull my interview question article.

�share via email

�No

�Not the appropriate author for a generic study.

�Every reference included here needs to be used IN the project plan. As you edit the document, you will need to edit this reference list.

�What are the page numbers?