Knowledge sharing and trust

Alignment to the Program of Study

The proposed topic of the dissertation is how employees in healthcare organizations describe their experiences of trust and knowledge sharing in the workplace. The purpose of this study is to gain a deeper understanding of how trust – or the lack thereof – influences employees’ willingness to share knowledge with colleagues. The primary research question guiding this study is: How do healthcare employees describe their experiences of trust in relation to knowledge sharing at work? This topic aligns closely with industrial and organizational psychology as it examines workplace behavior, organizational culture, and interpersonal dynamics that affect collaboration and performance.

According to Al-Alawi et al., (2007), interpersonal trust among coworkers significantly shapes workplace culture and affects the exchange of information. Kacperska and Lukasiewicz (2020) found that mistrust reduces organizational competitiveness and employee collaboration. Understanding how trust impacts these exchanges contributes to the field of industrial-organizational (I/O) psychology, as it relates directly to employee behavior, organizational culture, communication, and performance.

Problem to be Addressed

Organizations increasingly rely on knowledge-sharing to maintain competitiveness, innovation, and long-term sustainability (Andreeva & Kianto, 2012; Heisig et al., 2016). However, research consistently demonstrates that knowledge-sharing behaviors are significantly influenced by levels of interpersonal and organizational trust (Casimir et al., 2012; Kmieciak, 2021). The general problem is that low levels of trust within organizations inhibit effective knowledge-sharing among employees. When employees perceive a lack of trust – whether toward leadership or coworkers – they are less likely to share critical information, expertise, or insights (Serenko & Bontis, 2016). The specific problem is that employees who perceive low trust in their organization may intentionally withhold knowledge, thereby limiting collaboration, innovation, and overall organizational performance (Perotti et al., 2022). This issue exists across professional organizational settings where knowledge exchange is essential for operational effectiveness and employee engagement, yet psychological and relational barriers impede open information sharing.

Gap

Although prior research has established a relationship between trust and knowledge-sharing using quantitative methodologies (Casimir et al., 2021; Nguyen et al., 2019; Serenko & Bontis, 2016), there is limited qualitative research exploring how employees subjectively experience and describe knowledge-sharing in low-trust environments. Much of the existing literature emphasizes measurable predictors (e.g., motivation, rewards, leadership style) rather than the live experiences and perceptions of employees. This creates a gap in understanding the emotional, relational, and contextual dimensions of knowledge-sharing when trust is lacking. Addressing this gap is important because organizations continue to invest in knowledge management systems without fully understanding the psychological barriers that influence employee participation.

Primary Orientation

This study will be grounded in Social Exchange Theory (SET) (Homans,1961). Social Exchange Theory posits that individuals evaluate social interactions based on perceived costs and benefits. Within the context of knowledge-sharing, employees may assess whether sharing information will result in reciprocal benefits, recognition, or risk (e.g., exploitation, loss of power, or lack of reciprocation). When trust is low, perceived costs may outweigh perceived benefits, leading to knowledge withholding.

SET has been widely applied in knowledge-sharing research (Serenko & Bontis, 2016; Zhao et al., 2020). However, most studies test exchange dynamics quantitatively. This study extends SET by qualitatively exploring how employees interpret and describe their cost-benefit evaluations in low-trust environments. The framework provides conceptual grounding for understanding why employees may disengage from knowledge-sharing when reciprocity, fairness, or relational safety is uncertain.

Efforts to Address the Problem

Empirical research consistently shows that trust is positively associated with knowledge-sharing behaviors (Kmieciak, 2021; Kacperska & Lukasiewicz, 2020). Leadership style, intrinsic motivation, and organizational culture have also been shown to influence employees’ willingness to share knowledge (Nguyen et al., 2019; We-Li & Yi-Chih, 2017). However, most research identifies predictors of knowledge-sharing rather than exploring how employees interpret their experiences when trust is compromised.

Studies such as Casimir et al. (2012) highlight the cost implications of low trust but do not provide in-depth qualitative accounts of employee perspectives. Without understanding how employees construct meaning around trust and knowledge-sharing, organizational interventions may fail to address the psychological and relational dynamics underlying knowledge withholding. This study responds to that need by centering employee voice and lived experience.

