Printer Friendly

Effect of self-concept, knowledge sharing and utilization on research productivity among librarians in public universities in South-West, Nigeria.

Introduction

The hub of higher education in Nigeria is the universities. Sanyal (1995) stated that universities are institutions of higher learning which participate in the evolution of knowledge, provide facilities for teaching and research. The university library however, grows concurrently with their parent organization being an integral academic part of their parent organization. The university library is therefore a support system sets up to support teaching, research, promoting the publication of research work and community services (Okiy, 2000; Salaam and Agboola, 2002). Most of the research output in Nigeria occurs in the university. Indeed, research productivity has become essential for university success and academic's employment and promotion prospects for academic staff including librarians (Okiki, 2011). This is however true for librarians in the academic libraries because their promotion is tied to publishing and research. Therefore, in order to grow academically and professional wise, they need to undertake research and publish in reputable journals.

Research productivity in any university is a major index of a librarian's quality and the determinant of advancement in terms of prestige, recognition for creative thinking, promotion, salary increase and acceptability in the university setting (Edem, 1995; Ochai and Nedosa, 1998; Salaam and Agboola, 2002; Alemna, 1993; Bassey, U., Akuegwu B., Udida L. and Udey F.U. 2007). In addition, research output provides a good justification for librarians to become successful academics. This is so because research activity develops academic knowledge and as well reinforces the skills for effective knowledge transfer. The quality of research output among librarians in any university setting depends largely on quality and quantity of information resources at the university disposals as well as their self-concept.

Self-concept generally means the conscious reflection of one's own being or identity as object separate from other or from the environment (Huitt, 2009). The self-concept is an internal model which comprises self-assessments. The features assessed include but are not limited to: personality, skills and abilities, occupation(s) and hobbies, physical characteristics. Self-concept is the cognitive or thinking aspect of self (related to one's image) and it is generally refers to (Yahaya, 2009) as the totality of a complex, organized, and dynamic system of learned beliefs attitudes and opinions that each person holds to be true about his or her personal existence. Self concept according to McLeod (2008) is how we think about, perceive and evaluate one self. People with high self-concept see themselves set challenging goals and maintaining strong commitment to them. Many of the successes and failure that people experience in many areas of life are closely related to the ways they have learned to view themselves and their relationships with others (Purkey, 1988).

Lee (2000) pointed out that the knowledge and experiences of librarians are the assets of any library and should be valued and shared. This signified that knowledge is now being seen as an important asset for both the university libraries and personal growth of the librarians through their research productivity. Knowledge sharing involves knowledge access and dissemination (Yaghi et al., 2011). Tan, et al. (2010) defined knowledge sharing as an activity of disseminating information, values and ideas about the perception between two parties to agree or disagree. The two parties could be between and among librarians within the organization. Petrides and Nodine (2003) opined that knowledge sharing is known as the essential components of the knowledge management process in association with the exchange of information and transferring of knowledge among librarians.

Abell and oxbrow (2001) argued that the research productivity at times depend on how people share their competences with those who can use it. It then follows that knowledge sharing activities of any group will consequently create more opportunities for members to exchange ideas and engage in cooperative activities which will enhance their individual or group research productivity. Moorman and Miner (1997) observed that knowledge sharing creates the common ground that is necessary for co-operation and research productivity. Research has revealed that there are natural tendency of employees in almost every organization to hoard knowledge, this attitude of knowledge hoarding among librarian however can affect research productivity.

Knowledge utilization according to Alan (2011) is the ability to put knowledge into practice in an environment which supports interaction and experimentation. Choo (2003) specify the use of knowledge is an essential part of evaluating and adopting new knowledge. Knowledge use is vital to the work performance particularly research productivity of academic staff in any university system.

Statement of the Problem

Empirical studies have shown that research outputs of librarians are still significantly low compared to their teaching counterpart in Africa particularly in Nigeria (Okebukola, 2002; Uzun, 2002). A study conducted by Ochai and Nedosa (1998) revealed that librarians in universities prefer qualification and length of service as criteria for determining their appointment and promotion rather than scholarly publication output. In many instances, librarians fall victim of the inability to meet up with the prescribed number of publications required of them to advance on the academic ladder, this explain why some librarians have stayed in one position for upwards of ten years without promotion. This study however, investigates the effects of self-concept, knowledge sharing and utilization on research productivity among librarians in public universities in South-West, Nigeria.

Objectives of the Study

The objectives of this study are to:

1. find out librarian's level of self-concept in public universities in South-West, Nigeria

2. ascertain the extent of knowledge sharing among librarian in public universities in South-West, Nigeria.

3. determine the level of knowledge utilization among librarians in public universities in South-West, Nigeria

4. find out the research publication level of librarians in public universities in South-West, Nigeria.

5. To find out the relative effect of self-concept, knowledge sharing and knowledge utilization on research productivity of librarians in public universities in South-West, Nigeria.

6. find out if self-concept, knowledge sharing and knowledge utilization have joint effect on research productivity of librarians in public universities in South-West, Nigeria.

Research Questions

The study is set to answer the following questions derived from the objectives.

1. What is the level of self-concept of librarians in public universities in South-West, Nigeria?

2. To what extent do librarians in public universities in South-West, Nigeria share their knowledge?

3. To what extent do librarians utilize knowledge available to them for research activities?

4. What is the level of research productivity of librarians in public universities in South-West within the last 4 years?

5. What is the relative effect of self-concept, knowledge sharing and knowledge utilization on research productivity of librarians in public universities in South-West, Nigeria?

6. Do self-concept, knowledge sharing and utilization have joint effect on research productivity of librarians in public universities in South-West, Nigeria?

Literature Review

Research Productivity of Librarians in Public Universities in Nigeria

Research productivity of librarians in Nigeria rest largely upon the quality, and often the quantity of research in form of books, journals articles, technical reports, etc. (Alemna, 1993; Nwakanma, 2003; Ochai and Nedosa, 1998). According to Edem (1997), publication output used for research, measures various works in terms of the number of books or chapters in books written, journal articles published, conference/workshop proceedings published, and work related publications such as abstracts, bibliographies, and indexes published. Corroborating this, Ramsden (1994) findings revealed that number of books, refereed papers, conference papers, edited books, and chapters in books are used as indices for research productivity of academics. However, much importance is attached to research and publication which have been regarded as a major criterion for promotion, of teaching staff and librarians in Nigerian Universities. This assertion is supported by the study of Salaam and Agboola, (2002) who reported that failure of librarians in the university libraries to produce stipulated numbers of publications would be stopped in spite of the candidate having met all other requirements for promotion.

