Leadership & Knowleadge Sharing

ApplicationofStructuralEquationModellingtoEvaluatetheEffectofTransformationalLeadershiponKnowledgeSharing

SawasnAlhusseiniandIbrahimElbeltagiUniversityofPlymouth,SchoolofManagement,Plymouth,[email protected]@plymouth.ac.ukAbstract: Leadership style has been suggested as an important factor affecting knowledge sharing in organisations.Transformationalleadershiphasbeenacknowledgedashavingapositiveinfluenceonknowledgesharing.However,thereisa lackofempirical studiesexamining the relationshipbetween transformational leadershipandknowledgesharing inhigher education within developing countries such as Iraq. This research seeks to evaluate the impact of the fourcomponentsoftransformational leadership,namely idealised influence, inspirationalmotivation, intellectualstimulation,and individualised consideration,onknowledge sharing (bothdonatingand collecting).250usablequestionnaireswerecollected from public higher education institutions in Iraq. Structural equationmodellingwith AMOS 20 confirms theimportance of transformational leadership in encouraging knowledgesharing culture in higher education. The resultsreveal that,of the four componentsof transformational leadership, intellectual stimulationhas the strongesteffectonboththedonatingandcollectingofknowledge.Guidelinesaredevelopedforacademicsaswellasleaders,andevidenceisprovided insupportof theuseof transformational leadership topromoteknowledgesharingwithinhighereducation indeveloping countries, particularly Iraq. The implications of the findings, along with some potential applications andsuggestionsforfutureresearch,arediscussed.Keywords:transformationalleadership,knowledgedonating,knowledgecollecting,structuralequationmodelling

1. IntroductionThehighereducation(HE)sectoriscomingunderpressurefromadynamicenvironmentcharacterisedbyrapidtechnological change and increased demand (Mathew, 2010). These external pressures are forcing theeducation sector to become, not only more efficient and effective, but also more innovative. Academicinstitutionsplayan importantrole inpromotingandsustainingeconomicboomsthroughtheirresearch,andthe creation of a skilled graduateworkforce. They are suppliers of training, expertise, and personnel forvariousindustries(Maponya,2005).Knowledgeandknowledgemanagement(KM)arerecognisedasthemostsignificantresourcesforcreatingacompetitiveadvantage,andthekeytoenhancinginnovation(Nonakaetal.,2006).KManditstechniquesareuseful in theaccomplishmentoforganisational tasks. Itcan lead tobetterdecisionmakingcapabilities,andreduceproductdevelopment time (Hislop,2013).KM involves thecreating,sharingandusingofknowledge(HumayunandGang,2013).IntermsoftheapplicationofKMinitiatives,theimportanceofcreatingacultureofknowledgesharing(KS)amongthemembersofanorganisationhasbeennoted,assuchaculturehelpstoconvert the tacit knowledge embedded in individuals into explicit knowledge through interaction (Hislop,2013).IntheHEenvironment,KSisconsideredtobeabuildingblockofefficientperformanceandtoplayakeyroleinenhancingtheinnovationofuniversities(Mathew,2010).Theproblemtodayisnothowtofindknowledgebuthow toshare it.Thebigchallenge foranyorganisation is figuringouthow topromoteaKScultureandmakeknowledgeavailable(Hislop,2013).Prior literaturehaspointedout that leadershipstyle isoneof themost important factorsaffectingKS,withcertainleadershavingtheabilitytoencourageaKSculture.Theliteratureacknowledgesthattransformationalleadership (TL) is themost important style of leadership, increasing goaldirected behaviour exhibited byfollowers,andthusenhancingorganisationalperformance(BassandRiggio,2012).UnderTL,thefollowersfeelrespect,and trust towards their leader,andarewilling todomore than isexpectedof them (Bass,1985).Transformational leaders can contribute to organisational learning and employees creativity. They canencourage followers toparticipate ineducationalprogrammes anddevelop the skills theyneed to achieveexceptionalperformance(Yukl,2013).

