Everybody does KM?
Bob Kuo
Sun-Yet-Sen University, Taiwan
Introduction
• “Knowledge has become … even the only
source of comparative advantage” ~ Peter Drucker
(1995)
• KM : extracting the right knowledge from
people’s memory and storing it in networked
computers for later distribution ~ Tiwana (2001)
• Most KM studies are normative (Schultze and Leidner
2002)
Introduction (cont.) :
Smart Creative Teachers’ Net
•
•
•
•
Government Funding
Professors’ leadership
Teachers’ endorsement
Backdrops:
»
»
»
»
Am I smart (enough)?
Am I creative (enough)?
Is SCTNet itself smart and creative (enough)?
Is Government smart and creative (enough)?
「思摩特」平台
「思摩特」平台
Introduction (cont.)
SCTNet
70000
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
37
34
31
28
25
22
19
16
13
10
7
4
1
0
Accumulated Registers Per Month (2001/11~2003/11)
120000
100000
110047
100637
99275
98467
85355
73433
80000
66270
69242
69425
8
9
60000
40000
20000
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Login frequency per month (2002/12~2003/08)
Introduction (cont.)
• A theoretical approach at
the individual level:
– Research aim:to identify the
psychological mechanisms that govern
the practices of knowledge sharing
Anteceding
Determinants
Mind
KS Practices
– Motivational focus, especially on the
psychological mechanisms of volitional
control
The Survey:
Theoretical Background
•
•
•
•
•
•
Self-Regulation Paradigm
The Theory of Planned Behavior
Intention (Goal)
Controllability
Perceived Self-Efficacy
Action Control
Research Model : A Self-regulation Perspective
H8b
H1
Attitude Toward
Knowledge Sharing
Practices
Subjective Norm of
Knowledge Sharing
Practices
Controllability of
Knowledge Sharing
Practices
Perceived Knowledge
Sharing Self-Efficacy
Direct Effect
Moderating Effect
H2
Action Control
H8a
H8c
Intention to
Share Knowledge
H4
H5
H6
H7
H3
Knowledge Sharing
Behavior
Personal Control in KS Practices
• Self-regulation is a paradigm dedicated to the study of
– Purposefully directed human actions in which
humans judge what is ultimately best for themselves
– Set goals to achieve it
– Choose means to attain these goals
– Act in accord to these judgments ~ Karloy (1993)
– The enactment of actions depend upon the strength
of one’s volitional control mechanisms.
– “Self-motivation involves a dual cyclic process of
disequilibrating production followed by equilibrating
discrepancy reduction” ~ Bandura ( 1986, p47)
Personal Control in KS Practices
(cont.)
• In this study, we have
– Investigated four self-regulatory mechanisms of
control for studying KS practices
• Intention and Controllability, couched in the Theory of
Planned Behavior (Ajzen 1986, 1988, 2002)
• Perceived self-efficacy, couched in the Social Cognitive
Theory (Bandura 1997)
• Action control, couched in the theory of action control by
Kuhl (1985)
– Research model formulation based on TPB
The Theory of Planned
Behavior
– Attitude
• “Summary evaluation of a psychological object
captured in such attribute dimensions as goodbad, harmful-beneficial, pleasant-unpleasant,
and likable-dislikeable”
– Subjective norms
• Social factor term defined as the perceived
social pressure to perform or not perform the
behavior in question Intention
– Intention
• Intend to, will try to
• Controllability
– The amount of control on the achievement
of personal goals
– Introduced to deal with situations in which
people may lack complete volitional control
over the behavior of interest ~ Ajzen (1986,
1988, 2002)
Perceived Self-Efficacy
• Perceived self-efficacy
– “People’s judgment of their capabilities to
organize and execute course of action
required attaining designated types of
performances” ~ Bandura (1991, p. 257)
– concerned “not with the number of skills
you have, but with what you believe you
can do with what you have under a variety
of circumstances” ~ Bandura (1997, p37)
– I am confident that I can perform…
Action Control
• Self-regulatory mechanisms that mediate the
enactment of action-related mental
structures (intentions)
• State versus action orientation indicates that
a person’s general tendency to approach or
avoid things in a static (passive) or dynamic
(active) fashion
• Those with low self-regulatory capacity are
called state oriented
• Those with high self-regulatory capacity are
called action oriented
Research Methodology
• Subjects and Procedure
• Measures
Subjects and Procedure
• SCTNet (http://SCTNet.edu.tw)
• A virtual professional community of
teachers in Taiwan
• Over 60,000 members
• A total of 304 subjects completed the
questionnaire
• 260 of these were considered valid
responses
SCTNet Info
Registers
%
Total Registers
68,964(100%)
Male Users
22447(32.55%)
Female Users
46292(67.12%)
SCTNet Info (cont.)