The relevance of research productivity is that it enables librarians to share insights, demonstrate academic scholarship, gain recognition for creative thinking, and finally to develop a reputation for expertise in a specialty area (Rhodman, 2002). Librarians are engaged in publication for various reasons. These include: meeting institutional expectation; institutional support in travel funds, release time and research grants, intellectual curiosity (Fennewald, 2008); eagerness or enthusiasm to publish, presence of enabling environment (Ochai and Nedosa,1998) meeting the promotion and tenure demands of their institution to gain faculty status (Buttlar, 1991; Mularski and Bradigan,1991). Ogbomo (2010) reported that librarians are motivated to publish for various reasons, for promotion, to contribute to knowledge, and for pleasure.

Ochai and Nedosa (1998) asserted that publication is motivated by eagerness or enthusiasm to publish, presence of enabling environment, self perception of individual librarians with respect to their role, the will power on individual librarian to succeed and the determination not to "perish" in the academic high seas. Such self perception, according to Utulu (2005), is a product of education and skills acquired in the early days of professional practice which also determine the ability to produce scholarly papers. He added that one of the motivating factors for scholarly publications by librarians is the availability of other publications which contain the needed language for publication and how to use them.

Regardless of some of the motivating factors, librarians do not generally engage in adequate research and publication. This corroborates Powell (1997) who remarked that despite the benefits of publications to librarians, they do not conduct enough research and publication, this is acknowledged by Cullen (1998) and Molholt (1998), who noted that lack of interest hinders librarians' scholarly publication. Several studies have shown that librarians in their first 2-3 years of professional life are potentially non-productive years for scholarly publication.

Lertputtarak (2008) observed that there is still an unacceptably low level of research productivity, especially in public universities. Suwanwala (1991); Aina (1997); Oshagbemi (1997); Ochai and Nedosa (1998); Cullen (1998); Molholt (1998) Powell et al. (2002); Sedikadiwa (2005); Utulu 2005; Onohwakpor and Tiemo (2006); Moahi (2008); and Ogbomo (2010) have reported on some other reasons for low research productivity of librarians. These include "failing to understand the purpose of publication, its limitation or how it might be effectively used; lack of time to spending more time in their daily routine jobs than in publishing; ignorance about where to publish; lack of interest; lack of funds; poor education which hinders the acquisition of adequate skills in research and identification of research problems; insufficient knowledge, skills and experience as well as not realizing the importance of conducting research and perhaps their self-concept in the academic community.

Self-Concept of Librarians in Public Universities

There is a growing awareness that of all the perceptions we experience in the course of living, none has more profound significance than the perceptions we hold regarding our own personal existence, our concept of who we are and how we fit into the world (Yahaya, 2009). However, everyone including the librarians in public universities have a concept of what they are and who they are.

Shavelson and Bolus (1992) posited that self concept is an individual's perception of self through experience with the environment, interaction with significant others and attributions of his/her own behaviour. It means that self concept is not instinct; it is learned or acquired through experience by virtue of one's interaction with the environment and people. Self-concept is made up of how we assess ourselves, how we see our personality and how we rate our skills and abilities. As described by Baumeister (1997) the term self-concept refers to the totality of inferences that a person has about himself or herself. Positive self-concept is favorability of these self-inferences. Thus, individual with a positive self-concept evaluate themselves positively and are likely to make favorable inferences about themselves and be accepting of their identity. A strong self-concept enhanced human accomplishment and personal well being in many ways (including research productivity). People with high self-concept set themselves challenging goals and maintain strong commitment to them. They heighten and sustain their effort in the face of failure. Self-concept is influenced by our sense of identity (Ryan and Deci, 2000). Two things have powerful effects on our self-concept: The opinions and judgments other people make of us; and social comparisons - perceptions of the ways in which you are similar to and different from other people. Past studies have shown that self-concept of workers had significant relationship with their work performance/productivity across workplaces (Adeleye, 2009; Oguniyi, 2008; Iyaro, 2002).

Knowledge Sharing among Librarians in Public Universities.

Knowledge sharing is of central importance to librarians in public universities. Knowledge sharing enables employee (including librarians) to share their insight and experiences in order to allow for fast, efficient and effective provision of information services to their users. Knowledge sharing is an activity of disseminating information, values and ideas about the perception between two parties to agree or disagree (Tan, et al. 2010). To share knowledge according to Parekh (2009) means to learn, understand, extend and repeat the information, the ideas, the views and the resources with each other, connected with, on a specific ground. The success of knowledge sharing, that is, how knowledge is used among librarians, is claimed to build upon the amount and quality of interaction between librarians, as well as upon issues related to the reluctance to share knowledge, and the willingness and ability to use knowledge of others (Cohen and Levinthal, 1990; Szulanski, 1996).

The sharing of knowledge among librarians is a vital component of any knowledge management activities (Cabrera and Cabrera, 2002; Jarvenpaa and Staples, 2000; Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998; Wasko and Faraj, 2000). Nonaka (1994) identified four modes of knowledge sharing: socialization, externalization, internalization and combination. Parirokh (2008) sees socialization as interaction between two or more individuals for mutual understanding and benefits. He added that since tacit knowledge is intangible, through interaction, it can be understood and can create new tacit knowledge. Examples of such knowledge conversion is chat rooms, tea rooms, professional discussion groups, round tables, brainstorming and thinking sessions for discussing library issues and finding solutions to problems (Parirokh, 2008). This externalization can take many forms, including performing actions based on this knowledge, explaining it in a lecture or codifying it in an intelligent knowledge system (Hendriks 1999). Combination according to Binz-Scharf (2003) ties together different bodies of explicit knowledge held by individuals through processes such as meetings, telephone conversations, and document exchanges. Internalization is the conversion of explicit knowledge into tacit knowledge (Nonaka and Konno, 1998; Seufert et al., 2003). Internalization may occur during learning by doing activities in which concrete, articulated concepts emerge in interative trial-and error processes (Epple, Argote, and Devadas 1991; Darr, Argote, and Epple 1995), reading books, or trying to understand the codified knowledge in a knowledge base (Parirokh, 2008).

Knowledge Utilization of Librarians

The use of knowledge is a phenomenon which appears everywhere in the context of everyday life (Savolainen, 2009). Hughes (2006) remarked that as a multifaceted experience, the use of knowledge covers the user's behaviour, connecting (to the source of the knowledge), searching for knowledge, knowledge skills, knowledge utilization, knowledge need, reactions and effects, as well as results (of learning ). The use of knowledge can be characterized as intellectual activity which is manifested through various thoughts and deeds (Limberg, 1998). The underlying purpose of making knowledge available is to utilize the available knowledge to improve the group's performance (Alavi and Leidner, 1999; Salisbury, 2003). In other words, individuals share what they have learned and transferred what they knew to those who have the collective interest and who have found the knowledge useful. Kulkarni et al (2006) define knowledge use as the degree to which an individual believes he or she has incorporated a knowledge object into work practices, including problem-solving and decision-making activities. For the purpose of this study knowledge use means the correct/suitable application of experiences, insights, skills, innovative ideas / creative ideas of the librarians to enhance their research productivity.

