Table of Contents Mohammed Galib Hussain · 2017. 2. 2. · Mohammed Galib Hussain The Effect of Brainstorming Strategy on Grade Eight Students Achievement in General Science in Ajlun

Table of Contents

Articles

Employee Motivation: Conceptual Dimensions

Mohammed Galib Hussain

The Effect of Brainstorming Strategy on Grade Eight Students Achievement in General Science in Ajlun Governorate – Jordan

ensaf george rabadi

Case Studies

Knowledge Sharing and Its Impact on Innovation Performance: A case study of Teaching Quality Assurance Program

AbdulQadir R. A. Aljanabi, Dileep Kumar Mohanachandran

www.theinternationaljournal.org > RJCBS: Volume: 02, Number: 02, December-2012 Page 1

Employee Motivation: Conceptual Dimensions

Dr. Mohammed Galib Hussain,

Emeritus Professor, & Rector, Islamiah College, Vaniyambadi, India.

&

Dr. A. Thirupathy,

Assistant Professor, Department of Commerce,

K.M.G College of Arts Science, Gudiyattam, India.

Abstract

There are many psychological needs, like social needs, recognition needs, etc. which do not fall

under the category of wants A motive is defined as an inner state that energizes, activates (or moves),

and directs (or channels) the behavior of individuals towards certain goals. Thus, while motive

signifies the drive that propels people to action, motivation signifies the actual (level of) work behavior

of individuals. Motivation is the work behavior itself. Motivation depends on motives and motivating,

therefore, it becomes a complex process. Thus, managers have an important role to play in motivating

employees at the workplace so that not only are the motives of individuals properly channeled towards

the goals of the organization, but such goal-directed behaviors’ are also sustained or maintained over

time in the interests of the organization.

Key Terms:

Motive Motivation Motivating

Motive, Motivation and Motivating

The terms motive, motivation and motivating are important concepts which have distinct

connotations. The manager, who fully grasps the meaning and significance of these concepts and

learns how to apply them intelligently, will be able to steer the energies of the employees towards the

goals of the organization.

Motive

Based on the Latin word movere, motive (need) has been defined as follows

A motive is an inner state that energizes, activates, or moves, chance motivations and that

divert behavior towards goals.

Motive has also been described as follows

“A motive is restlessness, a lack, a yen, of a force. Once in the grip of a motive, the

organization does something to reduce the restlessness, to remedy the lack, to alleviate the yen, to

mitigate the force.

Here, we can differentiate between needs and wants. While needs are more comprehensive and

include desires-both physiological and psychological, wants are expressed in narrow sense and include

only those desires for which a person has money and also the desire to spend the money to satisfy the

wants. As we shall see later in this chapter, there are many psychological needs, like social needs,

recognition needs, etc. which do not fall under the category of wants

A motive is defined as an inner state that energizes, activates (or moves), and directs (or

channels) the behavior of individuals towards certain goals (Berelson & Steiner, 1964)1.

Though some

authors make distinction between motives and needs, we can conceptualize motives as certain critical

needs in human beings that have varying degrees of potency or strength. The strong motives or needs

make the individual restless and in a state of disequilibrium until the needs are fulfilled or satisfied. In

order to minimize the restlessness and keep it under control, the individual is propelled into action.


Thus, motives induce individuals to channel their behavior towards such types of action as would

reduce their state of restlessness or inner disequilibrium. Motives, then, can be thought of as drives that

energize people to action. For example, a clerk working for the Railways and nearing retirement might

have an intense desire to see his bright son have access to higher education. This might be the motive

that energizes him to work overtime every weekend in order to save money to send his son to a

university. The anxiety and restlessness in the father’s mind created by his intense desire or need to see

his son educated, which is minimized by his working and saving money now, will ensure that his son

can go to college later. Thus, the strong motive of the father was the force behind his behavior of

working during weekends when he could have easily rested. Likewise, the intense desire to achieve

name and fame may be the motive for a tennis player to practice eight hours a day in the heat for

several months before the actual tennis tournament takes place.

Motivation

While a motive is energizer of action, motivating is the channelization and activates of motives,

Motivation is the work behavior itself. Motivation depends on motives and motivating, therefore, it

becomes a complex process. For example, Dubin2 has defines motivations as follows:

“Motivators are the complex forces starting and keeping a person at work in an organization.

Motivation is something that moves the person to actions, and continues him in the course of action

already initiated”.

While motives are energizers of action, motivation is the actual action, (that is, work behavior)

itself. For instance, when an employee works very hard, the manager remarks that the level of the

individual’s motivation is high. When a person shirks work and is away from his desk wasting time,

the manager or supervisor is inclined to remark that the person has very low motivation. In other

words, the level of motivation of an individual is judged by person’s actual work behavior. Does the

individual come to work regularly? After coming to the workplace, does the person actually do the

allotted work? Does the individual work persistently till the work gets gone even if several difficulties

are encountered in the accomplishment of the task? These are some of the criteria by which the

motivation of individuals is judged. Thus, while motive signifies the drive that propels people to

action, motivation signifies the actual (level of) work behavior of individuals.

