Job Involvement and Knowledge Sharing Dependence on Organizational Citizenship Behavior

research by Research and Consultancy (RCF) offered Training Among several purposes; RCF focuses on improving research and consultancy activities in LGTI academic departments Abstract Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) was employed in this study as fitting theory for investigating determination of Knowledge Sharing behavior. TRA is a choice theory that elucidates drive of executing behavior by emphasising the definite processes that employees follow to take choices. TRA takes an employee drive to execute behavior by utilizing the concept of intention to execute behaviour. A TRA model was crafted on three variables [(Job Involvement (JI); Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) and Knowledge Sharing (KS)] and empirically investigated Job Involvement - Knowledge Sharing association. Then, OCB moderating role in this association; was tested as an extension variable to the traditional TRA model. Questionnaires were completed on self-rating fashion where 421 employees in Local Government Authorities (LGAs) formed study sample. Hayes (2004) and Mod-Graph (Jose, 2013) approach was jointly employed to determine potential OCB moderation role in the study. Results suggested; Job Involvement - Knowledge Sharing association was positive in nature; thus, both changes in tandem. Further, Job Involvement - Knowledge Sharing association strength depended on the third variable namely OCB; hence, OCB affected the strength of the independent and dependent variable association in the study. Implications for practice and future study were composed subsequent to conclusions.


Introduction
Knowledge refers individuals' competence on specific field acquired through tailor made training and observation when practicing or experiencing (Mahmood et al, 2011). Knowledge is perceived as set of information and understanding obtained through practical experience which is fundamentally existing in respective individual (Nonaka, 1994). It is known to be essential corporate resource that enables retention of sustainable competitive advantage in a competitive market share (Aliakbar et al, 2012). Knowledge Sharing (KS) is described as the process of handing over knowledge from an individual in knowledge possession to individuals in deficit (Hwie & Byung-Choon, 2003). Existing research reported stream of knowledge sharing benefits including but not limited to decreased production costs; improved team performance; and enhanced corporate innovation capacity (Collins & Smith, 2006). In respect to these likely benefits; some organizations invested substantial amount of resources Information and Knowledge Management www.iiste.org ISSN 2224-5758 (Paper) ISSN 2224-896X (Online) Vol.10, No.7, 2020 into Knowledge Sharing (KS) initiatives (Wang & Noe, 2010). Conferring Wang & Noe; investment is geared to enable knowledge data gathering, storage and delivery to desired destinations. Yet, difficult in knowledge sharing prevails because knowledge is acquired and possessed by individuals (Chow & Chan, 2008). The challenge to share knowledge is that; it is voluntary endeavor and sharing is conceivable when bearers are prepared to do so (Mahmood et al, 2011). Sharing difficulty is primarily worse when bearers perceive possessed knowledge as treasured assets and free knowledge sharing is against their natural preferences (Hsu et al., 2007). While Knowledge Sharing received stream of researches; most findings are devoted and restricted in private sector; with little findings in public sector (Ahmad, et al, 2013). Empirical studies have associated lack of findings of practical importance in public sector with lower pace discharge of public service delivery (McAdam & Reid, 2000).
Similarly, several other reasons have been advanced to explain as to why lack of researches directed to public sector. Ahmad, et al, (2006) suggested most of researches are inclined to private sector because business mission leads them in searching for predetermined profit margin and competitive advantage. Unlike private sector; public sector is locked in not for profit syndrome (Nurin, 2012). According to Ahmad, et al, not for profit syndrome has thrown knowledge sharing in public sector into infancy pool.  Wang & Noe (2010) just to name some. Though successful; some critics have been extended on TRA application. For instance ;Hagger, (2019) questioned sufficiency of attitudes and subjective norms to explain behavioral intentions and actual behavior as direct variables. He maintained; TRA simplicity and ability to explain behavior needs vigorous investigation. As  (2016); Van-Bree, et al. (2013);Sheeran & Conner (2017). This study concluded four issues from the reviewed literature. One: Though important; Public sector; is just commencing to appreciate the utility of knowledge sharing to quality and superiority of service delivery. Researches and findings into public sector are still developing and lacking. Two: literature put into overt, conflicting, incomplete and limited current empirical backing on Job Involvement -Knowledge Sharing association; a moderating role of OCB. Three: TRA has been intensively used to predict Knowledge Sharing behavior. Nevertheless, it has received adequate application criticism including sufficiency, simplicity and ability in predicting behavior. Four: Huge researches have been conducted across the global; yet; such researches are still at infancy and limited in Tanzanian context. These limitations supported the rational decision for researching the area in Tanzanian Local Government Authorities (LGAs). As such, this study seeks to fill this gap by investigating Job Involvement -Knowledge Sharing basing on Theory of Reasoning Action (TRA). It extends the TRA by introducing moderating variable (OCB) in the attitude -intention -knowledge sharing causal relation. In doing so; the following questions will be addressed: -  (Nurin, 2012). Knowledge sharing is equally vital to both public and private organization; thus, modern public institutions employ knowledge sharing measures as driving force to quality in service delivery (Milbraith, 1989). In quality footings, knowledge sharing has been recognized as utility in enhancing quality in service delivery to the community (Zhang et al., 2006). As such public institutions grasp innovation and active service delivery force through decent knowledge sharing management (Chen & Hsieh 2015). Despite this importance, knowledge sharing has established inadequate attention in public sector as opposed to private sector (Chen & Hsieh 2015) Researches indicates most findings of practical importance have been conducted in private organizations; leaving counterpart public sector with little findings and implications on knowledge sharing (Ahmad, et al, 2013). It is not shocking, therefore, some of public service delivery discharged at significantly lower pace compared to private sector (McAdam & Reid, 2000). Some authors went to the extent of saying; public sector is commencing to appreciate the utility of knowledge sharing to quality and superiority of service delivery (Taylor, 2002). But the importance of knowledge sharing in public sector is vivid; as it has fundamental rank not only in managing public Information and Knowledge Management www.iiste.org ISSN 2224-5758 (Paper) ISSN 2224-896X (Online) Vol.10, No.7, 2020 affairs; but also, service delivery in particular (Lodhi & Mikulecky 2017). According to Lodhi & Mikulecky; when knowledge sharing management is magnificent; it fosters institutional operations by improving employees' attitudes towards desired organizational outcomes. However, if knowledge sharing management is disappointing; lapses and exposure is obvious and traditional outcome. Pivotal question is why knowledge sharing findings mostly in private sector as opposed to public sector. Some authors have associated this shortfall with business mission across private and public sector. Unlike public corporates; private corporates focus in business mission to constantly improve profit margin and sustain competitive advantage in market share (Ahmad, et al, 2006). Such mission receives little attention in public corporates on account of not for profit syndrome (Nurin, 2012). This has thrown knowledge sharing in public sector into infancy pool; more and vigorous researches are of essence (Ahmad, et al, 2006). To address this gap; this study explored the moderating role of OCB in the impact of Job Involvement on Knowledge Sharing in Tanzanian LGAs Sharing) through directing employee to be more engrossed with their jobs and making committed efforts to corporate goals (Carson et al. 1995).

