Moderating Effects of Trust and Collaboration on Knowledge Responsiveness and Innovative Work Behaviour of Nigerian Workers in the Foreign Oil and Gas Companies Operating in Nigeria

Dr. Kenneth Chukwujioke Agbim^*1, Dr. Gomna Gbenger Gbar² and Beatrice C. Ndibe²

¹Department of Entrepreneurial Studies, Faculty of Management Sciences, Veritas University, Abuja, Nigeria

²Department of Management, University of Nigeria, Enugu, Nigeria

INTRODUCTION

Knowledge is an intangible resource that is acquired through the process of perception, learning, communication, association and reasoning. Knowledge workers employ knowledge to respond to employees and organisational challenges, to achieve enhanced work efficiency, new product development, a higher level of responsiveness to market conditions (Anser et al., 2020; Ghinoi et al., 2021) and to sustain the innovativeness of employees and their organisations through knowledge management (Kmieciak, 2020; Tsetim et al., 2020). Responsiveness to knowledge, knowledge application, knowledge implementation or knowledge utilisation is the most important aspect of knowledge management. This is because as established by the Resource-Based View and the Resource Dependent Theory, the value of both the internally and externally sourced knowledge are attached to their application (Al-Abbadi et al., 2020; Ode & Ayavoo, 2020). Ode and Ayavoo aver that knowledge application influences the innovative behaviour of workers.

Knowledge is obtained by knowledge workers in the oil and gas industry to respond to the dynamism in the automation of the process of developing a new oilfield, constructing a deep-sea drilling rig, building a liquefied natural gas plant and the maintenance of on- and off-shore oil and gas facilities. Knowledge workers are more responsive in an organisational climate that is characterised by trust and openness. Knowledge responsiveness within any organisation and between the organisation and other organisations is made possible through collaboration. Collaboration curbs knowledge hiding behaviours and promotes knowledge responsiveness and innovative work behaviour (Afsar et al., 2020; Feitosa et al., 2020; Kmieciak, 2020). Further, studies on knowledge management and innovative work behaviour in the manufacturing and service firms, and private and public firms abound in extant literature (e.g., Anser et al., 2020; Eren & Çiçeklioglu, 2020; Hamidah et al., 2021; Ochoa-Jiménez et al., 2021; Purwanto et al., 2021; Tsetim et al., 2020; Usman & Fadhilah, 2020).

Research has further shown that knowledge implementation affects innovation capability (Ode & Ayavoo, 2020; Usman & Fadhilah, 2020), while trust is related to knowledge management (Afsar et al., 2020; Kmieciak, 2020) and innovative work behaviour (Demir, 2021; Mitcheltree, 2021; Tamunomiebi & Adoki, 2020). Additionally, collaboration influences innovative work behaviour (Abbas et al., 2022; Atatsi et al., 2021; Purwanto et al., 2021) and knowledge management (Mathrani & Edwards, 2020; Yasuoka & Hirata, 2020; Yousef & Collazos, 2020). In spite of the increased interest in knowledge management, innovative work behaviour, trust and collaboration, studies that have empirically linked knowledge responsiveness to innovative work behaviour are still very limited. Again, a moderating variable is employed in research when the relationship between an independent variable and a dependent variable is significant or discordant. Yet, studies that have investigated the moderating effects of trust and collaboration on the relationship between knowledge responsiveness and innovative work behaviour of Nigerians working in the foreign oil and gas companies operating in Nigeria are scant.

Oil and gas companies comprise upstream processing, mid-stream transportation, downstream refineries, product distribution and field services firms. There are numerous multinational oil and gas companies in different parts of the world with workers of diverse cultural background (Ali et al., 2021). In Nigeria, oil and gas exploratory activities began in Araromi, Western Nigeria in 1908 by two firms; Nigerian Bitumen Corporation (a German entity) and British Colonial Petroleum (a Colonial chartered corporation). In 1937, Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria was awarded the sole license for oil exploration. Further, with the discovery of oil in commercial quantity in Oloibiri, Bayelsa State in 1956 and Nigeria’s independence in 1960, onshore and offshore exploratory license were also given to Mobil, Agip, Safrap (which later became Elf), Tenneco (which later became Texaco) and Amoseas (which later became Chevron). Nigeria joined the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and established the Nigerian National Oil Corporation (NNOC) in 1971; which became Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) in 1977. Nine out of Nigeria’s 36 States constitute the Niger Delta region; the source of the country’s onshore oil and gas (KPMG, 2020; Udok et al., 2020).