Motivating

Motivating is a term that implies that one person, says a manager, induces another, say

an employee, to engage in action (or work behavior) by ensuring that a channel to direct the motive of

the individual becomes available and accessible to the individual. For example, a highly qualified and

skilled employee who is doing routine clerical jobs at the workplace may have a very strong motive,

that is, an intensely experienced restlessness, to take on more challenging assignments. The manager,

who senses this motive, might then give that individual more responsibility and motivate the person to

attain his goal. This effort on the part of the manager enables the clerk to alleviate his restlessness. He

now works on his newly acquired responsibilities with enthusiasm instead of being frustrated and

bored in performing the routine jobs he was engaged in doing before. Thus, managers have an

important role to play in motivating employees at the workplace so that not only are the motives of

individuals properly channelled towards the goals of the organization, but such goal-directed

behaviors’ are also sustained or maintained over time in the interests of the organization.

In addition to channelling the strong motives in a direction that is satisfying to both the

organization and the employees, the manager can also awaken or activate the latent motives in

individuals- that is, the needs that are less strong and somewhat dormant-and harness them in a manner

that would be functional for the organization. For example, a senior clerk may have power motive

which is latent because there is no outlet for such a motive or need to get fulfilled in his current

position. If he is promoted to a supervisory position, the latent power motive in the individual will be

activated as he will now be influencing several employees under him. Because of his ability to

influence others, he is likely to do an excellent job of supervising his people and attaining the goals of


the organization. Thus, latent potential can also be tapped by understanding how to motivate people at

the workplace.

For the reasons just discussed, the three concepts of motive, motivation and motivating are

significant for managers. By knowing how to motivate employees, not only can the manager help

employees to satisfy their strong motives and activate the dormant motives in them, but in the process,

the goals of the organization and the needs of the individuals are simultaneously met.

According to McFarland3, “Motivation refers to the way in which urges, drives, desires,

aspirations, strivings, head direct, control or explain the behavior of human being”.

After defining motive, motivating, and motivation we can see the relationship among these.

Such a relationship is presented in the following figure.

Historical Development

Historical views on motivation, although not always accurate, are of interests for several

reasons. For one thing, they provide a foundation for contemporary thinking about motivation, an

appreciation of their strengths and weaknesses can help managers gain useful insights into employee

motivation in the workplace. One early view of motivation was based on the concept of hedonism- the

notion that people seek pleasure and comfort and avoid pain and discomfort. Scientific management

assumed that employees are motivated by money. The human relations approach to motivation

suggested that favorable employee attitudes results in motivation. Need theories of motivation assumes

that need deficiencies cause behavior.

The study of motivation can be traced back to the writings of the ancient Greek philosophers.

More than twenty-three centuries ago, they presented hedonism as an explanation of human

motivation. Hedonism says that a person seeks out comfort and pleasure and avoids discomfort and

pain. Many centuries later, hedonism was still a basic assumption in the prevailing economic and

social philosophies of such famous men as Adam Smith, Jeremy Bentham, and John Stuart mill4. They

all explained motivation in terms of people trying to maximize pleasure and minimize pain.

Early psychological thought was also influenced by hedonism. Psychologists in the 1800s and

even in the early 1900s assumed that humans consciously and rationally strive for hedonistic pleasure

and avoidance of pain. William James5, who is often called the father of American psychology, was

one of the first to question this assumption. In his classic principles of psychology, he gave recognition

to two additional important historical concepts in the study of motivation Viz- “instincts” and

“unconscious motivation”.


REFERENCES:

Bernard Berelson & Garry A. Steiner, (1964), human behavior, New York, Harcourt, Brace &World p. 240, 1964.

Robert Dubin, (1974), human relations in administration, New Delhi Preentice-Hall of India, p. 53, 1974.

Dalton E. McFarland, (1974), management principles and practices, New York Macmillan, p. 537, 1974.

Adam Smith, Jeremy Bentham, and John Stuart Mill loc. cit. William James, (1890), the principles of psychology, New York Holt, 1890.


The Effect of Brainstorming Strategy on Grade Eight Students Achievement in

General Science in Ajlun Governorate – Jordan

Dr. Insaf George Salamah El-Rabadhi Education Department- Ajlun University College El_ Balqa Applied university

Problem and Significance of the Study

Though teaching –learning process has been continuous for ages, the main factor is the teacher who

shoulders the responsibility of providing the student with information though the latter is unaware of

its consistency and logic. Because of the new developments the world has been witnessing like

knowledge proliferation, fast communication and openness to the world which has become a small

village, it is imperative to turn out new generations that can face these various challenges and

developments. This entails developments of new teaching methodology especially in science teaching.

New trends focus on the interaction between all the elements of the teaching- learning process to

enhance the student performance level. Among the new strategies adopted is brain storming to attain

the objectives of science teaching and development ( el- Mufti, 1995). Many academic conferences

and symposiums asserted the need to development of teachers preparing programs in colleges of

education. The student thing should be developed, too through controlled programs and various

teaching methods like learning through discovery, riddles , games enrichness activities,

brainstorming and brain storming.

The General science is one of the basic school topics that can develop the student though and build his

personality. This requires various teaching methods entailing the student to be a knowledge seeker

rather than receiver( Ghabyin,1992).

To due to the diverse science learning, the brain storming strategy has been the topic of this study.

