Scale library · HRM & organizational behavior
Knowledge sharing scale: van den Hooff & de Ridder (2004)
Van den Hooff and de Ridder (2004) treat knowledge sharing as a two-way process: knowledge donating, communicating what you know to colleagues, and knowledge collecting, consulting colleagues to learn what they know. Because the scale separates the two, it suits theses asking which side leadership or organizational culture affects. The 8-item version here drops the phrase 'within my department' and was used by Rafique et al. (2022) and Saif et al. (2024) to explain employee innovative behavior. Typical thesis topics are transformational leadership and innovation in firms, hospitals and universities.
Cite the original, not the blog.
- Model or scale: KS
- Constructs: 2
- Items: 8
Original English items
Items marked (R) are reverse-coded: recode them before computing reliability or scale scores. Replace bracketed placeholders such as [system] with the name of the system, brand or organization you study.
Knowledge Donating (KD, 4 items)
| Code | Item wording | Reverse-coded |
|---|---|---|
| KD1 | When I have learned something new, I tell my colleagues about it. | No |
| KD2 | I share the information I have with my colleagues. | No |
| KD3 | I think it is important that my colleagues know what I am doing. | No |
| KD4 | I regularly tell my colleagues what I am doing | No |
Knowledge Collecting (KC, 4 items)
| Code | Item wording | Reverse-coded |
|---|---|---|
| KC1 | When I need certain knowledge, I ask my colleagues about it. | No |
| KC2 | I like to be informed of what my colleagues know. | No |
| KC3 | I ask my colleagues about their abilities when I need to learn something. | No |
| KC4 | When a colleague is good at something, I ask them to teach me how to do it. | No |
Response scale
5-point Likert scale (1 = Strongly disagree … 5 = Strongly agree), as in Rafique et al. (2022). Saif et al. (2024) used a 5-point frequency scale from 1 (not at all) to 5 (frequently).
Licence and permission
The items are published in an academic article and reproduced in open-access articles; we found no specific terms of use from the authors. Cite van den Hooff and de Ridder (2004) and the article you took the wording from.
Sources (APA 7)
- Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
- Hooff, B. van den, & de Ridder, J. A. (2004). Knowledge sharing in context: The influence of organizational commitment, communication climate and CMC use on knowledge sharing. Journal of Knowledge Management, 8(6), 117–130. https://doi.org/10.1108/13673270410567675
- Kock, N., & Hadaya, P. (2018). Minimum sample size estimation in PLS-SEM: The inverse square root and gamma-exponential methods. Information Systems Journal, 28(1), 227–261. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12131
- Rafique, M. A., Hou, Y., Chudhery, M. A. Z., Waheed, M., Zia, T., & Chan, F. (2022). Investigating the impact of pandemic job stress and transformational leadership on innovative work behavior: The mediating and moderating role of knowledge sharing. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 7(3), 100214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2022.100214
- Saif, N., Amelia, Goh, G. G. G., Rubin, A., Shaheen, I., & Murtaza, M. (2024). Influence of transformational leadership on innovative work behavior and task performance of individuals: The mediating role of knowledge sharing. Heliyon, 10(11), e32280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e32280
Vietnamese translation
A Vietnamese translation of every item, with sample-size advice and studies that used the scale, is on the Vietnamese page for this scale.