This assignment is mainly based on a study of knowledge and innovation of a population of 10,000 people. It is not feasible to conduct a study of 10,000 people by considering each of their responses. This will give rise to both time and money constraints. Thus a sample of 370 people has been considered for the study. A survey questionnaire was prepared and distributed to 370 people selected randomly out of which 152 responses were returned. The analysis in this case will be performed based on these 152 responses.
To conduct this study, the research methodology that has been adopted is survey methodology. The mode of analysis will thus be quantitative. Appropriate quantitative techniques will be used to analyze the subject. The main objective of this research is to investigate the relationship between knowledge sharing, innovation award and firm performance. The population that has been targeted are all employees in the government sector. Information were collected on the demographic profile of the respondents as well as on other attributes such as knowledge sharing (both internal and external), innovation awards, innovation performance and firm performance. In this case, knowledge sharing has been considered as the dependent variable, innovation awards is the moderator variable and innovation performance and firm performance are the independent variables. Several questions were asked to the selected employees under each of the variable names specified. Thus, in order to consider each of the variables, a median of the scores given by the respondents have been considered. For the independent variable, knowledge sharing, sum of internal knowledge sharing and external knowledge sharing has been considered.
The first thing that has been performed for the purpose of the data analysis is analysis of the demographic factors of the respondents. The demographic factors of the 152 includes their gender, nationality, age, education, level of the job and number of years the person is working there.
It can be seen that among the participating 152 respondents, 90 were male and 62 were female. Thus there are 59.2 percent responses from the male point of view and 40.8 responses from the point of view of the females. The results are shown in table 3.1 and illustrated in table 3.1.
Table 3.1: Frequency table for Gender |
|||||
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
||
Valid |
Male |
90 |
59.2 |
59.2 |
59.2 |
Female |
62 |
40.8 |
40.8 |
100.0 |
|
Total |
152 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
Table 3.1: Pie Chart showing the percentage of male and female respondents
Again, it can be seen that most of the employees in the government sectors are from the UAE followed by Egypt, Syria and India. There are also employees belonging to other nations but to a very less number. The results obtained from the demographic analysis is provided in table 3.2 and illustrated in table 3.2 with the help of a bar chart.
Table 3.2: Frequency table for Nationality |
|||||
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
||
Valid |
Egypt |
14 |
9.2 |
9.2 |
9.2 |
France |
3 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
11.2 |
|
India |
10 |
6.6 |
6.6 |
17.8 |
|
Iraq |
6 |
3.9 |
3.9 |
21.7 |
|
Jordan |
2 |
1.3 |
1.3 |
23.0 |
|
Kuwait |
1 |
.7 |
.7 |
23.7 |
|
Lebanon |
4 |
2.6 |
2.6 |
26.3 |
|
Oman |
3 |
2.0 |
2.0 |
28.3 |
|
Sudan |
7 |
4.6 |
4.6 |
32.9 |
|
Syria |
12 |
7.9 |
7.9 |
40.8 |
|
UAE |
76 |
50.0 |
50.0 |
90.8 |
|
UK |
5 |
3.3 |
3.3 |
94.1 |
|
USA |
9 |
5.9 |
5.9 |
100.0 |
|
Total |
152 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
Tabel 3.2: Bar Chart showing the frequency of the nationalities of the respondents
Again, it can be seen that most of the employees in the government sectors are between 20 to 39 years old. The results obtained from the analysis is provided in table 3.3 and illustrated in figure 3.3 with the help of a pie chart.