According to Yacob( 1996) , brain storing has the following features;

1- It reduces student mind slackness. 2- Introducing thoughts without fearing failure. 3- It encourages the students to come up with new ideas. 4- It enhances the student innovative thinking and creates student- centered learning.

To be successful, the brainstorming process must have the following conditions (Jarwan ( 2000)):

1- The problem must be clear for the group leader and the participating. 2- The rules should be clear and the participant should adhere to them. 3- The leader or the teacher must have adequate experience in the brainstorming process.

Due to the importance of this strategy in fostering innovation and boosting achievement , the

researcher of this study conducted an empirical study on grade 8 students to validate the existence of

the effect this strategy on the students achievement in general science.

Problem of the Study:

Due the students’ low achievement level in general science and scantiness of student- centered

activities, this study is an endeavor identify the brainstorming strategy effect on grade eight students

achievement in General Science.

The problem Components:

The study tries to answer the following questions:

1- Is there any significant effect of using the brainstorming strategy compared to the regular method on grade eight students?

2- Are there any significant differences pertaining to sex in the controlled and the experimental group achievement?


The hypotheses of the Study:

The study tests the following hypotheses:

1- There are not any statistically significant differences attributed to the teaching method at(α=0.05) between the means of the controlled and the experimental group.

2- There are not any statistically significant differences attributed sex at(α=0.05) between the means of the controlled and the experimental group.

Significance of the Study:

The importance of this study stems from the significance of the brainstorming strategy in teaching as a

whole and in science teaching in particular. Validating its efficacy constitutes a drive for teachers to

adopt brainstorming strategy in teaching. It may encourage the educational supervisors to modify their

supervision methods, too. Other researchers may be encouraged to carry out other studied pertaining

to this strategy.

Limitations of the Study:

- Brainstorming strategy : this strategy provide scientific information in the forms of short problems that challenge the students minds and requires coming up with a number of solutions in

short period of time besides giving every student to express his opinion and share others opinions and

it fosters coming up with new ideas.

- The Normal Method; It is the method in which the teacher uses the lecturing, discussion or the presentation methods. The teacher has the greater role while the learner is receiver with limited share

in the learning process.

- The scholastic achievement: It is the score that student gets on the twenty –five multiple choice item test the researcher prepared for the study.

The Theoretical Background:

Because of the significance of brainstorming in many areas, it has several definitions:

- Jarwan( 2002) defines it as “the active challenge to the problem” and the basic aim of the brainstorming session is to generate a list of ideas that can solve the problem under discussion.

- Rawlinson (1981) sees at “a means to get significant number of ideas in short time”. - Geimer( 1998) defines it as “ to brainstorm others ideas with criticism or limitations.” - Al-Qayyesi(2001) defines it as” a collective learning strategy brainstorming the utmost number of the learners ideas without evaluation during the session”.

According to Qattami(2001) , the success of brainstorming depends on:

1- Deferring any judgments of the ideas put forward in the initial brainstorming stage, because criticism of an idea or evaluating it hinders the attainment of the best idea.

2- Quantity generates quality: focusing during the session on generating as many ideas as possible regardless of quality.

3- Building on others ideas: others ideas are common for all to come up or develop new ideas by using the ideas introduced during the session.

How can brainstorming be presented during class?

According to Hannorat(2002) the brainstorming session can be carried out in one or more of the

following studies:

1- Introducing in special syllabus issues like drugs addiction, environment pollution and the public opinion.

2- It should not be independent of scholastic curricula. 3- Merging the two preceding steps according the class needs

Brain storming Objectives:

According to Jarwan( 2002), the most important objects that can be attained during a brainstorming

session can be:

1. Innovative problem solving.


2. Creating problems for the opponent. 3. Fostering the trainees thinking and training them in brainstorming. To achieve these goals Ali( 2001) suggests the following:

1- Testing the main problem and rephrasing the data on the board as an introduction to the brainstorming session.

2- Varying the rephrasing of the problems starting with the know-how questions. 3- The teachers should brief the participants about the problem before the brainstorming session. 4- Diagnosing the session: the participant ideas are introduced at this stage in period of no more than five minutes.

5- Coming up with a unique that generates unprecedented ideas in the brainstorming session

But, El-Sobery (2001) suggests some procedures to obtain the brainstorming:

1. Dividing the students in groups of ( 5-8) and monitoring them. 2. Introducing the clarifying the problem to be discussed. 3. Ensuring that every student understand the problem and the topic to be discussed. 4. Encouraging every student express his opinion about every problem. 5. Warning against pre-formed judgments of others onions 6. Fixing the time: its beginning and it end. 7. Asking the students to answer the questions following the lesson.

Mattalqah ( 1998) and El-Zu’aby(2003) cite guidelines for using this strategy in teach general

science that can be to solve the problem and the questions of the study:

1. Deciding the session topic as the research problem( Environment Pollution) . 2. Briefing the class about the topic (Environment Pollution). 3. Rephrasing the problem into questions:

- How can we reduce air pollution? - How can we reduce water pollution?

4. Fostering an innovating atmosphere of brainstorming as the teacher explains the procedure to the students and reminding them with the brainstorming rules such as:

- Say whatever you like. - Don’t criticize any of the other participant’s opinions. - Don’t elaborate. - You can make use of the participant’s opinions. - Listen to the leader instructions and carry them out. - Give chance for jotting your ideas down.