Self-Concept and Research Productivity of Librarians

Franken (1994) states that "there is a great deal of research which shows that the self-concept is, perhaps, the basis for all motivated behavior. It is the self-concept that gives rise to possible selves, and it is possible selves that create the motivation for behaviour". The concept that a librarian has about himself/herself when it comes to what he/she is able to do may affect his or her research productivity. A librarian can develop his/her positive self-concept through behaving objectively in knowing oneself, always appreciate oneself, be friendly to oneself and always have a positive and rational thinking. A positive self concept can contribute to research productivity of a librarian's optimistic personal expectations about himself or herself.

Marsh and Craven (1997) claim that enhancing self-concept is a vital goal in and of itself and that self-concept is an important mediating variable that causally impacts on a variety of desirable outcomes including librarians' research productivity. In other words, self concept can effect personal accomplishment such as research productivity of librarians with this understanding therefore; there is likelihood that a librarian who has a high level or positive self-concept may exhibit high research productivity. This implies that self-concept whether positive or negative holds an implication for either high or low research productivity of librarians in a public university. A librarian's confidence and the ability to express his/her self and interact in seminar and workshop are closely related to self-concept. According to Coyle (1993) the ability for interpersonal communication which also implies knowledge sharing will affect the self-concept of an individual. In other words, this feeling of lack of ability to deliver or communicate leads to low self-concept which in turn may probably affect the research productivity/job performance of an individual like librarians in a university system.

Knowledge Utilization and Research Productivity of Librarians

Knowledge utilization is the ability to apply one's knowledge to the befit of goals either for self or others (Greenhalgh, et al. 2005). Knowledge utilization according to Estabrooks (1999) is the use of knowledge, regardless of the kind of knowledge. The utilization of knowledge in whatever form by librarians in Nigerian universities has been studied by Ehikamenor (2003); Aduwa-Ogiegbean and Stella (2006); Adogbeji and Toyo (2006). Shokeen and Kaushik (2002) noted that special scientists of Harrana University in india most frequently used current journals, textbooks and reference books. Agba; Kigingo-Bukenya and Nyumba (2004) noted that the proper knowledge utilization leads to their better quality, efficient and effective research more than ever. As librarians make use of the knowledge shared among their professional colleagues, there is every tendency for better quality and efficient research output (research productivity).

Kenoni (2000) carried out a study on knowledge utilization in the University of Nairobi, Kenya and reported that librarians made use of tacit and explicit knowledge. He added that conferences, workshops and seminars are avenues where knowledge are shared and effectively utilized, and that these knowledge has helped a lot in their research output.

Methodology

The descriptive survey research design of correlational type was adopted for the study. This is due to multivariate nature of the study and that the researchers are interested in establishing that self-concept, knowledge sharing and utilization are causative factors of research productivity of librarians in public universities in South-West, Nigeria. The population of the study was 174 librarians working in public universities (federal and state) in the South-West geo-political zone of Nigeria which comprises Oyo, Osun, Ogun, Lagos, Ondo, and Ekiti States. The single stage random sampling method was used to select 14 out of the 16 public universities in the South-West Nigeria and the librarians therein the selected university were covered. The researchers administered 174 copies of the developed questionnaire Research Productivity, Self-Concept, Knowledge Sharing and Utilization (RPSKSU) scale on the sampled librarians in the 14 public universities in South-West, Nigeria out of which 134 responded. However, the response rate achieved was 77%. (See table 1)
Table 1: Questionnaire Administration and Retrieval

S/n     Name of     Population  Sample  Questionnaire  Percentage
       University                  Size     returned         %

1    University of          25      25             17          68
     Ibadan

2    Ladoke                 11      11              7        63.6
     Akintola
     University of
     technology,
     Ogbomosho

3    University of          21      21             19        90.5
     Agriculture,
     Abeokuta

4    Olabisi                15      15             12          80
     Onobanjo
     University,
     Ago-Iwoye

5    Tai Solarin             7       7              5        71.4
     University
     Education,
     Ijebu-Ode

6    University of          16      16             12          75
     Lagos

7    National Open           6       6              6         100
     University of
     Nigeria

8    Lagos State            13      13             10        76.9
     University

9    Obafemi                23      23             20          87
     Awolowo
     University,
     Ile-Ife

10   Osun State              7       7              4        57.1
     University

11   Federal                14      14             12        85.7
     University of
     Technology,
     Akure

12   Adekunle                7       7              4        57.1
     Ajasin
     University,
     Akungba

13   Ekiti State             2       2              2         100
     University of
     Technology,
     Ifaki

14   University of           7       7              4        57.1
     Ado-Ekiti

15   Ondo State              2
     University,
     Okitipupa

16   University of           2
     Education,
     Ikere-Ekiti

     Total                 178     174            134       77.00


Method of Data Analysis

Descriptive statistics of frequency count, percentage, means and standard deviation and inferential statistics such as the multiple regression and pearson product correlation method were used to analyze the data. The statistical package used for the data analysis was statistical package for social sciences (SPSS).

Results

Research Question 1: What is the level of self-concept of librarians in public universities in South-West, Nigeria?

Table 2 shows the percentage, mean and standard deviation scores of self-concept of librarians in public universities in South-West, Nigeria.
Table 2. Mean and standard deviation scores of librarians in public
universities in South-West, Nigeria.

S/n  Self concept             SD         D       NS    A      SA

1.   I take a positive         2          1      5     50     76
     attitude toward
     myself

                            1.5%       0.7%   3.7%  37.3%  56.7%

2.   I always express my       2          2      8     45     77
     feeling freely

                            1.5%       1.5%   6.0%  33.6%  57.5%

3.   My life add great         4          4      7     43     76
     value for me

                            3.0%       3.0%   5.2%  32.1%  56.7%

4.   I feel that I have a      3                 7     64     60
     number of good
     qualities which help
     me to be a good
     researcher

