Knowledge Sabotage Model in Government Organizations: an Interpretive Structural Approach

Document Type : Research َ Article

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, Department of Management, Faculty of Management and Economics, Lorestan University, Khoramabad, Iran

2 Bachelor of Accounting, Department if Economics and Accounting, Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Iran

Abstract

Purpose: Human behavior is often unpredictable and influenced by diverse factors. Organizations frequently encounter individuals who, despite management efforts to optimize knowledge sharing and foster a knowledge-based environment that ensures sustainable growth and employee development, engage in disruptive and destructive behaviors. Such behaviors negatively impact organizational productivity and employee performance. One critical form of behavioral deviation causing significant harm to organizational structures is known as knowledge sabotage. This study aims to develop a knowledge sabotage model specifically for government organizations using an interpretive structural modeling (ISM) approach.
Method: The present study is applied in terms of purpose and descriptive survey in terms of nature and method. The statistical population of the research is senior managers and human resources managers of government organizations in Lorestan province, 30 of whom were selected using purposive sampling. The data collection tool in the qualitative part is an interview, and in the quantitative part, it is a questionnaire, whose validity and reliability were confirmed using the content and theoretical validity method and the intra-coder and inter-coder reliability. In this study, qualitative data were analyzed using the content analysis method and Maxqda software, and in the quantitative part, the interpretive structural modeling method and ISM software were used.
Findings: The study identified the dimensions and components influencing knowledge sabotage within four main categories: contextual factors for knowledge sabotage formation, intervention factors affecting knowledge sabotage, its various dimensions, and its consequences.
Conclusion: The findings reveal that knowledge sabotage leads to reduced managerial decision-making efficiency, increased administrative and time costs, diminished innovation and continuous improvement, and a decline in the organization's social capital.

Keywords

Main Subjects


سبزی، عطیه، رمضانی، یوسف، و سجاد، عاطفه (1398). بررسی تأثیر رفتارهای مخرب نظارتی بر تسهیم دانش با توجه به نقش میانجی خستگی عاطفی و نقش تعدیلی عدالت سازمانی. مدیریت دولتی، 11(2)، 339-354.
کریمی، رضا، و رخشان‌نیا، ندا (1400). فراتحلیل رابطه زیرساخت و مدیریت دانش در کتابخانه‌ها. مطالعات کتابداری و سازماندهی اطلاعات، 32(4)، 23-42.
 