Synthesis of the Evidence

Across the reviewed literature, a consistent theme emerges: trust is a foundational element in the successful exchange of knowledge within organizations. Studies suggest that when employees feel respected, they are more likely to share expertise and seek input from others, leading to improved organizational outcomes (Dong et al., 2017; Fard & Karimi, 2015). In contrast, environments characterized by mistrust or fear of judgment discourage open communication and hinder innovation. Despite these findings, most research relies on quantitative surveys, leaving a gap in the literature exploration of how healthcare employees personally describe and interpret experiences of trust and knowledge sharing.

Purpose of the Project

The purpose of this generic qualitative study is to explore how employees who perceive low organizational trust describe their knowledge-sharing experiences in workplace settings. By examining employees’ lived experiences, this study seeks to deepen understanding of the psychological and relational dynamics that influence knowledge-sharing behavior.

Statement of the Primary Question(s)

This study is guided by a central qualitative research question intended to explore how employees describe their experiences with trust and knowledge-sharing within organizational settings. Although prior research has demonstrated statistical relationships between trust and knowledge-sharing behaviors (Casimir et al., 2012; Nguyen et al., 2019), much of the literature relies on quantitative methods that do not fully capture employees’ contextualized perceptions and experiences. A generic qualitative research design is appropriate because it allows for an in-depth exploration of participants’ perspectives without being bound to a specific qualitative tradition (Park & Park, 2016). Grounded in Social Exchange Theory (Homans, 1961), which posits that individuals evaluate workplace interactions based on perceived costs and benefits, this study seeks to understand how employees interpret trust-related dynamics when deciding whether to share knowledge. Therefore, the primary research question guiding this study is:

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

Definition of Terms

Knowledge-Sharing: The voluntary exchange of task-related information, expertise, or insights, among organizational members to support 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 theoretical framework suggesting that social behavior is guided by individuals’ evaluation of perceived costs and benefits in interpersonal exchanges (Homans, 1961).

Knowledge Withholding: The intentional decision not to share knowledge when requested or when sharing would benefit others (Perotti et al., 2022).

Methodological Approach

This study will be conducted using a generic qualitative research design to explore how healthcare employees describe their experiences of trust in relation to knowledge sharing in the workplace. The generic qualitative approach is appropriate for this project because it allows the researcher to explore and interpret participants’ perspectives and experiences without being bound to the strict philosophical or procedural assumptions of a specific qualitative tradition such as phenomenology or grounded theory (Kahlke, 2014; Percy et al., 2015). This design focuses on understanding the meanings individuals assign to their experiences and how those meanings shape workplace interactions and behaviors.

The study aligns with the purpose of exploring the role of trust in knowledge sharing by examining participants’ subjective experiences within their natural work environments. Through semi-structured interviews, participants will provide narrative accounts that capture their thoughts, emotions, and behaviors related to trust and information exchange. This approach supports flexibility in data collection and analysis while maintaining a strong emphasis on interpretation and meaning-making (Caelli et al., 2003).

The generic qualitative methodology will use an inductive analytical process to identify common themes and patterns across participants’ accounts. Data will be coded and analyzed using thematic analysis, which enables the researcher to identify, analyze, and report recurring meanings related to trust and knowledge sharing (Braun & Clarke, 2021). This approach provides a practical yet rigorous framework for examining how healthcare employees experience and interpret trust, revealing insights that can inform organizational strategies for improving communication, collaboration, and knowledge management practices.

Population and Sample (including site if necessary)

The population consists of employees within the healthcare field who have been working for at least two years. This timeframe is significant as it allows for sufficient experience in their roles, which can influence their perspectives on trust and knowledge sharing within their work environment. The healthcare sector includes a wide range of professionals, such as doctors, nurses, allied health professionals (like physical therapists and radiologists), administrative staff, and support personnel. The healthcare field is diverse, encompassing various settings such as hospitals, clinics, long-term care facilities, and community health organizations. Each setting may foster different levels of trust and knowledge sharing based on organizational culture. While not strictly defined by demographics such as age or gender, understanding the diversity within this population can provide insights

Constructs, Phenomena, Variables

Because this project follows a generic qualitative design, the focus is on exploring phenomena rather than measuring variables or testing constructs. The central phenomenon under investigation is employees’ lived experiences of trust in relation to knowledge sharing within healthcare organizations. The aim is to understand how employees perceive and describe trust, how it influences their willingness to share or withhold information, and what organizational or interpersonal factors shape those experiences (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).

