Knowledge Sharing Practices Among Library Personnel in a University Library: A Case Study

1. Introduction

Knowledge is fundamental to human understanding and action, encompassing awareness of facts, familiarity with individuals and situations, and practical skills. Within the realm of philosophy, knowledge, particularly propositional knowledge, is distinguished as true belief supported by justification, separating it from mere opinion or guesswork. Despite widespread agreement among philosophers regarding propositional knowledge’s validity, controversies abound concerning its justification (Ishaya et al., 2021). These debates, accentuated in the latter part of the 20th century by thought experiments prompting alternative definitions, have fuelled ongoing discourse.

Moreover, knowledge acquisition occurs through various means, with perception serving as a primary source of empirical knowledge (Elangovan & Priya, 2021). Perception involves using the senses to comprehend the external world, while introspection allows for insight into internal mental states and processes.

Knowledge sharing is the exchange of knowledge, including information, skills, or expertise, among individuals, groups, or organizations (Ogunmodede & Popoola, 2019; Pusiri & Tongurai, 2021). It bridges individual and organizational knowledge, enhancing absorptive and innovation capacities, thereby fostering sustained competitive advantages. While traditional face-to-face knowledge sharing methods persist, social media platforms offer convenient and efficient avenues for sharing knowledge. Despite technological advancements, challenges remain in knowledge sharing within organizations, influenced by factors such as organizational culture, trust, and incentives. Resistance from some employees poses a significant hurdle in effective knowledge sharing, impacting organizational knowledge management efforts (Ramayah et al., 2018).

2. Literature Review

Developing an effective knowledge-sharing strategy is crucial for any organization that wants to stay competitive in today’s fast-paced business environment. Sharing knowledge can help organizations improve their processes, increase innovation, and ultimately achieve their goals more efficiently (Al-Azawei, 2018). Knowledge sharing is defined as the transfer of wisdom, skills and technology between organizational subunits (Areekkuzhiyil, 2022). In addition, it refers to collective beliefs or behavioural routines related to exchanging employee knowledge, experiences and skills throughout a department or organization (Hamid, 2020). In the view of Zhao et al. (2018), knowledge sharing is the process of transferring or sharing undocumented and documented information from one person to the other. It is a process through which the employees of an organization can easily share knowledge, experience, observations, and inputs with everyone in the organization.

Studies have shown that the way individuals perceive knowledge sharing can significantly influence their actual sharing behaviours (Chen & Hsieh, 2015; Nguyen et al., 2019). Marouf (2016) found that librarians generally have a positive perception of knowledge sharing, recognizing its importance for professional development and organizational success. However, Mutage and Dewah (2022) noted that there is sometimes a reluctance among librarians to share their knowledge, due to factors such as job insecurity or a desire to maintain power and status.

Understanding the motivations that drive library personnel to share their knowledge is crucial. The literature suggests that both intrinsic and extrinsic motivations play a role in knowledge sharing behaviours (Nguyen et al., 2019; Law et al., 2017). Intrinsic motivations, such as a sense of enjoyment or a desire to help others, have been found to be particularly important in the context of voluntary knowledge sharing (Matoskova, 2019; Carpentier, 2021). On the other hand, extrinsic motivations, such as rewards or recognition, can also influence knowledge sharing, but their impact may be more complex (Fischer, 2018; Xia & Yang, 2020). Furthermore, prosocial motivation, or the desire to benefit others, has been identified as a significant driver of knowledge sharing in various organizational settings (Babic et al., 2019; Gohler et al., 2022). This is particularly relevant in the library context, where the primary goal is to serve the information needs of the community.

Additionally, factors such as organizational identity, reciprocity, and a sense of belonging to a collective have been shown to motivate knowledge sharing among library personnel (Jin & Suntrayuth, 2022). Nezafati et al. (2023) studied promoting knowledge sharing performance in a knowledge management system: do knowledge workers behaviour patterns matter? The findings emphasize on the importance of the behavioural, organizational environment and psychological factors such as reward system, top management support openness and trust on knowledge sharing performance of knowledge workers among knowledge intensive company in Iran. Kaushal and Nyoni (2025) examined why do rewards fail to motivate knowledge sharing behaviour among employee in organization. The funding showed that knowledge sharing is positively linked to organizational performance. Furthermore, management’s lack of knowledge of employees’ preferences regarding rewards leads to the provision of incorrect rewards that do not enhance knowledge sharing behaviour.

