Research indicates that relationship‐oriented HR practices can increase organizational knowledge, yet we know little about the effects of relationship‐oriented HR practices on employee knowledge management behaviors. Drawing from affective events theory, we examine the indirect effect of participation in one type of relationship‐oriented HR practice (i.e., organizational social activities) on three knowledge management behaviors (i.e., knowledge sharing, knowledge hiding, and knowledge manipulating) via positive affect, as well as the conditional indirect effect of intrinsic motivation for organizational social activities on these relationships. Utilizing a time‐separated field study ( n = 163), our analysis reveals positive affect fully mediates the relationship between participation in organizational social activities and (a) knowledge sharing and (b) knowledge hiding, and partially mediates the relationship between participation in organizational social activities, and (c) knowledge manipulating. Most interestingly, we unexpectedly found a positive direct effect of participation in organizational social activities on knowledge manipulation, even though the indirect effect via positive affect was negative. The results also indicate that, for individuals with high intrinsic motivation for social activities, there is a significant indirect effect of participation in organizational social activities on all three knowledge management behaviors.

This study explores how the motivational framing of a network training program may positively or (inadvertently) adversely impact participants' discomfort with strategic networking and motivation to network. We examine the impact of a “me‐focused” framing (i.e., on the personal career benefits that individuals can accrue through strategic networking) and a “we‐focused” framing (i.e., on the benefits to the team/organization of individuals' strategic networking) compared to a control group in two field‐based quasi‐experiments. In both studies, we found no difference between the two training frames in their effect on the two training outcomes when looking at participants' reactions, on average. However, in the second study, we find that individual differences in the way participants relate to others (i.e., the extent to which they endorse an individual or a collective self‐concept) change the impact of the framing on their discomfort with and motivation to network. The findings highlight the importance of considering the match or mismatch between training framing and self‐concept. In the we‐focused condition, a match was related to decreased networking discomfort, while a mismatch was related to increased discomfort and decreased motivation. In the me‐focused condition, a mismatch was counter‐intuitively related to decreased discomfort. These findings suggest that considering participants' reactions to training (i.e., change in discomfort and motivation), on average, may mask important differences in their response to network‐based training and that tailoring network training to participants' self‐concepts may be an important consideration for human resource management professionals.

Organizations are increasingly recognizing the important role employee inclusion perceptions play in promoting positive employee attitudes and behaviors. Although social networks are frequently cited as being a driver of perceived inclusion, little empirical work has examined the social network conditions that give rise to it. We address this gap by examining how both network position (indegree centrality) and network structure (network closure) relate to perceived workplace inclusion. We test our hypotheses with a sample of 364 professionals in a multinational pharmaceutical firm. We find that both indegree centrality and network closure are positively related to perceived workplace inclusion. The relationship between network centrality and perceived workplace inclusion is strengthened by a high level of network closure. In addition, the relationship between network closure and perceived workplace inclusion is strengthened by a high level of need for affiliation. Our results, therefore, suggest that both network centrality and closure play an important role in employee perceptions of inclusion and demonstrate the importance of considering need for affiliation as a boundary condition. We conclude by discussing the implications of these findings for theory and practice.