This study examines the ethical and behavioural implications of technology-enabled knowledge management (KM) systems, challenging the dominant view of digital technologies as neutral tools that merely facilitate knowledge processing. Instead, it conceptualises KM systems as sociotechnical infrastructures that actively shape how knowledge is produced, shared, evaluated, and legitimised within organisations. Building on insights from the knowledge management, organizational behaviour, and information systems literature, this study develops an integrated conceptual framework that links technological design features to employee behaviour and knowledge-sharing outcomes through embedded ethical risks.
Adopting an integrative and theory-building methodology, this research synthesises interdisciplinary literature to identify recurring mechanisms through which digital KM infrastructures influence organisational dynamics. The analysis highlights three interrelated dimensions of ethical risk: (1) surveillance and visibility, (2) control and standardisation, and (3) power asymmetries and transparency. These dimensions are conceptualised as embedded governance mechanisms that regulate not only the flow of knowledge but also the behavioural and epistemic conditions under which employees engage in knowledge-sharing practices.
The findings show that increased visibility and traceability, while enhancing coordination and accountability, may reduce psychological safety when associated with monitoring and evaluation, leading to self-censorship and selective participation. Similarly, standardisation and codification processes tend to privilege explicit and measurable knowledge, contributing to epistemic narrowing and limiting organisational knowledge diversity. Finally, algorithmic opacity and information asymmetries undermine perceptions of procedural fairness and organisational trust, weakening employees’ willingness to contribute. These dimensions interact to produce reinforcing effects that encourage defensive behaviours, such as knowledge hiding and risk-averse participation, ultimately constraining organisational learning.
By linking these technological features to micro-level mechanisms, such as trust, intrinsic motivation, perceived fairness, and psychological safety, this study demonstrates that ethical risks are not external constraints but endogenous components of KM systems that shape knowledge-sharing outcomes. This study advances four theoretical propositions that explain how these mechanisms operate individually and in combination.
This study contributes to KM theory by integrating behavioural and ethical perspectives into the analysis of digital infrastructures, reframing KM systems as instruments of knowledge governance. It also provides practical implications, suggesting that organisations should prioritise transparency, participatory design, and psychologically safe environments to foster more inclusive and sustainable knowledge-sharing practices.