The phenomenon of trust and knowledge sharing is explored as a complex social process that unfolds in daily workplace interactions. Trust is conceptualized as a relational experience characterized by perception of integrity, reliability, and competence among coworkers (Dirks & Ferrin, 2002). Knowledge sharing is understood as the voluntary exchange of information, expertise, or insights that contribute to organizational learning (Wang & Noe, 2011). Investigating how healthcare employees experience these phenomena together provides a nuanced understanding of the interpersonal and contextual conditions that enable or hinder collaboration and learning in healthcare settings.

By focusing on these phenomena, the study will illuminate the meaning and significance of trust as it is experienced by employees rather than as a measurable construct. This aligns with the interpretive goals of qualitative inquiry, which emphasize describing and understanding human experiences in context rather than quantifying them (Creswell & Poth, 2018). The findings will contribute to the broader industrial-organizational psychology literature by deepening the understanding of how trust operates in professional environments and how it affects knowledge-sharing behavior among healthcare professionals.

Measures or Artifacts to be Reviewed

Semi-structured interviews will be used as the primary data collection instrument. Semi-structured interviews provide flexibility while maintaining consistency across participants, allowing the researcher to explore participants’ perceptions in depth (Creswell & Poth, 2018; Kallio et al., 2016). An interview guide will ensure that questions remain aligned with the research purpose and the central phenomenon of trust and knowledge sharing among healthcare employees.

Each interview will consist of approximately 10-12 open-ended questions, supplemented by probing questions to encourage elaboration and clarification. The interview guide will be pilot-tested with one to two healthcare professionals to ensure clarity and appropriateness of language prior to official data collection (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 influence 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 influence trust and knowledge sharing?

8. How do you perceive the relationship between trust and teamwork 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

Data collection will follow a structured yet flexible procedure aligned with best practices for qualitative research (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). After obtaining Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval from Capella University, recruitment will begin through professional healthcare networks. Interested participants will receive an information sheet via email describing the study’s purpose, voluntary nature, confidentiality, and data security measures.

Participants who consent will schedule an interview via Zoom, lasting approximately 45-60 minutes. Before the interview, participants will receive a consent form and have an opportunity to ask questions. Each session will be recorded using the Zoom platform’s (audio only) built-in recording feature to ensure accuracy of data capture. I will also maintain field notes to document nonverbal cues and contextual details that enhance interpretations (DeJonckheere & Vaughn, 2019).

Following the interview, audio files will be transcribed verbatim using transcription software and manually verified for accuracy. All identifying information will be removed, and pseudonyms (e.g., P1-P15) will be used. Each participant will be emailed their transcript to verify accuracy (member checking). Transcripts will be stored securely on an encrypted flash drive in a locked cabinet in my home office. Only I will have access to the data.

Once all interviews are completed and verified, data will be updated into NVivo software coding and thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke’s (2021) six-phase framework: familiarization, coding, theme development, reviewing, defining, and reporting. Throughout the analysis, I will maintain an audit trail documenting coding decisions and reflective notes to ensure transparency (Nowell et al., 2017).

Validity/Reliability/Credibility/Dependability

To ensure the credibility and dependability of this qualitative study, several strategies will be applied throughout data collection and analysis. Credibility will be enhanced through member checking, where participants will review and confirm the accuracy of their interview transcripts and preliminary interpretation to ensure their experiences are authentically represented (Nowell et al., 2017). Triangulation of data sources, such as comparing responses across various professional roles within healthcare, will also strengthen the trustworthiness of findings. Maintaining detailed field notes and an audit trail throughout the research process will document methodological decisions and reflections, promoting transparency and allowing others to follow the researcher’s decision-making process (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).