Owing to the inadequacy in indigenous human capital development in the foreign oil and gas companies operating in Nigeria, the federal government in 2010 enacted the Local Content Act. The term “local content” implies participation of Nigerians in the foreign oil and gas companies as employees and contractors. The essence of the Act was to attract foreign direct investments, increase the participation of Nigerians in the foreign oil and gas companies, job creation, technology transfer and to add value to the economy (Udok et al., 2020). With the number of years the foreign oil and gas companies have operated in Nigeria and the over one decade that the Local Content Act has been in existence, the objectives of the Act have not yet been sufficiently achieved. Rather, the key knowledge application positions in these foreign oil and gas companies are still manned by foreigners. This dominance has been attributed to fear on the part of the foreign workers that involving Nigerians in knowledge responsiveness could imply losing relevance and their jobs. On the part of Nigerians, distrust has been the bane. Moreover, the knowledge hiding behaviour and lack of knowledge application collaboration between the indigenous and foreign workers that has characterised the foreign oil and gas companies operating in Nigeria is limiting the rate of oil and gas knowledge transfer to Nigerians in these companies. It is equally making it difficult for the Nigerian workers to develop their innovative work behaviour and by extension limiting the rate at which Nigerians establish oil and gas companies.

There is therefore need to overturn this situation. This can be done by empirically investigating the moderating roles of trust and collaboration in knowledge responsiveness and innovative work behaviour in the foreign oil and gas companies operating in Nigeria. The motivation for this study is premised on the neglect of the provisions of the Local Content Act by the foreign oil and gas companies, and fear that the dominance of the Nigerian oil and gas industry by the foreign companies will continue if the current situation is not checked. The other motivations are the attendant consequences of the dominance which include loss of foreign exchange as majority of the foreigners are paid in foreign currencies, increase in unemployment and poverty rate, more cases of bunkering and vandalisation of oil and gas facilities, and increase in social vices among the youths. This study seeks to bring to the fore the importance of trust, collaboration and knowledge responsiveness in the development of innovative work behaviour among indigenous oil and gas workers in the foreign oil and gas companies operating in Nigeria.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Knowledge Responsiveness

The term “knowledge responsiveness” is a coinage of Darroch (2005, as cited in Hamidah et al., 2021). Knowledge responsiveness is also referred to as knowledge application, knowledge utilisation or knowledge implementation. It is one of the dimensions of knowledge management (i.e., knowledge acquisition, knowledge dissemination and knowledge responsiveness) (Ode & Ayavoo, 2020; Usman & Fadhilah, 2020). The term “responsiveness” is constructed from three behavioural elements: orientation to customer needs; actions of competitors; and inter-functional combination. Responsiveness to knowledge implies that the organisation must be seen to be utilising the knowledge acquired in making decisions and taking actions that create superior performance internally and in the marketplace. Internally, the organisation can: improve employees’ creativity, skills, innovative behaviour and core business processes; decrease operation costs and product cycle time; and increase productivity. Externally, the organisation can increase sales volume, develop better relationship with customers, increase market shares and develop better relationship with suppliers. Knowledge responsiveness is the process of using new knowledge to solve organisational problems, develop innovative employees and organisations, improve product/service quality and increase the worth of organisations. Knowledge responsiveness incorporates the knowledge obtained from both the acquisition and sharing stages of knowledge management. The application of the specialised knowledge from the interaction of tacit and explicit knowledge can enhance innovative work behaviour. As such, the process of knowledge responsiveness is characterised by tacit and explicit knowledge interaction. In this study, knowledge responsiveness is defined as a behaviour that is characterised by the utilisation of new knowledge to solve identified problems.

Innovative Work Behaviour

Innovative work behaviour is the “ability of an individual to adopt, implement, and/or make use of creative ideas to solve problems in his/her work role, work unit, and/or organisation” (Shah et al., 2020:2). It can also be viewed as the “intentional creation and application of new ideas or innovations (new products or processes) in the workplace to improve individual, group, or organisational performance” (Kmieciak, 2020:1838). These definitions depict that innovative work behaviour is associated with concepts such as employee innovativeness, innovative job performance and on-the-job innovation (Kmieciak, 2020; Tsetim et al., 2020). Therefore, for the purpose this study, innovative work behaviour is an act of employees that is geared towards using new technologies to discover new ideas, offer new workable models, and respond to problems so as to achieve desirable outcomes.

Trust

Trust connotes the willingness to be positive and defenseless toward the actions of others (Demir, 2021). It also refers to the reliability and confidence in the exchange party to fulfill its obligation in a way that leads to positive outcomes (Tamunomiebi & Adoki, 2020). Trust is faith, belief and reliance in the integrity, sincerity, justice, intentions and behaviours of others (Bencsik & Juhasz, 2020). Trust promotes collaboration among co-workers (horizontal trust) and between co-workers and their superiors (vertical trust) (Feitosa et al., 2020; Kmieciak, 2020; Safari et al., 2020). Trust facilitates risk taking, coordination, cooperation and task performance among individuals. Thus, it enhances innovation, learning, openness, reliability, transparency, integrity, dependability and consistency in the workplace. This explains why trust is associated with the principle of reciprocity, organisational culture and organisational climate (Kacperska & Łukasiewicz, 2020). Knowledge is employed in innovative activities in the organisational atmosphere of trust; both in formal and informal settings. Most of the definitions of trust portray the term as a state, belief or positive expectation. However, for the purpose of this study, trust is confidence in the actions and inactions of an individual that is devoid of the intent to take undue advantage of the individual. It is a unique hallmark of intra- and inter-organisational collaboration that is facilitated by technologies such as social media platforms.