Service Organization
Distribution
%
Kindergarten
628(0.91%)
Primary School
44164(64.04%)
Junior High School
8162(11.84%)
Senior High School
1722(2.5%)
College/University
1302(1.89%)
Others
12674(18.38%)
Data Collection Process
On-line
Questionnaires
Distribution
2002/9
Activity Log
Collection*
2002/10
2002/11
*Active Log Collection included:
The frequency of posting work-related issues, sharing personal teaching
experiences or know-how from work with other peers in teaching field,
uploading teaching materials that are designed by individuals, participating
discussions, giving critiques after reading particular topics that are proposed by
others, downloading teaching materials or resources, and giving critic or
feedback while performing teaching materials down loading
Data Analysis and Results
• Scale Validation
• Structural Model
• The moderating effect of action versus
state orientation
Data Analysis and Results
(cont.)
Variable
Value
Age
Variable
Value
Experience of using a computer
20-30
58.7% <= 1 year
2.7%
30-40
23.1% 1-2 years
7.2%
40-50
15.2% 2-3 years
12.1%
Over 50
3.0%
78.0%
Education
Over 3 years
Average use of Internet per week
Bachelor’s degree or equivalent
84.5% <= 3 hours
9.8%
Master’s degree
15.5% 4-12 hours
36.7%
Own a personal computer
13-36 hours
Yes
95.8% Over 37 hours
No
4.2%
35.2%
18.1%
Scale Validation (cont.)
Table 4. Rotated Factor Matrixes with Varimax Rotation
Component
1
2
3
4
5
SE1
.725
.173
-.050
-.048
.167
SE2
.907
.009
-.016
.066
.101
SE3
.942
.011
.005
.077
.079
SE4
.926
.002
-.011
.116
.086
SE5
.872
.090
-.028
.114
.144
SE6
.847
-.037
-.004
.040
.039
A1
.062
.900
.165
.169
.134
A2
.059
.881
.141
.242
.181
A3
.027
.903
.126
.205
.148
SN1
-.033
.107
.898
-.011
.069
SN2
-.015
.132
.905
.103
.033
SN3
-.039
.138
.825
.185
-.009
I1
.157
.406
.167
.827
.171
I2
.134
.339
.165
.861
.191
C1
.261
.168
.106
.184
.828
C2
.177
.253
-.009
.117
.865
Scale Validation (cont.)