Job Involvement and Knowledge Sharing
In an empirical study; Teh & Sun (2011) reported a positive association between Job Involvement and Knowledge sharing. Teh & Sun, claim; Job Involvement may lead employees acquire self-confidence and influence to share possessed work knowledge as opposed to inadequate job involvement employees. Further, Rehman et al., (2011) found employees who reported high in Job Involvement are more likely to share their knowledge with peers. It was reasoned; employees who reported significant Job Involvement are more satisfied with their jobs and develop engagement spirit which is fundamental to knowledge sharing (Carson et al. 1995). In a study; in manufacturing sector; Probst (2000) produced findings that; Job Involvement positively impact knowledge sharing behavior; when intent to share behavior is impacted as well. An obvious claim is Job Involvement may create happiness environment which is ultimate in intent to share knowledge and actual sharing behavior (Constant et al., 1994). In addition, Eman & Din (2015) contended the impact Job Involvement has on knowledge sharing behavior at work.
They found direct and positive relationship between the two constructs. It was maintained that; employee's psychological attitude such as job involvement may persuade employees' intention to share knowledge to those in need (Ten & Sun, 2011). It can be reasoned; Job Involvement influence employee's cognitive readiness to perform knowledge sharing by making combination of positive attitude and subjective norms functional (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1980  Literature proposes; positive job attitude such as JI have positive impact on OCB (Podsakoff et al. 2000). Of course, in obvious ways, it is because employees engross willingness to take more than assigned duties when they have positive attitude towards job (Bolino et al., 2002). It is also evident that employees high in OCB are more likely to engage Knowledge Sharing behavior (Hsu & Lin 2008). Consequently, it is proposed that Knowledge

