Associate director of the Systems Testing Excellence Program at the FedEx Institute of Technology, University of Memphis; Associate professor of management information systems at the Fogelman College of Business and Economics, University of Memphis
The tendency to remain silent about project-related issues can contribute to suboptimal project performance or project failure. Prior research in offshore outsourcing suggests that client managers should play a critical role to induce offshore vendors’ employees not only to report project problems in a timely fashion but also to brainstorm and contribute ideas to a project. Also, the extant research on cross-cultural teams has emphasized the importance of cultural adaptation in the smooth functioning of these teams, but the role of cultural adaptation in silence mitigation has been largely underdeveloped in the literature. In this research, we bring these concepts of vendor silence and cultural adaptation in cross-cultural teams together and develop a process framework that illustrates how vendor silence may be mitigated in offshore outsourcing through various silence mitigation mechanisms. We then develop three propositions for organizational action toward mitigating vendor silence, which highlight the mediating role of cultural adaptation.
Knowledge management systems (KMSs) facilitate the efficient and effective sharing of a firm's intellectual resources. However, sifting through the myriad of content available through KMSs can be challenging, and knowledge workers may be overwhelmed when trying to find the content most relevant for completing a new task. To address this problem, KMS designers often include content rating schemes (i.e., users of the KMS submit ratings to indicate the quality of specific content used) and credibility indicators (indicators describing the validity of the content and/or the ratings) to improve users' search and evaluation of KMS content. This study examines how content ratings and credibility indicators affect KMS users' search and evaluation processes and decision performance (how well and how quickly users selected alternatives offered by the KMS). Four Interrelated laboratory experiments provide evidence that ratings have a strong influence on KMS search and evaluation processes, which In turn affects decision performance. Finally, this study demonstrates that certain credibility indicators can moderate the relationship between rating validity and KMS content search and evaluation processes.