                            2.2%              5.2%  47.8%  44.8%

5.   I think I am as good      4          3     10     46     71
     as other librarians

                            3.0%       2.2%   7.5%  34.3%  53.0%

6.   I like to be myself       6          9      7     58     54
     always

                            4.5%       6.7%   5.2%  43.3%  40.3%

7.   I am always happy         3          7     11     72     41
     with my outcome

                            2.2%       5.2%   8.2%  53.7%  30.6%

8.   I am used to taking       7          7     17     60     43
     rational decision

                            5.2%       5.2%  12.7%  44.8%  32.1%

9.   I have warm social        6          5     17     74     32
     attraction for
     others

                            4.5%       3.7%  12.7%  55.2%  23.9%

10.  I can face any            2         12     19     74     27
     difficulties in life

                            1.5%       9.0%  14.2%  55.2%  20.1%

11.  I am ambitious over       3         12     23     61     35
     attaining mastery of
     things

                            2.2%       9.0%  17.2%  45.5%  26.1%

12.  I am totally             13         32     13     36     40
     dependable

                            9.7%      23.9%   9.7%  26.9%  29.9%

13.  I feel proud because     20         25     10     60     19
     of my status in my
     work place

                           14.9%      18.7%   7.5%  44.8%  14.2%

14.  I sometimes regret        7         49     30     37     11
     some of my actions

                            5.2%      36.6%  22.4%  27.6%   8.2%

15.  I am not concerned       15         42     26     35     16
     about what other
     people are thinking
     about me

                           11.2%      31.3%  19.4%  26.1%  11.9%

16.  I cannot pray well       30         26     25     45      8
     when I am disturbed

                           22.4%      19.4%  18.7%  33.6%   6.0%

17.  I feel I don't have      22         51     13     30     18
     much to be proud of

                           16.4%      38.1%   9.7%  22.4%  13.4%

18.  I sometimes feel shy     21         51     23     33      6

                           15.7%      38.1%  17.2%  24.6%   4.5%

19.  I am often feeling       34         49     27     22      2
     withdrawn to myself

                           25.4%      36.6%  20.1%  16.4%   1.5%

20.  I constantly feel        29         73     17     11      4
     insecure

                           21.6%      54.5%  12.7%   8.2%   3.0%

21.  Life is meaningless      52         47     13     19      3
     to me at times

                           38.8%      35.1%   9.7%  14.2%   2.2%

22.  I often experience a     48         58     10     13      5
     feeling of
     worthlessness and
     helplessness in life

                           35.8%      43.3%   7.5%   9.7%   3.7%

                                  Aggregate
                                  (overall)

S/n  Self concept         [bar.X]    S.D.

1.   I take a positive      4.47     0.74
     attitude toward
     myself

2.   I always express my    4.44     0.80
     feeling freely

3.   My life add great      4.37     0.94
     value for me

4.   I feel that I have a   4.33     0.77
     number of good
     qualities which help
     me to be a good
     researcher

5.   I think I am as good   4.32     0.93
     as other librarians

6.   I like to be myself    4.08     0.06
     always

7.   I am always happy      4.05     0.90
     with my outcome

8.   I am used to taking    3.93     0.06
     rational decision

9.   I have warm social     3.90     0.96
     attraction for
     others

10.  I can face any         3.84     0.90
     difficulties in life

11.  I am ambitious over    3.84     0.99
     attaining mastery of
     things

12.  I am totally           3.43     0.38
     dependable

13.  I feel proud because   3.25     0.32
     of my status in my
     work place

14.  I sometimes regret     2.97     0.09
     some of my actions

15.  I am not concerned     2.96     0.23
     about what other
     people are thinking
     about me

16.  I cannot pray well     2.81     0.28
     when I am disturbed

17.  I feel I don't have    2.78     0.33
     much to be proud of

18.  I sometimes feel shy   2.64     0.15

19.  I am often feeling     2.32     0.07
     withdrawn to myself

20.  I constantly feel      2.16     0.96
     insecure

21.  Life is meaningless    2.06     0.12
     to me at times

22.  I often experience a   2.02     1.08
     feeling of
     worthlessness and
     helplessness in life

                           75.00  8.06


The test rule for the self-concept scale is 30. A score of 1-29 indicating low self-concept, 30-59 indicating moderate self-concept and 60-88 indicating high self-concept. Since the minimum score of a respondent on a self-concept scale is 88. The overall mean score of the respondents is [bar.X] = 75.00, SD=8.06. One can therefore infer that the respondents have high self-concept. More so, this be justifies in Table 2. The reason being that majority of the respondents claimed that they take a positive attitude towards themselves ( [bar.X] =4.47, SD=0.74), they always their feelings freely ([bar.X] =4.44, SD=0.80) etc.

Research question 2: To what extent do librarians in public universities in South-West, Nigeria share their knowledge?

The result in table 3 shows responses on the knowledge sharing behaviour of the librarians in the public universities South-West, Nigeria. The overall mean score of knowledge sharing behaviour of the respondents is [bar.X] = 31.11, SD=6.54 one therefore deduce that the respondents exhibit good knowledge sharing behaviour. The reason being that majority of them claimed that:
Table 3: percentage, mean and standard deviation scores of knowledge
sharing of the librarians

s/n  Statements        Not at  Rarely       Some  Often   Very   [bar.X]
                          all              times         often

1.   I share                7       4         21     60     42   3.94
     knowledge about
     new trend in
     library and
     information
     science with my
     workmates

                         5.2%    3.0%      15.7%  44.8%  31.3%

2.   I share                8       9         27     55     35   3.75
     knowledge about
     cataloguing and
     classification
     with work
     colleagues

                         6.0%    6.7%      20.1%  41.0%  26.1%

3.   I share                9       7         29     58     31   3.71
     knowledge, so
     that I can use
     the experience
     often in finding
     solution to
     problems I
     encounter on the
     job

                         6.7%    5.2%      21.6%  43.3%  23.1%

4.   I share new            7       3         36     65     23   3.70
     library and
     information
     science practice
     with my work
     colleagues

                         5.2%    2.2%      26.9%  48.5%  17.2%

5.   I share new            9       5         26     71     23   3.70
     working skills I
     learn with my
     workmates

                         6.7%    3.7%      19.4%  53.0%  17.2%

6.   My colleagues         12      10         29     64     19   3.51
     share knowledge
     on library and
     information
     science practice
     with me

                         9.0%    7.5%      21.6%  47.8%  14.2%

7.   My work               17      12         35     55     15   3.29
     colleagues share
     with me new
     working skills
     they learn

                        12.7%    9.0%      26.1%  41.0%  11.2%

8.   I share only of       21      10         34     55     14   3.23
     the important
     knowledge on
     library matters
     with my work
     colleagues

                        15.7%    7.5%      25.4%  41.0%  10.4%

9.   I find it             53      22         27     32      -   2.28
     difficult to
     share knowledge
     from my work
     colleagues

                        39.6%   16.4%      20.1%  23.9%

                                       Aggregate                31.11

s/n  Statements        S.D.