1

SawasnAlhusseiniandIbrahimElbeltagi

IndevelopingcountrieslikeIraq,theHEsectorisfacingrapidlychangingchallengesthatrequireextraordinaryleadership.Aseducationalmarketsarebecomingincreasinglyglobal,theabilityofIraqseducationsystemtoreachaglobalmarketwilldependonthechangesitmakestoitssystems,methods,structure,andcurricula.Previous studieshave lookedat the relationshipbetweenTLandKS (Leeetal.,2010,HumayunandGang,2013).However, there is a lackof empirical studieson TL and its impacton teaching staffsdonation andcollectionofknowledgewithindevelopingcountries,likeIraq.Thus,thisresearchaimstoexaminetheimpactof the fourcomponentsofTLon theKSprocessesofdonatingandcollecting, in thecontextof the IraqiHEsector.

2. TransformationalleadershipandknowledgesharingResearchershavepaidmuchattentiontoTL.ThetheorywasintroducedbyBass(1985),basedontheworkofBurns (1978),when hewas trying to find relationships between political leaders and their followers. Thisleadership style refers toattempts tomake changes thatwill increaseorganisationaleffectivenessand theperformanceofthefollowers,bytransformingthelatterspersonalvaluesandselfconcepts.BassandRiggio(2012)suggestedfourbehavioursneededinordertopractiseTL,namely idealised influence,inspirationalmotivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualised consideration. Transformational leadersprovideidealisedinfluencewhentheyactasrolemodels,expressconfidenceintheorganisationalvision,andinstil trust, respect, admiration, and faith amongorganisationalmembers. Such leadershave the ability tofostercooperationamongtheirfollowers. Inspirationalmotivationreferstothedegreetowhich leadersareable to inspire their followers to become committed to the organisational vision. They are able to buildrelationshipswith their followers through interactive communication, and encourage individual and teamspiritamongorganisationalmembers.Intellectualstimulationreferstothedegreetowhichleadersstimulatetheirfollowerstotrynewapproaches,and to reexamineandchallengeexistingassumptions.Leaderswhodemonstrate thisbehaviourencourageimagination,anddevelop innovativewaysofdealingwithorganisational issues. Individualisedconsiderationdescribes the extent to which leaders build interactive relationshipswith their followers and pay specialattentiontotheirneeds.Theyshowsupport,considertheirskills,andabilities,andshowappreciationfortheirwork. Leaders operating according to this style act as coaches and mentors when trying to assist theirfollowers to become fully actualised and to develop jobrelated competencies, and show empathy andconsideration.Mathew (2010) indicated that knowledge is amix of data, information, skills, and experiences,which arerelated to each other andwhichmay be used inmaking decisions. The prior literature has distinguishedbetween tacit and explicit knowledge. Tacit knowledge describes the personal, the subjective, and theintangible (Nonaka et al., 2006). It is embedded in theminds of people, is accumulated through study,learning, and experiences, and is developed through social interaction (von Krogh et al., 2012). Thus it isdifficult to share.On the other hand, explicit knowledge denotes knowledge that is articulated, objective,externalisedandcaptured,andwhichhasamoretangibleformat(Nonakaetal.,2006).Thistypeofknowledgeis saved in documents and found in books, databases, and regulations,making it easily shared betweenindividualsandorganisations.HumayunandGang(2013)statedthatKMconsistsofacquisition,sharingandapplication.TheyexplainedthateffectivenessandinnovationisachievedwhenKSistakenintoconsiderationinKM.Hislop(2013)showedthattacitKSamongorganisationalmembersisoneofthemostimportantaspectsofsuccessinKM.Itplaysalargeroleinincreasingthecompetitiveadvantageofanorganisationandiskeytoenhancingcreativity(vonKroghetal.,2012).KSreferstoatwodimensionalprocesswherebyorganisationalmembersshareandexchangetheirtacitandexplicit knowledge.Daily interaction creates new knowledge through the process of knowledge exchange,donation, and collection (Hooff andWeenen, 2004). The purpose of donating knowledge is to see tacitknowledge become explicit and owned by the entire group. Meanwhile, collecting knowledge refers toconsultingpeopleandseekingknowledgeout,whichinturnimprovestheentirestockofknowledgeavailabletotheorganisation(vonKroghetal.,2012).