Table 3. Item –to-Construct Loadings & Construct Reliability
Construct & Items
Mean
Standard
Deviation
Item-toConstruct
Loading
Error Loading
Composite
Reliability
Average
Variance
Extracted (AVE)
A1
6.25
0.82
0.90
0.13
0.95
0.88
A2
6.19
0.86
0.93
0.1
A3
6.09
0.93
0.92
0.13
SN1
4.92
1.24
0.84
0.46
0.84
0.64
SN2
4.88
1.16
0.93
0.19
SN3
5.31
1.10
0.74
0.55
INT1
5.89
0.91
0.97
0.05
0.95
0.91
INT2
5.86
0.89
0.92
0.13
C1
5.82
1.04
0.85
0.3
0.79
0.65
C2
6.06
1.05
0.79
0.41
SE1
9.37
1.20
0.68
0.78
0.87
0.54
SE2
8.65
1.69
0.91
0.51
SE3
8.70
1.61
0.97
0.16
SE4
8.55
1.74
0.94
0.37
SE5
8.66
1.59
0.87
0.6
SE6
8.10
1.89
0.78
1.39
Attitude
Subject Norms
Intention
Controllability
Self Efficacy
Structural Model
Attitude Toward
Knowledge Sharing
P ractices
Subjective Norm o f
Knowledge Sharing
P ractices
Controllability of
Knowledge Sharing
P ractices
0.50
(7.34)**
0.14
(2.66)**
Intention to
Share Knowledge
0.18
(2.55)**
0.08
(1.07)
Knowledge Sharing
Behavior
R 2  0.04
R2  0.49
-0.11
(-1.35)
0.13
(2.40)**
P erceived Knowledge
Sharing Self -Efficacy
0.19
(2.75)**
 2 / df  1. 11 ( 
Significant
Non-significant
NNFI  0. 99
CFI  1. 00
RMSEA  0. 02
Results of the Model Test
2
 114 .33 , df  103 )
Structural Model (cont.)
Table 5. Significance of Individual paths
Path
Path coefficient
(t-value)
Attitude -> Intention
0.50
(7.34)**
H1 (Supported)
Subject Norms -> Intention
0.14
(2.66)**
H2 (Supported)
Intention -> Behavior
0.08
(1.07)
H3 (Not Supported)
Controllability -> Intention
0.18
(2.55)**
H4 (Supported)
Controllability -> Behavior
-0.11
(-1.35)
H5 (Not Supported)
Self-efficacy -> Intention
0.13
(2.40)**
H6 (Supported)
Self-efficacy -> Behavior
0.19
(2.75)**
H7 (Supported)
Note: ** p-value < 0.05
Hypotheses
Structural Model (cont.)
Attitude Toward
Knowledge Sharing
P ractices
Subjective Norm of
Knowledge Sharing
P ractices
Controllability of
Knowledge Sharing
P ractices
0.47
(4.69)**
0.21
(2.83)**
Intention to
Share Knowledge
0.20
(1.87)
0.22
(2.11)**
2
R  0.54
Knowledge Sharing
Behavior
R2  0.05
-0.18
(-1.37)
0.08
(1.00)
P erceived Knowledge
Sharing Self-Efficacy
0.13
(1.32)
 2 / df  1.12 (  2  119 .69 , df  107 )
Significant
Non-significant
NNFI  0 .99
CFI  0 .99
RMSEA  0 .03
Results of the Model Test for Action-Orientation Group
Structural Model (cont.)
Attitude Toward
Knowledge Sharing
P ractices
Subjective Norm of
Knowledge Sharing
P ractices
Controllability of
Knowledge Sharing
P ractices
0.51
(5.36)**
0.09
(1.15)
Intention to
Share Knowledge
0.17
(1.70)
-0.05
(-0.47)
Knowledge Sharing
Behavior
R  0.05
2
R2  0.44
-0.06
(-0.59)
0.16
(1.95)
P erceived Knowledge
Sharing Self -Efficacy
0.25
(2.54)**
 2 / df  1 . 07 ( 
Significant
Non-significant
2
 111 .69 , df  104 )
NNFI  0. 99
CFI  0 . 99
RMSEA  0. 02
Results of the Model Test for State-Orientation Group
The moderating effect of action
versus state orientation
Fit of the Model with the Path
Path
Attitude ->Intention
Free
 2 (211)=231.39
Fixed to be Equal
 2 (212)=231.31
Test of Invariance
Hypotheses
 2 (df)-test
 2 (1)=-0.08
H8a
p=1
Subjective Norms ->
Intention
 2 (211)=231.39
Intention ->
Behavior
