Generally, this chapter focuses on the research procedure and process of this study. The chapter includes among other things: research framework, research hypothesis, research procedure, research design, research instruments and measures, data collection. Finally, the chapter provides an explanation of statistical elements or features used in this study, since the research approach used was quantitative.
Research Framework
This was a model IEKKIP (Figure 3.1.) was designed and developed by (Shih & Abdou, 2017) based on the literature review provided in chapter 2, purpose and questions of the research. Having being scrutinised by the advisor, it was approved and validated hence work commenced. As reflected in the research framework, the research will examine the role of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, knowledge sharing, knowledge creation, and innovation on The Gambia Telecom performance.
Figure 3.1. IEKKIP Research framework by Shih and Abdou
Research Hypothesis
Reference to the research questions, research framework and the evidence garnered from the literature review, the researcher was able to establish the following null-hypotheses:
H1: Intrinsic motivation has no effect on knowledge sharing.
H2: Extrinsic motivation has no effect on knowledge sharing.
H3: Knowledge creation has no effect on knowledge sharing.
35 H4: Knowledge sharing has no effect on innovation.
H5: Innovation has no effect on organization performance.
Research Procedure
Figure 3.2. Research procedure
Data Collection
Having fulfilled the necessary pre-conditions for this study as mentioned above, the next step was data collection. The data collection basically used snow bowl sampling method, this to help collect as many samples as possible and, also minimise biasness and other related inaccurate practices. An initial data collection for the pilot study was conducted. It was done during the summer vacation a period when the researcher was on vacation in Gambia. A total
Research Motivation
Identify Research Subject
Review of Literature
Develop Research Framework and Topic
Identify Research Questions and Hypothesis
Identify Research Method
Instrument Selection
Pilot Study Sample Collection
Pilot Study
Main Study Data Collection
Data Analysis
Conclusion and Recommendation
36
of 53 questionnaires were collected for the pilot study from 103 distributed questionnaires.
This data collection process uses hard copy questionnaires that were distributed among employees. For the main study, a total of 206 questionnaires valid were collected from 300 distributed questionnaires sent via email in relation to the six constructs in the study (intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, knowledge sharing, knowledge creation, innovation and organizational performance). The questionnaires comprised of 80 items and 4 demographic questions. The questionnaires were self-reported anonymous instrument which present clear instructions for employees to fill out all items. A 5-point Likert scale was used in this study.
The questionnaires were filled online by employees in the company – (Gamtel/Gamcel). This process was facilitated and coordinated by a friend who also serviced as the contact person during the whole data collection process for in the study.
Measurement Instrument
This study as mentioned earlier used non-experimental, quantitative approach and as such a questionnaire-based survey was used to collect data. The obtained data was eventually used to carry out the investigations. The instrument used in this study constituted of 6 constructs as mentioned earlier, with a total of 80 items. A pilot study was conducted initially to examine the reliability and validity of the questions and this would be determined by the standardised acceptable Cronbach’s Alpha Value of (.70). Hence omit if necessary those questions that may not fit the purpose of the study. The questionnaire consists of six parts and the last part demographic questions. Each of the parts are briefly discussed below.
Part 1: Intrinsic motivation, which comprises of four indicators such as, enjoyment in helping others (IM_EHO), knowledge self-efficacy (IM_KSE), autonomy (IM_AUTO) and competence (IM_COMP), and each has four items used to measure the construct. All together 16 items included.
Part 2: Extrinsic motivation, also comprises of four indicators including, relationship with co-workers (EM_RWC), expected organisational reward (EM_EOR), work environment (EM_WE) and job security (EM_JS). Each indicator is measured using four items, thus a total of 16 items was included.
Part 3: Knowledge creation process, this part consists of four indicators which includes socialisation (KCP_S), combination (KCP_C), internalisation (KCP_I) and externalisation (KCP_E) with each having 3 items. A total of 12 items.
37
Part 4: Innovation, also has three dimensions for example, process innovation (INNO_PI), technological innovation (INNO_TI) and organisational innovation (INNO_OI) with each been measured using four set of items. Total 12 items.
Part: 5: Knowledge sharing, in this category three dimension are included, leadership (KS_L), trust (KS_T) and opportunity (KS_O) each measured by four items with a total of 12 items.
Part 6: Organisational performance, here too has three dimensions. Customer satisfaction (OP_CS), market share (OP_MS) and financial performance (OP_FP) with each having four set of items. Total items 12.
Part 7: Demographics, this section consists of four components, gender, age, level of education and work duration.