2


TL is able to promote and cultivate norms and values that encourage KS. Transformational leaders withidealised influenced instil admiration, respect, pride, and faith, and tend to emphasise the importance ofhavingacollectivesenseoftheorganisationsmission(BassandRiggio,2012).Whenmembersfeelthattheirleadershaveconfidenceinthem,trustintheircapabilities,careabouttheirworkandappreciatetheireffortstocreateknowledge, forexamplebyhavingnew ideas, theywillbemorewilling togive theiropinionsandshareknowledge(Leeetal.,2010).Employeesworkingunderleaderswhopractiseinspirationalmotivationareencouragedtoachievetheorganisationalvisionbecauseoftheindividualandteamspiritthatiscreated,andareinspiredtoleadtaskorientedcommitmentbysharingthatvision(Saenz,2011).

When they exhibit intellectual stimulation, transformational leaders generate different ways of thinking,challenge followers assumptions, and seeknew solutions toproblems frommultipleperspectives. Leaderswhopromotediscussion,reviews,andtheopensharingofideasaremorelikelytoencourageKSactivities(vonKrogh et al., 2012). Leaderswho use individualised consideration are aware of their followers needs andconcernsasindividuals,anddeveloptheirstrengthsthroughcoachingandconsulting(BassandRiggio,2012).Leaderswhoareawareoftheuniqueknowledgeoftheirmembersandlistentotheirviewsaremorelikelytomotivatethemtosharetheirknowledgewithothers(Shihetal.,2012).

Previous literaturehasstudiedTLfromdifferentcontexts.For instance,HumayunandGang(2013) indicatedthat leadershave thepower toaffect the intentionsofemployees to collect knowledgebydeveloping theknowledge culture within organisation. Shih et al. (2012) showed that TL can increase R&D workersknowledgeexchangebehaviourbycreatingatrustingclimate, intheirstudyofTaiwaneseelectronicproductmanufacturers.Sebaetal.(2012)foundthat,withinpublicorganisationsintheUAE,themainbarrierstothepractisingofKSactivitiesamongemployeesweretrust,theorganisationalstructure,andtheleadershipstyle.

In theHE sector, Jahani et al. (2011)demonstrated that transformational leaders encourage individuals tobreak throughboundariesandshare theirexperienceswithinandacrossdepartments.Meanwhile,Mathew(2010)arguedthatalackofleadershipsupportisthemainbarriertoKSinhighereducationinstitutions(HEIs),makingitdifficultforpeopletouseknowledge,andsharedataandinformationeffectively.

Although,theabovestudieslookedattherelationbetweenTLandKS,researchonTLhasnotfullyexaminedthemechanismsthroughwhichTLshapesteachingstaffsperformanceandbehaviour(Yukl,2013),andthereisa call for research intohow leadershipaffectsKS inHEwithindeveloping countries (Jahanietal.,2011),particularlyIraq.Therefore,thisresearchproposesthefollowinghypotheses:

H1: TL, through (H1a) idealised influence, (H1b) inspirational motivation, (H1c) intellectualstimulation,and(H1d)individualisedconsideration,willhaveapositiveeffectonthedonatingofknowledgeinIraqsHEIs.

H2: TL, through (H2a) idealised influence, (H2b) inspirational motivation, (H2c) intellectualstimulation,and(H2d)individualisedconsideration,willhaveapositiveeffectonthecollectingofknowledgeinIraqsHEIs.

3. Method

This research used a quantitative approach to examine the effects of the four components of TL on thedonatingandcollectingofknowledge.Quantitative research seeks to test theoriesbyexamining thecausalrelationshipsamongvariables(Saundersetal.,2012).AselfadministeredquestionnairewithafivepointLikertscale ranging from1= (stronglydisagree) to5= (stronglyagree)wasused.Thequestionnairewas translatedintoArabicusingthetranslationbacktranslationprocedure.