 2 (211)=231.39
 2 (212)=233.31
 2 (1)=1.92
H8b
p=0.17
 2 (212)=235.63
2
(1)= 4.24
p=0.04**
H8c**
Implication
Anteceding
Mind
KS Practices
Determinants
Action control
Cultural
Differences
Intention
Self-efficacy
Controllability
‧SCTNet Usage
Implication
Anteceding
KS Practices
Mind
Determinants
‧Environmental
Factors
‧IT characteristics
Defensive
Strategies
(Argyris)
Intention
Self-efficacy
Controllability
‧ Make attributions about others' personalities and
motives
‧Craft the attributions in ways
that make them
untestable
Stressful Condition
‧Interactivity
‧Quality of
Discussion
Qualitative Research ~
Web-based KMS (SCTNet) as a
Virtual Space for Sharing
“Lived Experience”
“Lived Experience” Sharing Space
Life in School
Projections
Opportunities & Barriers
Life in SCTNet: the
smart and the outside
Web-based KMS (SCTNet) as a Space
for Sharing “Lived Experience”
• The opportunities: SCTNet as a facilitating
force
• The barrriers: SCTNet as a obstructing
force
• The projections: Life after SCTNet
The「Smart」舞台
The「Smart」舞台
The Outside「外面」
The Outside「外面」
The Opportunities
• The possibility for defying the rigid hierarchical
structure of the “teacher community” (解構科層
的可能)
• The applauses as knowledge sharing motivation
(掌聲作為分享的動力)
• The buffering zone for reducing embarrassment
from sharing knowledge face-to-face(面對面尷尬
的緩衝)
The Opportunities (cont.)
• The way to reach the world outside the
“classroom castle” (走出教室城堡)
• The trace of professional and personal growth
(紀錄成長的足跡)
• The incubator of ideas (思緒沉澱與醞釀)
• The playground for novices (新手成功的契機)
The Barriers
• Small and Rigid Community (圈子小)
– The easy-to-recognize “anonymity”(匿名的匿
名性)
– The concern for security and trust(安全與信任)
– The reticence of professional status in
sharing(身份的矜持)
– The face (平凡與漏氣的顧忌)
The Barriers (cont.)
• Text as the Media of Shharing
Contextually Dependent Knowledge (文字
為主的情境描述媒介 )
– The Richness(豐富性)
– The Immediateness and Effectiveness(直接
與立即性)
– The ability of explicating the tacit
knowledge(外顯能力)
The Barriers (cont.)
• Computers as the Sharing Tool (電腦作為
分享的工具)
– The complexity of functions(複雜的系統功能)
– The screen as the reading media(螢幕作為閱
讀的媒介)
– The speed of typing (打字速度)
The Barriers (cont.)
• The face of them: To see or not to see”
(見面及見過面)
• The professional doctrine of “must-dothe-right-things” as the impediment (專
業作為阻斷的堡壘)
• The conversation: historical, temporal,
and structural (脈絡作為對話的基礎)
• The time limitation(時間的侷限)
The Projections
• They (the unknown others) have changed
because of me (有了思摩特，他人因我而改變)
• I Have change because of them (有了思摩特，
我因他人而改變)
• SCTNetting becomes the habit of my life
• SCTNetting becomes an invisible barrier
between I and colleague(思摩特成為一道摸不著
的牆)
Reflections
We try our best in promoting
the benefits of sharing
through SCTNet. And yet, the
participants are few…
「我們也極力去推廣，也介紹它
的好處，可是，畢竟來參與的人，
跟來應用的人很懸殊… 」
Reflections
The meaning of
Sharing
Measuring Success
Education
systems
The Habit
Busy
The Classroom Castle
The Face
The Meaning of Sharing
• The Education System (教育體制)
– Share teaching materials, classroom management, etc.