1.   I share           0.03
     knowledge about
     new trend in
     library and
     information
     science with my
     workmates

2.   I share           0.10
     knowledge about
     cataloguing and
     classification
     with work
     colleagues

3.   I share           0.09
     knowledge, so
     that I can use
     the experience
     often in finding
     solution to
     problems I
     encounter on the
     job

4.   I share new       0.96
     library and
     information
     science practice
     with my work
     colleagues

5.   I share new       0.02
     working skills I
     learn with my
     workmates

6.   My colleagues     0.11
     share knowledge
     on library and
     information
     science practice
     with me

7.   My work           0.18
     colleagues share
     with me new
     working skills
     they learn

8.   I share only of   0.22
     the important
     knowledge on
     library matters
     with my work
     colleagues

9.   I find it         0.22
     difficult to
     share knowledge
     from my work
     colleagues

                       6.54


I share knowledge about new trend in library and information science with their workmates ([bar.X] =3.94, SD=0.03); they share knowledge about cataloguing and classification with their work colleagues ([bar.X] =3.75, SD=0.10), I share knowledge, so that I can use the experience often in finding solution to problems I encounter on the job ([bar.X] =3.71, SD=0.09), I share new library and information science practice with my work colleagues ([bar.X] =3.70, SD=0.96), I share new working skills I learn with my workmates ([bar.X] =3.70, SD=0.02), My colleagues share knowledge on library and information science practice with me ([bar.X]=3.51, SD=0.18), My work colleagues share with me new working skills they learn ([bar.X] =3.29, SD=0.22), I share only of the important knowledge on library matters with my work colleagues ([bar.X] =3.23, SD=0.22) and I find it difficult to share from my colleagues ([bar.X] =2.28, SD=O.22).

Research question 3: To what extent do librarians utilize knowledge available to them?

Table 4 shows the responses on the knowledge utilization of librarians: Knowledge got from the library document is used to generate new research skills ([bar.X] =4.13, SD=0.94) was ranked highest by the mean scores and was followed by I applied the knowledge I gained from my colleagues to enhance my work performance ([bar.X] =4.12, SD=0.91), Information and knowledge I obtained from workshop/seminars and symposia attendance has really helped me to publish more scholarly papers ([bar.X] = 4.10, SD=0.86), Knowledge derived from the use of virtual library is applied to improve my information searching skills ([bar.X] =4.07, SD=1.01), Effective use of electronic information resources has helped me to resent better seminary/workshops papers ([bar.X] =4.04, SD=0.95), I applied knowledge acquired through discussion group to improve my statistical data analysis ability ([bar.X] =3.84, SD=0.95), I have increased my research output in referred journals as a result of my applying knowledge I gained from my colleagues ([bar.X] =3.84, SD=0.89), Knowledge gained from community of practice in my workplace is used for writing research proposals ([bar.X] =3.81, SD=0.94), I make regular use of explicit knowledge more than tacit knowledge in solving work problems ([bar.X] =3.75, SD=0.99) respectively. On the whole one can therefore submit that the knowledge utilization of the respondent is high.
Table 4: percentage, mean and standard deviation scores of knowledge
utilization of librarian

s/n  Statement                SD     D         NS      A    SA   [bar.X]

1    Information and           6     3          8     71     46   4.10
     knowledge I obtained
     from workshop/
     seminars and symposia
     attendance has really
     helped me to publish
     more scholarly
     papers

                            4.5%  2.2%       6.0%  53.0%  34.3%

2    I applied the             5     4          6     74     45   4.12
     knowledge I gained
     from my colleagues to
     enhance my work
     performance

                            3.7%  3.0%       4.5%  55.2%  33.6%

3    Knowledge got from        5     2          6     79     42   4.13
     the library document
     is used to generate
     new research skills

                            3.7%  1.5%       4.5%  59.0%  31.3%

4    Knowledge derived         8     3          7     70     46   4.07
     from the use of
     virtual library is
     applied to improve my
     information searching
     skills

                            6.0%  2.2%       5.2%  52.2%  34.3%

5    I make regular use of     7     6         21     80     20   3.75
     explicit knowledge
     more than tacit
     knowledge in solving
     work problems

                            5.2%  4.5%      15.7%  59.7%  14.9%

6    I applied knowledge       7     6         13     84     24   3.84
     acquired through
     discussion group to
     improve my
     statistical data
     analysis ability

                            5.2%  4.5%       9.7%  62.7%  17.9%

7    I have increased my       6     5         14     88     21   3.84
     research output in
     referred journals as
     a result of my
     applying knowledge I
     gained from my
     colleagues

                            4.5%  3.7%      10.4%  65.7%  15.7%

8    Effective use of          7     2          8     79     38   4.04
     electronic
     information resources
     has helped me to
     present better
     seminary/workshops
     papers

                            5.2%  1.5%       6.0%  59.0%  28.4%

9    Knowledge gained from     7     8         15     78     26   3.81
     community of practice
     in my workplace is
     used for writing
     research proposals

                            5.2%  6.0%      11.2%  58.2%  19.4%

                                        Aggregate                35.67

s/n  Statement               S.D

1    Information and        0.94
     knowledge I obtained
     from workshop/
     seminars and symposia
     attendance has really
     helped me to publish
     more scholarly
     papers

2    I applied the          0.91
     knowledge I gained
     from my colleagues to
     enhance my work
     performance

3    Knowledge got from     0.86
     the library document
     is used to generate
     new research skills

4    Knowledge derived      1.01
     from the use of
     virtual library is
     applied to improve my
     information searching
     skills

5    I make regular use of   .95
     explicit knowledge
     more than tacit
     knowledge in solving
     work problems

6    I applied knowledge     .95
     acquired through
     discussion group to
     improve my
     statistical data
     analysis ability

7    I have increased my     .89
     research output in
     referred journals as
     a result of my
     applying knowledge I
     gained from my
     colleagues

8    Effective use of        .94
     electronic
     information resources
     has helped me to
     present better
     seminary/workshops
     papers

9    Knowledge gained from   .99
     community of practice
     in my workplace is
     used for writing
     research proposals

                             7.1


Research Question 4: What is the research publications level of librarians in public universities in South-West within the period of 4 years?