Theory of Reasoned Action
The existence of Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) dates back in 1967 when it was first coined to predict the association between attitude and behavior (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). Figure 1: present schematic form of the Theory of Reasoned Action. TRA was crafted following once in a while failure to determine behavior using classical procedures of attitude (Fishbein, 1993). The theory sits on the assumption that employees are not only lucid but also make orderly use of accessible information. Thus, employees contemplate consequences of their conduct's prior final decision on behavioral options (Tlou, 2009). Literary, TRA seeks to determine the association between belief, attitudes, intentions and behavior (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). It suggests the pivotal factor for predicting employee's behavioral intention is attitude and subjective norms connected to the behavior of interest (Montano & Kasprzyk, 2002). Putting in another way, the employee's choice as to whether or otherwise, engross in certain behavior is dictated by intent to execute the behavior; which originate from subjective norm and attitude on the behavior under considerations (Yu et all., 2010) On TRA attitude standings, TRA define as individual's defiance towards executing the behavior of interest (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). It is the extent to which one feels positive in sharing knowledge to those in deficit (Bock et al. 2005). In other words, it accrues from behavioral belief and extent of positive or negative touch of an employee over intention to share knowledge across the corporate (Rahab & Wahyuni, 2013). This is to say, employees' prospects to execute behavior under considerations gets stronger when facilitative attitude prevails (Fishbein, 1993). On TRA subjective norm standings, it clicks the extent to which an employee carries belief that individuals who exert pressure on peoples conducts expects them to execute behavior of interest multiplied by the degree of individuals' submission with each dependent referent (Fishbein & Ajzen 1975). It is crafted from normative belief and covers employee belief that peers/relevant others expect joint engagement in desirable behavior (Rahab & Wahyuni, 2013). In organizational rapports, relevant others; covers top, middle and lower management teams. By itself, it is ordinary smart employees would wish to obey with management team's prospects in knowledge sharing standards (Lee et al, 2001). Bestowing Lee, as employees are further motivated to imitate group norms; the further the attitude incline to group norms. Consequently, it is practical to speculate that subjective norms on knowledge sharing would encourage others attitude in the direction of knowledge sharing at work (Lee, 2005). On TRA intention to share relations, intention to share knowledge behavior refers the extent to which knowledge will be shared by individuals in question (Dennis (1996). It takes into considerations employees' subjective likelihood that they will execute certain behavior perhaps desirable by the corporate (Fishbein & Ajzen 1981). The pivotal word here is individual intent which is described as employee's cognitive willingness to execute specific behavior.
Stating otherwise, it is defined as individuals' plan of action and denote self-articulated motivation engage in behavior of interest (LaCaille, 2013,). Peslack perceive the same as the propensity and tendency to engross in the behavior which is actual by itself (Peslack et al., 2012). That said it is vivid that; joint influence accruing from attitude, subjective norms and behavioral intent spans disciplines in determining behavior outcomes across organizations (Fishbein & Ajzen, 2011) Information and Knowledge Management www.iiste.org ISSN 2224-5758 (Paper) ISSN 2224-896X (Online) Vol.10, No.7, 2020 Figure 1: Theory of Reasoned Action (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980) Employees' decisions to share knowledge in Local Government Authorities (LGAs) can be studied through the lens of TRA. Primarily, Job Involvement (JI) and Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) are both attitudes important in determining organizational outcomes such as knowledge sharing behavior (Hoshyar et al, (2017).
This feature, because employees high in both JI and OCB develop constructive job spirit which in turn triggers desired organizational outcomes (Rehman et al., (2011). Practically, employees who trust that important referent (eg supervisor or peers) are in the opinion that she/he should execute desired behavior (in this case Job Involvement) and he/she is motivated to conform with the said referent desires; will grip positive subjective norm (Tlou, 2009). Much as TRA adopts a causal relation that connect behavior and normative beliefs to behavior intention and actual behavior through attitude and subjective norms (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980); it sensible to suggest that employees are likely to engage in knowledge sharing behavior; if they evaluate positively others think they should engage in Job Involvement (Montano & Kasprzyk, 2002). Equally important; if positive attitude is pivotal variable to knowledge sharing behavior intent and actual knowledge sharing (Hoshyar et al, 2017;Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980); the propensity of sharing knowledge will be sturdy, if they engross decent Job Involvement attitude towards knowledge sharing behavior (Fishbein & Middlestadt 1989). Precisely putting, positive attitude towards JI and OCB; and positive perceptions of norms for JI and OCB create intentions to actual knowledge sharing (Mahmood et al, 2011). It is practical to suggest therefore; using TRA, positive attitude towards Job Involvement and OCB (attitudes) are good predictor of intention and actual knowledge sharing behavior.
Despite TRA's acceptance, adequate quantity of critiques has been offered. One of the chief critics; is sufficiency of attitudes and subjective norms to explain behavioral intentions and actual behavior (Hagger, 2019).
Additionally, the simplicity and ability to explain behavior has also been put TRA under scrutiny. Thus, there is a significant conclusion that TRA offer limited explanation of behavior. In response; authors suggested TRA to employees possessing sturdy habits, assessed by self-report and earlier behavioral occurrence, incline to display weaker or insignificant intention-behavior relationship ( Van-Bree, et al. 2013). The treatment to this gap; is to involve moderators into the TRA model; to reinforce intention-behavior relationship (Sheeran & Conner 2017). It is unfortunate, however, that OCB moderating effect on attitude -intention-behavior relationship has rarely been tested (Hagger, 2019) 3. Methodology