Collaboration

Formerly, managers accomplished tasks through an individual. Today, the strategy is now collaboration. The collaborative effort of a team in a specific job is qualitatively and quantitatively better than the solo effort of the best individual in similar or same job. As such, the concept collaboration is related to terms like team learning, employee participation and cooperation, employee networking, and employee support (Atatsi et al., 2021; Demircioglu et al., 2021; Husin et al., 2021; Mathrani & Edwards, 2020; Tan et al., 2021; Yang et al., 2022; Yasuoka & Hirata, 2020). Cooperation is valuable in the improvement of interactions among workers. However, it requires the workers to interact and work together to attain organisational goals (Fuller, 2021; Vasin, 2020). Collaboration represents intra- and inter-organisational connection. It is challenging due to the risks that emanate from the association. However, it is beneficial and rewarding to the collaborators (Mathrani & Edwards, 2020; Ode & Ayavoo, 2020). Mathrani and Edwards (2020) aver that collaboration is a highly rewarding process that can make companies successful if time and effort is taken to ensure the risks are negligible.

Jokanovic et al. (2020) define collaboration as a process of interaction involving individuals who perceive the same problem differently but seek solution that is beyond their possibility by constructively exploring their differences. Thus, collaboration is a process of shared experience, knowledge, skills, learning, creation and goals. Knowledge responsiveness and collaboration are complemented by the collaborative technologies for knowledge management activities. These technologies (e.g., social media platforms) help knowledge workers to achieve successful knowledge application.

Hypothesis Development

Knowledge Responsiveness, Trust and Innovative Work Behaviour

Knowledge management practices have a significant and positive impact on innovation performance (Boussenna & El Kharraz, 2021b). Further, the use of appropriate organisational strategies and information technology has greatly boosted knowledge implementation and innovation processes in Moroccan Universities (Boussenna & El Kharraz, 2021a). Alolayyan et al. (2020) confirm that innovation is an outcome of knowledge management. But in relation to trust, Mitcheltree (2021) found that trust plays an essential role in efficient innovation implementation in organisations. This is evident from the positive relationship between trust and innovative work behaviour (Anser et al., 2020) and the significant prediction of innovative behaviour by trust (Demir, 2021). Again, Fitria (2020) empirically establish that organisational trust mediates the relationship between knowledge management and the performance of organisations such as oil and gas companies. Foreign oil and gas companies are vulnerable to shortage of indigenous skilled workers, and difficulty in the application of shared knowledge. These vulnerability and difficulties are unconnected with issues associated with trust and cooperation. Moreover, the distrust and limited collaboration between the indigenous and foreign workers in foreign oil and gas companies has also been linked to the shortage of indigenous oil and gas companies (Ali et al., 2021).

We infer that the literature on knowledge responsiveness, trust and innovative work behaviour are scant. However, studies on the effects of trust on knowledge sharing and innovative work behaviour, and the positive relationship among knowledge sharing, trust and innovative work behaviour abound in extant literature (e.g., Anser et al., 2020; Kipkosgei et al., 2020; Kmieciak, 2020; Marampa et al., 2020; Perman et al., 2020; Zhao et al., 2020). Taken together, we argue that since knowledge sharing and knowledge responsiveness are both dimensions of knowledge management, trust can play a significant role in knowledge responsiveness and innovative work behaviour. Accordingly, we hypothesize that:

H_01: Trust has no significant moderating effect on the relationship between knowledge responsiveness and innovative work behaviour in the foreign oil and gas companies operating in Nigeria.

Knowledge Responsiveness, Collaboration and Innovative Work Behaviour

Collaboration enhances the success of knowledge management projects (Yousef & Collazos, 2020). Mathrani and Edwards (2020) conclude that the transfer of expert knowledge between sources is facilitated through knowledge implementation and collaborations. Knowledge implementation via collaboration is associated with effort and time wastage; this include the effort made to explain and transfer the knowledge to others, the time spent in seeking advice, and the time used in developing and maintaining trust among the collaborators. Collaboration is beneficial to the collaborating companies when there is knowledge transfer and implementation. However, there are more challenges in knowledge application than in knowledge sharing. Purwanto et al. (2021) affirm that knowledge management and cooperation help firms to develop innovation capability. Demircioglu et al. (2021) found that networking practices (increased interaction) are related to higher levels of innovative work behaviours. Employees who participate in diverse jobs and activities for their organisation are more engaged and enthusiastic on their jobs, and are more proactive and innovative in task performance.

Similarly, Husin et al. (2021) observe that employee participation has significant effect on work engagement, while work engagement significantly affects innovative work behaviour. In support of Husin et al. observation, Mitcheltree (2021) assert that lack of employee participation and involvement may redirect employees’ attention, loyalty, and responsibility away from innovation. More recently, Abbas et al. (2022) found that knowledge implementation through collaboration that is aided by knowledge management systems enhances innovation. It is obvious that the relationships among collaboration or cooperation, knowledge implementation and innovative work behaviour as established in extant literature are positive. However, studies relating knowledge responsiveness and innovative work behaviour seem not to have focused on the foreign oil and gas companies operating in Nigerian. Therefore, we propose that:

H_02: Collaboration has no significant moderating effect on the relationship between knowledge responsiveness and innovative work behaviour in the foreign oil and gas companies operating in Nigeria.