3.1 MeasuresTLwasmeasuredusingamultifactorleadershipquestionnaire(MLQ)(BassandAvolio,2000).Eachparticipantwas asked to rate aspects of his/her leadership behaviour related to each of the four TL components: 1)idealised influence, underwhich style leaders encourage theirmembers of staff to have pride, faith, andrespect in themselves and their university. (2) inspirationalmotivation, throughwhich leaders attempt tostimulatetheirmembersofstaffbymotivatingthemtoget involved inasharedvisionfortheuniversity,(3)intellectualstimulation,bywhich leaderspromote learningandcreativityamongstaff,and(4) individualisedconsideration, throughwhich leadersprovide satisfaction tomembersof staffby advising, supporting, and

3


coachingthemand listeningtotheir individualneeds,thusallowingthemtodevelopandselfactualise.Thescalecontained21items(questions):7foridealisedinfluenced,5forinspirationalmotivation,5forintellectualstimulationand4forindividualisedconsideration.KS is described in this paper as the exchange of knowledge, experiences, and skills regarding teachingoperations and administrative issues, among members of staff, through the donating and collecting ofknowledge.TheoriginalinstrumentofHooffandWeenen(2004)consistedof12items,proventobevalidandreliable

3.2 DatacollectionThequestionnairesweredistributedby researchersusing thedelivery andcollectionmethod.Membersofstaff fromeightpubliccolleges in Iraqwere randomly selected to receive thequestionnairesand rate theirleaders (DeputyDeansandHeadsofDepartment).By theyear2011, theMinistryofHigherEducationandScientific Research (MOHESR) in Iraq had 69 public universities and institutes under its supervision. Theseuniversities educate their students indifferent specialisations, leading to graduate certificates at theB.Sc.,M.Sc.,andPh.D.levels.Thelateststatisticsshowedthenumberofstudentsenrolledinpubliceducationtobe421,987,including21,121postgraduatestudents.2,140scholarshipshadbeenawarded(MOHESR,2012).Stratified random samplingwas used in this research. This type of sampling ismore effective than othermethodswhen thepopulationof the study covers a large geographical area andwhen the researcher caneasilyaccess theentirepopulation (Saundersetal.,2012).400questionnairesweredistributed to theeightcolleges.Ofthese,250werereturnedandusablefortheanalysis.

4. FindingsTheaimofthisresearchwastoexaminetheeffectofthefourcomponentsofTLonKSprocessesinIraqiHE.Structuralequationmodelling(SEM)wasperformed,usingAMOS20.Thismethodhelpsresearcherstobuildmodelsofcomplexrelationshipsandanalysedirectandindirecteffects(Hairetal.,2010).Themeasurementmodel addresses and evaluates the reliability and validityof the indicators formeasuring thehypotheticalconstructs,whilethestructuralmodeladdressestherelationsamongtheunobservedvariablesanddealswiththecausalrelationsamongthevariablesaccordingtotheproposedhypotheses(Hairetal.,2010).