Approach, Sample and Procedure
Moderating effect studies normally involves quantitative and questionnaire-based approach such that constructs and variables can be quantitatively related (Salas-Vallina et al, 2017). Thus, this study employed the same approach. It was designed on postulation that OCB works as moderator following its reported buffering role in Job Involvement -Knowledge Sharing relationship. This suggests the use of data collected from non-managerial employees (Bogler & Somech, 2005). According to Bogler & Somech subordinate employees executes issues on the ground and thus stand a better chance to intensively describe OCB, Job Involvement and Knowledge Sharing at work. In response, data were collected from subordinate staff as opposed to managerial staff; given study nature.
Questionnaires were administered in Tanzanian Local Government Authorities (LGAs) in four varied administrative zones namely Central, Coastal, Lake, and Southern zone. Respondents were requested to complete closed ended questionnaire organized in three scales that measured Knowledge sharing desire; Job Involvement attitude and perceived level of OCB. In aggregate, 357 employees were approached to complete predetermined questionnaire. Of course, on obvious ways, employees were given an option to submit the same day or suggest convenient time. Of 357 employees, 52.7% were males (n = 188); 47.3% were females (n = 169); 57.7% were age below 35 (n = 206); 42.3% were age above 35 (n = 151). Data collecting procedures adequately complied with ethical considerations as proposed by Bryman & Bell (2000). For example; participants were made to understand that filling questionnaire was voluntary and that collected data were to be kept in solid confidentiality. Above all; procedures for requesting data collection permission was given passable priority. All these were possible following pre-departure brief training extended to data collectors.
Study sample were conveniently obtained on belief; it is fastest and affordable to secure bulky data in large organizations (Bailey, 2012). Technically, the sample was expected to be biased towards subordinate employees; though, there is no reason to suggest the sample inclined to subordinate as opposed to managerial employees. In fact, the nature of the study made it necessary to survey subordinate employees (Bogler & Somech, 2005). Further, the sample had adequate coverage as it involved the same adequate number of subordinates across LGAs.
Consequently, non-randomness and selection issues across prospects were contained (Blair et al., 2014). Data collecting procedures adequately complied with ethical considerations as proposed by Bryman & Bell (2000). For Information and Knowledge Management www.iiste.org ISSN 2224-5758 (Paper) ISSN 2224-896X (Online) Vol.10, No.7, 2020 example; participants were made to understand that filling questionnaire was voluntary and that collected data were to be kept in solid confidentiality. In addition; procedures for requesting data collection permission preceded entire data collection activity. All these were possible following pre-departure brief training extended to data collectors.