Dependability will be established through consistent data collection procedures and a clearly defined analytical framework following Braun and Clarke’s (2021) six-phase thematic analysis process. This structured approach supports methodological rigor by ensuring that each step – from coding to theme development – is systematically conducted and documented. I will also engage in peer debriefing, consulting with academic mentors to review coding consistency and emerging interpretations. These combined practices ensure that the study’s findings are both credible and dependable, reflecting an accurate and trustworthy representation of participants’ experiences with trust and knowledge sharing in healthcare settings.

Sampling Strategy, Number Participants

A generic qualitative study requires selecting participants who can provide rich, detailed descriptions of their experiences with the topic of interest. Therefore, this study will use purposive sampling, a widely recommended strategy for qualitative research because it intentionally identifies individuals with direct, relevant experiences (Creswell & Poth, 2018; Palinkas et al., 2015). In this project, purposive sampling ensures that participants have meaningful exposure to trust and knowledge-sharing processes within healthcare settings, allowing them to offer in-depth insights aligned with the study’s purpose. Since generic qualitative inquiry focuses on understanding how people make sense of their experiences without adhering to a specific qualitative tradition, selecting “information-rich cases” is essential for capturing variation in employee perspectives across roles, departments, and organizational contexts (Kahlke, 2014; Percy et al., 2015).

This sampling strategy supports the aims of a generic qualitative design by allowing the researcher to gather descriptive accounts from participants who can speak to interpersonal dynamics, organizational culture, and workplace communication practices surrounding trust and knowledge sharing. Purposive sampling also enables the inclusion of diverse roles – including nurses, allied health professionals, physicians, administrative employees, and support staff-broadening the understanding of how trust influences knowledge exchange in different parts of healthcare organizations. Because generic qualitative studies do not seek representativeness but rather depth and variations, this approach aligns with recommended practices for collecting data that reflect multiple viewpoints and experiences (Caelli et al., 2003; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).

The proposed sample size for this study is approximately 10 to 15 participants, consistent with standards for generic qualitative research, which emphasizes depth over quantity (Guest et al., 2020). This range is sufficient to capture variability across participants’ experiences while allowing the researcher to conduct detailed, iterative thematic analysis. Data collection will continue until thematic saturation is reached – defined as the point at which no new themes, insights, or patterns emerge from additional interviews (Saunders et al., 2018). A sample size within this range supports rigorous interpretation, allowing the study to identify meaningful themes and procedures a rich, descriptive understanding of how healthcare employees perceive and experience trust in relation to knowledge sharing.

Recruitment Procedures

Recruitment for this study will begin after obtaining approval from the Capella University Institutional Review Board (IRB). Participants will be recruited using purposive sampling, starting with a small group of healthcare employees who meet the inclusion criteria. These initial participants will be identified through professional networks, healthcare associations, and LinkedIn groups related to healthcare practice and management. After participating in an interview, each individual will be asked to recommend colleagues who also meet the criteria and may be willing to participate. This referral-based approach will help me access a broader and more diverse pool of healthcare professionals who may not be reachable through traditional recruitment channels.

Eligible participants will include healthcare professionals currently employed in hospitals, clinics, or other healthcare settings who have at least two years of work experience. The study will be open to a range of roles, including nurses, physicians, allied health staff, and administrative personnel, to capture varied perspectives on trust and knowledge sharing across organizational levels. Individuals must be at least 18 years old and willing to participate in a 45-60 minute virtual interview conducted via Zoom.

Interested participants will receive an email invitation containing a brief description of the study, its purpose, and participation requirements. Those who express interest will be emailed an informed consent form detailing the voluntary nature of the study, confidentiality protections, and data security procedures. After providing electronic consent, participants will schedule a virtual interview at a time convenient for them. All recruitment communications will be conducted through secure email to protect participant privacy. Pseudonyms (e.g., P1-P15) will be used to maintain confidentiality, and no identifying information will be shared with others. This recruitment process ensures ethical engagement with participants and aligns with best practices for qualitative research involving human participants (Mozersky et al., 2020; Resnik, 2018).

Data Collection Process

Semi-structured interviews with healthcare workers will be used to collect data. Zoom video conferencing with voice recording and transcription turned on will be used for the interviews. Using an online video-conferencing platform that allows audio recording and transcript generation is a best practice for conducting interviews. The interviews will be scheduled at times that are convenient for the participants. Since the interviews are taking place virtually, there is no specific location for them.