It is shown in table 5 above that the highest percentage rate of publication of the respondents was articles in learned journals 107(79.9%), followed by Conference proceedings 42 (31.3%), chapters in books 41 (30.6%), co-authored textbook 27(20.1%), textbooks 19 (14.2%), occasional paper 18 (13.4%), scientific peer-reviewed bulletin 12 (9.0%), monographs 10 (7.5%) and patent and certified invention 2(1.5%) respectively. The result shows that librarians publish more of articles in learned journals. The mean score of the research productivity of the librarians is ([bar.X] =82, SD=-5.0) while the low mean score is ([bar.X] =67, SD=9.0) by placing 95 percentage confidence interval on the mean population of the librarians in public universities in South-West, Nigeria of one can therefore deduce that the respondent research productivity is high especially a mean score of ([bar.X] =75.47, SD=10.06).
Table 5: The research publications level of librarians in
public universities in South-West within the period of 4 years

s/n  Publications    N      No. of      Percentage
                           publications    rate of
                               from      publications
                             2007-2011

1    Textbooks      134            19          14.2

2    Chapters in    134            41          30.6
     books

3    Co-authored    134            27          20.1
     textbooks

4    Patent and     134             2           1.5
     certified
     invention

5    Monographs     134            10           7.5

6    Occasional     134            18          13.4
     papers

7    Articles in    134           107          79.9
     learned
     journals

8    Technical      134            11           8.2
     Reports

9    Scientific     134            12           9.0
     peer-reviewed
     bulletin

10   Conference     134            42          31.3
     proceedings

     Total          134           289


Research question 5: What is the relative effect of self-concept, knowledge utilization on research productivity of librarians in Nigerian universities?

Table 6 indicates the relative effect of each of the independent variables on the dependent variable (research productivity) of the respondents: Self Concept (u =.253; P <0.05), Knowledge Sharing (u = -.144; P >0.05) and Knowledge Utilization (u =.216; P <0.05). This implies that while self-concept and knowledge utilization of the librarians individually has effect on their research productivity of the respondents, knowledge sharing did not.
Table 6. The relative effect of self-concept, knowledge utilization on
research productivity of librarians in public universities in
South-West, Nigeria

Model         Unstandardized              Standardized    T     Sig.
                Regession                  Regression
                Coefficient                 Coefficient
                 ([beta])                   ([beta])

                 ([beta])     Std. Error
                               ([beta])

(Constant)            -2.222       1.622                -1.370  .173

Self Concept          0.0058        .020          .253   2.587  .005

Knowledge             0.0025        .015         -.144  -1.628  .106
Sharing

Knowledge             0.0057        .023          .216   2.450  .016
Utilization


Research question 6: Do self-concept, knowledge sharing and utilization have joint effect on research productivity of librarians in public universities in South-West Nigerian?

In table 7, it was observed that the joint effects of the independent variables (Self Concept, Knowledge Sharing and Knowledge Utilization) on Research Productivity of the respondents were significant (F(3;130) = 6.067; P < 0.05). The independent variables jointly explained 12.3% variance in research productivity of the respondents. This result revealed that all the independent variables, that is, self-concept, knowledge sharing and knowledge utilization jointly have effects on research productivity of librarians in South-West, Nigeria.
Table 7. The joint effects of self-concept, knowledge sharing
and knowledge utilization on the research productivity of
librarians in public universities in South-West Nigeria.

Model       Sum of   Degree of   Mean    F-Ratio  Sig. P
            Squares   freedom   Square
              (SS)       (DF)      (MS)

Regression   56.214          3  18.738     6.067    .001

Residual    401.495        130   3.008

Total       457.709        133

Adj R = .350

Adj [R.sup.2] = .123

Standard Error of Estimate SEE= 1.757


Discussion of Findings

The study revealed that librarians in public University in South-West, Nigeria exhibit high level of self-concept. Moreso, Yahaya (2008) asserted that one develops his or her positive self-concept through behaving objectively in knowing oneself, always appreciate oneself, be a friend to oneself and always have a positive and rational thinking. It is equally important to note that many of the successes and failures that employees experience in the world of work are closely related to the ways they have learned to view themselves and their relationships with others. Librarians that have high self-concept are likely to be productive in their workplace.

Regarding the extent to which librarians share knowledge, the findings of this study, revealed that librarians often share knowledge about new trend in librarianship and also by sharing knowledge, they use experience gained in finding solution to their problems on the job.

It was revealed by this study that librarians utilizes knowledge available to them to a great extent and that knowledge got from the library documents help generate new research skills got from their colleagues to enhance their work performance. The reason for this high knowledge utilization perhaps maybe as a result of the pressure to justify their academic status. Ochai and Nedosa, (1998) opined that what is however not so certain is their ability to demonstrate and, in fact, convince the academic community in which they operate, the justification for academic status so accorded them by way of research and publication. But librarians are however responding positively to knowledge utilization as this study has revealed.

This study also showed that research productivity of librarians was moderately high in the last four years. When ranking the highest publication by librarians it was discovered that articles in learned journals ranked high, followed by publication in co-authored textbook. The reasons for this may be as a result of the fact that article are very easy and cheaper to publish compare to textbook, monograph, etc. This is in line with the finding of Ogbomo (2010) that librarians most often publish in refereed and non-refereed journals in the Library and Information Science field. These publications include work done by librarians in the course of carrying out research.

The study indicated that self-concept, knowledge sharing, and knowledge utilization had significant joint effects on research productivity of the respondents. The ability of a person to interact with others requires a wide array of behaviours generally labelled social skills. When knowledge is internalized it gives a person the confidence, in addition one cannot share knowledge of what he/she does not know of. In other words when knowledge gained is internalized, it enhances ones' skills in research productivity as revealed in this study. Corroborating this is the study of Gergen (1971) who reported that knowledge sharing can affects individual self-concept.

It was revealed in this study, that self-concept and knowledge utilization have significant relative effect on research productivity while knowledge sharing did not. Keroni (2002) reported that the knowledge gained through seminar/workshops has helped many librarians to increase their research productivity. The significant contribution knowledge utilization has on research productivity is also supported by the findings of Agba, Kigingo, Bukenya and Nyumba (2004). They reported that proper knowledge utilization leads to better quality, efficient and effective research productivity. As librarians make use of knowledge shared among their professional colleagues, there is every tendency for better and quality research output.

Summary of Findings

1. The self-concept of librarians in public universities in the South-West, Nigeria is very high.

2. Librarians in public universities in the South-West, Nigeria share their knowledge.

3. The extent of knowledge utilization by librarians as revealed by the study is great.

4. The level of research publication of librarians in the last four years is moderately high with articles in learned journals occupying the fore front.

5. There is a significant joint effect of self-concept, knowledge sharing and knowledge utilization of librarians in public universities in South-West, Nigeria.

6. There is a relative contribution of both self-concept and knowledge utilization on research productivity, but it was revealed by this study that there was no relative contribution of knowledge sharing on research productivity.

Conclusion

Librarians occupy a central position in the university system, and they are regarded as academics. In order to justify this status accorded them, they need to publish in order not to perish in the academic blue seas. As a result the research productivity of librarians is very important.

