Proceeding of the 19th International Business Information Management (IBIMA) Conference, 12-13th November 2012, Barcelona (ISBN: 978-0-9821489-8-3)

Job Design and Knowledge Productivity: A Conceptual Framework

Nur Izzati Yusof Faculty of Information Management, MARA University of Technology, Malaysia E-mail: izzatiyusof@hotmail.com Mohamad Noorman Masrek Accounting Research Institute / Faculty of Information Management, MARA University of Technology, Malaysia E-mail: mnoormanm@gmail.com Siti Arpah Noordin Accounting Research Institute / Faculty of Information Management, MARA University of Technology, Malaysia E-mail: siti@salam.uitm.edu.my Rusnah Johare Faculty of Information Management, MARA University of Technology, Malaysia E-mail: r.johare@yahoo.com Abstract Knowledge plays a governing role in leading the productivity and maintaining the economic performance growth during the transition towards knowledge based economy. Despite the emphasis on knowledge as the mean of production, the existence of studies in investigating the source of productivity and the factors influencing the knowledge productivity have received little interest. Therefore, this paper develops a conceptual model on knowledge productivity which incorporates the job design characteristics as the factors in promoting the knowledge productivity. The model also incorporates knowledge creation processes in identifying the knowledge productivity activities among the Malaysian government officers. The proposed model can be used by researchers or practitioners to conduct further research in identifying the job design factors influencing knowledge productivity in different settings or research design. Keywords: Knowledge productivity, job design, conceptual model, Malaysia. Introduction With todays economy vigorously transform towards knowledge based economy, knowledge plays a governing role in leading the productivity and maintaining the economic performance growth. As the emphasis is on knowledge as the mean of production, organization is challenged to direct their employees productivity in making the knowledge more productive. Hence, as mentioned by Drucker (1999), in the 21 th century society, the foremost priceless asset will be the knowledge workers and their productivity. Knowledge productivity is gradually becoming a critical economic factor (Keursten, Kessels & Kwakman, 2003). It has not been in limelight until knowledge researcher began to explore the theory of knowledge productivity (Harrison & Kessels, 1994). Since then, various models and frameworks have been developed by numerous studies in attempt to explore the concept of knowledge productivity (Kessels, 1996; Antikainen and Lnnqvist, 2005; Stam, 2007; Huang & Wu, 2010 and Sobia & Bakhtiar, 2011). There is also a rising awareness to understand the productivity development as well as the drivers of knowledge productivity in improving the organizational performance (Stam, 2007). Each study has different standpoints while discussing the factors influencing the knowledge productivity. It is visible that there are no common agreements on how influential are the factors discussed by the researchers against

Proceeding of the 19th International Business Information Management (IBIMA) Conference, 12-13th November 2012, Barcelona (ISBN: 978-0-9821489-8-3)

knowledge productivity. Based on the literature studies, it is also found that studies investigating the source of productivity and the factors influencing the knowledge productivity have received little attention in Malaysia. To this effect, this paper proposed a conceptual model on knowledge productivity by integrating the job design components as the factors in promoting the knowledge productivity among the Malaysia government officers. Furthermore, this study will also adapt knowledge creation processes in identifying the knowledge productivity activities among the Malaysian government officers. The relationship of the knowledge creation activities towards service and process innovation will also be investigated. Similar approach was conducted by Easa (2012). The Proposed Model

Figure 1 illustrates the proposed conceptual framework in investigating the job design characteristics which are the motivational, social and work context characteristics that influences the knowledge productivity. The proposed model is an adaption based on previous studies (Morgeson and Humphrey, 2006; Humphrey, Nahrgang and Morgeson, 2007; Easa, 2011 and Easa, 2012). The dependent variable for this framework is knowledge productivity. This variable is measured based on the knowledge creation process and its effect on innovation. Meanwhile the independent variables consists the job design characteristics which are the motivational characteristics, social characteristics and work context characteristics.