The literature suggests that library personnel engage in knowledge sharing across a variety of areas, including professional development, service delivery, and technological advancements (Islam & Tsuji, 2016; Odede, 2020). Librarians often share their expertise in areas such as cataloguing, reference services, and information literacy instruction (Muchaonyerwa & Mutula, 2018). Additionally, they may share knowledge related to the implementation and use of new technologies, such as integrated library systems and bibliographic utilities (Fakandu, 2023).

Library personnel utilize a range of channels, both conventional and technological, for knowledge sharing. Conventional channels may include face-to-face interactions, workshops, and professional conferences (Lille, 2016; Dobreski & Huang, 2016). Additionally, technological channels, such as social media, online communities, and virtual learning platforms, have also become increasingly important for knowledge sharing in the library context (Yılmaz, 2017; Islam & Tsuji, 2016). The choice of knowledge sharing channels may be influenced by factors such as the type of knowledge being shared, the geographical distribution of library personnel, and the level of technological proficiency within the organization (Fakandu, 2023; Islam & Tsuji, 2016). Moreover, it is important to note that effective integration of both conventional and technological channels can enhance the reach and impact of knowledge sharing efforts among library personnel (Yılmaz, 2017; Lille, 2016).

3. Methodology

The survey research design was adopted for this study. 55 library personnel in the Olusegun Oke Library, LAUTECH, including professionals and para-professionals, comprised the population of the study and were enumerated. A structured questionnaire served as the primary instrument for data collection, offering a standardised approach to capturing information on knowledge sharing behaviours, motivations, and channels through which knowledge is shared. It is a close-ended scale adapted from Onifade (2015) and Ogunmodede (2020) and modified to measure perception of library personnel on knowledge sharing. It consists of 18 items on a four points Likert scale rating with ranked options: Strongly Agree (SA) = 4, Agree (A) = 3, Disagree (DA) = 2 to Strongly Disagree (SD) = 1. The conventional and technological methods of the knowledge sharing contain 36 items with four points Likert scale rating with ranked options: SA = 4; A = 3; DA = 2; to SD = 1. Cronbach-Alpha reliability method was used to establish the reliability coefficients of each of the sub-sections. The reliability coefficient of perception of knowledge sharing by library personnel was 0.85, while the reliability coefficient of conventional and technological methods of knowledge sharing was 0.98 respectively.

The instrument was administered to the respondents personally. 45 copies of the questionnaire were returned and found valid for analysis, giving a response rate of 81.8%. Furthermore, descriptive statistics was used to summarize the characteristics and distributions of key variables, providing an overview of knowledge sharing behaviours, motivations, and channels among library personnel studied and were presented in simple percentages, mean and standard deviation.

4. Results and Discussion of Findings

The result analysis is hereby presented beginning with the demographic data of the respondents.

The socio-demographic distribution of participants in the study is presented in Table 1. Out of the total 45 participants, the majority were female, constituting 71.1% of the sample, while males accounted for 28.9%. This gender distribution reflects a higher representation of females among the participants. Regarding marital status, a significant proportion of participants were married, comprising 84.4% of the sample, while single individuals accounted for 15.6%. This suggests that the majority of participants were in committed relationships or partnerships.

Table 1.

Socio-demographic distribution of the participants

In terms of job status, the largest category of participants were para-professionals, making up 48.9% of the sample. Other job status categories included Librarian I (11.1%), Librarian II (8.9%) Senior Librarian (8.9%), Principal Librarian (15.5%) and Deputy (6.7%). This distribution indicates a diverse representation of librarian positions among the participants. Regarding the highest academic qualification, participants with a Diploma constituted the majority at 40.0%, followed by those with a Bachelor’s degree (22.2%) and Ph.D. (20.0%).

In terms of the section / unit within the library where participants were employed, the Reader’s Unit had the highest representation at 66.7%, followed by the Cataloguing Unit (15.5%), then acquisitions and Serials Unit both having the same distribution (6.7%) the Virtual unit has the least distribution (4.4%). This distribution reflects the diverse roles and responsibilities of participants within different functional areas of the library. Regarding years of work experience, participants with 11 years of experience constituted the largest group at 26.7%. This indicates a relatively experienced cohort of participants, with a range of tenure within the field of librarianship.

∙ Research Question 1: What is the perception of library personnel on knowledge sharing?

Table 2 presents the perceptions of library personnel regarding knowledge sharing practices within the university library setting. Analysis of the responses reveals several noteworthy findings. Overall, a substantial proportion of the respondents expressed a positive inclination towards knowledge sharing. For instance, a majority of respondents indicated a willingness to share their working skills acquired from job-related documents with colleagues (71.1%). Similarly, a significant percentage believed that librarians should have access to each other’s experiences within the library (57.8%).

Table 2.