Measuring Job Involvement
Job Involvement is described as how employees are interested, entangled and occupied by organizational goals, cultures and assigned duties to perform (Joiner & Bakalis, 2006). By itself, it is the degree to which workers are customarily interested in, identified with and preoccupied with assigned tasks (Kanungo, 1982). Bestowing Kanungo, Job Involvement is viewed as attitudinal state that replicates single dimensional cognitive response of respective worker. In its basics, it is considered as an attitude important for organizational Effectiveness (Hoshyar et al, 2017). This is due to the fact that; employees high in Job Involvement also possess job satisfaction, positive spirit which is key in positive organizational outcomes such as Knowledge Sharing Behavior (Carson, 1995). A scale regularly used to measure Job Involvement is that of Kanungo (1982

Measuring OCB
OCB is viewed as performance that creates enabling social and psychological environment in which completion of assigned duties actually happen (Organ, 1997). The importance of OCB is relatively tricky (Katz & Kahn, 1978). Because, involve conducts that do not directly relay to duties completion but imperative to aggregate organizational well-being (Bateman & Organ, 1983). It is indirect as its traditionally discretionary and not overtly documented by any organizational official reward scheme; but facilitates sound operations of an organization (Organ et al., 2006). Examples of OCB include facilitating others at work in terms of unconditional help, completing additional assignments more than what allocated, and defending organizational interests (Bolino & Turnley, 2003). That is why in better performing organizations; it is custom to incorporate OCB in executing tasks, assisting needy staff, in the course of meeting organizational goals (Amabile et al. 2014

Measuring Knowledge Sharing
Knowledge sharing is a process intended to capture experiences from possessor such that' it transferred to deficit areas (Levitt, & March, 2008). In other words, it is a knowledge transfer that enhances learning in respective institution. Thus, it defines transfer of knowledge across organizational structure sharing knowledge between employees (Szulansk et al, 2004). Practically, it involves a set of shared experiences pertaining to enabling workers Information and Knowledge Management www.iiste.org ISSN 2224-5758 (Paper) ISSN 2224-896X (Online) Vol.10, No.7, 2020 access to relevant skills, knowledge and experiences using knowledge systems within an organization (Hogel et al., 2003). Lin (2007) define knowledge sharing as social communication culture, involving give and take knowledge, experiences, and skills in entire organization structure. Importance of knowledge sharing in organization settings is not in dispute. Its availability produces opportunities to exploit organization ability to create solutions that foster competitive advantage in competitive markets (Reid, 2003). It should however be noted that knowledge transfer is individual willingness. Precisely putting, it can't be forced in any way; connotes individual willingness to share acquired skills, experiences and knowledge with co-workers (Gibbert & Krause 2002). The questionnaire designed and developed by Cheng & Chen (2007)

Data Analysis and Interpretation
Data analyses and interpretation employed Hayes and Mod-Graph Approaches to analyse and test OCB moderation. While earlier approach provides just conditions essential to suggest moderation (Hayes, 2004); the latter provide the actual size of the moderation and confirmation (Jose, 2013). With Hayes; Moderation can be revealed if it is vivid that; the nature of relationship between two variables of interest varies as the values of moderating variable vary (Hayes, 2004). This is executed by creating two regression models. The first regression model contains independent variable (Job Involvement-JI) and moderator variable (OCB). The second regression model comprise of independent variable, moderator variable and interaction term (JI*OCB). This is executed by introducing in the model an interaction variable and observes changes in the model variance (if any). Indeed, observation focus on checking if the interaction is significant; and that variance determined in the response variable is better than before introduction of interaction variable. The two regression models (first and second) are described in subsequent section. Knowledge sharing from Job Involvement, OCB and Involvement*OCB. The difference here was that; interaction term (JI * OCB) was introduced in the model. The focus was to check if at all there was significant difference in the model; following introduction of interaction term in the first model. In this case not only the model is checked its significance but also significance in R 2 change. In the second regression model; it's when moderation analysis was tested. Literally, it estimated moderation through putting onto the second regression model; the product term Information and Knowledge Management www.iiste.org ISSN 2224-5758 (Paper) ISSN 2224-896X (Online) Vol.10, No.7, 2020 55 of two variables as predictor variable (Gatignon & Osgerau 2006). The effect of independent variable; in this case, depends on the degree of strength in moderator variable. That said; product term facilitated in describing the natures of predictor-outcome association either (Preacher et al, 2007). Generally, Regression model interpretation was based on two scenarios. In the first scenario; when JI and OCB were not significant with the interaction term (JI * OCB) introduced in the model. This could be interpreted as absolute moderation. Second scenario is when Job Involvement and OCB were significant with the interaction term introduced in the model. This could be interpreted as moderation existed parallel with main effect influence.
Specifically, estimations interpretation were based on four steps:-[1]Demonstrate that regression model one (before introducing product term) is significant; [2]Demonstrate that regression model two (after introducing product term) is significant; [3]Demonstrate that regression model two explain adequately more variance in outcome variable than model one; [4] If step three is in affirmative; then moderation is likely to occur between independent and dependent variable. Traditionally, procedures for analyzing moderation (full or partial) provide just conditions essential to suggest moderation in the model (Hayes, 2004). They don't provide the actual size of the moderation (Jose, 2013). Consequently, Mod-Graph Analysis as recommended by Jose (2013) was made part of the analysis for further moderation confirmation. Basically, Mod-Graph analysis result into graphical presentation following internet Mod-Graph version calculation of cell means. It offers a far better overly picture related to enhancing role that OCB plays in the Job Involvement -Knowledge Sharing relationship.