Figure 1: Conceptual Model on Knowledge Productivity Knowledge Productivity Various models and frameworks have been developed by numerous studies in attempt to understand the concept of knowledge productivity (Kessels, 1996; Antikainen and Lnnqvist, 2005; Stam, 2007; Amiri et al., 2010; Huang & Wu, 2010; Ramezan, 2011 and Sobia & Bakhtiar, 2011). Similarly, diverse definitions were developed to describe the concept of knowledge productivity. Amiri et al. (2010) define knowledge productivity as the learning

Proceeding of the 19th International Business Information Management (IBIMA) Conference, 12-13th November 2012, Barcelona (ISBN: 978-0-9821489-8-3)

ability in order to create knowledge-based results. Stam (2007) refer knowledge productivity as knowledge-based production process. A more elaborate definition by Kessels (1996) on knowledge productivity interprets it as a process that discovers relevant information and uses this information to develop new competencies which will then be applied to gradual improvement and radical innovation of products, services and work processes. While exploring the interpretation of knowledge productivity, it is identified that there are strong resemblance between the processes supporting the knowledge productivity with the processes in creating knowledge. Some studies suggested that knowledge productivity consists of processes in creating knowledge as well as processes that make the knowledge productive (Kessels, 2001; Nonaka, Toyama & Byosiere, 2001 and Keursten, Verdonschot, Kessels & Kwakman, 2006). In producing the knowledge, knowledge productivity comprise several knowledge processes including identifying, collecting, exchanging and interpreting the information. These processes are comparable with the functions of knowledge creation processes of SECI model. The SECI model consists of four processes; socialization, externalization, combination and internalization are a cyclical model that supports continuous interactions and conversions of tacit and explicit knowledge for creating knowledge in an organization (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995; Tsai & Yong, 2007 and Easa, 2011). Keursten et al. (2006) mention that as for making the knowledge become more productive, knowledge productivity develops and applies competencies in improving and innovating products, services or work processes of an organization. Continuous improvement and innovation is the ideal processes of knowledge productivity in sustaining the success of an organization in knowledge economy era. Therefore, knowledge productivity could be measured by evaluating the improvement or innovation that have been made to the products, services or work processes of an organization (Keursten et al., 2006). Accordingly, for the proposed model, we define knowledge productivity as the process in which an employee identifies, gathers, exchange and interprets relevant information and uses this information to develop new skills and applies the skills in innovating services and work processes. Against this argument, the proposed model will adopt the process of SECI model in identifying the knowledge creation activities that support the knowledge productivity among the Malaysian government officers. Similarly, the relationship of the knowledge creation activities towards service and process innovation will also be investigated. Similar approach focusing on the knowledge creation process and innovation was conducted by Easa (2012). Knowledge Creation Process Tacit knowledge and explicit knowledge are two major types of knowledge identified by knowledge theories (Polanyi, 1966). The conversion or interaction among these knowledge based on the SECI model leads to the creation of new knowledge. The four knowledge creation processes in the SECI model consisting (i) socialization which is the conversion of tacit knowledge into new tacit knowledge through shared experience where it may take place through social and cultural processes linked to the organizational activities (Martin, Lopez & Novas, 2008), (ii) externalization is the conversion of tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge which occurs when the organization articulate its internal rules of operation formally or openly sets its organizational goals which is then are captured by writing or computerized (Easa, 2011), (iii) combination is the conversion of explicit knowledge into more complex and systematic sets of explicit knowledge by integrating, categorizing, reclassifying and synthesizing existing explicit knowledge before disseminating it among the members of the organization (Tsai & Yong, 2007) and (iv) internalization refers to the creation of new tacit knowledge from explicit knowledge where it may occur for example through the involvement of members of the organization in training programs or through reading the organization's documents or manuals. Based on the consideration on the resemblance of the knowledge creation processes and knowledge productivity based processes, this study adopts the four knowledge creation processes to identifies the knowledge productivity activities among the Malaysian government officers.

Proceeding of the 19th International Business Information Management (IBIMA) Conference, 12-13th November 2012, Barcelona (ISBN: 978-0-9821489-8-3)