5. Appointing the session leader 6. The answers to the questions are sequentially- dependent. 7. The participants are asked to express their opinions are answers to the questions asked. 8. The reporter of the session writes the ideas in sequence. 9. The session leader urges the participants to settle on the most peculiar idea and develop it into a practical one, then associate the ideas together to become up with good idea.

10. Classifying the ideas introduced by the participants into - Feasible and teachable ideas. - Good ideas but cannot be directly applied and needs further investigation.

11. The session leader selects the applicable good ideas.

Previous Studies:

Following the studies and research that highlight the effect of brain storming on the student’s

achievement:

El-Zu’abey ( 20030 investigated the effect of controlled discovery and brainstorming on el Qoorah

district(in Jordan) grade eight the development of critical thinking and achievement in the Islamic


education – jurisdiction .The study showed that there is an effect of the three methods: brainstorming,

and discovery and discussion, regardless of sex.

El- Harbi’s study ( 20020 showed statistically differences on the first secondary biology class in the

post achievement of the cognitive objectives of Bloom’s Taxonomy in favor of the controlled group.

It also showed significant differences in the achievement of experimental group which was taught by

the brainstorming method.

Collado( 1992) compared the analogue learning method and brainstorming in the development of

the innovative thinking. The results showed that the analogue learning is more effective in the

development of the innovative thinking than the brainstorming method.

Berumdez and Prater ( 1998) conducted a study on brainstorming on the comprehension of a sample

at university of Houston ,Texas and showed that there were higher significant differences in

comprehension for experimental group.

The studies show that brainstorming has a significant effect improving the student achievements in

various topics including general science.

Therefore, this study is based on the past studies and it investigates the effect of brainstorming on the

grade eight students in general science and sex has a role in this effect.

Method and procedures:

Members of the Study:

The sample of the study involved 130 eight graders in the scholastic year 2011- 2012, in Ajlun city, the

Province of Ajlun. Sixty-four were male students at Ajlun Primary School for Boys grouped into two

classes of 32 students each: Class A, the control group, and class B, the experimental group. Two

other experimental and control groups , each consisting of 33 students, of Ajlun primary school for

girls were also involved .The brainstorming strategy was adopted in teaching the experimental groups.

The two schools were chosen for the study by the purposive method because of teachers’ cooperation

and readiness for taking part in the study.

The Study Tools:

The researcher prepared the teaching plans for the first unit, “The Electronic Environment of the

Elements Atoms Determines Their Chemical Behavior” , for the grade eight general science

syllabus, which aims to familiarize the students with the chemical concepts of this unit and how to

use the elements periodical table, and mastering the balance of formulas. This entails a separate plan

according the content of each lesson. The plans were validated by five expert judges to ensure their

level appropriateness, and the proper steps of brainstorming. Then the final versions of other plan were

prepared before starting teaching as shown in appendix-1.

- The achievement test : The initial version of the test consisted of ( 30) multiple choice items to measure grade eight students in the electronic environment unit, but it consisted of ( 25) items as in

appendix -2.

- Test validity: the test was validated by a group of expert specialist judges of the teaching staff; some of the items were rephrased according to their recommendations.

- Test Reliability : The reliability of the test was ensured through neutral pioneering sample of 30 grade students not

belonging to the study sample .the test last one hour and the answers were marked and the reliability

coefficient ( 0.85) according ( K.R-20) , an acceptable value for the purpose of this study.

- Fixing of the Time: the pioneering achievement test took one hour an so is the time the main test.

The steps of study procedures can summarized as follows:

1. Preparing a brainstorming based plan; they were ten as shown in appendix-1 for the experimental group , and training plans for the control group according to the traditional method.


2. Selecting the members of the study. 3. Preparing the achievement test according a specification table and the ensuring its validity and reliability.

4. Conducting the pioneering test on a sample of ( 30) students belonging to the population of the study to make sure of its appropriateness : clarity of items, instructions and time needed for the test.

5. Orienting the teachers with brainstorming strategy. 6. Then, teaching unit -1 “The Electronic Environment of the Elements Atoms Determines Their Chemical Behavior”.

7. Four weeks after administering the trial study m the achievement test was administered and the students answers were recorded per items of the two groups for analysis and comparison of

achievements according the key answer specially prepared for the test.

Generalization of the Study:

The semi-experimental design is adopted to find out the effect of The brain storming on the students

a achievement. The variables of study are;

G1O1×

G2O1-

G1: the experimental group

G2: the control group

O1: the post test.

× the experimental factor.

The Statistical Processing:

The statistical processes were used in the study:

The means, and the standard deviations of the students scores for the achievement pre-test and the post

test. The t-test was used to compare the control and the experimental groups differences in

achievements in the pre-test and the post-test.

Findings of the Study

After carrying out the statistical analysis of the result, the findings of study were as shown in

table-1:

Table -1

The post tests results of the control and the experimental groups

Group number the

mean

St

deviation

t-

value

Statistical

significance

Total number of

males &females

The

experimental G

65

22.2 3.02 5.59 0.001

The control G 65 17,2 3

females The experimental 33 23.3 2.3 4.88 0.001

The Control 33 20 2.2

Males The experimental 32 22.8 2.64 3.36 0.001

The control 32 20.2 1.82

The First Question: Is there any significant effect of using the brainstorming strategy compared to the

regular method on grade eight students?

