Knowledge hiding is a counterproductive workplace behavior that can undermine collaboration, organizational effectiveness, and healthcare quality. This study examined the behavioral mechanisms linking hypocritical leadership to knowledge hiding among nurses by investigating the sequential mediating roles of workplace incivility and workplace cheating behavior. Guided by social learning theory and behavioral integrity theory, a three-wave time-lagged survey was conducted among 299 registered nurses working in a tertiary healthcare hospital in Southern Punjab, Pakistan. Data were analyzed using Hayes’ PROCESS Model 6 to evaluate direct and sequential mediation effects. The findings showed that hypocritical leadership was positively associated with workplace incivility and workplace cheating behavior. The direct association between leaders’ hypocrisy and knowledge hiding was not statistically significant, whereas the indirect effects through workplace incivility and workplace cheating behavior were significant, indicating an indirect-only mediation. This suggests that the association between hypocritical leadership and knowledge hiding is established through intermediate behavioral mechanisms, while the direct effect is not statistically distinguishable from zero in this sample. Furthermore, the sequential mediation pathway from hypocritical leadership through workplace incivility and workplace cheating behavior to knowledge hiding was supported. These findings suggest that leadership hypocrisy is associated with a behavioral environment characterized by incivility and unethical workplace conduct, which in turn is related to employees’ tendency to conceal knowledge. Promoting ethical leadership and respectful workplace interactions may be associated with a lower level of counterproductive workplace behaviors and may support a collaborative knowledge-sharing culture in healthcare organizations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ullah et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: