Knowledge Sharing Paradox in Green HRM: Dual Effects on Compensation and Employee Involvement for SDGs

HRMARS - Knowledge management literature overwhelmingly portrays knowledge sharing as universally beneficial for organizational outcomes. This study challenges this assumption by uncovering a paradox: extensive green knowledge sharing (GKS) can simultaneously amplify certain human resource management practices while undermining others. Drawing on data from 414 faculty members across four Saudi public universities and employing moderation analysis within a Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling framework, we examine how GKS differentially moderates the relationships between two contrasting green HRM practices (employee involvement and compensation) and sustainable development goals (SDGs) achievement. Results reveal striking asymmetry: GKS positively moderates the compensation-SDGs relationship (? = 0.087, p = 0.015), creating synergy between formal rewards and informal learning. However, GKS negatively moderates the involvement-SDGs relationship (? = -0.120, p = 0.023), revealing that extensive knowledge exchange can undermine participatory governance. We theorize five mechanisms explaining this paradox: information overload, substitution effects, diffusion of responsibility, coordination costs, and focus displacement. Grounded in Social Exchange Theory and the Ability-Motivation-Opportunity framework, this research demonstrates that knowledge sharing effectiveness depends fundamentally on the nature of the focal HRM practice. For transactional, criterion-based practices like compensation, knowledge sharing enhances effectiveness by clarifying reward pathways. For relational, participatory practices like employee involvement, excessive knowledge exchange creates cognitive burden and crowds out formal participation. This study contributes to knowledge management theory by identifying boundary conditions of knowledge sharing benefits, advances contingency perspectives in green HRM research, and offers practical guidance for calibrating knowledge systems to complement rather than compete with participatory structures. Our findings carry profound implications for universities and organizations pursuing sustainability: more knowledge sharing is not always better, and strategic restraint may prove more effective than maximalist information exchange.