The inference that can be drawn from the outcome of this study is that self-concept, knowledge sharing and knowledge utilization variables play important role in the enhancement of research productivity of librarians in public universities. There is no doubt that librarians who possess high self-concept and who properly make use of knowledge gained through knowledge sharing will have high research productivity.

Recommendations

1. The library management should try as much as possible to encourage sharing and discourage hoarding of knowledge, by motivating them, giving the incentives that will encourage them to share their knowledge.

2. The library management should also solicit for fund from their parent body to sponsor librarians to conferences, workshops and seminars.

3. The library management should give self-concept training to the librarians there in public universities so as to improve their research productivity.

4. The library management should see that frequent internal seminar and workshops are organized, where it will be made compulsory for each librarian to present a quality paper every quarter of the year. This will increase their zeal to utilize knowledge and also have more research publications.

REFERENCES

Alavi, M. and Leider, E. D. 2002. Knowledge management systems. In Barnes Stuat(ed.) knowledge management systems: theory and practice, Thomse learning.

Abell, A. and Oxbrow, N. 2001. Competing with knowledge: the information professional in the knowledge management age, London: Facet

Adeleye, R. O. (2009) Relationship among self-concept, job satisfaction and work productivity of individual workers in Lagos State, Nigeria. Journal of personnel management, 8(2): 152-164.

Agba, D.M., Kigongo-Bukenya, I.M.N. and Nyumba, J.B. 2004. Use of electronic information resources by academic staff at Makerere University. University of Dar Es Salaam Library Journal 6(1) 18-29.

Alemna, A. 1998. An overview of library and information science in West Africa. African Journal of Library Archive and Information Science 8(1) 1-2.

Bassey, U., Akuegwu B., Udida L. and Udey F.U. 2007. Academic staff research productivity: a Study of Universities in South-South Zone of Nigeria. Educational Research and Review, 2(5)103-108. Retrieved June 24, 2011, from http://www.academicjournals.org/ERR

Baumeister, R. E. 1997. Identify self-concept and self-esteem: the self lost and found. in R. Hogan and J. A. (Eds). Handbook of personality psychology. 681-710. San Diego, CA: Academic press.

Binz-Scharf, M.C. 2003. Exploration and Exploitation: Toward a Theory of Knowledge Sharing in Digital Government Projects. Dissertation

Black, W. K. and Leysen, J. M. 1994. Scholarship and the Academic Librarian. College and Research Libraries 55 (May 1994): 229-41.

Buttlar, L. 1991. Analyzing the library periodical literature: Content and authorship. College and Research Libraries 52: 38-53. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.

Cabrera, A., and Cabrera, E. F. 2002. Knowledge-sharing dilemmas. Organization Studies 23(5) 687-710.

Choo, C. W. 2006. The knowing organization; how organization use information to construct meaning, creates knowledge, and makes decisions. (2rd ed). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Cullen, R. 1998. Does performance measurement imply organizational effectiveness? In Proceedings of the Second Northumbria International Conference on Performance Measurement in Libraries and Information Services, Newcastle on Tyne, UK Information North: 3-20.

Darr, E. D., Argote, L., and Epple, D. 1995. The acquisition, transfer, and depreciation of knowledge in service organizations: Productivity in franchises. Management Science 41(11)1750-1762.

Epple, D., Argote, L., and Devadas, R. 1991. Organizational learning curves: A method for investigating intra-plant transfer of knowledge acquired through learning by doing. Organization Science 2(1) 58-70.

Franken, R.1994. Human Motivation (3rd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole pub.

Gergen, K. 1971. The concept of self. New York: holt.

Greenhalgh, T. et al. 2005. Diffussion of innovations in health service organizations. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell publishing Ltd.

Hughes, H. 2006. Responses and influences: a model of online information use for learning. Information Research 12(1). Retrieved July 23, 2011, from http://information.net/r/12-1/paper279.html

Iyaro, A. O. 2002. Influence of self-concept, job motivation and satisfaction on work performance of university Library personnel in south-west, Nigeria. Unpuplished MLIS project, Ibadan, Nigeria, 86p.

Jarvenpaa, S.L. and Staples, D.S. 2000. The use of collaborative electronic media for information sharing: an exploratory study of determinants. Journal of Strategic Information System 9(1) 129-154.

Kulkarni, U. R., Ravindran, S., and Freeze, R. (2006). A knowledge management success model: Theoretical development and empirical validation. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23(3), 309?347.

Lee, H. 2000. The role of libraries in knowledge management. Retrieved on April 24, 2011from http:/szlib.szptt.net.cn/download/km_n_lib.ppt

Lertputtarak, S.2008. An Investigation of Factors Related to Research Productivity in a Public University in Thailand: A Case Study. A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Education, School of Education, Faculty of Arts, Education and Human Development, Victoria University, Melbourne, Australia. Retrieved June 2, 2011, from http://wallaby.vu.edu.au/adt-VVUT/uploads/approved/adt-UT20080711.120505/public/01front.pdf

Limberg, L. 1998. To seek information for learning: a study of interaction between information seeking and learning. Boras Sweden: Valfrid.

Marsh, H. W., and Craven, R. 1997. Academic self-concept: Beyond the dustbowl. In G. Phye (Ed.), Handbook of classroom assessment: Learning, achievement, and adjustment (pp. 131-198). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

McLeod, S. A. (2008). Simply Psychology; the Self Concept in Psychology. Retrieved April 3, 2012 from http://www.simplypsychology.org/self-concept.html

Moahi, K.H. 2007. Library and Information Science Research in Botswana: an analysis of trends and patterns world library and information congress: 73rd ifla general conference and council 19-23 august 2007, durban, south Africa. Retrieved June15, 2011 from http://www.ifla.org/iv/ifla73/index

Molholt, P. 1998. Structuring models of research information science: Attitudes, perceptions, and values. Samuel Laseraw Memorial lecture presented at the University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Moorman, C. and Minner, A.S. 1997. The impact of organizational memory in new product performance and creativity. Journal of marketing research 34: 91-109

Mularski, C.A., and Bradigan, P.S. 1991. Academic health science librarians publication pattern. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association. 79 (2): 168-177.

Nahapiet, J. and Ghoshal, S. 1998. Social capital, intellectual capital and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(3) 242-267.

Nonaka, I. 1994. A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science 5(1)14-37.

Nwakanma, C. D. 2003. Research publications in library and information Science (LIS) in Nigeria: publishing to the wrong audience. African Journal of Library, Archives and Information Science, 13(2) 93-106.

Ochai, A. and Nedosa, P. 1998. Publication output of librarians: the search for alternative justifications. African Journal of Library and Information Science 8 (2) 89-96.