Table 3.3: Frequency table for Age |
|||||
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
||
Valid |
20 – 29 |
50 |
32.9 |
32.9 |
32.9 |
30 – 39 |
57 |
37.5 |
37.5 |
70.4 |
|
40 – 49 |
27 |
17.8 |
17.8 |
88.2 |
|
More than 50 |
18 |
11.8 |
11.8 |
100.0 |
|
Total |
152 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
Table 3.3: Pie Chart showing the frequency of the age of the respondents
Again, it can be seen that most of the employees in the government sectors are have completed bachelor’s degree and some have completed masters’ degree as well. The results obtained from the analysis is provided in table 3.4 and illustrated in figure 3.4 with the help of a pie chart
Table 3.4: Frequency table for Education |
|||||
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
||
Valid |
High School |
1 |
.7 |
.7 |
.7 |
Bachelor Degree |
79 |
52.0 |
52.0 |
52.6 |
|
Master Degree |
53 |
34.9 |
34.9 |
87.5 |
|
Doctorate Degree |
19 |
12.5 |
12.5 |
100.0 |
|
Total |
152 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
Table 3.4: Pie Chart showing the frequency of the education of the respondents
Again, it can be seen that most of the employees in the government sectors are senior employees. The results obtained from the analysis is provided in table 3.5 and illustrated in figure 3.5 with the help of a pie chart
Table 3.5: Frequency table for Job_Level |
|||||
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
||
Valid |
Junior Employee |
39 |
25.7 |
25.7 |
25.7 |
Senior Employee |
59 |
38.8 |
38.8 |
64.5 |
|
Lower Management |
21 |
13.8 |
13.8 |
78.3 |
|
Middle Management |
22 |
14.5 |
14.5 |
92.8 |
|
Top Management |
11 |
7.2 |
7.2 |
100.0 |
|
Total |
152 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
Table 3.5: Pie Chart showing the frequency of the job level of the respondents
Again, it can be seen that most of the employees in the government sectors are employed for 9 to 15 years. The results obtained from the analysis is provided in table 3.6 and illustrated in figure 3.6 with the help of a pie chart
Table 3.6: Frequency table for Working_Years |
|||||
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
||
Valid |
1 Year or less |
21 |
13.8 |
13.8 |
13.8 |
2 to 8 Years |
50 |
32.9 |
32.9 |
46.7 |
|
9 to 15 Years |
68 |
44.7 |
44.7 |
91.4 |
|
More than 15 Years |
13 |
8.6 |
8.6 |
100.0 |
|
Total |
152 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
Table 3.6: Pie Chart showing the frequency of the years of employment of the respondents
Further, descriptive analysis has been performed on the independent variables, dependent variable and the moderator variable. As it can be seen from the analysis that all the variables have a mean rating score close to each other and which is quite high. The standard deviation for the scores are quite close to one which indicates that the scores given by the respondents on the chosen issues are quite close to the average value. Thus, it can be said that most of the employees have given very high ratings. 50 percent of the people have rated 4 or higher in each of the aspects and most of the people have rated 4 in the aspects. Table 3.7 gives the descriptive summary of the variables followed by the histograms for each of the variables showing their distributions.
Table 3.7: Summary of Descriptive Statistics |
||||||
Knowledge_Sharing |
Moderator |
Value |
Performance |
Growth |
||
N |
Valid |
152 |
152 |
152 |
152 |
152 |
Missing |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Mean |
7.2237 |
3.66 |
3.69 |
3.56 |
3.81 |
|
Median |
8.0000 |
4.00 |
4.00 |
4.00 |
4.00 |
|
Mode |
8.00 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
|
Std. Deviation |
1.99734 |
1.151 |
1.016 |
1.211 |
1.105 |
The next analysis that will be performed is the correlation analysis between all the selected variables. It can be seen that the variable knowledge sharing has a strong association with the other variables, moderator, firm value, performance and growth. Thus, these factors can be considered for predicting the knowledge sharing between the employees.