Table -1 shows a difference in the means of the two groups; the mean for the experimental group is(

22.2) whereas it is (17.40) for the control group. To confirm this result, the t-test was used and

showed a value of (5.59) at (α+=0.001). This is a statistically significance difference that shows that

the experimental group using the brainstorming strategy scored higher than the control group.


The Second Question: Are there any significant differences pertaining to sex in the controlled and the

experimental group achievement?

Table -1 show that there is a difference between experimental and the control female groups in the post

test means: the value for the experimental was ( 23.3) and for the control group, it was ( 20) . To

confirm this result, the t-test was used and its value (α+=0.001). This is a statistically significance

difference that shows that the experimental group using the brainstorming strategy scored higher than

the control group.

The table also show that the post test mean for experimental group was( 22.8) , whereas it was( 20.2)

for the control group. To confirm this result, the t-test was used and its a value was (α+=0.001).

This is a statistically significance difference that shows that the experimental group using the

brainstorming strategy scored higher than the control group.

Discussion of the Results:

The first question: Is there any significant effect of using the brainstorming strategy compared to the

regular method on grade eight students?

The results of the study show a difference in the means of the two groups; the mean for the

experimental group is( 22.2) whereas it is (17.40) for the control group. To the t-test confirmed this

result with a value of (5.59) at (α+=0.001). This is a statistically significance difference that shows that

the experimental group using the brainstorming strategy scored higher than the control group. This

result agrees with El-Harbi’s( 2002) study that investigated the effect of brainstorming in

development of the critical thinking and post test achievement and showed that the experimental group

scored higher the control one. But it contradicts Collado ( 1991) study that show analogue learning

surpasses learning by brainstorming.

Therefore, the brainstorming strategy has a positive effect on science teaching and students scholastic

achievement. This achievement advantage can be attributed to the following reasons:

- The recent introduction of brainstorming as learning strategy in teaching science the Jordanian schools. This encourages the students to take part in the teaching – learning process.

- This strategy requires cooperation and interaction among the students themselves through questions and this boosts their willingness and impulse to learning as indicated by el_Zu’abey (

2003).

The Second Question: Are there any significant differences pertaining to sex in the controlled and the

experimental group achievement?

The study shows that there are no significant difference (α=≤0.05) attribute to sex; the mean score for

the females was( 23.3) , whereas it was( 22.8).

This can be attributed to:

- The similarity of the educational environment, the curricula, preparation, training and the teaching environment of both sexes.

- The similar credentials of female and male teachers. - Following the same methods and procedures for teaching both sexes and this created an equal positive effect on the students regardless of sex.

Recommendations:

The study came up with the following recommendations:

1. Teachers should be urged to use the brainstorming strategy in teaching science. 2. The Ministry of education should focus on training and qualification of teachers and should adopt new teaching strategies including brainstorming.

3. Further studies should be conducted to investigate the importance of brainstorming and its effect on other facets the teaching learning process.


Appendix–1

xddneppA-1 The lesson Design according To the Brainstorming Method: Atomic Number and Mass

You are expected to be able to

- Differentiate between the atomic number and the mass number. - Describe the case of the electrically balanced atom. - Identify particles that determine the atom mass. - Learn as you are told by the teacher

Selecting the problem (topic) for the students:

You have already learnt in the Measuring the Atomic Mass Unit is important because it studies the

elements properties. What makes the element different? Why the atom is electrically balanced, though

it has particles with negative electrons and positive protons? Does the number of the atom electrons

have role in determining its atomic number, mass number and the method of their calculations?

Rephrasing the problem for the students:

a. What is the meaning if the atomic number and the mass number? b. Describe the electrically balanced atom. c. What are the particles that determine the atom mass? d. Inference of the charge type of each atom particles.

When answering the questions, the students should abide by these rules: a. Don’t criticize any idea introduced by your colleagues. b. Suggest the maximum number of related Ideas that come to your mind. c. Your ideas are common for all; they can make use of them in producing new ideas like merging

two ideas into one or more.

d. The innovation atmosphere should be facilitated for the teacher. The teacher explains the work method to students illustrating the basics of the brainstorming session

depending on:

- Encouraging the students say whatever they like regardless of its peculiarity, reality, unreality, or strangeness.

- Not to criticize or oppose the ideas of others. - Making use of and developing ideas introduced by the group members.

The Role of the Teacher during the Brainstorming session:

The teacher writes the questions made in the rephrasing stage on condition that the students introduce

their ideas in sequence. The class will be divided into four groups and everyone them will discuss one

of the following questions:

Group One:

The main question: “What is the atomic number and what is the mass number? What is the difference

between them?

The teacher listens to the group and writes the ideas introduced on the board.

Group Two:

The main question: How are the charges in the electrically balanced atoms?


Group Three:

The main question: The particles of the atom are the electron, the proton and the neutron, which one of

them decides the atom mass?


Group Four:

The main question: Every particle inside the atom has a charge, identify it?



Deciding the Strangest Idea:

The teacher urges the students to come up with the strangest idea, scrutinizes the ideas introduced to

deduce the important and strange ones to develop them into feasible ones.