Ogbomo, E. F. 2010. Publication Output of Librarians in Tertiary Institutions: A Case Study of Delta State University, Abraka, Nigeria. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal). 1-9 Received on 27/4/2011 from http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/322

Oguniyi, A. S. (2008) self-concept, personal factors and job productivity of workers in federal colleges of Education in Nigeria. Education Research, 8(3): 138-156.

Okebukola, P. 2002. The state of university education in Nigeria. National Universities Commission, Abuja, Nigeria.

Okiy, R. B. 2000. Assessing students and faculty use of academic libraries in Nigeria: The study of Delta State University, Abraka. Frontiers of Information and Information Science 1(1) 65-75.

Okiki, O. C. 2011. Information literacy skills as factors influencing research productivity of academic staff in Nigerian Federal Universities. A PhD pre-field seminar presented at the department of Library, Archival and Information Studies, University of Ibadan, Nigeria.

Onifade, F.N. 2011. Relationship among knowledge sharing, organizational culture and organizational effectiveness in Nigerian Federal University Libraries. PhD. Thesis. Dept. of Library, Archival and information studies. University of Ibadan. 68pp.

Onohwakpor, J.E., Tiemo, D.A. 2006. The pains and gains of publication requirements: A survey of librarians in Delta State University, Nigeria. Library Philosophy and Practice 8 (2).

Oshagbemi, T. 1997. Job satisfaction and dissatisfaction in higher education. Education and Training 39(9) 354-359.

Parekh, R.A. 2008. Knowledge Sharing: Collaboration between Universities and Industrial Organisations.

Parirokh, M. 2008. How Implementation of Knowledge Management can make a difference in Libraries: A Case Study of KM practice in Astan Quds Library Organization. World Congress of Muslim Librarian & Information Scientists 25th -27th November 2008 Putra World Trade Center.

Petrides, A. L. and Nodine, R.T. 2003. Knowledge management in Education: defining the Landscape, the institute for the study of knowledge management in Education press, USA.

Popoola, S. O. 2010. Knowledge untilization scale of managers in organization. Ibadan: Department of Library, Archival and Information Studies, University of Ibadan, Nigeria.

Powell, R. R., Baker, L. M., and Mika, J. J. 2002. Library and information science practitioners and research. Library and Information Science Research 24 (1) 49-72.

Powell, R.R. 1997. Basic research methods for librarians. 3rd ed. Greenwich, CT: Ablex.

Purkey, W. W. 1988. An Overview of Self-Concept Theory for Counselors. Highlights: An ERIC/CAPS Digest. ERIC Clearinghouse on Counseling and Personnel Services Ann Arbor MI.

Ramsden, P. 1994. Describing and Explaining Research Productivity. Higher Education, 28(2) (Sep., 1994), pp. 207-226. Retrieved June16, 2011 from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3447753

Rhodman, A. 2002. The effects of academic origin and academic affiliation on research productivity: an empirical investigation of information system faculty, Doctoral Dissertation, Mississippi State University, USA, viewed 4 May 2011, retrieved from UMI database.

Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.I. 2000. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development and well-being. American Psychologist, 55:68-78.

Salaam, M.O. and Agboola, A.T. 2002. Academic status and Job performance in Nigerian Library and Information Science Review 20 (1/2) 41-48

Salisbury, M. W. 2003. Putting theory to practice to build knowledge management systems. Journal of Knowledge Management 7(2)128-141

Sanyal B.C. 1995. Innovations in University Management. Paris UNESCO Publishing. International Institute for Educational Planning

Savolainen, R. 2009. Epistemic work and knowing in practice as conceptualizations of information use. Information Research 14(1), paper 392. Retrieved Aug. 24, 2011, from http://information.net/ir/14-1/paper392.html

Sedikadiwa, E. 2005. Scholarly publishing in East African public universities. Research report presented at staff-students seminars, University of Dar Es Sallam Library, 6th October (unpublished).

Seufert, A., Back, A. and Von Krogh, G. 2003. 'Unleashing the power of networks for knowledge management: putting knowledge networks into action', in Beerli, A.J., Falk, S. and Diemers, D. (Eds.): Knowledge Management and Networked Environments: Leveraging Intellectual Capital in Virtual Business Communities, AMACOM, New York, pp.99-136.

Shavelson, R.J. and Bolus, R. 1992. Self Concept: the interplay of theory and methods. Journal of Educational Psychology 853-882.

Shokeen, A. and Kaushik, S.K. 2002 Information seeking behaviour of social scientists of Hanyana universities. Library Heraid 4(1) 28-35

Suwanwala, J. 1991. The road of University, Chulakorn University Press, Bangkok, Thailand

Utulu, S.C.A. 2005. Role of journals in developing emerging scholars in library and information science. Proceedings of the conference held at conference centre University of Ibadan, Nigeria. Third World Information Services Ltd.

Uzun, A. 2002. Productivity ratings of institutions based on publication in scientometrics, infometrics, and bibliometrics, 1981-2000, Scientometrics, 53 (3) 297-307.

Wasko, M.M. and Faraj, S. 2000. It is what one does: Why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice. Journal of Strategic Information System, 9(1), 155-173.

Yaghi, K. et al. 2011. Knowledge sharing degree among the undergraduate students: a case study at applied science private university. International Journal Of Academic Research 3(1)

Yahaya, A. 2009. The Relationship between Self-Concept and Communication Skills towards Academic Achievement among Secondary School Students in Johor Bahru. International Journal of Psychological Studies 1(2)

sarah okonedo

University of Agriculture Abeokuta, sarah_okonedo@yahoo.com

Sunday Olarenwaju Popoola

University of Ibadan, drpopoolaso@yahoo.co.uk

okonedo, sarah and Popoola, Sunday Olarenwaju, "Effect of Self-Concept, Knowledge Sharing and Utilization on Research Productivity Among Librarians in Public Universities in South-West, Nigeria." (2012). Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal). Paper 865.

http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/865

by Sarah Okonedo

'Nimbe Adedipe Library, Federal University of Agriculture

P.M.B. 2240, Abeokuta, Ogun State, Nigeria.

sarah_okonedo@yahoo.com

S. O. Popoola, Ph.D

Department of Library, Archival and Information Studies

Faculty of Education, University of Ibadan, Nigeria.

drpopoolaso@yahoo.co.uk
COPYRIGHT 2012 University of Idaho Library
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2012 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Okonedo, Sarah; Popoola, Sunday Olarenwaju
Publication:Library Philosophy and Practice
Article Type:Report
Geographic Code:6NIGR
Date:Nov 1, 2012
Words:9363
Previous Article:Influence of digital literacy on career progression and work motivation of academic library staff in South-West, Nigeria.
Next Article:Rural libraries in support of rural reconstruction: Tagores' thinking and reality.
Topics:

Terms of use | Copyright © 2017 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters