Drawing on social comparison theory, this study aims to explore how perceived status disagreement influences employee knowledge behaviors and identifies the boundaries of its positive and negative effects. Specifically, the authors examine the impact of perceived status disagreement on individual knowledge behaviors, analyze the distinct mediating roles of prestige and dominance status-striving motivations and further investigate the moderating effects of status stability and individual status.
To test these hypotheses, two studies were conducted: Study 1 was a scenario experiment (n = 220) and Study 2 was a time-lagged study among employees (n = 456).
Results showed that perceived status disagreement fosters knowledge sharing by stimulating prestige status-striving motivation while simultaneously promoting knowledge hiding through dominance status-striving motivation, and that these effects are contingent on team status stability. In addition, exploratory analyses revealed that individual status further shapes these relationships.
By positioning perceived status disagreement as the central construct, the study broadens the conflict domain beyond overt disputes to encompass underlying cognitive misalignments with meaningful behavioral consequences and, through the lens of social comparison theory, offers a more nuanced understanding of status-driven workplace behaviors.