Innovation As mentioned before, the knowledge creation processes makes the knowledge productive by continuously supporting its improvement and innovation through the development of new abilities or ideas on product, services or organizational work process (Soo, Midgley & Devinney, 2002). Several studies state the importance of gradual improvement and radical innovation in evaluating the outcomes of the knowledge productivity (Drucker, 1993; Kessels, 2001; Keursten et al., 2006 and Verdonschot & Van Rooij, 2007). Gradual improvement refers to additional enhancement on existing service, products or process meanwhile radical innovation refers to creating new prospects by eliminating existing service, products or process. As this study will be conducted in the government sectors where the nature of job is providing services to the people, this study will adapt the service innovation and process innovation to investigate the effect of the knowledge creation processes on innovation among the Malaysian government officers. Based on the preceding discussion, this study hypothesizes that: Knowledge creation process is significantly related to innovation. Job Design The term job design had been used interchangeably with other terms such as work design or task design (Griffin & McMahan, 1994). In term of definition, work design is likely to have a broader scope then job design as it encompass the elements of job and its environment (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006 and Humphrey, Nahrgang et al., 2007). Opatha (2002) defines job design as the arrangement of task, roles and responsibilities within a division of work. A broader clarification by Griffin & McMahan (1994) is opted by this study define job design as an approach to structure a persons jobs in order to optimize the organizational results such as competence, quality and productivity and as well as the individual results such as satisfaction, motivation and personal growth. The importances of job design in boosting individuals productivity and performance have been discussed extensively in few studies (Griffin & McMahan, 1994; Morgeson & Humphrey 2006, Humphrey, Nahrgang et al., 2007; Raghunath, 2007; Hameed & Amjad, 2009; Ali & Aroosiya, 2010; Fernando & Ranasinghe, 2010 and Dere, 2011). From the organizational aspect, job design plays crucial part in supporting the employees work performance in achieving organizational relevant outcomes as it may directly or indirectly influence the manner they perform their responsibilities and tasks (Ali & Aroosiya, 2010). Hameed and Amjad (2009) add that by providing the needs of the employees such as with a conducive workplace could help in increasing their work productivity. Hence, the job design characteristics need to be assessed and restructure constantly in order to maintain an efficient work performance and productivity. In comprehending the concept of job design, this study will adapt the comprehensive work design measure known as Work Design Characteristics (WDQ) developed by Morgeson & Humphrey (2006) as it is widely used by other studies in assessing the job design and the nature of work (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2008; Humphrey, Nahrgang et al., 2007 and Dere, 2011). WDQ was also developed as a common organizational diagnostic tool for work characteristics; thus it can be employ in any fields to assess the nature of work or to design and restructure jobs (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006). The measure consists of three major characteristics of work design which are the motivational characteristics, social characteristics and work context characteristics (Morgeson & Humphrey 2006 and Humphrey, Nahrgang et al., 2007). The proposed model will apply this measure in identifying the foremost job design characteristics that influences the knowledge productivity among the Malaysia government officers. Motivational Characteristics Motivation at work is an age old aspect of organizational behavior that has been researched by numerous studies (Hackman & Oldham, 1976; Griffin & McMahan, 1994; Antikainen and

Proceeding of the 19th International Business Information Management (IBIMA) Conference, 12-13th November 2012, Barcelona (ISBN: 978-0-9821489-8-3)

Lnnqvist, 2005; Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006; Humphrey, Nahrgang et al., 2007 and Dere 2011). Anderson, Griego & Stevens (2010) define motivation as the intrinsic reasons for associating to a particular behavior. In other words, peoples internal motivation could influence their competencies and dedication towards their job (Antikainen and Lnnqvist, 2005). Motivation is also composite with the study of job design. Daft (1994) defines job design as applying the motivational theories in the work structure in order to improve the work productivity as well as satisfaction. For the purpose of this study, the proposed model divided the motivational features of job design into task characteristics and knowledge characteristics (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006). Task characteristics Task characteristics focuses on the scope and the nature of a job and also the manner in accomplishing the tasks associated with the job. The dimensions of task characteristics are autonomy, task variety, task significance, task identity and feedback from job (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006). These dimensions are some of the core job characteristics that motivate the employees to enhance their work performance and acquire the job satisfaction (Hackman & Oldham, 1976, 1980). Autonomy Autonomy is defined as the liberation on the manner of conducting owns work or tasks (Hackman & Oldham 1975 and Humphrey, Hollenbeck, Meyer & Ilgen, 2007). Some studies broaden the concept of autonomy by suggesting that autonomy could represent the ability to schedule the timing of owns work, making decisions and decide on how to carry out tasks (Hackman & Oldham, 1976, 1980; Jackson, Wall, Martin & Davids, 1993; Humphrey, Hollenbeck et al., 2007 and Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006). Thus, this study will include the three aspects of autonomy which are (i) work scheduling autonomy, (ii) decision making autonomy and (iii) work methods autonomy. Task Variety Task variety is associated with the range of tasks that need to be performed by the employees on their job (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006). Ali & Aroosiya (2010) mention that task variety is similar to job enlargement which is one of the many approaches to job design. Task variety expands a job to more interesting varied tasks; thus could increase the motivation level of an employee (Ali & Aroosiya, 2010). Task Significance Task significance reflects the impact of ones job on the lives or works of others, whether inside of the organization or in the outside environment (Hackman & Oldham, 1975, 1980 and Morgeson & Humphrey 2006). Task significance is significant in increasing employees job performance level as well as dedication towards owns job (Grant, 2008). Task Identity Task identity is where the employee performs identifiable tasks and involve in each steps of the tasks completion from the beginning to end (Hackman & Oldham, 1976, 1980). Task identity is recognized as an important element of job satisfaction where it elevates a sense of pride in the employees toward their job (Hackman and Oldham, 1976). Feedback from Job Feedback from job describes that the job will provide sufficient information on the ones job performance level (Humphrey, Nahrgang et al., 2007). Morgeson & Humphrey (2008) explain that the employee will receive timely feedback directly from the job they are performing. This feedback will allow the employee to assess their aims in relation to their job performance and change their working attitudes accordingly.