– Love your colleagues: “Don’t fight,” “No showing off”, (「愛現」、
「突兀」及與「以和為貴」牴觸的行為 )
• Teacher
– A way of professional growth: I grow because I improve
– A way of building identity and community belongingness
– A sense of self- and mutual- respect (「成長」、尋求「社群歸
屬」的可能)
• Information Technology
– Store, Index, and Distribute: One size fits all
– Administrative tool
– Workshop: Security and censoring of the virtual space(審核機制、
網路虛擬的「教室城堡」及「私底下」的小空間)
Busy
• The Education System (教育體制)
– 24 hours/week
– Computerize what you do; as the knowledge repository
grows, teachers’ knowledge will also grow
– Easier administration (二十四節課、政策配合、兼任行政工作、
體貼的設想)
• Teacher
– “Burn out”
– Tired after school or children fall asleep(「已經疲憊」 、在
下班之餘、在孩子睡著之後)
– I am not superman or superwoman
• Information Technology
– Typing, and more typing
– Extra burden, beyond the structure, “surplus” role(文字敘述、
額外的負擔、體制之外、 「剩餘的角色」)
The Classroom Castle
• The Education System (教育體制)
– The class is designed is like “egg crate”
– Be responsible for all activities in the classroom (教室的設計像一
格格的蛋盒,老師的角色設計,在教室中主導所有的事情)
– Teaching vs. Learning
• Teacher
–
–
–
–
Classroom is where I should be
King or Queen of the castle: A tyrant or a savior?
Must solve the problems efficiently inside the castle
Little time for learning: Interrupted thinking by kids(多數的時間是
留在教室空間裡、「老師所遇到的多為立即需要解決的問題」、
被孩子中斷的思考
• Information Technology
– Classroom IT? Say what?
– Share the IT: Administration first, personal stuff next
The Face
• The Education System (教育體制)
– Small community (social network built through class-mating, co-working, or
apprenticing (教師圈圈子小)
– Traditional Guan-Xi
• Teacher
– Highly respected by the society
– Should be able to provide inquiries all life long: Being a teacher also means
being an instructor, a mentor, a consultant, a care provider, a policy
coordinator,… (「一輩子要被人家尊敬」、「一輩子要被人家問」、「當學生
的貴人」、「當學生的情緒知音」，要傳道、要授業、要解惑…這樣的期待
是在有某種「關係」的人面前被實踐著)
– Face-based security and trust systems (「一面之緣」、「見面三分情」這個
文化脈絡下，奠基在 「臉、面」上面所建構的安全與信任系統 )
– “Don’t lose face” becomes an important concern
• Information Technology
– No face-to-face interaction
– No social cues
– Yet, traceable by those who have been in the community a long time (看不到
臉，透過ID的方式呈現自己，然而卻顧忌著經由詳實的文字敘述，而暴露出
任何可以經由「圈子小」的脈絡所追尋到的線索)
Habit
• The Education system (教育體制)
– Face-to-face communication
– Learning through apprenticeship
– Lead, rather than facilitate (透過口頭的分享模式及透過師徒觀摩
的學習方式，來達到生命經驗的成長，是被設計在教學體制中的
「習慣」模式)
• Teacher
– get used to being busy, speaking in secured environment,
avoiding presenting self in public, concealing failed experience,
keeping “peace,” “Keeping face,” etc. (教師習慣教學現場忙碌的步
調、習慣在安全的場域中講話、習慣不在公開的場域中呈現自己、
習慣不任意呈現自己內心及失敗的經驗、習慣不做踰越身份層級的
分享、習慣不做與「以和為貴」牴觸的論述與辯證…)
• Information Technology
– Using IT is NOT a habit: Not use to communicating through
monitors, using text to describe the event or context,
communicating without seeing each others’ “face”, operating the
complex function of SCTNet, (不習慣透過螢幕進行分享、不習慣
透過文字陳述事情脈絡、不習慣沒有面對面的溝通方式、不習慣操
作「思摩特」複雜的使用方式 、體制外的資訊系統)
Measuring Success
• The Education System (教育體制)
– “Quantity”: Number of teachers, posting, etc.