4.1 EvaluatingthemeasurementmodelThevalidityofthemeasurementmodeldependsonestablishingacceptable levelsofgoodnessof fit forthemodel,and finding specificevidenceof constructvalidity (Hairetal.,2010).Toevaluate thevalidityof themeasurementmodel,constructvalidity,consisting,ofconvergentanddiscriminantvalidity,wasassessed.Thesixfactors, idealised influence, inspirationalmotivation, intellectualstimulation, individualisedconsideration,knowledgedonating,andknowledgecollecting,weremeasuredusing33items.Theconvergentvalidityofthemodelwas evaluated through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) using AMOS 20,which significant factorloadings of 0.5 or higherwere investigated (Hair et al., 2010), and the average variance extracted (AVE)measurewasrequiredtobe0.5orhigher(FornellandLarcker,1981).Nineitemswithfactorloadingsoflessthan0.5,andthereforenotmakingagoodcontributiontotheirpredictedconstructs,weredeletedfromthescale.Reliabilitywasassessedbasedon theCronbachsalphasandcomposite reliability (CR),eachofwhichwasrequiredtoexceed0.7(Hairetal.,2010).Table(1)showstheconvergentvalidityandinternalreliabilitytobesatisfactory,sinceallfactorloadings,CRandAVEvaluesareacceptableandsignificant:Discriminantvalidityreferstotheextenttowhichaconstructistrulydifferentfromtheotherconstructs,themaingoalbeingtoestablishinternalconsistency.Thisresearchevaluateddiscriminantvalidityusingtherulesof Fornell and Larcker (1981).According to them, theAVE shouldbe greater than the squared correlationbetween twoconstructs.Table2 shows themeansand standarddeviations.Additionally, it shows that thevariancesextractedfromtheconstructsweregreaterthanallofthesquaredcorrelationsbetweenitems.Thegoodnessofthemodelwasfoundtobeacceptable,asshowninTable3,include:(1)Absolutefitindices,thisincludesX/df,andtherootmeansquareerrorofapproximation(RMSEA),and(2)theModelcomparisonindices.The fit indicesusedmostoften are the incremental fitmeasurement,which includes anormed fitindex(NFI),acomparativefitindex(CFI),andTheTuckerLewisindex(TLI)(Hairetal.,2010)

4


Table1:ResultsofCFA

Factor Itemcode Loading AVE CRID1 0.790ID2 0.810ID3 0.880

Idealisedinfluence

ID4 0.790

0.78 0.73 0.79

IM5 0.800IM6 0.880IM7 0.870

Inspirationalmotivation

IM8 0.790

0.80 0.75 0.80

IS9 0.750IS10 0.730IS11 0.857

Intellectualstimulation

IS12 0.853

0.82 0.74 0.83

IC13 0.750IC14 0.870IC15 0.860

Individualisedconsideration

IC16 0.770

0.85 0.73 0.85

KD17 0.890KD18 0.710KD19 0.690

Knowledgedonating

KD20 0.880

0.81 0.70 0.80

KC21 0.700KC22 0.690KC23 0.860

Knowledgecollecting

KC24 0.853

0.82 0.72 0.83

Table2:Descriptiveanddiscriminantvalidityanalysis

Factor Mean S.D 1 2 3 4 5 61idealisedinfluence 3.310 0.915 0.73

2inspirationalmotivation 3.335 0.896 0.345 0.75

3intellectualstimulation 3.470 0.876 0.320 0.160 0.74 4individualisedconsideration 3.542 0.892 0.251 0.315 0.202 0.73

5knowledgedonating 3.462 0.879 0.235 0.290 0.463 0.354 0.70

6knowledgecollecting 3.520 0.880 0.248 0.294 0.478 0.362 0.421 0.72

Note:S.D=standarddeviation

Table3:Thefitindicesofthemodel

Fitindices TL KS Target/df 1.553 1.870 25CFI 0.970 0.950 0.90NFI 0.968 0.974 0.90TLI 0.971 0.950 0.90

RMSEA 0.032 0.041


Table4:Findingsofthestructuralmodel

Hypothesis Pathofthehypothesis Estimate CRH1a Idealiseddonating 0.52** 9.807H1b Inspirationaldonating 0.55** 9.330H1c Intellectualdonating 0.68* 10.073H1d Individualiseddonating 0.64* 9.870

H1

H1(ad) TLdonating 0.601** 9.765H2a Idealisedcollecting 0.58** 9.321H2b Inspirationalcollecting 0.60** 9.449H2c Intellectualcollecting 0.73* 9.952H2d Individualisedcollecting 0.71* 9.891