RESEARCH METHOD

Cross sectional survey design was adopted for this study. The population of the study is made up Nigerians working in the five foreign oil and gas companies operating in the oil and gas rich region of Nigeria; South-South, Nigeria. The States in the region are Akwa Ibom, Bayelsa, Delta and Rivers. The population is 5208 workers; this is made up of 847 workers in Akwa Ibom State, 348 workers in Bayelsa State, 255 workers in Delta State and 3758 workers in Rivers State. The sample size of 358 was computed from 5208 using Krejcie and Morgan (1970) sample size formula for finite population. The sampling techniques employed in this study are proportionate stratified random sampling and simple random sampling techniques. Proportionate stratified random sampling technique is employed to allocate to the five oil and gas companies (38, 33, 48, 173 and 66) and the State’s strata [Akwa Ibom State (58), Bayelsa State (24), Delta State (18) and Rivers State (258)] a representative proportion of the sample size. The proportionate stratified random sample of 358 workers was computed using Bowley (1937) proportional allocation formula. Simple random sampling technique was employed to select from each oil and gas company the workers that completed the research instrument.

The measures of knowledge responsiveness were adapted from Ode and Ayavoo (2020). The measures of innovative work behaviour were adapted from Kustanto et al. (2020) and Shah et al. (2020). The measures of trust were adapted from Kipkosgei et al. (2020) and Kmieciak (2020). The measures of collaboration were adapted from Yang et al. (2022). All the item statements are assessed on a five point Likert scale that ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The research instrument was independently subjected to content and construct validity by three Lecturers in the Department of Entrepreneurial Studies, Veritas University, Abuja. The corrections and suggestions of the validators were effected accordingly. The reliability of the instrument was confirmed by an overall Cronbach’s alpha value of .791. Data for the main study were generated and analysed based on Baron and Kenny’s (1986) four step approach for testing moderating variable. The choice of Baron and Kenny’s approach for this study is premised on the significant and positive results of studies that have examined the relationship between knowledge implementation and innovative work behaviour.

A moderating variable is a qualitative or quantitative variable that increases or decreases the strength of the relationship between the independent and dependent variables or that changes their direction from positive to negative and vice versa. Baron and Kenny’s (1986) approach entails the use of simple and multiple regression analysis and the examination of the unstandardised beta values at each step. The four steps in Baron and Kenny’s approach are: (i) the independent variable must have an effect on the dependent variable; (ii) the independent variable must have an effect on the moderating variable; (iii) the moderating variable must significantly influence the dependent variable; and (iv) the regression coefficient on the dependent variable (unstandardised beta value) will increase in relation to the beta value in step one. Linear regression was used in the first three steps, while multiple regression was applied in the fourth step with the aid of SPSS (Version 21.0 for Windows). The independent variable is knowledge responsiveness, the dependent variable is innovative work behaviour, while trust and collaboration are the moderating variables.

RESULTS

The demographics show that the age of the respondents ranged from 28 to 56 years. The distribution of the respondents by sex shows that 86.6% are male, while 13.4% are female. Also, 61.2%, 26.3% and 12.5% of the respondents have first, second and third degrees respectively, while the work experience of majority (67.8%) of the respondents is 10-15 years.

Table I depicts a significant change in the value of the unstandardised beta from .175 to .295. This result shows that hypothesis one (H₀₁) is supported. As such, trust moderates the relationship between knowledge responsiveness and innovative work behaviour of Nigerians working in the foreign oil and gas companies operating in Nigeria.

Table I: Regression Analysis for Moderation of Knowledge Responsiveness and Innovative Work Behaviour by Trust

**P < .05

Note: KR = Knowledge Responsiveness, IWB = Innovative Work Behaviour

Source: SPSS Output, 2022

The result of the regression analysis presented in Table II reveal that the unstandardised beta value for knowledge responsiveness increased from .284 to .317. This result supports hypothesis two (H₀₂) and denotes that collaboration can moderate the relationship between knowledge responsiveness and innovative work behaviour of Nigerians working in the foreign oil and gas companies operating in Nigeria.

Table II: Regression Analysis for Moderation of Knowledge Responsiveness and Innovative Work Behaviour by Collaboration

**P < .05

Note: KR = Knowledge Responsiveness, IWB = Innovative Work Behaviour

Source: SPSS Output, 2022

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

The purpose of this study is to investigate the moderating effects of trust and collaboration on the relationship between knowledge responsiveness and innovative work behaviour. The study was conducted in the context of Nigerian workers in foreign oil and gas companies operating in Nigeria. Firstly, the results show that trust significantly moderates the relationship between knowledge responsiveness and innovative work behaviour of Nigerian workers in the foreign oil and gas companies operating in Nigeria. The results specifically indicate that the strength of the relationship between knowledge responsiveness and innovative work behaviour of Nigerian workers in the foreign oil and gas companies operating in Nigeria can be increased or decreased via the building of trust for Nigerian workers by the foreign workers. This finding is somewhat consistent with prior studies, which depict trust as an important facilitator of knowledge responsiveness and innovative work behaviour in other organisational and geographical context (Anser et al., 2020; Demir, 2021; Mitcheltree, 2021). However, previous studies did not examine the issue of trust for Nigerian workers by the foreign workers. The present study investigated how trust for Nigerian workers by the foreign workers influences the indigenous workers’ level of innovative work behaviour in the foreign oil and gas companies operating in Nigeria. The similarity between the current and previous findings can be attributed to the fact that trust helps to create the environment that fosters interactions among employees (Fuller, 2021).