Table 3.8: Correlations |
||||||
Moderator |
Value |
Performance |
Growth |
Knowledge_Sharing |
||
Moderator |
Pearson Correlation |
1 |
.732** |
.566** |
.643** |
.774** |
Sig. (2-tailed) |
.000 |
.000 |
.000 |
.000 |
||
N |
152 |
152 |
152 |
152 |
152 |
|
Value |
Pearson Correlation |
.732** |
1 |
.612** |
.680** |
.718** |
Sig. (2-tailed) |
.000 |
.000 |
.000 |
.000 |
||
N |
152 |
152 |
152 |
152 |
152 |
|
Performance |
Pearson Correlation |
.566** |
.612** |
1 |
.592** |
.600** |
Sig. (2-tailed) |
.000 |
.000 |
.000 |
.000 |
||
N |
152 |
152 |
152 |
152 |
152 |
|
Growth |
Pearson Correlation |
.643** |
.680** |
.592** |
1 |
.640** |
Sig. (2-tailed) |
.000 |
.000 |
.000 |
.000 |
||
N |
152 |
152 |
152 |
152 |
152 |
|
Knowledge_Sharing |
Pearson Correlation |
.774** |
.718** |
.600** |
.640** |
1 |
Sig. (2-tailed) |
.000 |
.000 |
.000 |
.000 |
||
N |
152 |
152 |
152 |
152 |
152 |
|
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). |
A reliability test was conducted on the questionnaire that was used for this research. From the analysis, it has been observed that the reliability statistics (Cronbach’s alpha) has been found to be 0.963, which is close to 1 and is considered very high. Thus, it can be said that the data collected is quite reliable and can be used further for the analysis of the study of knowledge and innovation. The results of the test are given in table 3.9
Table 3.9: Reliability Statistics |
||
Cronbach’s Alpha |
Cronbach’s Alpha Based on Standardized Items |
N of Items |
.963 |
.963 |
32 |
The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure was found to be 0.930 and hence the sample data used was deemed to be adequate for factor analysis. The following table shows the result of the KMO test.
Table 3.10: KMO and Bartlett’s Test |
||
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. |
.930 |
|
Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity |
Approx. Chi-Square |
3062.012 |
df |
496 |
|
Sig. |
.000 |
Five factors from component 1 to component 5 were found to have eigen values greater than 1. The first component after rotation had eigen value of 4.480, accounting for 14.001% of the total variation, the second component accounted for 12.973% with eigen value 4.151. The third component accounted for 12.316% of the variation with eigen value 3.941. The fourth component had eigen value of 3.615 with proportion of explained variation being 11.298 and finally the fifth and final factor with eigen value 3.484 explained 10.887%. The sum total variation explained by the five factors was found to measure up to 61.474% of the total variation in the data. The following table shows the “Total Variance Explained” table output from SPSS.
Table 3.11: Total Variance Explained |
||||||
Component |
Initial Eigenvalues |
Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings |
||||
Total |
% of Variance |
Cumulative % |
Total |
% of Variance |
Cumulative % |
|
1 |
15.005 |
46.892 |
46.892 |
4.480 |
14.001 |
14.001 |
2 |
1.378 |
4.307 |
51.198 |
4.151 |
12.973 |
26.974 |
3 |
1.164 |
3.638 |
54.837 |
3.941 |
12.316 |
39.290 |
4 |
1.095 |
3.423 |
58.260 |
3.615 |
11.298 |
50.587 |
5 |
1.029 |
3.214 |
61.474 |
3.484 |
10.887 |
61.474 |
6 |
.908 |
2.838 |
64.312 |
|||
7 |
.905 |
2.828 |
67.140 |
|||
8 |
.847 |
2.648 |
69.788 |
|||
9 |
.782 |
2.444 |
72.232 |
|||
10 |
.727 |
2.273 |
74.505 |
|||
11 |
.705 |
2.202 |
76.707 |
|||
12 |
.626 |
1.957 |
78.665 |
|||
13 |
.607 |
1.898 |
80.562 |
|||
14 |
.557 |
1.741 |
82.303 |
|||
15 |
.520 |
1.624 |
83.927 |
|||
16 |
.494 |
1.543 |
85.470 |
|||
17 |
.475 |
1.485 |
86.955 |
|||
18 |
.443 |
1.383 |
88.338 |
|||
19 |
.429 |
1.341 |
89.679 |
|||
20 |
.395 |
1.234 |
90.913 |
|||
21 |
.384 |
1.201 |
92.114 |
|||
22 |
.343 |
1.070 |
93.184 |
|||
23 |
.322 |
1.008 |
94.192 |
|||
24 |
.290 |
.905 |
95.097 |
|||
25 |
.277 |
.864 |
95.961 |
|||
26 |
.240 |
.750 |
96.712 |
|||
27 |
.222 |
.695 |
97.407 |
|||
28 |
.206 |
.645 |
98.052 |
|||
29 |
.188 |
.588 |
98.640 |
|||
30 |
.179 |
.561 |
99.201 |
|||
31 |
.151 |
.473 |
99.674 |
|||
32 |
.104 |
.326 |
100.000 |
|||
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. |
An inflection point is a point of change in a situation or in this case a curve. The inflection point in this context is the point which marks the significant drop in rate of change in eigen values as one moves across the factor components. Two inflection points can be seen in the Scree plot shown below. A Scree plot, plots the eigen value of a component against the corresponding component number. It is used to give an idea of the number of factors that ought to be taken into consideration. The first inflection point is at component 2 which is obviously apparent and the second one is at 5. Since the criteria for eigen value is >1, and a small inflection can be seen at component 5 as well after which the curve decreases without any other apparent inflection, the inflection point is taken to be 5 and five of the first factors are taken into consideration.