H2

H2(ad) TLcollecting 0.624** 9.698H1,H2 H1,H2(ad) TLKS 0.612** 9.415

Note:p*


within the educational environment in Iraq as itwillhelps teaching staff to connectwith and support thecommonvision.Intermsofintellectualstimulation,transformationalleaderscanfacilitatethesearchfornewapproachesandtheestablishmentof a common vision ((Saenz,2011). Leadersexhibiting thisbehaviourhave theability tochallengefollowersassumptionsandencouragethemtolookfornewwaysofsolvingproblemsfrommultipleperspectives (Bass andRiggio, 2012).When leaders place a high value on knowledge and encourage theirfollowerstoquestion,anddiscusstheirwork,theyempowerthem,andaremorelikelytoencourageKSamongthem (Lee et al., 2010). The findings of this study demonstrate that leaders in Iraqs public HEIs createopportunities that stimulate and encourage KS among teaching staffby challenging them to find technicalsolutions toproblems.This confirms the resultsofprevious studies (Shihetal.,2012;HumayunandGang,2013),whichhave indicated that leaderswhopromote carefulproblem solving to their employeeswillbemorelikelytoimproveKS.Leadersusing individualisedconsiderationtendtopayattentiontotheneedsoftheirfollowersanddeveloptheir strengths through coaching and mentoring (Bass and Riggio, 2012). This research has found thatmembersofstafffeelthattheirleaderssupportandencouragethemtosharetheircontributions,collaborate,and enact joint decisionmaking processes. They encourage the sharing of knowledge by coaching themeffectivelytocommunicatewitheachother,andbylisteningtotheirsuggestionsonteachingoperationsandadministrativeissuesthroughformalandinformalmeetings.

6. ConclusionsandimplicationsoftheresearchThisresearchaimed toexamine the impactof the fourcomponentsofTLon thecollectinganddonatingofknowledge inpublicHE in Iraq.The research strengthensand supports the linkbetweenTLandKSamongteachingstaff,showingthatTLprovidessupport,vision,encouragement,andtrust,andpromotesaKSculture.ThisgivesanindicationastothemostimportantfactorsthatinfluenceKSandprovidesaclueregardinghowHEIscanpromoteKSactivities.TheanalysisoftheeffectsinthisresearchhasclarifiedspecificaspectsofTL(idealisedinfluence,inspirationalmotivation, intellectualstimulationand individualisedconsideration)andtheir impactsonthecollectionanddonationofknowledgebymembersofstaff.ThisinformationcanprovideleaderswithideasaboutthestyleofbehaviourtheycanusetopromoteKSamongtheirteachingstaff,unlikepreviousstudies (Shihetal.,2012)thatstudiedTLasasinglefactorandthusdidnotidentifyspecificTLbehavioursandtheireffectsonKS.ThefindingsofthecurrentresearchextendandconfirmtheuniversalityofTLtheoryanditseffectsacrosscultures(Bass,1985),bytakingIraqasacasestudyofadevelopingcountrywithinwhichtoexaminetheimpactofTLonKS.Thefindingsindicatethat,TLplaysasignificantroleinpromotingaKScultureinpublicHEIsinIraq.From a methodological perspective, this research supports and achieves validity and reliability for theconstructsmeasuringTL,andKS,inanewgeographicalarea.ThisgivesgreateraccuracytotheresultsforIraqiHEIs,andprovidesavaluableexampleofamethodologythatresearchersandacademicsmightusetotracktheextentofTLanditseffectsonKSinother,similarresearch.This research has implications for academics and policymakers in public HEIs. The study found TL to beessentialtothepracticeofKSamongteachingstaffwithinHEIs.Transformational leadershavetheabilitytocreateacultureoftrustandaffectivecommitment,whichisnecessaryinordertoencouragestaffmemberstoovercome theirnatural resistance to sharingwhat they know. Such leaders can stimulate their faculties topractiseKSactivitiesbyencouraging them toestablish sessions, lectures,workshops,andother formalandinformalmeansofcommunicationinordertoshareandexchangetheirlearningandexperiences.Thisresearchhasfurtherrevealedthat intellectualstimulation isthestrongestpredictorforthepractisingofKS.Thus,leadersshouldencouragediscussionandthesharingofknowledgeamongteachingstaffbyseekingnewapproachesregardingteachingmaterials,anddevelopingskillsthroughbrainstorming,regularmeetingsandseminarswithinandoutsidetheirdepartmentsandcolleges.