Perception of library personnel on knowledge sharing

However, some barriers to knowledge sharing were also identified. A notable proportion of librarians expressed concerns about the perceived lack of time to share their expertise with colleagues (44.4%) and the difficulty in convincing others of the value of knowledge sharing (57.8%). Additionally, a minority of respondents reported not sharing insights with colleagues when asked to do so (24.4%). Despite these challenges, there were instances of active knowledge sharing among the library personnels. For example, a majority indicated sharing experiences about library automation (60.0%), serials management (53.3%), and collection development (42.2%) with colleagues. Interestingly, there were variations in the willingness to share knowledge across different domains. While librarians showed a high propensity to share ideas about reference services (77.8%) and skills about collection development (42.2%), they were less inclined to share insights about readers’ services (31.1%) and skills outside librarianship (17.8%).

∙ Research Question 2: What motivates library personnel to share knowledge?

The results presented in Table 3 shed light on the motivations behind knowledge sharing among library personnel within the university library setting. A significant proportion of librarians expressed intrinsic motivations for sharing knowledge. For instance, (100%) respondents affirmed sharing their knowledge gives them a sense of achievement, while majority (73.4%) respondents indicated that they share their experience with colleagues because they believe it contributes to their sense of fulfilment. These findings suggest that personal satisfaction and a sense of accomplishment play important roles in motivating the library personnels to engage in knowledge sharing activities. Interestingly, a relatively smaller percentage of the respondents expressed concerns about potential negative consequences of knowledge sharing. Conversely, a minority (4.4%) respondents believed that sharing their experience with colleagues could erode their authority in the profession. This suggests that while some library personnel may perceive risks associated with sharing knowledge, such as not widely prevalent among the study participants

Table 3.

Motivation of knowledge sharing among library personnel

∙ Research Question 3: In what area do library personnel share knowledge?

In the context of knowledge sharing within the workplace, Table 4 reveals a consistent trend of active participation among colleagues in disseminating new work skills and experiences. A significant percentage of library personnel reported sharing new work skills acquired from conferences with their colleagues, highlighting the importance of disseminating knowledge obtained from external professional development opportunities. Similarly, a majority of librarians (93.3%) indicated that their colleagues share new skills learned at conferences with them, demonstrating a reciprocal exchange of knowledge within the library community. Furthermore, library personnel reported sharing actionable information during staff meetings and useful ideas through seminars and workshops, indicating that internal organizational forums serve as platforms for knowledge dissemination.

Table 4.

Areas of knowledge sharing

∙ Research question 4a: What are the conventional methods of sharing knowledge adopted by the library personnel?

The examination of conventional channels for knowledge sharing within an organization, as depicted in Table 5, the findings indicate that face-to-face interaction is a predominant channel for knowledge sharing, with a majority of respondents agreeing on its effectiveness. This suggests that direct interpersonal communication plays a significant role in facilitating knowledge sharing within the library community. Moreover, memoranda were identified as another commonly used channel, with (71.1%) respondents agreeing on its utility for sharing information. This highlights the importance of written communication in disseminating relevant updates and instructions among the library personnel.

Table 5.

Conventional Channel for knowledge sharing

∙ Research Question 4b: What are the technological-based methods of sharing knowledge adopted by the library personnel?

In the context of technological channels for knowledge sharing, the data presented in Table 6 reveals a clear preference for certain digital communication tools over others. E-mail emerged as the most commonly used technological channel for knowledge sharing, with a majority of respondents agreeing (64.4%) and a significant proportion agreeing (28.9%) on its effectiveness. This suggests that electronic mail remains a preferred method for exchanging information and communicating within the librarian community. Moreover, the use of mobile phones was identified as another prevalent channel, with (86.7%) respondents agreeing on its utility for knowledge sharing. This underscores the importance of mobile technology in facilitating real-time communication and collaboration among librarians, irrespective of their physical location.

Table 6.

Technological channel for knowledge sharing

Furthermore, social media platforms such as WhatsApp, Facebook, and LinkedIn were identified as popular channels for knowledge sharing, with a majority of respondents agreeing on their effectiveness. This emphasizes the role of social networking in facilitating informal communication, professional networking, and resource sharing among the library personnel.

5. Conclusion

The comprehensive research conducted at Ladoke Akintola University of Technology’s library system has provided a nuanced understanding of knowledge sharing behaviours among library personnels. The cross-sectional study design, coupled with a structured questionnaire, has effectively captured the multifaceted nature of knowledge exchange within the academic library setting. The socio-demographic distribution of participants indicates a predominance of experienced male librarians with advanced degrees, suggesting a workforce with a strong potential for effective knowledge sharing. The findings reveal a positive inclination towards knowledge sharing, with library workforce willing to share their expertise in various domains, particularly in reference services and library automation. However, the study also highlights barriers such as time constraints and difficulties in convincing colleagues of the value of knowledge sharing. Despite these challenges, the librarians exhibit a strong motivation for knowledge sharing, driven by both intrinsic factors like personal fulfilment and extrinsic factors such as career advancement and recognition.