The pre-made interview guide will be used during the interview process. Each interview should last between 45 and 60 minutes, divided into three parts: 10 minutes for the initial welcome, greeting, and rapport-building, 35-50 minutes for asking and receiving interview questions, and 5 minutes for closing off the interview. Before beginning a formal interview, interviewers should take a few minutes to establish a positive rapport with the interviewee (Nathan et al., 2019).

Below is a summary of the interview process:

· Set aside a specific time for every interview.

· Welcome each participant and express gratitude for their time in accordance with the interview instructions.

· To get more clarification, as the current interview questions, and if necessary, use the insightful follow-up questions.

· End the interview by expressing gratitude to the person once more for their time.

· Inform the participants that a copy of the transcript will be sent to them so they can check it for accuracy.

· Download the transcript and audio recording.

· Listen to the audio recording while reviewing the transcript, and adjust it as necessary to match the audio recording.

· Remove participant or business names from the transcript to de-identify it.

· Provide the participant with the transcript via email so they can confirm its accuracy.

· To get ready for data analysis, compile the transcripts of all 12 interviews.

Ethical Considerations

Since collecting data for a qualitative project entails speaking with participants about their professional activities, the highest ethical standards must be adhered to (Mozersky et al., 2020). Participants in this project will participate in semi-structured interviews. I will get permission from the Capella University IRB before proceeding with recruiting and data collection, and reaching out to any possible participants. No information about participants’ personally identifiable information or input that may be used to identify them will be released in order to protect privacy and confidentiality. P1-P12 will be used as a unique identification for each participant. When working with human subjects, privacy and confidentiality are two of the most crucial factors to take into account (Resnik, 2018).

Participants may withdraw from the study at any time, including during the interview, for any reason or no reason at all. According to Singer and Couper (2008), using incentives to lure participants may be regarded as excessive coercion and lead to faulty results. Since volunteers will not receive any incentives, participation in this experiment is entirely voluntary. Three core ethical concepts are outlined in the Belmont Report: beneficience, fairness, and respect for persons (Nagai et al., 2022). By eliminating participant coercion, minimizing participation risks through confidentiality, and keeping all collected data in a secure file in my home office for seven years, these requirements are upheld. After seven years, any electronic content stored on a flash drive will be deleted, and the drive itself will be destroyed, along with all print copy data.

Proposed Data Analysis Plan

The proposed data analysis plan will follow a systematic, qualitative approach grounded in phenomenology to explore how employees describe trust in knowledge-sharing experiences. After all interviews are transcribed and verified by participants through member checking, the analysis will begin with repeated readings of each transcript to develop familiarity with the data. This initial immersion allows the researcher to gain a holistic understanding of participants’ lived experiences before coding begins (Moustakas, 1994). Notes and reflective memos will be kept throughout the process to document my thoughts, early impressions, and evolving interpretations.

Next, the analysis will proceed using thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke’s (2006) six-phase approach: (1) 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. Initial codes will be created inductively, capturing meaning statements related to trust, knowledge sharing, interpersonal dynamics, organizational culture, and perceived costs or benefits of sharing information. Codes will then be grounded into broader themes that reflect shared experiences across participants. This approach aligns with the study’s social exchange theory framework by revealing how participants interpret the relational and reciprocal aspects of trust.

To maintain methodological rigor, I will use strategies to enhance trustworthiness, including member checking, audit trails, and triangulation of concepts with existing literature (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). The data will be analyzed manually or with the assistance of qualitative analysis software such as NVivo to support organization and pattern identification. Themes will be continually refined to ensure they accurately reflect the data and answer the research question.

Finally, the findings will be presented using rich, descriptive narratives supported by direct quotations from participants. These narratives will illustrate how trust shapes knowledge-sharing behaviors and how employees interpret the consequences of trusting or withholding information. The final analysis will connect the emergent themes back to the conceptual framework, demonstrating how social exchange processes influence employees’ decisions to share knowledge. This approach allows for a deep, contextualized understanding of trust within organizational knowledge-sharing practices.