Furthermore, from parts 1 to 6, which denote questionnaires, thus a 5-point Likert Scale ranging from (1) Strongly Disagree to (5) strongly Agree was used. Participants were instructed to complete circling the number that corresponds to their opinion. While the final part, will be completed by the participants choosing from the multiple choice provided.
This study adopted the survey instruments from various research papers that were conducted by previous researchers and after thorough peer review it was confirmed and approved by the researcher’s advisor. Table 3.7. illustrates the constructs, items, author(s) and year of article publication.
Construct Coding and Scales
This section provides tables which illustrate the items used in this study. Each construct will be given specific coding and a questionnaire item. For easy data analysis, each item has code that will be used in the process. The final part of the questionnaire represents the demographic questions which includes; gender, age, level education and work duration.
Table 3.1.
Items Measuring Intrinsic Motivation
Construct Coding Items Enjoyment in
I enjoy helping my colleagues in problem solving.
It feels good to help someone accomplish a task.
It feels pleasurable working in teams to achieve a particular objective.
I enjoy helping colleagues in providing assistance in difficult situations.
I have the expertise required to provide valuable knowledge for my organization.
38 KSE_3
KSE_4
I am confident in my ability to provide knowledge that others in my organization consider valuable
.
It does not make any difference whether I share my knowledge with colleagues.
Most other employees can provide more valuable knowledge than I can.
I control the content of my job.
I have a lot of freedom to decide how I perform assigned tasks.
I set my own schedule for completing assigned tasks.
I have the authority to initiate projects at my job.
Competency
I look back on the today’s work with s sense of my job done well.
I feel unhappy when my work is not up standards.
(Continued) Table 3.2.
Items Measuring Extrinsic Motivation
Construct Coding Items Relationship company which promotes healthy discussions.
I feel safe and secured whenever I am at work.
People often get alone well in our company especially when it comes to team work.
Co-workers often take colleagues for lunch as a form
Considering all my efforts and achievements, I receive the respect and prestige I deserve at work.
Considering all my efforts and achievements, my salary/income is adequate.
I always look forward to higher bonus for helping others gain valuable knowledge.
Overall, my work area is appropriate for my work.
The variety of work environments needed for my job is available to me.
I like the style/quality of my furniture.
My work environment is too noisy.
39
How likely do you think it is that you will lose your job or be laid off in the next year?
How satisfied are you with the amount of job security you have?
I have experienced or I expect to experience an undesirable change in my work situation.
My job security is poor.
(Continued) Table 3.3.
Items Measuring Knowledge Creation Process
Construct Coding Items Socialization
(S; 3 items)
S_1 S_2 S_3
My company stresses sharing experience with employees and customers.
My company stresses finding new strategies and market opportunities by wandering inside the firm.
My company stresses creating a work environment that allows peers to understand the craftsmanship and expertise.
Combination
My company stresses exchanging various ideas and dialogues.
My company stresses planning strategies by using published literature and forecasting.
My company stresses building up materials by gathering management figures and technical information.
My company stresses creating manuals and documents on
My company stresses forming teams as a model, conducting experiments, and sharing results with entire departments.
My company stresses searching and sharing new values and thoughts.
My company stresses benchmarking and test marketing.
40 Table 3.4.
Items Measuring Innovation
Construct Coding Items Process speed in comparison with our competitors.
The nature of delivery process in our company is always different compared with that of our main competitors.
Company encourages to use process innovation to understand the information of customers, suppliers and competitors.
Technological
There is rapid change in technology in our company.
The changes in technology has provided huge opportunities in our company.
The technological breakthroughs in our company has made a big changes in the processing of information.
Company can fast its’ service to customers because company’s technology innovation.
Company improves internal communication efficiency because company’s organizational innovation.
Company cross-cultural communications ability is good for keeping ahead of market.
Company continues to import new way of management and knowledge to keep flexibility.
Employees highly accept the new way of innovation management.
41 Table 3.5.
Items Measuring Knowledge Sharing
Construct Coding Items Leadership
The leadership thinks that encouraging knowledge sharing with colleagues is beneficial.
I believe leaders in my company make cooperative and team decision.
The management is keen to see that the staff are happy to share their knowledge with colleagues.
I sometimes feel senior staff are unwilling to learn from junior staff because they think they have a higher position, more experience and/or authority in the company.
Trust helping hand if I encounter difficulties.
I sometimes feel uncertain to share information with colleagues if I feel there is no confidentiality.
I can always rely on my colleagues for clarity whenever the need arises.
I can always speak my mind whenever I see an inappropriate thing happening.
Company provides training programs, structured work teams, colloquia, etc. to facilitate knowledge sharing.
Company’s infrastructure enables employees to access the shared knowledge effectively.
I am satisfied with the job-related training my organisation offers.