The research underscores the importance of both conventional and technological channels for knowledge sharing. Face-to-face interactions, memoranda, notice boards, and formal training sessions are identified as effective conventional channels, while email and mobile phones are preferred technological channels. These channels facilitate a collaborative learning environment and foster a culture of knowledge exchange within the librarian community.

6. Recommendations

To enhance knowledge sharing among library personnels, it is essential to develop strategies that overcome time constraints and improve the perceived value of such activities. Increasing the use of technological channels, especially the Library Portal, can facilitate more efficient knowledge exchange and collaboration. Encouraging greater gender diversity and representation from all job statuses and units within the library will enrich the knowledge-sharing process. Implementing recognition programs to acknowledge librarians’ contributions can reinforce their motivation. Supporting and expanding effective channels like peer assistance, mentoring, and community of practice activities will enhance professional growth. Embedding knowledge sharing into the organizational culture through policies and practices that promote regular exchange of information and collaboration is also crucial. By adopting these measures, Ladoke Akintola

University of Technology’s library system can strengthen its knowledge-sharing framework, leading to improved library services, professional development of library personnels, and fostering a more innovative academic environment.

References

• Al-Azawei, A. (2018). Predicting the Adoption of Social Media: An Integrated Model and Empirical Study on Facebook Usage. Interdisciplinary Journal of Information, Knowledge, and Management, 13, 233-258. [https://doi.org/10.28945/4106]
• Areekkuzhiyil, S. (2022). Determinants of Knowledge Sharing Practices among Teachers Working in Higher Education Sector of Kerala. In Knowledge Management in Higher Education Institutions (p. 134). Manipal University Jaipur: Rajasthan, India.
• Babic, K., Cerne, M., Connelly, C., Dysvik, A., & Skerlavaj, M. (2019). Are we in this together? knowledge hiding in teams, collective prosocial motivation and leader-member exchange. Journal of Knowledge Management, 23(8), 1502-1522. [https://doi.org/10.1108/jkm-12-2018-0734]
• Booker, Q. S., Austin, J. D., & Balasubramanian, B. A. (2021). Survey Strategies to Increase Participant Response Rates in Primary Care Research Studies. Family Practice, 38, 699-702. https://academic.oup.com/fampra/article/38/5/699/6313102#google_vignette [https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmab070]
• Carpentier, P. (2021). Understanding individual motivations among members of online communities. Les Cahiers Du Numérique, 17(1-2), 153-183. [https://doi.org/10.3166/lcn.16.2020.0062]
• Chen, C., & Hsieh, C. (2015). Knowledge sharing motivation in the public sector: the role of public service motivation. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 81(4), 812-832. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852314558032]
• Dobreski, B., & Huang, Y. (2016). The joy of being a book: benefits of participation in the human library. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 53(1), 1-3. [https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.2016.14505301139]
• Elangovan, M., & Priya, R. (2021). An exploratory study of Blackboard and Moodle for online teaching and learning in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18(1), 28. [https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00274-7]
• Fakandu, A. (2023). Ict as enabler for the adoption of knowledge management practices in selected north-west Nigeria federal university libraries. Journal of ICT Development Applications and Research, 5(1), 35-44. [https://doi.org/10.47524/jictdar.v5i1.36]
• Fischer, C. (2018). Motivated to share? development and validation of a domain-specific scale to measure knowledge-sharing motives. [https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/r5xba]
• Giannotti, V. A., Vasilakakos, T., Monaci, M., & Tsiailas, T. (2019). The use of virtual reality in anatomy teaching. Journal of Education and Health Promotion, 8, 185.
• Gohler, G., Hattke, J., & Göbel, M. (2022). The mediating role of prosocial motivation in the context of knowledge sharing and self-determination theory. Journal of Knowledge Management, 27(3), 545-565. [https://doi.org/10.1108/jkm-05-2021-0376]
• Hamid, N. A. A. (2020). Usage of Social Media Tools in Teaching and Learning and Its Influence on Students Engagement, Knowledge Sharing and Academic Performance. https://publisher.uthm.edu.my/periodicals/index.php/rmtb/article/view/524