– “Having face” (他去教育部開會的時候，「思摩特」這個網
站…我們在上面沒有什麼資料這樣子，上司回來就有一點不
高興，就叫所有的學校反正都要送一份去教育局，就要每個
學校都要把那個部份通通上傳上去，結果資料量，衝上所有
縣市的前幾名)
• Teacher
– Acquire knowledge and keep progress is the nature of being
a teacher(追求進步與知識，是身為教師的天職。沒有跟上進
步的腳步，沒有主動追求知識，如何能成為一個教師呢？)
– To use IT is a presentation of “having face”(資訊科技的使用
是一種「面子」的表現 、資訊科技代表著進步與知識的意涵 )
• Information Technology
– IT carries an implicit meaning of progress and knowledge
– Virtually no limitation in terms of the quantity of knowledge
Implication
Anteceding
Mind
KS Practices
Determinants
‧What environmental
factors?
‧What IT
characteristics?
What psychological
Constructs?
Intention?
Self-efficacy?
Controllability?
‧How to Measure
success?
Interactivity?
Quality of
Discussion?
Networking?
Personal growth?
Thank You
Attitude (cont.)
• H1:The more favorable the individual’s
attitude toward knowledge sharing
practices, the stronger his/her intention to
share knowledge.
Norm (cont.)
• H2: The stronger the individual’s perceived
subjective norms towards knowledge
sharing practices, the stronger his/her
intention to share knowledge.
Perceived Behavioral Control
(cont.)
• H3: The stronger the individual’s intention
to share knowledge, the more likely it is
that he/she will share knowledge.
• H4: The greater the individual’s
controllability of knowledge sharing
practices, the stronger his/her intention to
share knowledge.
Perceived Self-Efficacy (cont.)
• H5: The greater the individual’s controllability
of knowledge sharing practices, the more
likely it is that he/she will perform knowledge
sharing behavior.
• H6: The greater the individual’s perceived
knowledge sharing self-efficacy, the stronger
his/her intention to share knowledge.
• H7: The greater the individual’s perceived
knowledge sharing self-efficacy, the more
likely it is that he/she will share knowledge.
Action Control (cont.)
• H8a: The effect of attitude on an individual’s
intention to share knowledge is invariance
across action-state oriented groups.
• H8b: The effect of subjective norms on an
individual’s intention to share knowledge is
invariance across action-state oriented
groups.
• H8c:The effect of an individual’s intention to
share knowledge on his/her knowledge
sharing practice is invariance across actionstate oriented groups.
Measures
Intention:
INT1 I intend to share knowledge on SCTNet
INT2 I will try to share knowledge on SCTNe
Attitude:
A1 I think to do knowledge sharing on
SCTNet is good
A2 I think to do knowledge sharing on
SCTNet is beneficial
A3 I think to do knowledge sharing on
SCTNet is valuable
Measures (cont.)
Subjective Norms:
SN1 I think my school principal will support
me in sharing knowledge on SCTNet
SN2 I think the colleagues in my school will
support me in sharing knowledge on SCTNet
SN3 I think the peers in educational domain
will support me in sharing knowledge on SCTNet
Measures (cont.)
Controllability:
C1
I believe that I have full control of using SCTNet
C2
It is mostly up to me whether or not I use SCTNet
Measures (cont.)
Self-Efficacy:
SE1 I am confident that I can find out all the
resource that I want through using
SCTNet’s search engine
SE2 I am confident that I can post new issue
on SCTNet’s Discussion Forum
SE3 I am confident that I can give response to
a specific issue on SCTNet’s Discussion
Forum
SE4 I am confident that I can discuss work
related issues on SCTNet’s Professional
Forum
Measures (cont.)
Self-Efficacy
SE6 I am confident that I can perform
resource sharing on SCTNet’s Resource
sharing Forum
SE7 I am confident that I can have a chat in a
specific topic on SCTNet’s Coffee Shop
Measures
(cont.)