I am satisfied that I have the opportunities to apply my talents and expertise.
42 Table 3.6.
Items Measuring Organizational Performance
Construct Coding Items Customer
Our competitive advantage is based on understanding our customers' needs.
We regularly monitor and assess our commitment to customer satisfaction.
The accomplishment of our goals is based on the satisfaction of our customers.
We continuously seek to increase the value we provide to our customers.
Comparing to company’s competitors, company’s market development is good.
Comparing to company’s competitors, company’s market share is high.
Comparing to company’s competitors, company’s Sales growth is satisfying.
Comparing to company’s competitors, the products of company’s brand is popular.
Comparing to company’s competitors, company’s profitability is satisfying.
Comparing to company’s competitors, company’s Cost control is good.
Comparing to company’s competitors, company’s Cash flow from operations is satisfying.
Comparing to company’s competitors, company’s return on investment is good.
43 Table 3.7.
Summary of Instrument Used in This Study
Construct Coding Number of
Items Author (s) Year Knowledge Creation Process KCP_S
KCP_C
For any academic research conducted, the reliability and validity are features that must tested to give genuine representation of item fit. In most instances for master thesis writing the scales used in the questionnaire are borrowed from other researchers, therefore re-examining the reliability and validity is important. The validity of an item is the strength at which it measures what the researchers claim it measures. Reliability on the other hand, checks for the consistency of the items with time. Reliability and validity could be regarded the spine of any credible research, therefore it must be handled with professionalism and judiciously protected in order not to be misplaced.
The significance of reliability in a study cannot be overemphasised. Virtually for any further investigation to effect, the reliability of the instruments must be examined. Therefore, it is very important to take into account the pivotal role it plays in a study. To be able to justify
44
the internal and external consistency of the measurement instruments, reliability helps in determining or detecting the consistency of the instruments.
Table 3.8.
Reliability of Instrument
Reliability Theoretical Meaning Achieving Reliability Reliability Analysis (Neuman, 2014) described
that reliability is the
dependability or consistency of the measure of a variable.
Based on the evidence from the pilot test with reference to the Cronbach’s Alpha of the constructs being equal instruments are but it also takes into consideration whether the measures are measuring what is supposed to measure. Hence the crucial role of validity comes to play in trying to settle the midst.
Table 3.9.
Validity of Instrument
Validity Type Theoretical Meaning Achieving Validity Face Validity It is a type of validity measurement in
which an indictor proves as a measure of a construct for which it is designed (Neuman, 2014)
The instruments are explicit in terms of variable characteristics and with clear instructions for employee understanding.
Criterion Validity It is a type of measurement validity that relies on some independent, outside verification (Neuman, 2011)
A pilot test was initially carried out on the questionnaire
Construct Validity This is a type of validity measurement that uses multiple indicators and has two segments: how well the indicators of one construct converge or how well the indicators of different constructs diverge (Neuman, 2011)
Divergent validity is established using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)
Note. Adapted from “Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches,” by W. L. Neuman. 2011, p. 165.
Copyright by Pearson Education, Inc.
45
Data Analysis Partial Least Square (PLS)
For both the pilot and main study, the collected data was analysed using PLS. According to Abdi, (2003), partial least square is a statistical tool that combines component analysis and multiple regression. Hence, SmartPLS 3.0 software was used to analysis obtained data in this study to perform a confirmatory factor analysis and path analysis. To determine the internal consistency reliability in an exploratory study, value above 0.70 should attained to be considered acceptable. The outer loadings of each indicator measure its reliability. To confirm or prove the validity of each indicator and how much of the variance can be explained by that particular variable, the loadings helps to determine that.
In order to validate the research model and confirm the internal consistency reliability, this study would use features such as, path coefficients, coefficient of determination (R2) which also called multiple correlation coefficient. The R square is defined as “as the proportion of variance” and it was explained by the regression model to make it important as a determinant measure of success in predicting the dependable variable from the independent variables (Nagelherke, 1991). Furthermore, the t-value and bootstrapping would be included in the process. In order to determine the relationship between constructs, the direction of the relationship and the significance, path coefficients would help identify.
In PLS, the hypotheses testing is enabled by using a statistical technique of bootstrapping.
This tools in PLS duplicates the sample and retrieve the t-value to examining the significance of the sample. Henseler et al. (2009), explained that bootstrapping the sample allows the estimated coefficients in PLS-SEM program to be verified for their significance level. Thus, Hair et al. (2011), emphasized that critical t-values from two-tailed test are 1.65, 1.96 and 2.58, where; 1.65 represents weak significance, 1.96 moderate and 2.58 represents strong significance respectively.
46