The Appraisal Session:

All the ideas are written on the board for classification and then summarized into the minimum number

of ideas into:

1- Feasible and applicable ideas (every element has its unique properties based on the atoms it consists of).

2- Useful; but inapplicable ideas (the number of the electrons and the protons are equal.) 3- Curious and non-scientific ideas (all electrons are alkaline). 4- Excluded ideas: (they represent the elements the interaction elements under common circumstances).

Appendix–2

Achievement Test Instructions:

1. This test consists of (25) items. 2. Every item has four choices, one of them is true. Put (×) inside the space of the correct answer

against each item. Example:

The shadow form behind retina because of:

a- D deformation in the eye ball b- Slackness of lash muscles c- ( a+ b) correct d- None of the above

Item no. Choices

A B C D

3. You test score is the sum of all correct answers. 4. Don’t write anything the question paper and hand it in with the answer sheet. 5. Answer all the question items. Good Luck The researcher

1. The unit measuring the atom mass is a . Kg. b. atom mass unit c. Newton d-atomic number unit

2. The element atom that can give one positive charge ion is : a. Sodium b. Aluminum c. oxygen d. chlorine.

3. The fireworks element is: a. magnesium nitrite, sulphur and carbon.

b. silver nitrite, sulphur and carbon

c. potassium and carbon

d. aluminum nitrite and carbon

4. The substance color resulting from magnesium and oxygen is: a. ozone b- red c- black d- yellow.

5. Mendel’s table was accepted because of:

a. Discovery of Uranium

b. The existence of vacuums for the elements atoms.

c. Ordering the items with their atomic weight.

d. Ordering the element according to their chemical interaction

6. The state of the element in the room normal temperature is:

a . solid b. liquid c. gas d. fluid


Achievement Test Answer Key Sheet:

No Answer No Answer

1 B 22 A

2 A 23 C

3 B 24 A

4 D 25 D

5 D

6 C

7 A

8 B

9 B

10 C

11 C

12 B

13 C

14 C

15 A

16 D

17 A

18 C

19 A

20 A

21 A


Knowledge Sharing and Its Impact on Innovation Performance: A case study of

Teaching Quality Assurance Program

Abdul Quadir Rahomee Ahmed,

Research Scholar, Othman Yeop Abdullah Graduate School of Business, Universiti Utara, Malaysia

&

Dr. Dileep Kumar M,

Professor, HRM/OB/ Strategic Management

Othman Yeop Abdullah Graduate School of Business, Universiti Utara, Malaysia

ABSTRACT

This case study aims to examine the internal factors that contribute to successful Knowledge Sharing

(KS) among the university teaching staff, employees and students towards achieving innovation

performance. A review of literature has been presented that focuses on the KS and innovation

performance. The debate is supported by a practical KS program called Teaching Quality Assurance.

Finally, conclusions and discussions derived from both the literature review and the practical case have

been submitted with suggestions for future research trends.

Keywords: Knowledge, Knowledge sharing, Innovation performance, Teaching quality assurance

INTRODUCTION

Knowledge sharing (KS) is one of the main components in knowledge management process which rely

heavily on social interaction between organization’s members to expand their own knowledge. On the

other hand, the importance of this knowledge in providing new innovations is well known to everyone

nowadays; since many organizations focus on their knowledge assets in its rival more than focusing on

their financial or physical assets to produce new innovations. Within the domain of higher education;

KS is considered as the building blocks of efficient performance at Universities and can play a key role

in enhancing their innovation performance, by contrast the deficiency of knowledge sharing may result

in reduce performance level and poor quality of education. This case study deals with the knowledge

sharing various issues and the factors that affect it, in addition to the impact of knowledge sharing in

innovation performance. The purpose of this study is to examine the factors and barriers that contribute

to knowledge sharing process among teaching staff in public higher education in Iraq. Furthermore, a

case study of Teaching Quality Assurance Program (TQAP) is presented to show the impact of

knowledge sharing in innovation performance in University of Northern Iraq. In order to ensure the

confidentiality, the name of University has changed, so that the information’s indicated do not affect

the reputation of the University and academic staff, moreover, the same scenario can be tested with

other University. The final section presents a discussion based on review and the case study will

determine the core outcomes of this paper.

UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN IRAQ BACKGROUND

University of Northern Iraq was first established in 1968, the main campus is located in the north

region of Iraq. Due to the deteriorating political situation that followed the founding of the period; the

University suffered a lot of deficiencies and neglect, affecting the level of performance and the quality

of education. After stabilizing the security situation in the area and the advent of aware government to

the importance of education, the University pays attention to those problems that are related directly to

the real life of people & tries to find appropriate solution for them. It’s one of the important sources of

knowledge for the society and developing the individuals.

