A structured literature review of personality traits research in the knowledge behavior context: synthesis of the findings and practical recommendations

Purpose This paper aims to present a structured literature review of personality traits research in the context of knowledge behavior. Design/methodology/approach A total of 200 empirical articles published in knowledge management-centric journals and other journals indexed by Google Scholar were discovered and analyzed. Findings It was found that many knowledge management researchers are inadequately aware of the personality psychology literature. More than two-thirds of the proposed nomological networks exclude trait-relevant situational cues, without which the trait–behavior relationship may not exist. Consequently, their conclusions on the predictive power of many personality traits are contradictory and inconclusive. Particularly unclear is the role of the Big Five traits, performance-approach/avoidance goal orientation and personal motivation traits. Personality trait constructs cannot simply be blindly borrowed from the psychology literature and recklessly added to knowledge management causal models. Practical implications Journal editorial teams should declare a moratorium on publishing empirical studies in which researchers carelessly add personality trait constructs to their causal models without proper conceptualizing that uses relevant theories and cites the original sources. Practitioners need to exercise caution when applying the recommendations of the studies reporting the impact of employee personality traits on knowledge behavior. Organizations should favor employees possessing emotional intelligence, learning-approach goal orientation and prosocial cooperative value orientation – and avoid those with the Dark Triad traits. Managers should explore their workplace and understand what situational cues activate the desirable and undesirable personality traits of their workers. Originality/value This study draws the attention of various stakeholders of the knowledge management discipline to a vital, yet possibly derailed, research area.