 
References
Al Hassan, S., Majeed, M., & Parveen, R. (2025, April). The dog-eat-dog phenomenon of perceived over-qualification sparking knowledge sabotage with the dark side of LMX. In Evidence-based HRM: a Global Forum for Empirical Scholarship. Emerald Publishing Limited.‏ https://doi.org/10.1108/EBHRM-06-2024-0227
Bari, M. W., Khan, Q., & Di Virgilio, F. (2025). Knowledge donation, hoarding, and hiding behaviors of high performers: Mediation role of deviant silence. European Research on Management and Business Economics, 31(2), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iedeen.2025.100276
Bergh, D. D., D'Oria, L., Crook, T. R., & Roccapriore, A. (2025). Is knowledge really the most important strategic resource? A meta‐analytic review. Strategic Management Journal, 46(1), 3-18.‏
Boon, C., Jiang, K., & Eckardt, R. (2025). The role of time in strategic human resource management research: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 51(1), 172-211.‏
Chacón-Henao, J., & Arias-Pérez, J. (2022). The not invented here syndrome, knowledge sabotage, and breakthrough performance: the role of employee awareness on artificial intelligence. Revista Facultad de Ciencias Económicas: Investigación y Reflexión, 30(1), 131-143.‏
Enwereuzor, I. K. (2024). Dispositional greed and knowledge sabotage: the roles of cutting corners at work and ethical leadership. Current Psychology, 43(2), 1325-1339.‏
Islam, T., Ali, H. F., & Abdullah, H. (2025). Unfolding knowledge sabotage: the roles of knowledge-sharing climate, trustful climate and dark triad. Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication.‏ https://doi.org/10.1108/GKMC-08-2024-0544
Jiwei, S., & Qiang, L. (2023). How the perceived climate of differential team association affects employees' knowledge sabotage: a moderated dual path model. Science & Technology Progress and Policy, 40(4), 114-123.‏
Karimi, R., & Rakhshannia, N. (2021). Meta-analysis of the relationship between infrastructure and knowledge management in libraries. Library and Information Organization Studies, 32(4), 23-42. [In Persian]
Masrum, M., Akob, M., & Jumady, E. (2025). The role of organizational commitment in mediating the effect of knowledge sharing and competence on organizational citizenship behavior. Golden Ratio of Human Resource Management, 5(1), 251-265.‏
Perotti, F. A., Rozsa, Z., Kuděj, M., & Ferraris, A. (2024). Building a knowledge sharing climate amid shadows of sabotage: a microfoundational perspective into job satisfaction and knowledge sabotage. Journal of Knowledge Management, 28(5), 1490-1516.‏
Rahmat, A., & Abdillah, M. R. (2023). Authentic leadership and knowledge-sabotaging behavior: a test of self-determination theory. Sains Organisasi, 2(1), 38-48.‏
Ribeiro, V. B., Nakano, D., & Muniz Jr, J. (2024). The human resources and knowledge management integrated role in Industry 4.0/5.0: a human-centric operations management framework. Production 34, e20240014. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-6513.20240014
Sabzi, A., Ramezani, Y., & Sajjad, A. (2019). Investigating the effect of destructive supervisory behaviors on knowledge sharing with regard to the mediating role of emotional exhaustion and the moderating role of organizational justice. Public Administration, 11(2), 339-354. [In Persian]
Serenko, A. (2020). Knowledge sabotage as an extreme form of counterproductive knowledge behavior: the perspective of the target. Journal of Knowledge Management, 24(4), 737-773.‏
Serenko, A., & Choo, C. W. (2020). Knowledge sabotage as an extreme form of counterproductive knowledge behavior: the role of narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and competitiveness. Journal of Knowledge Management, 24(9), 2299-2325.‏
Shah, R., Hussain, R. Y., & Irshad, H. (2024). Green knowledge management for smes with an emphasis on human resource. In Innovative Human Resource Management for SMEs (pp. 1-21). IGI Global Scientific Publishing.‏
Tan, Z., Yuan, L., Wang, J., & Wan, Q. (2024). When the victims fight back: the influence of workplace ostracism on employee knowledge sabotage behavior. Journal of Knowledge Management, 28(5), 1249-1277.‏
Trivedi, K., & Srivastava, K. B. (2025). Mediation of knowledge management processes in enabling strategic HR practices to achieve differentiation and cost-effectiveness. Kybernetes, 54(2), 789-806.‏
Usman, M., Garavan, T., Karatepe, O. M., Akhtar, M. W., Rescalvo-Martin, E., & Aslam, M. K. (2025). A moderated mediation model of despotic leadership and knowledge sabotage behavior. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 124, article 103966.‏
Wang, J., Yuan, L., & Tan, Z. (2024). Understanding the influence of communication visibility in preventing knowledge sabotage: a knowledge power perspective. Internet Resear.
Zainab, T. (2023). Boreout, job search behavior, knowledge hiding and knowledge sabotage behavior.‏
Zhang, Z., Takahashi, Y., & Rezwan, R. B. (2025). Knowledge hiding and social exchange theory: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 15.‏  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1516815
Zhu, Y., Long, L., Xu, Y., & Zhang, Y. (2024). Knowledge seeking or sabotage? The effect of coworker relative overqualification on employee reaction from social comparison theory. Journal of Knowledge Management, 28(3), 724-742.‏
Zulfiqar, S., Garavan, T., Huo, C., Akhtar, M. W., & Sarwar, B. (2025). Leaders’ knowledge hiding and front-line employee service sabotage. The Service Industries Journal, 45(2), 161-179.‏
CAPTCHA Image
  • Receive Date: 07 June 2025
  • Revise Date: 19 September 2025
  • Accept Date: 22 October 2025
  • Publish Date: 06 August 2026