The University has deep relations with other universities, governmental and private organizations, by

providing them with new knowledge through training courses, consulting and conferences. Annually

hundreds of students enrolled to the University; new students are referred to the university from the

Central Admission Bureau of the Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research; the students


are accepted according to their desires and grades obtained in the baccalaureate exams which needed

for the department that they applied for; each student should complete all the credits and other

requirements at his college before award the certificate of graduation by the University. Today,

University of Northern Iraq represents the biggest University over the region due to the huge

development steps achieved at the level of infrastructure, teaching quality and academic staff who

enrolled from different ethnicities and religions. Seminars and workshops held weekly, under the new

law, in order to activate knowledge sharing process among academic staff, management, employees

and students.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Knowledge and Knowledge sharing

For many years ago, the questions and importance of knowledge and knowledge Management (KM)

are increasingly studied (Geiger & Schreyogg, 2012). A sizeable body of researches pointed out that

knowledge is an essential and vital resource for organizations to achieve success and competitive

advantage in both industrial and service sectors (Suppiah & Sandhu, 2011; Kamas & Bulutlar, 2010;

Tohidinia & Mosakhani, 2010). In this context knowledge can be understood as “something deeper

and richer than data or information” (Tohidinia & Mosakhani, 2010), it is the codified information

including prudence, interpretation, experience, skills, wisdom, and so forth (Fong, et al., 2011). In

general, Knowledge can be classified commonly into two types; explicit and tacit (Fong, et al., 2011;

Lin, 2007). Knowledge that can be captured, documented codified, and expressed in formal language

to easy access and exchange represents the explicit part of the knowledge (Kamasak & Bulutlar ,

2010). On the other side, tacit knowledge is ‘‘uncodified’’ and conjectural and it is a component of an

personal thought (Suppiah & Sandhu, 2011) but It is noteworthy that both explicit and tacit knowledge

are indispensable to create new knowledge and they complemented each other (Kamasak & Bulutlar ,

2010).On the other hand, knowledge Management (KM) can be seen as the generating, notification,

hording, sharing and protecting of organizational knowledge (Burke,2011). Simply stated (KM) is

integrated process of acquisition, sharing and utilization of knowledge to create new knowledge

(Sohail & Daud, 2009). In the recent periods the roles of knowledge workers have increased Obviously

(Tohidinia & Mosakhani, 2010) to possess significant effect on organizational performance and

innovation (Emelo, 2012). In this context organizations have to encourage people to share their own

individual knowledge not to forced them (Hooff, et al., 2012), in order to achieve the greatest possible

benefit of knowledge embedded in worker’s heads (Suppiah & Sandhu, 2011), since individuals have

well-justified reasons to reject sharing their own knowledge or as it is known “knowledge-sharing

hostility” (Husted, et al., 2012). In this regard, many organizations utilize Knowledge networks like

“communities of practice” (CoPs) which can be defined as: “a group of people in an organization who

interact with each other across organizational units or organizational boundaries due to a common

interest or field of application in order to learn and support one another, create, spread, retain, and

use knowledge relevant to the organization” (Zboralski, 2009). In addition to informal networks and

work groups where people know each other and support each other regardless of rank or job title

(Marouf,2007), through narrative mode of communication as natural way and custom of knowledge

sharing (Geiger & Schreyogg, 2012).

In this context Knowledge Sharing (KS) can be defined as process by which people exchange their

(tacit and explicit) knowledge to create new knowledge together (Hooff, et al., 2012). Likewise (Lin,

2007) identified KS as a process of social interaction by which people can exchange mutual of (tacit

and explicit) knowledge, experiences, skills within the organization. While, Husted, et al., (2012)

argued that KS is a type of mutual social behavior of individuals to participate their own knowledge to

the common good. While Tohidinia & Mosakhani, (2010) highlighted that KS takes place when “team

members sharing task-relevant ideas, information, and suggestions with each other”, to represents the

most important part of knowledge management process (Cao & Xiang, 2012). Based on the above

definitions, KS has two dimensions; donating, and collecting (Lin, 2007), according to Rahab, et al.,

(2011) and Kamasak & Bulutlar (2010) knowledge donating define as the voluntary communication


between people to transfer intellectual capital, while knowledge collecting represents attempting to

consulting colleagues to encourage each others to share what they know. Although knowledge sharing

has advantage to both individuals and organizations (Tohidinia & Mosakhani, 2010) and can be a good

method to address and solve difficult problems (Burke, 2011) it does not occur spontaneously (Cao &

Xiang, 2012) especially when people feel with risk of losing their knowledge; but in the same time it is

a voluntary behavior that helps in organization’s success and can interpret employees’ organizational

citizenship behavior (Casimir, et al., 2012). Overall, Knowledge sharing is a deliberate efforts

occurring with the existence of sufficient willingness of individuals to participate their own

experience, skills and knowledge with their colleagues to foster organizational Knowledge. In

addition, Knowledge sharing derives its importance from the nature of knowledge, which is considered

as the most important source of competitive advantage.

Determinants of knowledge-sharing processes

If the organizations want to take advantage of the effective participation of knowledge they will have

to consider a number of key factors that can affect knowledge sharing process (Rahab, et al., 2011).