Additionally, trust increases the willingness to pursue organisational goals through joint actions, and to develop and deploy innovative behaviours based on the application of internally and/or externally acquired knowledge (Erat, 2020; Kacperska & Łukasiewicz, 2020; Kmieciak, 2020). One factor that can hinder the effect of trust on knowledge responsiveness and innovative work behaviour is knowledge hiding and hoarding (Bilginoğlu, 2019). Surprisingly, Al-Abbadi et al. (2020) aver that knowledge hoarding does not increase or decrease the strength of the relationship between tacit knowledge application and innovation performance. It follows that by developing and displaying trust in all their dealings, the Nigerian workers in the foreign oil and gas companies may have the foreign workers transfer the industry specific tacit knowledge to them. This may be done by the foreign workers jointly working with the Nigerians when responding to the dynamism in the oil and gas market and industry. Apart from the probability of enhancing knowledge transfer to the indigenes through involvement in knowledge responsiveness, a climate of trust in the workplace can facilitate the establishment of indigenous oil and gas companies by the Nigerian workers upon retirement or resignation. Conversely, an oil and gas work environment that is characterised by distrust; particularly against the indigenes will breed, knowledge hiding and hoarding, agitations, all kinds of criminalities, bunkering and vandalisation of oil and gas facilities (Al-Abbadi et al., 2020).

Secondly, this study found that collaboration moderates the relationship between knowledge responsiveness and innovation work behaviour of Nigerians working in the foreign oil and gas companies operating in Nigeria. More specifically, the finding shows that the strength of the relationship between knowledge responsiveness and innovative work behaviour of Nigerian workers in the foreign oil and gas companies operating in Nigeria can be increased or decreased through collaboration or team work involving the indigenous and foreign workers in the companies. This finding is in tandem with the propositions of the existing researches, which affirm the existence of a significant relationship among knowledge responsiveness, collaboration and innovative work behaviour (Abbas et al., 2022; Purwanto et al., 2021). However, the departing point between the current and previous finding is the current finding’s focus on indigenous workers in foreign oil and gas companies. Tacit knowledge transfer from a foreign knowledge worker to the indigenous workers is enhanced by close interaction; that is characterised by a strong collaboration culture that is supported by knowledge management systems. Conversely, knowledge hiding and hoarding arises when the expectations (knowledge transfer inclusive) of both the indigenous and foreign workers are not built into the development and implementation of the knowledge management system (Abbas et al., 2022).

As noted by Ali et al. (2021), workforce diversity is one of the hallmarks of multinational oil and gas companies. Notwithstanding, it takes a team of interacting workers to collaborate. Additionally, the innovative work behaviour of teams is influenced by the knowledge acquired from the external environment of a firm through collaboration. Collective learning and implementation of internally and/or externally acquired knowledge is required for the development of the innovative behaviour of all the workers; irrespective of their diversities. Team learning behaviours promote knowledge application and innovative work behaviour, and innovation implementation (Vlasblom, 2020). This suggests that through team learning, networking or collaboration, the Nigerian workers in the foreign oil and gas companies may acquire the industry specific knowledge from their foreign co-workers. This knowledge can in turn be jointly used by the two categories of workers to respond to the changing demands in the industry. Moreover, any of the Nigerian workers may via resignation or retirement leave the foreign oil and gas companies to establish an oil and gas firm; thus contributing or otherwise to the achievement of the provisions of the Local Content Act.

The main theoretical contribution of this study is in confirming trust and collaboration as factors that can increase or decrease the strength of the relationship between knowledge responsiveness and innovative work behaviour. Previous studies have shown that trust, collaboration (or cooperation) and knowledge application (employee participation or networking) are related (Abbas et al., 2022; Husin et al., 2021; Ode & Ayavoo, 2020; Perman et al., 2020; Purwanto et al., 2021; Vlasblom, 2020). However, none of the studies seem to have employed trust and collaboration as moderating variables of the relationship. Again, it is evident from extant literature that there is a rarity of studies that have focused on one category of workers in the studied companies; particularly the oil and gas companies. The current study investigated Nigerian workers in relation to their foreign co-workers in the foreign oil and gas companies operating in Nigeria. Finally, by focusing on the use of internally and externally sourced knowledge for knowledge responsiveness in oil and gas companies, the study supplements the underpinning theories of the study and previous empirical findings on knowledge responsiveness and innovative work behaviour.