Proceeding of the 19th International Business Information Management (IBIMA) Conference, 12-13th November 2012, Barcelona (ISBN: 978-0-9821489-8-3)

Going through the literature reviews related to motivational aspect of job design, task characteristics has been linked repeatedly with job performance and satisfaction. However, scholars have yet to establish a clear association between task characteristics and knowledge productivity as well as innovation. Therefore, this study hypothesizes that: Task characteristics are significantly related to knowledge productivity. Knowledge characteristics Knowledge characteristics refer to the need of certain skill, knowledge or competency in an individual or employee in order from them to conduct their job (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006). The dimensions of knowledge characteristics are job complexity, information processing, problem solving, skill variety and specialization (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006). Job Complexity Job complexity is the level of complexity of the tasks on the job as well as the difficulty level in performing the tasks (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006). Some research states that job with high complexity level will advance the employees satisfaction towards their job but it also might increase their workloads (Humphrey, Nahrgang et al., 2007). Information Processing Information processing helps in identifying the job that necessitates attending to or the job with active information processing based on the provided amount of information processing (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006 and Humphrey, Nahrgang et al., 2007).Study shows that information processing could enhance the learning and development in the job environment; however, this could also lead to the demand on skill requirement (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2008). Problem Solving Problem solving refers to the needs of having unique ideas or solution to a job related problems (Humphrey, Nahrgang et al., 2007).Some study also suggests that problem solving involves generating innovative ideas as well as solving non-routine problems and correcting or avoiding errors (Jackson et al., 1993) Skill Variety Skill variety is one of the core job characteristics in the Job Characteristics Model (Hackman & Oldham, 1976, 1980). Hackman and Oldham (1980) state that skill variety reflects to the need of acquiring and utilizing several different skills in order to perform a job. Although it is rather difficult in utilizing the multiple skills, the need will prompt further interest to perform the skills (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006). Specialization Specialization is the need of specialized knowledge or skills for job performance or one is involve in performing specialized tasks (Edwards, Scully & Brtek, 2000; Morgeson & Humphrey 2006 and Humphrey, Nahrgang et al., 2007). Specialization reflects an individual depth of knowledge and skills. By acquiring a specialized knowledge in a specific area, it could make the job more motivating and engaging (Humphrey, Nahrgang et al., 2007). Similar to task characteristics, the outcomes of knowledge characteristics are associated with job performance. Thus, there is an enthusiasm to investigate the relationship between knowledge characteristics and knowledge productivity. Therefore, this study hypothesizes that: Knowledge characteristics are significantly related to knowledge productivity. Social Characteristics Social characteristics received less consideration in the study of work design (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006). However, there is study that states the significant of relating the social