Reliability Analyses
Prior to actual data analysis; scales reliability analyses were conducted as proposed by Nunnally, (1978) andBriggs &Cheek, (1986). According to Nunnally, scale reliability can be checked using internal consistency which is the degree to which the constructs hang together. Simply putting, it is the degree to which constructs in the scale are Cheek propose an alternative scale internal consistency to be mean inter-item correlation for the constructs. Mean inter-item correlation values falling between .2 and .4 suggested better scale internal consistency. An assessment of Corrected Item-Total Correlation column revealed no values worse than .2; suggesting the degree to which each construct correlate with the total score is practically significant.

Regression Analysis
In retort of research question one; that focused in investigating the nature of Job Involvement and Knowledge Sharing association; regression analysis was employed. Chiefly, regression analysis facilitates and allows researchers to know the level of variance in dependent variable explained by independent variable (Levin & Rubin, 2006). Precisely putting; it suggests contribution of independent variable in predicting levels of dependent variable.  (2000); who reported Job involvement to impact Knowledge sharing on positive fashion. Perhaps, this is due to nothing but Job Involvement desire instil, in employees, psychological identification with respective work and/or turn work into individual's identity (Lodhal & Kejner, 1965). Psychological identity in this respect augments work motivation that unlocks berries in knowledge sharing (Fletcher, 1998). Further; these results are consistent with TRA reasoning.
In TRA perspectives; employees' chance to execute a certain behavior is robust when they possess favorable attitude towards execution of respective behavior. Thus, positive attitude towards Job Involvement should be sound predictor of knowledge sharing intent and respective actual Knowledge Sharing behavior. On TRA application rapports; JI positive impact on KS results; matches TRA reasoning as advanced by Ajzen & Fishbein, (1980).
Positive JI involvement attitude should form favorable attitude towards not only knowledge sharing intention; but also, to actual knowledge sharing to other employees. The argument is based on the fact that; employee's choice as to engross in certain behavior is dictated by intent to execute the behavior; which originate from subjective norm and attitude on the behavior under considerations (Yu et all., 2010). In other words; employees' choice to share knowledge they possess; is dictated by intent to share knowledge; which originate from positive Job Involvement attitude.

Hierarchical Regression Analysis
In response to research question two; Hierarchical Regression Analysis was conducted as per Hayes (2004).
Second research question wanted to know as to whether, or not, Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB) play Information and Knowledge Management www.iiste.org ISSN 2224-5758 (Paper) ISSN 2224-896X (Online) Vol.10, No.7, 2020 an enhancing/moderating role in Job Involvement -knowledge sharing relationship? According to Hayes; moderation is to the effect that; when moderating variable is introduced to the crafted regression model; it modifies the direction or size of the association between predictor and outcome variable. In this respect; regression model one (before introducing product term) was conducted where Job Involvement -Knowledge Sharing relationship was the case. F (1,394) = 329.439, P <.005 Suggested that regression model one was significant and thus moderation estimation step one was satisfied. In the same vein; regression model two (after introducing product term) was conducted. It included third variable (OCB) in Job Involvement -Knowledge Sharing relationship; making a product term JI×OCB. Results in table 2 indicated model two was, significant as well (F (1,393) = 230.640, P <.005) and therefore the second parameter for moderation was satisfied. In step three; regression model one and two were compared to discover; whether or not; regression model two registered more variances. Results in table 2 indicates R 2 change .085, p = .000; proposing or extending moderating effect hint in Job Involvement -Knowledge Sharing relationship. Hierarchical regression; in this case; addressed reported TRA weaknesses such as sufficiency of attitudes and subjective norms to explain behavioral intentions and actual behavior (Hagger, 2019). OCB introduction in the model genuinely addressed reported sufficiency and simplicity issues; as it reinforced intention-behavior relationship (Sheeran & Conner 2017) Mod-Graph analysis program enables researchers to introduce statistical data collected from regression analysis; into Mod-Graph program to uncover statistical interactions presented in graph form. Primarily, it serves as the confirmation analysis following hint offered by hierarchical regression analysis. Further, visual assessment of the graph; suggests; even at lower levels of Job Involvement; employees with higher levels of OCB reported higher levels of Knowledge sharing as well (Figure 1). Putting into other words; improving Apparently, Job Involvement -Knowledge sharing relationship is sturdy when employees are high in OCB.
Significant Job Involvement impact on Knowledge sharing; takes indirect rout through OCB.   (2015) 3. TRA has been intensively used to predict Knowledge Sharing behavior. Nevertheless, it has received adequate application criticism including sufficiency in predicting behavior. Fundamental characteristics of Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) in its relative economy, meanness and weakness while determining behavior variances across cultural context. This was interpreted as simplicity and lack of capacity in TRA to determine or predict behavior vigorously.