The rotated component matrix consists of the factor loading values of the variables for each of the selected factor components. The “Rotate Component Matrix” table obtained from SPSS in this case has five components and the loadings for the variables in each component which are above 0.4 were considered for simplification purposes. The matrix shows that component 1 or factor one has 6 variables which contribute more than 0.4 loadings. Component 2 has 7 variables separate from factor 1, component 3 has 6 variables, component 4 and 5 have 4 variables each which contribute substantially to the respective factors.
Table 3.12: Rotated Component Matrixa |
|||||
Component |
|||||
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
Innovation Award competition shall raise the awareness of the importance of innovations. |
.736 |
||||
The award will provide creative and cutting-edge solutions to counter any challenges. |
.694 |
||||
The work environment encourages innovation and increases productivity of the organization. |
.582 |
||||
The policies and procedures of the organization support and encourage creativity and innovation. |
.565 |
||||
Knowledge-sharing culture provides innovative solutions. |
.562 |
||||
The award will engage employees within a framework that supports innovative thinking which will deepen both existing and new innovations. |
.531 |
||||
Applying the excellence or innovation award in the organization will encourage employees to work better in a knowledge-sharing environment. |
|||||
The leadership of the organization believes in creativity, honors and motivates creative employees. |
|||||
External communication and knowledge-sharing are very important between organizations. |
.690 |
||||
The innovative solutions can equip the employee with innovation skills such as critical thinking, analytical thinking, problem-solving and creativity. |
.633 |
||||
There is a good relationship between my organization and other organizations in terms of exchange and knowledge-sharing. |
.627 |
||||
Do you think there is a relationship between innovation thinking and the academic qualifications of the employee? |
.591 |
||||
Our organization accepts all creative ideas from employees to improve the work process. |
.572 |
||||
As an employee, I accept any feedback and learn from mistakes, which is part of our internal knowledge – sharing environment to develop the organization. |
.548 |
||||
The effective communication and knowledge-sharing with other staff are easy and clear. |
.668 |
||||
Our work environment encourages creativity and innovation. |
.619 |
||||
All staff members show willingness and positiveness in sharing knowledge, and I don’t personally find any difficulty with my team on that matter. |
.618 |
||||
The award will engage employees at the organization within a framework that supports innovative thinking. |
.558 |
||||
My organization facilitates a work environment that enhances the concepts of innovation and consolidation of creative practices. |
.549 |
||||
My organization creates the knowledge-sharing culture by changing employee attitudes and |
Essay Writing Service Features
Our Experience
No matter how complex your assignment is, we can find the right professional for your specific task. Contact Essay is an essay writing company that hires only the smartest minds to help you with your projects. Our expertise allows us to provide students with high-quality academic writing, editing & proofreading services.Free Features
Free revision policy
$10Free bibliography & reference
$8Free title page
$8Free formatting
$8How Our Essay Writing Service Works
First, you will need to complete an order form. It's not difficult but, in case there is anything you find not to be clear, you may always call us so that we can guide you through it. On the order form, you will need to include some basic information concerning your order: subject, topic, number of pages, etc. We also encourage our clients to upload any relevant information or sources that will help.
Complete the order formOnce we have all the information and instructions that we need, we select the most suitable writer for your assignment. While everything seems to be clear, the writer, who has complete knowledge of the subject, may need clarification from you. It is at that point that you would receive a call or email from us.
Writer’s assignmentAs soon as the writer has finished, it will be delivered both to the website and to your email address so that you will not miss it. If your deadline is close at hand, we will place a call to you to make sure that you receive the paper on time.
Completing the order and download