Towards Innovation Performance among University Staff

This study examined how individuals in their
respective teams contributed to innovation performance besides
defining the term of innovation in their own respective views. This
study also identified factors that motivated University staff to
contribute to the innovation products. In addition, it examined
whether there is a significant relationship between professional
training level and the length of service among university staff
towards innovation and to what extent do the two variables
contributed towards innovative products. The significance of this
study is that it revealed the strengths and weaknesses of the
university staff when contributing to innovation performance.
Stratified-random sampling was employed to determine the samples
representing the population of lecturers in the study, involving 123
lecturers in one of the local universities in Malaysia. The method
employed to analyze the data is through categorizing into themes for
the open-ended questions besides using descriptive and inferential
statistics for the quantitative data. This study revealed that two types
of definition for the term “innovation” exist among the university
staff, namely, creation of new product or new approach to do things
as well as value-added creative way to upgrade or improve existing
process and service to be more efficient. This study found that the
most prominent factor that propels them towards innovation is to
improve the product in order to benefit users, followed by selfsatisfaction
and recognition. This implies that the staff in the
organization viewed the creation of innovative products as a process
of growth to fulfill the needs of others and also to realize their
personal potential. This study also found that there was only a
significant relationship between the professional training level and
the length of service of 4 - 6 years among the university staff. The
rest of the groups based on the length of service showed that there
was no significant relationship with the professional training level
towards innovation. Moreover, results of the study on directional
measures depicted that the relationship for the length of service of 4-
6 years with professional training level among the university staff is
quite weak. This implies that good organization management lies on
the shoulders of the key leaders who enlighten the path to be
followed by the staff.

• C. S. Quah
• S. P. L. Sim

• Innovation
• length of service
• performance
• professional training level
• motivation.

[1] C. L. Wang, and P. K. Ahmed, “The development and validation of the
organizational innovativeness construct using confirmatory factor
analysis”, European Journal of Innovation Management, 7, 2004, pp.
303-313.
[2] C. Y., Lin, and T. H. Kuo, “The mediate effect of learning and
knowledge on organizational performance”, Industrial Management &
Data Systems, 107(7), 2007, pp. 1066-1083.
[3] Southern Regional Education Board. Schools need Good Leaders now:
State progress in creating a Learning-Centered School Leadership
System. Atlanta, 2007. Retrieved from: 9211www.sreb.org 2007.
[4] Global Human Capital Trends 2014: Engaging the 21st-century
workforce, A report by Deloitte Consulting LLP and Bersin, United
Kingdom: Deloitte University Press, 2014.
[5] R., Bordia, E, Kronenbreg, and D. Neely, Innovation’s OrgDNA, U. S.
A.: Booz Allen Hamilton Inc, 2005.
[6] A. H., Van de Ven, and H. L. Angle, An introduction to the Minnesota
innovation, 1989. [7] L. D. McLean, “Organizational Culture’s Influence on Creativity and
Innovation: A Review of the Literature and Implications for Human
Resource Development”, Advances in Developing Human Resources,
7(2), May 2005, 226-246.
[8] P. E., Tesluk, J. L, Farr, and S. A. Klein, “Influences of organizational
culture and climate on individual creativity”, Journal of Creative
Behavior, 31(1), 1997, 27-41.
[9] A. H. Maslow, “A Theory of Human Motivation”, Psychological
Review, 50(4), 1943, 370-96. Retrieved from
http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Maslow/motivation.htm
[10] A. G. Robbinson, and S. Stern, Corporate creativity: How innovation
and improvement actually happen, San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler,
1997.
[11] Seyed Ebrahim Jafari Kelarijani, Ali Reza Heidarian, Reza Jamshidi and
Mohamad Khorshidi, “Length of Service and Commitment of Nurses in
Hospitals of Social Security Organization (SSO) in Tehran”, Caspian
Journal of Internal Medicine, 5(2), 2014, 94-98.
[12] S. O. Popoola, “Personal Factors Affecting Organizational Commitment
of Records Management Personnel in Nigerian State Universities”, IFE
Psychologia, 14, 2006, 183–97. In A. H. Van de Ven, H. L. Angle, & M.
S. Poole (Eds.), Research on the management of innovation (pp. 3-30).
New York: Harper & Row.
[13] J. Y. Chang and J. N. Choi, “The Dynamic Relation between
Organizational and Professional Commitment of Highly Educated
Research and Development (R&D) Professionals”, Journal of Social
Psychology, 147(3), 2007, 299–315.
[14] S. Bauld, and K. McGuiness, Exercising Leaderships, U. S. A.: Public
Sector Purchasing, 2007.
[15] R. F. Elmore, “Leadership as the Practice of Improvement Preliminary
Draft. OECD Activity on Improving School Leadership”, Paper
presented at International Conference: International Perspectives on
School Leadership for Systemic Improvement, June, 2006.
[16] I. Nonaka, “The Knowledge-Creating Company”, Harvard Business
Review, 69, Nov-Dec 1991, 96-104.
[17] M., Basadur, G. B. Graen, and S. G. Scandura, “Training Effects on
Attitudes toward Divergent Thinking among Manufacturing Engineers”,
Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(4), 1986, 612-661.