Proceeding of the 19th International Business Information Management (IBIMA) Conference, 12-13th November 2012, Barcelona (ISBN: 978-0-9821489-8-3)

characteristics with the study of job design. Social features such as social interaction influence the condition at workplace as it is related with affirmative mood such as enthusiasm (Humphrey, Nahrgang et al., 2007 and Dere, 2011). Dere (2011) states that interaction related to work purpose, either inside or outside the organization can provide direct feedback on tasks being carried out. Social characteristics dimensions are social support, interdependence, interaction outside organization and feedback from others. Social Support Social support reflects the prospects of getting support and guidance from others including from the co-workers as well as supervisors (Karasek et al., 1998 and Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006). Social support also includes the opportunities in developing friendship at the workplace (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006). This could promote a conducive atmosphere at the workplace particularly in a stressful working environment. Interdependence Interdependence refers to the reliance of the job to others work and also the dependent of other job on the work of the main job (Humphrey, Nahrgang et al., 2007). In other words, interdependence reflects the connection of the jobs with other people works. Interaction Outside Organization Interaction outside organization is the work-related interaction and communication between the employee and non-organizational member including supplier, customer or other organization (Morgeson & Humphrey 2006; Humphrey, Nahrgang et al., 2007 and Morgeson & Humphrey, 2008). This social feature could promotes a broader social setting (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2008). For the purpose of this study, interaction outside organization will also involve the communication between non-departmental member and the employee in the same organization. Feedback from others Opposed to feedback from job, feedback from others takes place when other organizational members provide feedbacks on ones performance or feedback on interpersonal characteristic (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006; Humphrey, Nahrgang et al., 2007 and Morgeson & Humphrey, 2008). The source of feedback could be provided by the coworkers and supervisors (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006, 2008). Provided that the feedback received is accurate and timely, employee that knows what is expected from oneself will likely feel satisfied and motivated on conducting the job (Humphrey, Hollenbeck et al., 2007). While there are literatures on work design recognizing the importance of the social influence towards employees satisfaction and motivation, studies on the relation between social characteristics and knowledge productivity have received little interest. Accordingly, this study hypothesizes that: Social characteristics are significantly related to knowledge productivity. Work Context Characteristics Work context characteristics include the features from the physical and organizational context (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2008). Griffin & McMahan (1994) mention that work context features focuses on designing jobs based on physical comfort, physiological concerns and also consider other biological factors in the workplace. Morgeson & Humphrey (2006) state that in the studies on work design, the dimensions of work context characteristics are ergonomics; physical demands, work conditions and equipment use. The implementation of the work context characteristics will result in less fatigue physical injuries; hence, this could increase the job satisfaction level and also lowered the absenteeism level among the employees. Ergonomics

Proceeding of the 19th International Business Information Management (IBIMA) Conference, 12-13th November 2012, Barcelona (ISBN: 978-0-9821489-8-3)

Ergonomics refer to designing the job by taking consideration on the employees correct movement and appropriate posture (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006). This includes the seating arrangements, ample working space and any other elements related to physical working conditions. There are few studies on relating the relationship between ergonomics and job satisfaction (Griffin & McMahan, 1994; Edwards, Scully & Brtek, 1999; Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006 and Dere, 2011). Raghunath (2007) believes that satisfaction towards physical working qualities help to maintain the comfort at workplace and the employees health and this could lead to increase in productivity. Physical Demands Physical demands are the extent of physical activity as well as the effort required in conducting the job (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006; Humphrey, Nahrgang et al., 2007 and Morgeson & Humphrey, 2008). Physical demands assess the endurance, strength, physical effort and also the metabolic demands (Edwards et al., 1999). Work Conditions Work conditions reflect the component of the work environment where a particular job is performed (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006; Humphrey, Nahrgang et al., 2007 and Morgeson & Humphrey, 2008). Some of the features are temperature, health hazards, noise and cleanliness of the workplace (Edwards et al., 1999, Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006; Humphrey, Nahrgang et al., 2007 and Morgeson & Humphrey, 2008). Few studies have revealed that work condition have positive relationship to job satisfaction (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2008) as well as to the employees productivity (Hameed & Amjad, 2009). It is reported that workplace surroundings, spatial arrangement are some of the components of work condition that have significant impact on the employees productivity. Equipment Use Equipment use refers to the variety of technology and equipment used in performing the job as well as the complexity of the technology and equipment (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006, 2008) For the purpose of this study, the learn-ability and adequacy of the technology and equipment will also be assessed. Although previous study indicates low impact of equipment use on work outcomes (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006), this study will investigate whether there is relationship between equipment use and knowledge productivity. Although there are existences of previous literatures on the impact of several work context components toward productivity, it did not focus on assessing the impact towards knowledge productivity. To this effect, this study hypothesizes that: Work context characteristics are significantly related to knowledge productivity. Conclusion The objective of this paper is to develop a conceptual framework on the study of knowledge productivity in the public sector. The proposed model discussed in this study assures a general measure on the influence of job design components; motivational characteristics, social characteristics and work context characteristics on knowledge productivity. Based on the proposed model, several hypotheses have been posited. A survey research method could be employed to validate the proposed model as well as to test the hypotheses. The proposed model can be used by researchers to conduct further investigation in the topic in a different settings or research designs. References Ali, Husain & Aroosiya. (2010). Impact of Job Design On Employees' Performance (With Sp. School Teachers In The Kalmunai Zone). Paper presented at the International Conference on Business & Information, University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka.