7


7. LimitationsandfutureresearchThesampleinthisstudywaslimitedtothepublicHEsector,andthereforetheresultscannotbegeneralisedtoothersectors.Furtherstudiesshouldexploresuchrelationshipsinothersectors,suchasindustry,toexaminewhethertheresultsofthecurrentstudyaresupportedornot.Intermsofgeographicalarea,thecontextwasdevelopingcountries,specificallyIraq.Hence,thefindingsmaynotbegeneralisabletoothercountries,sinceculturaldifferencesmayleadtodifferentinfluences(Hofstedeetal.,2010).Forfurthervalidity,themodelcouldbeextendedtodifferentcities,countriesandcultures,andthismayleadtodifferentfindings.TheresearchfocusedonTLasanenablerforKS.However,itdidnotconsiderotherenablersthatarecriticaltoKS,suchasindividualcharacteristicsororganisationalclimate.Futureresearchcouldstudysuchfactors.

Appendix1

Factor ItemInstilsprideinbeingassociatedwithhim/her*

GoesbeyondselfinterestforthegoodofthegroupTalksabouthis/herimportantvaluesandbeliefs*

EmphasisestheimportanceofhavingacollectivesenseConsidersthemoralandethicalconsequencesofdecisions*

Actsinwaysthatbuildmyrespect

Idealisedinfluence

DisplaysasenseofpowerandconfidenceArticulatesacompellingvisionofthefuture*

TalksoptimisticallyaboutthefutureTalksenthusiasticallyaboutwhatneedstobeaccomplishedDevelopsateamattitudeandspiritamongmembersofstaff

Inspirationalmotivateon

ExpressesconfidencethatgoalswillbeachievedReexaminescriticalassumptionstoquestionwhethertheyareappropriate

Suggestsnewwaysoflookingathowtocompleteassignments*Seeksdifferentperspectiveswhensolvingproblems

Getsmetolookatproblemsfrommanydifferentangles

Intellectualstimolation

EncouragesmetorethinkideasthathaveneverbeenquestionedbeforeSpendstimeteachingandcoaching

TreatsmeasanindividualratherthanjustasamemberofagroupConsidersmeashavingdifferentneeds,abilitiesandaspirationstoothers

Individualisedconsideration

HelpsmetodevelopmystrengthsKnowledgesharingwithcolleaguesisconsiderednormalthinginmydepartment

WhenIhavelearnedsomethingnewregardingteachingprofession,Itellmycolleaguesinmydepartmentaboutit.*

Whentheyhavelearnedsomethingnew,mycolleagueswithinmydepartmenttellmeaboutitWhentheyhavelearnedsomethingnew,colleaguesoutsideofmydepartmenttellmeaboutit.WhenIhavelearnedsomethingnewregardingteachingprofession,Itellcolleaguesoutsideof

mydepartmentaboutit.

Knowledgedonating

Knowledgesharingwithcolleaguesisconsiderednormalthingoutsideofmydepartment.*IshareanyinformationIhavewithcolleagueswithinmydepartmentwhentheyaskforit.

Colleagueswithinmydepartmentshareknowledgewithme,whenIaskthemaboutit.Isharemyskillswithcolleagueswithinmydepartmentwhentheyaskmeto.*

IshareinformationIhavewithcolleaguesoutsideofmydepartment,whentheyaskmeto.ColleaguesoutsideofmydepartmenttellmewhattheyknowwhenIaskthemaboutit.*

Knowledgecollecting

Isharemyskillswithcolleaguesoutsideofmydepartment,whentheyaskmeto.

Note:(*)ReferstoitemsthatweredeletedaftertherunningoftheCFA.

References

Bass,B.(1985)Leadershipandperformancebeyondexpectations,FreePress,NewYork.Bass,B.,andAvolio,B.(2000)Themultifactorleadershipquestionnaire5xshortform,Redwood,CA:MindGarden.Bass,B.,andRiggio,R.(2012)Transformationalleadership,2nded.,LawrenceErlbaumAssociates,Inc,US.