Action Control:
AC1 When I have lost something that is very valuable to me and I can’t find it
anywhere:
(a). I have a hard time concentrating on something else
(b). I put it out of my mind after a little while
AC2 If I’ve worked for weeks on one project and then everything goes completely
wrong with the project:
(a). It take me a long time to adjust myself to it
(b). It bothers me for a while, but then I don’t think about it anymore
AC3 When I’m in a competition and have lost every time:
(a). I can soon put losing out of my mind
(b). The thought that I lost keeps running through my mind
AC4 If I had just bought a new piece of equipment (for example a tape deck) and it
accidentally fell on the floor and was damaged beyond repair:
(a). I would manage to get over it quickly
(b). It would take me a long time to get over it
AC5 If I have to talk to someone about something important and, repeatedly, can’t find
him or her at home:
(a). I can’t stop thinking about it, even while I’m doing something else
(b). I easily forget about it until I see the person
AC6 When I’ve bought a lot of stuff at the store and realize when I get home that I’ve
paid too much-but I can’t get my money back:
(a). I can’t usually concentrate on anything else
(b). I easily forget about it
Measures
(cont.)
Action Control:
AC7 When I am told that my work has been completely unsatisfactory:
(a). I don’t let it bother me for too long
(b). I feel paralyzed
AC8 If I’m stuck in traffic and miss an important appointment:
(a). At first, it’s difficult for me to start do anything else at all
(b). I quickly forget about it and do something else
AC9 When something is very important to me, but I can’t seem to get it right:
(a). I gradually lose heart
(b). I just forget about it and do something else
AC10 When something really gets me down:
(a). I have trouble doing anything at all
(b). I find it easy to distract myself by doing other things
AC11 When several things go wrong on the same day:
(a). I usually don’t know how to deal with it.
(b). I just keep on going as though nothing had happened
AC12 When I have put all my effort into doing a really good job on something and the
whole thing doesn’t work out:
(a). I don’t have too much difficulty starting something else
(b). I have trouble doing anything else at all
Measures
(cont.)
Action Control:
AC13 When I know I must finish something soon:
(a). I have to push myself to get started
(b). I find it easy to get it done and over started
AC14 When I don’t have anything in particular to do and I am getting bored:
(a). I have trouble getting up enough energy to do anything
(b). I quickly find something to do
AC15 When I’m getting ready to tackle a difficult problem:
(a). It feels like I am facing a big mountain that I don’t think I can climb
(b). I look for a way that the problem can be approached in a suitable manner
AC16 When I have to solve a difficult problem:
(a). I usually don’t have a problem getting started on it
(b). I have trouble sorting things out in my head so that I can get down to working on the problem
AC17 When I have to make up my mind about what I am going to do when I get some
unexpected free time:
(a). It takes me a long time to decide what I should do during this free time
(b). I can usually decide on something to do without having to think it over very much
AC18 When I have work to do at home:
(a). It is often hard for me to get the work done
(b). I usually get it done right away
Measures
(cont.)
Action Control:
AC19 When I have a lot of important things to do and they must all be done soon:
(a). I often don’t know where to begin
(b). I find it easy to make a plan and stick with it
AC20 When there are two things that I really want to do, but I can’t do both of them:
(a). I quickly begin one thing and forget about the other thing I couldn’t do
(b). It’s not easy for me to put the other thing I couldn’t do out of my mind
AC21 When I have to take care of something important which is also unpleasant:
(a). I do it and get it over with
(b). It can take a while before I can bring myself to it
AC22 When I am facing a big project that has to be done:
(a). I often spend too long thinking about where I should begin
(b). I don’t have any problems getting started
AC23 When I have a boring assignment:
(a). I usually don’t have any problem getting through it
(b). I sometimes can’t get moving on it
AC24 When I have an obligation to so something that is boring and uninteresting:
(a). I do it and get it over with
(b). It can take a while before I can bring myself to do it