Proceeding of the 19th International Business Information Management (IBIMA) Conference, 12-13th November 2012, Barcelona (ISBN: 978-0-9821489-8-3)

Amiri, A.N., Ramezan, M., & Omrani, A. (2010). Studying the impacts of organizational organic structure on knowledge productivity effective factors case study: Manufacturing units in a domestic large industrial group. European Journal of Scientific Research, 40(1), 91101. Anderson, P., Griego, O. V., & Stevens, R. H. (2010). Measuring high level motivation and goal attainment among Christian undergraduate students: An empirical assessment and model. Business Renaissance Quarterly, 5(1), 73-88. Antikainen, R., and Lnnqvist, A., (2005). Knowledge worker productivity assessment. In the Proceeding of the 3rd Conference on Performance Measurement and Management, France, Nice. Daft, R.L. 1994. Management (3rd ed.). Fortworth: Dryden. Dere, S.N.D. (2011). A Diagnostic Exploration of Campus Recreation Using the Work Design Questionnaire. (Masters thesis, Texas State University). Retrieved from https://digital.library.txstate.edu/handle/10877/3341 Drucker, P.F. (1993). The post-capitalist society. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann. Drucker P.F. (1999) Management Challenges for the 21st Century. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann. Easa, N. F. (2011). Knowledge Creation Process and Innovation in Egyptian banking sector. Paper presented at the Organization Learning, Knowledge and Capabilities Conference 2011, Hull University Business School. Easa, N.F. (2012). Knowledge Creation Process and Innovation in the Egyptian banking sector: Methodological Aspects. . Paper presented at the 20th EDAMBA Summer Academy, Soreza, France. Edwards, J. R., Scully, J. A., & Brtek, M. (1999). The measurement of work: Hierarchical representation of the Multimethod Job Design Questionnaire. Personnel Psychology, 40, 505-517. Edwards, J. R., Scully, J. A., & Brtek, M. (2000). The nature and outcomes of work: A replication and extension of interdisciplinary work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(6), 860-868. Fernando, A. and Ranasinghe, G. (2010). The Impact of Job Design and Motivation on Employees Productivity as Applicable in the context of Sri Lankan Software Engineers: A HR Perspective. Paper presented in the International Conference on Business & Information, University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka. Grant, A. M. (2008). The significance of task significance: Job performance effects, relational mechanisms, and boundary conditions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 108-124. Griffin, R.W., & McMahan, G.C. (1994). Motivation through Job Design. In Jerald Greenberg (Ed.), Organizational Behavior: The State of the Science. Hillsdale, NJ.: L.Erlbaum Associates. Hackman, J.R., & Oldham, G.R. (1975). Development of the Job Diagnostic Survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 159-170. Hackman, J.R., & Oldham, G.R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 250-279. Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1980). Work redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Hameed, Amina & Amjad, Shehla. (2009). Impact of Office Design on Employees' Productivity: A Case Study of Banking Organizations of Abbottabad, Pakistan. Journal of Public Affairs, Administration and Management, 3 (1). Harrison, R. & Kessels J.W.M. (2004). Human Resource Development in a knowledge economy: An Organizational view. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Huang, Y.C., & Wu, Y.C.J. (2010). Intellectual capital & knowledge productivity: the Taiwan biotech industry. Management Decision, 48 (4), 580 599. Humphrey, S. E., Hollenbeck, J. R., Meyer, C. J., & Ilgen, D. R. (2007). Trait configurations in self-managed teams: A conceptual examination of seeding for maximizing and minimizing trait variance in teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(3):885-92. Humphrey, S. E., Nahrgang, J. D., & Morgeson, F. P. (2007). Integrating motivational, social, and contextual work design features: A meta-analytic summary and theoretical