Our study contributes to the practical development of trust, collaboration, knowledge responsiveness and innovative behaviour among workers. Nigerian workers can develop behaviours that will compel their foreign co-workers to trust and collaborate with them through team learning. By institutionalising team learning among indigenous and foreign workers, knowledge acquisition from internal and external sources, confidence building among indigenous workers, and knowledge transfer from the foreign to indigenous workers can be augmented. Apart from reducing the distrust, and knowledge hiding and hoarding practices in the foreign oil and gas companies, team learning can as well foster the utilisation of the acquired knowledge in responding to the demands in the oil and gas market (Atatsi et al., 2021). Trust and team building ensures fairness and honesty in dealings involving managers and workers. It promotes collaboration among all the workers, and encourages workers to express their positive and negative frustration, opinions, personal beliefs and feelings (Ali & Hemed, 2020; Atatsi et al., 2021). Further, the challenges encountered by the foreign oil and gas companies in Nigeria are associated with the agitations, buckering and the vandalisation of oil and gas facilities in the nation’s oil rich region. Managers can control these menace by reinventing their knowledge management system. This is to ensure that the desires of both the indigenous and foreign workers (as it concerns trust building, knowledge responsiveness and innovative work behaviour), and the provisions of the Local Content Act are incorporated into the system (Ali et al., 2021; Udok et al., 2020).

Based on the findings of this study, we suggest that just like knowledge sharing, knowledge responsiveness should be presented as a strategy for developing innovative work behaviour. Similarly, the development of innovative work behaviour should be a continuous activity since it enhances knowledge workers’ capacity to respond to the changes in the oil and gas market. To create and sustain the impact of knowledge responsiveness on innovative work behaviour, the building of trust and collaborative network should be consciously maintained. The managers of the foreign oil and gas companies should make concerted efforts to reduce the rate of agitations, bunkering and vandalisation of oil and gas facilities. This can be done through fairness in the transfer of knowledge to all workers; particularly the indigenous workers, and the involvement of both the indigenous and foreign workers in knowledge application. This study will add to the existing literature on trust, collaboration, knowledge responsiveness and innovative work behaviour with respect to foreign oil and gas companies.

This study has limitations that may be overcome in future studies. First, the study data were collected from only the Nigerian workers; including data on innovative work behaviour which ought to have been elicited from the managers. However, the inherent bias was minimised by hiding the identity of the respondents. Future studies may consider collecting such data from the managers. Second, this study investigated the moderating effects of trust and collaboration on knowledge responsiveness and innovative work behaviour. Based on the current findings there is need to examine the mediating effects of trust and collaboration on the relationship in the future. Third, there is scant literature on knowledge responsiveness and collaboration. This limitation was however overcome by using literature on related terms. Fourth, the current study adopted cross-sectional data; which is less valid for effect/relationship studies in the long term. Hence, further study can employ longitudinal data which is more valid for causal relationships among trust, collaboration, knowledge responsiveness and innovative work behaviour. Better still, the use of triangulation method is suggested for future studies. Fifth, the use of data from only the oil and gas industry limits the generalisability of the findings. Thus, future studies can address this limitation by collecting data from different industries.

CONCLUSION

Previous studies on knowledge management have mostly established a relationship between knowledge sharing and innovative work behaviour. Thus, neglecting the all important aspect of knowledge management, knowledge responsiveness and worsening the scant nature of literature on knowledge responsiveness and innovative work behaviour. To reduce the dearth of literature in this area, this study found that the relationship between knowledge responsiveness and innovative work behaviour of Nigerian workers in the foreign oil and gas companies operating in Nigeria is moderated by trust and collaboration. As such, the results of this study depicts that with the assistance of the managers, the indigenous workers can increase their innovative work behaviour through trust building and participation in the application of the oil and gas industry specific knowledge. Trust among workers and managers can be fostered in a climate that encourages trust building. In addition, managers can achieve the participation of indigenous workers by implementing fair practices in the workplace. The implementation of these measures is expected to augment the achievement of the expectation of the indigenous workers and the provisions of the Nigerian Local Content Act and by extension reduce the rate of agitations, buckering and vandalisation of oil and gas facilities in the oil rich region of Nigeria.

REFERENCES

1. Abbas, Y., Martinetti, A., Rajabalinejad, M., Schuberth, F., & van Dongen, L. A. M. (2022). Facilitating digital collaboration through knowledge management: A case study. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/14778238. 2022.2029597

2. Afsar, B., Al-Ghazali, B. M., Cheema, S., & Javed, F. (2020). Cultural intelligence and innovative work behaviour: The role of work engagement and interpersonal trust. European Journal of Innovation Management. 24(4), 1082-1109. https://doi.org/10. 1108/EJIM-01-2020-0008

3. Al-Abbadi, L., Alshawabkeh, R., & Rumman, A. A. (2020). Knowledge management processes and innovation performance: The moderating effect of employees’ knowledge hoarding. Management Science Letters, 10(2020), 1463-1472. http://dx.doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2019. 12.021

4. Ali, E. A. M., & Hemed, Y. A. (2020). The impact of collaborative knowledge environment on intention to share knowledge. Journal of Administrative Science, 17(1), 48-59.