• Ishaya, B., & Azamabel, N. (2021). Behavioural Impact of Social Media Platforms Among Youths in Yola Metropolis. United International Journal of Research and Technology, 2, 32-36. https://paper.researchbib.com/view/paper/271094
• Islam, A., & Tsuji, K. (2016). Information professionals’ knowledge sharing practices in social media: a study of professionals in developing countries. International Journal of Knowledge Content Development & Technology, 6(2), 43-66. [https://doi.org/10.5865/ijkct.2016.6.2.043]
• Jin, J., & Suntrayuth, S. (2022). Knowledge sharing motivation, behavior, and creativity of knowledge workers in virtual organizations. Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society, 2022(1). [https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/4358132]
• Kaushal, S., & Nyoni, A. M. (2025). Why do rewards fail to motivate knowledge sharing behavior among employees? VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, 55(1), 34-55. [https://doi.org/10.1108/VJIKMS-06-2022-0202]
• Law, K., Chan, A., & Ozer, M. (2017). Towards an integrated framework of intrinsic motivators, extrinsic motivators and knowledge sharing. Journal of Knowledge Management, 21(6), 1486-1502. [https://doi.org/10.1108/jkm-03-2016-0119]
• Lille, M. (2016). Evaluating the success of markerspace in a public library. New Library World, 117(9/10), 587-595. [https://doi.org/10.1108/nlw-04-2016-0030]
• Marouf, L. (2016). What motivates librarians to share knowledge? The International Information & Library Review, 48(2), 102-111. [https://doi.org/10.1080/10572317.2016.1176451]
• Matoskova, J. (2019). Why employees share their knowledge. E+m Ekonomie a Management, 22(2), 83-96. [https://doi.org/10.15240/tul/001/2019-2-006]
• Muchaonyerwa, N., & Mutula, S. (2018). Knowledge-sharing strategies among library staff at selected university libraries. Mousaion: South African Journal of Information Studies, 35(3). [https://doi.org/10.25159/0027-2639/2003]
• Mutage, M., & Dewah, P. (2022). Knowledge hoarding at a state university library in Zimbabwe. University of Dar Es Salaam Library Journal, 16(2), 3-18. [https://doi.org/10.4314/udslj.v16i2.2]
• Nezafati, N., Razaghi, S., Moradi, H., Shokouhyar, S., & Jafari, S. (2023). Promoting knowledge sharing performance in a knowledge management system: do knowledge workers’ behavior patterns matter?. VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, 53(4), 637-662. [https://doi.org/10.1108/VJIKMS-11-2020-0202]
• Nguyen, T., Nham, T., Froese, F., & Malik, A. (2019). Motivation and knowledge sharing: a meta-analysis of main and moderating effects. Journal of Knowledge Management, 23(5), 998-1016. [https://doi.org/10.1108/jkm-01-2019-0029]
• Odede, I. (2020). Rethinking bibliographic utilities for library consortia. Library Hi Tech News, 37(8), 7-9. [https://doi.org/10.1108/lhtn-02-2020-0014]
• Ogunmodede, T. A. (2020). Knowledge creation, sharing and use as precdictors of creativity and innovation of librarians in federal universities in Nigeria. A Doctoral Thesis submitted to the Department of Library and Information Studies, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria.
• Ogunmodede, T. A., & Popoola, S. O. (2019). Knowledge sharing Behaviour by Librarians in Federal Universities in Nigeria. Journal of Balkan Libraries Union, 6(1), 20-33. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/jblu/issue/50569/584475#article_cite
• Onifade F. N. (2015). Knowledge sharing among librarians in Federal University Libraries in Nigeria. Journal of Information and Knowledge Management, 5(3), 91-97 http://www.iiste.org
• Pusiri, T., & Tongurai, C. (2021). Comparative study of blackboard and moodle for e-learning in higher education. Journal of Engineering Science and Technology Education, 14(2), 61-69.
• Ramayah, T. J. F. H., Cheah, J., Chuah, F., Ting, H., & Memon, M. A. (2018). Partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) using smartPLS 3.0. In An Updated Guide and Practical Guide to Statistical Analysis (pp. 1-32). Pearson. Research Management and Technological Business, 1, 278-295.
• Xia, Z., & Yang, F. (2020). Ethical leadership and knowledge sharing: the impacts of prosocial motivation and two facets of conscientiousness. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. [https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.581236]
• Yılmaz, R. (2017). Social presence and transactional distance as an antecedent to knowledge sharing in virtual learning communities. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 55(6), 844-864. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633116688319]
• Zhao, J., Zhu, C., Peng, Z., Xu, X., & Liu, Y. (2018). User Willingness Toward Knowledge Sharing in Social Networks. Sustainability, 10, 4680. [https://doi.org/10.3390/su10124680]