Proceeding of the 19th International Business Information Management (IBIMA) Conference, 12-13th November 2012, Barcelona (ISBN: 978-0-9821489-8-3)

extension of the work design literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 13321356. Jackson, P. R. Wall, T. D. Martin, R., & Davids, K. (1993). New measures of job control, cognitive demand and production responsibility. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(5), 753-762. Karasek, R., Brisson, C., Kawakami, N., Houtman, I., Bongers, P.,& Amick, B.(1998). The Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ): an instrument for internationally comparative assessments of psychosocial job characteristics. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 3(4), 322-55. Kessels, J.W.M. (2001). Tempting towards knowledge productivity. Inaugral lecture. Enschede: Universiteit Twente. Kessels, J.W.M. (1996). Knowledge productivity and the corporate curriculum. In: J.F. Schreinemakers ( Ed.), Knowledge management, Organization, competence and methodology (pp. 168174). Wurzburg: Ergon Verlag. Keursten, P., Kessels, J. W. M., & Kwakman, K. (2003). Knowledge productivity in organizations: towards a framework for research and practice. AHRD Academy of Human Resource Development (892-899). Minneapolis: Minnesota. Keursten, P., Verdonschot, S., Kessels, J., & Kwakman, K. (2006). Relating learning, knowledge creation & innovation: case studies into knowledge productivity. Int. J. Learning and Intellectual Capital, 3(4), 405420. ISSN 1479-4853 Martin-de-Castro, G., Lopez Saez, P., & Novas-Lopez, J.E. (2008), Processes of knowledge creation in knowledge-intensive firms: Empirical evidence from Bostans Route 128 and Spain, Technovation, 28(4), 222-230 Morgeson, F. P., & Humphrey, S. E. (2003, August). Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ): Developing and validating a comprehensive measure of work design. Interactive paper session presented at the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Seattle, WA. Morgeson, F. P., & Humphrey, S. E. (2006). The Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ): Developing and validating a comprehensive measure for assessing job design and the nature of work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 1321-1339. Morgeson, F. P., & Humphrey, S. E. (2008). Job and team design: Toward a more integrative conceptualization of work design. In J. Martocchio (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resource management, 27, 39-92. United Kingdom: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Nonaka, I, & Takeuchi, H., (1995). The knowledge creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press. Nonaka, I., Toyama, R. and Byosiere, P. 2001. A theory of organisational knowledge creation: understanding the dynamic processes of creating knowledge. In M. Dierkes, A. Berthoin Antal, J. Child and I. Nonaka (eds), Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Opatha, H.H.D.N.P., (2002), Performance Evaluation of Human Resources , 1st Edition, pp.212, 170-183, Colombo, Sri Lanka: the Author publication. Polanyi, M. (1966). The Tacit Dimension. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Raghunath, P. (2007). Define job design to increase productivity. The Hindu. Retrieved July 8, 2012, from http://www.thehindujobs.com/0702/2007020700391000.htm Ramezan, M., 2011. Examining the impact of knowledge management practices on knowledge-based results. J. of Knowledge-based Innovation in China, 3(2): 106 118. Sobia, M., and Bakhtiar, A., 2011. An Empirical Investigation on Knowledge Workers Productivity in Telecom Sector of Pakistan. Information Management and Business Review, 3 (1): 27-38. Soo, C.W., Midgley, D. & Devinney, T.M. 2002, "The process of knowledge creation in organizations", Organization Science, 1-42. Stam, C. D., 2007. Knowledge productivity: designing and testing a method to diagnose knowledge productivity and plan for enhancement. (Doctoral thesis, University of Twente). Retrieved from http:// doc.utwente.nl/58109/1/thesis_Stam.pdf

Proceeding of the 19th International Business Information Management (IBIMA) Conference, 12-13th November 2012, Barcelona (ISBN: 978-0-9821489-8-3)

Tsai, M.T., & Yong, H. L. (2007) Knowledge Creation Process in New Venture Strategy and. Performance Journal of Business Research, 60(4), 371-381. Verdonschot, S. G. M., & Van Rooij, M. (2007, October). Validation of a set of design principles to promote knowledge productivity and innovation. Paper presented at the 10th European Conference on Creativity and Innovation, Copenhagen.