5. Ali, J., Lodhi, M. S., & Shafiq, M. (2021). Challenges of knowledge sharing within oil & gas sector. Journal of Public Value and Administrative Insight, 4(2), 128-142. https://doi. org/10.31580/jpvai.v4i2.2084

6. Alolayyan, M. N., Alalawin, A. H., Alyahya, M. S., & Qamar, A. (2020). The impact of knowledge management practice on the hospital performance in Abu Dhabi. Cogent Business & Management, 7(1), 1827812. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2020.1827812

7. Anser, M. K., Yousaf, Z., Khan, A., & Usman, M. (2020). Towards innovative work behaviour through knowledge management infrastructure capabilities: Mediating role of functional flexibility and knowledge sharing. European Journal of Innovation Management, 24(2), 461-480. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-09-2019-0250.

8. Atatsi, E. A., Stoffers, J., Kil, A. (2021). Team learning, work behaviors, and performance: A qualitative case study of a technical university in Ghana. Sustainability, 2021, 13, 13703. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132413703

9. Baron, R., & Kenny, D. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182

10. Bencsik, A., & Juhasz, T. (2020). Impacts of informal knowledge sharing (workplace gossip) on organisational trust. Economics and Sociology, 13(1), 249-270. https://doi.org/10. 14254/2071-789X.2020/13-1/16

11. Bilginoğlu, E. (2019). Knowledge hoarding: A literature review. Management Science Letters, 9(1), 61-72.

12. Boussenna, Y., & El Kharraz, O. (2021a). Testing availability of human and technical requirements for knowledge management implementation in Moroccan Universities. European Journal of Business and Management Research, 6(4), 237-244. http://dx.doi. org/10. 24018/ejbmr.2021.6.4.984

13. Boussenna, Y., & El Kharraz, O. (2021b). Information technology as moderator between knowledge management and organizational performance. International Journal of Economics, Business and Management Studies, 8(8), 18-25. http://dx.doi.org/10. 36713/epra8120

14. Bowley, A. L. (1937). Elements of statistics. London: P. S. Kings and Staples.

15. Demir, S. (2021). Organisational trust perception and innovative behaviours of teachers. European Journal of Educational Management, 4(1), 25-33. https://doi.org/10. 12973/eujem.4.1.25

16. Demircioglu, M. A., Hameduddin, T., & Knox, C. (2021). Innovative work behaviors and networking across government. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523211017654

17. Erat, S. (2020). Information sharing and the effect of organizational trust on innovation behaviour and individual performance: A research on vocational high school teachers. International Review of Economics and Management, 8(1), 124-145. https://doi.org/10. 18825/iremjournal.756072

18. Eren, A. S., & Çiçeklioglu, H. (2020). The impact of knowledge management capabilities on innovation: Evidence from a Turkish banking call center sector. European Journal of Social Sciences, 60(3), 184-209.

19. Feitosa, J., Grossman, R., Kramer, W.S., & Salas, E. (2020). Measuring team trust: A critical and meta-analytical review. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 41(5), 479-501.

20. Fitria, A. (2020). The effect of knowledge management ability on organizational performance with organizational trust as a mediation variable. Management Analysis Journal 9(4), 383-391.

21. Fuller, L. P. (2021). Managing peer-to-peer cooperation using knowledge-based trust and encouraging the willingness to share tacit knowledge. Open Journal of Business and Management, 9, 1246-1262. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojbm.2021.93067

22. Ghinoi, S., De Vita, R.,Steiner, B., Sinatra, A. (2021). Knowledge networks and the role of family firms: The case of an Italian regional cluster. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market and Complexity, 7, 193, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc 7030193

23. Hamidah, R., Sule, E. T., Yunizar, Y., & Ariawaty, R. N. (2021). Influence of knowledge management on innovative behaviour and its impact on managerial performance of medium-scale batik industry owners in west java, Indonesia. Palarch’s Journal of Archaeology of Egypt/Egyptology, 18(2), 436-455.

24. Husin, N. H., Mansor, N. N. A., Kelana, B. W. Y., & Sondoh, S. L. (2021). Employee participation and innovative work behaviour: The mediation effect of work engagement. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 11(7), 1043-1055. http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v11-i7/10571

25. Jokanovic, B., Zivlak, N., Okanovic, A., Culibrk, J., & Dudak, L. (2020). The model of knowledge management based on organisational climate. Sustainability, 2020, 12, 1-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su12083273

26. Kacperska, E., & Łukasiewicz, K. (2020). The importance of trust in knowledge sharing and the efficiency of doing business on the example of tourism. Information, 2020, 11, 1-18. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/info11060311

27. Kipkosgei, F., Kang, S. -W., & Choi, S. B. (2020). A team-level study of the relationship between knowledge sharing and trust in Kenya: Moderating role of collaborative technology. Sustainability, 12, 1615. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su12041615

28. Kmieciak, R. (2020). Trust, knowledge sharing, and innovative work behaviour: Empirical evidence from Poland. European Journal of Innovation Management, 24(5), 1832-1859. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-04-2020-0134

29. KPMG (2020). Advisory Services. KPMG International Cooperative.

30. Krejcie, R. V. & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607-610. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 001316447003000308

31. Kustanto, H., Hamidah, H., Eliyana, A., Mumpuni, J. H. S., & Gunawan, D. R. (2020). The Moderation Role of Psychological Empowerment on Innovative Work Behaviour. Systematic Review in Pharmacy, 11(8), 254-264.