8


Bollinger,A.,andSmith,R.(2001).Managingorganizationalknowledgeasastrategicasset,JournalofKnowledgeManagement,Vol.5,No.1,pp.818.

Burns,J.M.(1978)Leadership,Harper&Row,NewYork.Fornell,C.,andLarcker,D.(1981).Evaluatingstructuralequationmodelswithunobservablevariablesandmeasurement

error,JournalofMarketingResearch,Vol.18,No.1,pp.3950.Hair,J.,Black,W.,Babin,B.,andAnderson,R.(2010)Multivariatedataanalysis:Aglobalperspective,7thedition,Pearson

PrenticeHall,US.Hislop,D.(2013)Knowledgemanagementinorganisations,3rded.,OxforUniversityPress,UK.Hofstede,G.,Hofstede,G.,andMinkov,M.(2010)Culturesandorganisationssoftwareofthemind,3rdedition,McGraw

Hill,US.Hooff,V.,andWeenen,F.(2004).Committedtoshare:CommitmentandCMCuseasantecedentsofknowledgesharing,

KnowledgeandProcessManagement,Vol.11,No.1,pp.1324.Humayun,M.,andGang,C.(2013).ImpactofleadershipsupportonKMSbasedknowledgeseekingbehavior:Lessons

learned,ResearchJournalofAppliedSciences,EngineeringandTechnology,Vol.5,No.1,pp.218223.Jahani,S.,Ramaya,T.,andEffendi,A.(2011).Isrewardsystemandleadershipimportantinknowledgesharingamong

academics?,AmericanJournalofEconomicsandBusinessAdministration,Vol.3,No.1,pp.8794.Lee,P.,Gillespie,N.,Mann,L.,andWearing,A.(2010).Leadershipandtrus:Theireffectonknowledgesharingandteam

performance,ManagementLearning,Vol.41,No.4,pp.473491.Maponya,O.(2005).Fosteringthecultureofknowledgesharinginhighereducation,SouthAfricanJournalofHigher

Education,Vol.19,No.5,pp.900911.Mathew,V.(2010).Servicedeliverythroughknowledgemanagementinhighereducation,JournalofKnowledge

ManagementPractice,Vol.11,No.3,pp.114.MOHESR(2012)TheannualguidebookoftheMinistryofHigherEducationandScientificResearch,HigherEducationPress,

Baghdad.Nonaka,I.,Krogh,G.V.,andVoelpel,S.(2006).Organizationalknowledgecreationtheory:Evolutionarypathsandfuture

advances,OrganizationStudies,Vol.27,No.8,pp.11791208.Saenz,H.(2011)Transformationalleadership(pp.299310)inBryman,Alan,Collinson,David,Grint,Keith,Jackson,Brad,

andBien,Mary,TheSAGEhandbookofleadership,SAGEPublicationsLtd,London.Saunders,M.,Lewis,P.,andThornhill,A.(2012)Researchmethodsforbusinessstudents,7ed.,Pearsoneducationlimited,

England.Seba,I.,Jennifer,R.,andLambert,S.(2012).Factorsaffectingattitudesandintentionstowardsknowledgesharinginthe

Dubiapoliceforce,InternationalJournalofInformationManagement,Vol.32,No.4,pp.372380.Shih,H.A.,Chiang,Y.H.,andChenc,T.J.(2012).Transformationalleadership,trustingclimate,andknowledgeexchange

behaviorsinTaiwan,TheInternationalJournalofHumanResourceManagement,Vol.23,No.6,pp.10571073.vonKrogh,G.,Nonaka,I.,andRechsteiner,L.(2012).Leadershipinorganizationalknowledgecreation:Areviewand

framework,JournalofManagementStudies,Vol.49,No.1,pp.240277.Yukl,G.(2013)Leadershipinorganizations,8thed.,UpperSaddleRiver,PearsonEducation,N.J.

9

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited withoutpermission.

Leadership & Knowleadge Sharing

Documents

Transcript of Leadership & Knowleadge Sharing