Implications for practices
This study offered one of the landmark empirical tests of the Job Involvement -Knowledge sharing relationship; a moderating role of OCB in Tanzanian LGAs using TRA model. It makes several practice implications including: -1. This study approached Job Involvement as knowledge sharing predictor with respect to employees' actual sharing behavior influenced by intention to do so. In fact, findings established Job Involvement and Knowledge Sharing are positively related in nature. Respondents' scores were significantly higher for Job Involvement causing higher variances in Knowledge Sharing behavior. In other words, Job Involvement explained significant and unique variances in Knowledge Sharing behavior. In practice terms; LGAs human resource practitioners should concentrate in developing or maintaining more enriching job environment that attract employees Job Involvement. This could be a valuable ground to enhance public servants' Job Involvement as well as Knowledge Sharing desire.
2. The study model designed in this study is of worth in two imperative ways. First, it contributes to theorizing on the moderating role of OCB in predicting Knowledge among public servants; LGAs in Information and Knowledge Management www.iiste.org ISSN 2224-5758 (Paper) ISSN 2224-896X (Online) Vol.10, No.7, 2020 particular. Second, it adds value to the empirical evidence in the domain of the respective constructs under the research, as it analyses the moderation of OCB in the hypothesized linkage between Job Involvement and Knowledge Sharing. Findings suggest management and supervisor's support in creating positive attitude (Teo, 2005) for example JI, OCB etc is central. In practice ramifications; public service should reward managers and supervisors for providing support in developing and maintaining both Job Involvement and OCB among public servants 3. The study model that incorporated moderator variable into TRA model in this study is of worth in several parameters: In particular; it adds value to the empirical evidence in the domain of TRA lacking constructs reported as critics to the model that put into questions its vigorousness in predicting behavior. It did so by analyzing the moderation of OCB in the hypothesized linkage between attitude/subjective belief and Knowledge Sharing. As remedy; researchers proposed TRA model to introduce OCB variables (moderator) into the model that may strengthen variances in intentionbehavior relationship. In other words, TRA model to incorporated moderator variable to address simplicity, insufficiency and variance adequacy issues (Sheeran & Webb (2016); Van-Bree, et al. (2013); Sheeran & Conner (2017).

Implications for Future Researches
The results of this study should be taken in light of few noted limitations, which may not blow findings worthiness in any way. Incorporation moderator variable into TRA model in this study; was done in LGAs based data. It is risky to generalize these findings in entire Tanzanian public service. It is proposed; therefore, the designed theoretical model of this study should be tested in other public service settings, such as Central Government, Parastatal, Executive Agencies, and State Owned Enterprises etc.
This study surfaced various directions for future studies in two dimensions. First: longitudinal research is proposed as it would add value to deduce causal associations of Job Involvement and Knowledge Sharing behavior in public servants. Second: it is of essence to collect responses from employees in top management, middle management and lower management as well, public service. This would reduce bias risk and inclusion issues pertaining to management and professional groups in public service. Again; similar to previous studies in this area; questionnaire in self-reporting fashion was opted to collect data. This might have limited the deductions reached about causality and also registers questions about common method bias. Much as findings to this study are consistent with other previous findings; it is likely that Job Involvement positively determine Knowledge Sharing with OCB moderating the relationship either.