32. Marampa, A. M., Adi, P. H., Angreani, A. I., & Wulandari, W. V. (2020). The importance of trust in knowledge sharing among micro, small, and medium enterprises. International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research, 9(4), 3584-3590.

33. Mathrani, S., & Edwards, B. (2020). Knowledge-sharing strategies in distributed collaborative product development. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market and Complexity, 2020, 6, 194, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc6040194

34. Mitcheltree, C. M. (2021). Enhancing innovation speed through trust: A case study on reframing employee defensive routines. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 10(4), 1-31. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-020-00143-3

35. Ochoa-Jiménez, S., Leyva-Osuna, B. A., Jacobo-Hernández, C. A., García-García, A. R. (2021). Knowledge management in relation to innovation and its effect on the sustainability of Mexican tourism companies. Sustainability, 13, 13790. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13241 3790

36. Ode, E., & Ayavoo, R. (2020). The mediating role of knowledge application in the relationship between knowledge management practices and firm innovation. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 5(2020), 209-217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2019.08.002

37. Perman, A. A. B., Jalil, S. Z. B., & Zaaba, Z. B. (2020). The impact of trust and social network on employee knowledge sharing capabilities. ESTEEM Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 5(February), 11-26.

38. Purwanto. E. N., Sule, E. T., Soemaryani, I., & Azis. Y. (2021). The roles of knowledge management and cooperation in determining company innovation capability: A literature review. Interdisciplinary Journal of Information, Knowledge, and Management, 16, 125-145. https://doi.org/10.28945/4739

39. Safari, A., Barzoki, A. S., & Heidari Aqagoli, P. (2020). Exploring the antecedents and consequences of impersonal trust. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 28(6), 1149-1173. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-08-2019-1850.

40. Shah, S. I., Afsar, B., & Shahjehan, A. (2020). Unique contextual conditions affecting coworker knowledge sharing and employee innovative work behaviours. Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 36(2), 125-134. https://doi.org/10.5093/jwop2020a12

41. Tamunomiebi, M. D., & Adoki, E. B. (2020). Organizational trustworthiness and employee innovative work behaviour. Global Journal of Management and Business Research, 20(3), 16-23.

42. Tan, A. B. C., Van Dun, D. H., & Wilderom, C. P. M. (2021). Innovative work behavior in Singapore evoked by transformational leaders through innovation support and readiness. Creativity and Innovation Management, 30(4), 697-712. https://doi.org/10.1111/ caim.12462

43. Tsetim, J. T., Adegbe, O. B., & Agema, R. J. (2020). Knowledge management infrastructure capabilities and innovativeness of small and medium scale enterprises in Benue State, Nigeria. Saudi Journal of Business and Management Studies, 5(3), 216-225. https://doi.org/10.36348/sjbms.2020.v05i03.006

44. Udok, U., Udofia, M., & Okunbolade, O. (2020). Local content development in the oil and gas industry in Nigeria: Problems and prospects. Global Journal of Politics and Law Research, 8(1), 90-110.

45. Usman, M., & Fadhilah, H. (2020). Knowledge management practice for competitive advantage through innovation. International Journal of Business and Management Invention, 9(7/ I), 01-05.

46. Vasin, S. M., Gamidullaeva, L. A., Wise, N. A., & Korolev, K. Y. (2020). Knowledge exchange and the trust institution: A new look at the problem. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 11, 1026-1042. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-019-00588-2

47. Vlasblom, N. (2020). Team learning behaviours to foster innovation implementation: A qualitative study on the perceptions of work team members (Unpublished Master’s thesis). Radboud University, Nijmegen.

48. Yang, L., Holtz, D., Jaffe, S., Suri, S., Sinha, S., Weston, J., Joyce, C., Shah, N., Sherman, K., Hecht, B., & Teevan, J. (2022). The effects of remote work on collaboration among information workers. Nature Human Behaviour, 6(January), 43–54. https://doi.org/10. 1038/s41562-021-01196-4

49. Yasuoka, M., & Hirata, S. (2020). Designing knowledge management system for supporting craftsmen’s collaboration beyond temporal boundaries. Proceedings of the 53rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 4880-4889). https://hdl.handle.net/ 10125/64341978-0-9981331-3-3

50. Yousef, M., & Collazos, C. A. (2020). Collaborative strategies supporting knowledge management in organizations. Revista Colombiana de Computación, 21(2), 6-12. https://doi.org/ 10.29375/25392115.4026

51. Zhao, S., Jiang, Y., Peng, X., & Hong, J. (2020). Knowledge sharing direction and innovation performance in organisations: Do absorptive capacity and individual creativity matter? European Journal of Innovation Management, 24(2), 371-394. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ EJIM-09-2019-0244