Individual factors play a prominent role in knowledge sharing processes and the most important of

which is the trust between individuals and the nature of social bonds and individual attitudes towards

knowledge sharing (Marouf, 2007), in this regard Nan in (2008) indicates that most of knowledge

sharing problems may be due to the lack of trust among individuals within the organization result in

weakness of willingness to share their knowledge with colleagues. At the same time other studies have

focused on the role of social capital and social values (Sohail & Daud, 2009; Marouf,2007), emotional

bonds between individuals (Casimir, et al., 2012; Hooff, et al., 2012), backgrounds and perspectives

(Kim, et al., 2012), frequency/quality of interaction between individuals (Zboralski, 2009) tension and

friction that occur among varying stakeholders (Sohail & Daud, 2009) as an incentives to weaken or

strengthen this trust to knowledge sharing behavior. Organizational factors also have a significant role

to facilitate knowledge sharing process, many scholars (Emelo, 2012; Kim, et al., 2012; Suppiah &

Sandhu, 2011; Tohidinia & Mosakhani, 2010) indicate the direct or indirect role to some

organizational and managerial variables in knowledge sharing process; such as organizational

structure, leadership, motivation and rewards awarded by top management, organizational culture and

change management. Recent study for Kim, et al., in (2012), however, report that these variables may

pose a big challenge in front of knowledge sharing process such as organizational culture which

represents one of the most important and most forestry input to the knowledge management process.

Through the practice of their daily responsibilities senior managers can develop a certain positive

values towards knowledge sharing and maintain and strengthen these values (Tohidinia & Mosakhani,

2010; Zboralski, 2009) by supporting staff to adhere to these values through their rewards or

punishments to support participation process and through their commitment to specific behaviors to be

a pacemaker in such practices. While the Individual and Organizational factors are important,

Technological factors also be worth to take into consideration, according to Geiger & Schreyogg

(2012) the first approaches towards facilitate and fostering the sharing of knowledge have been widely

dominated is technological media. Sohail & Daud (2009) suggest that information and communication

technologies (ICT) may provide great and important facilities to share knowledge by removing

temporal and spatial barriers between knowledge sharer, like video conferencing, electronic forums,

twitter and facebook (Suppiah & Sandhu, 2011) in addition to usability of technology such as ease of

use, ease of access, ease of locating knowledge by employed specific type of technology (Han &

Anantatmula, 2007). Nevertheless, Criticism still exists for technological way especially for its

weakness compared with face to face communication in transfer tacit knowledge (Geiger &

Schreyogg, 2012) in addition to the mmisconception of some executives that people are willing to use

the technology to share knowledge (Han & Anantatmula, 2007). Thus, many factors may affect KS

process and the effects of such factors may differ from one organization to another, but individual

factors remain the most important among others; due to nature of sharing process that based on human

interaction and relationships on hand, and the fact that individuals themselves who determines the


amount and the time of shared knowledge and with whom will share their own knowledge. While

other factors play the facilitator and supportive roles in knowledge sharing process.

Organizational Innovation Performance

Nowadays, more than ever, organizations face a dramatic increase in customers’ requirements and

needs, in the midst of such circumstances, the successful organizations are not those who capable to

determine market’s needs only, but also who are able to satisfying customers’ needs in the best ways,

and innovation may consider the suitable mean to achieve that (Neira, et al., 2009). Innovation can be

understood as generation, adoption and implementation of new ideas, policy, program, process,

product, or service to the adopting organization (Kamasak & Bulutlar, 2010). Due to innovation role in

improve and facilitate people’s lives and open a new market for firms as well (Ooi, et al., 2012), in

addition to the pivot role played by development product with a superior value in achieving

competitive advantage for the firms (Neira, et al., 2009) there is general consensus among scholars that

“innovation is power” for all organizations nowadays (Kamasak & Bulutlar, 2010). In this context

firms depend on their different resources to innovate, but not all these resources are available at a

certain time within the focal firm especially knowledge assets; or have equal importance in offering

success and developing performance (Abu Bakar & Ahmad, 2010) therefore organizations have to

understand the nature of required innovation to certain necessary resources from the inside or even

from abroad (Parida, et al., 2012). Based on these aspects, two dimensions could be considered to

study organizational innovation performance; they are technological and administrative innovation

performance. As regards to technological innovation performance, it refers to an integrated process

dependent on the inputs of research and development (R&D) to obtain the output in terms of new

products, process or new devices (Ko & Lu, 2010). In the same perspective Heng, et al., in (2010)

reported that innovation performance can be understood through two dimensions; output (products and

technologies) performance and process innovation performance. Product innovation performance may

includes physical or intangible products to covers services firms in its boundaries (Ooi, et al., 2012),

and it has been defined as “the economic financial and non-financial outcomes of the firm’s product

innovation efforts” (Abubakar & Ahmad, 2010), in this sense product innovation performance could be

measured by the share of sales of products or the new services adopted in the last three years (Ooi, et

al., 2012), and it related directly with the commercial performance of the firm by achieving

commercial interests throughout selling process of innovative products and patents (Heng, et al.,

2010).

On the other hand, process innovation performance covers the organizational aspects (Ooi, et al., 2012)

including the improvement of the internal operations and capacities (Neira, et al., 2009) and it can be

internalized into the organization's capacity, and provides support for the organizational structure

depending on the embedded knowledge into innovators (Heng, et al., 2010), in this sense it includes

administrative innovation which typically refers to the process of adoption new management system,

administrative process and practices or member development program including rules, roles,

procedures, and structures changing to helps organizations achieve harmony with turbulence of

external environments (Ussahawanitchaki, 2012). Three indicators could be used to measure process

innovation: the production lead time, the employee productivity, and the rework or scrap rate (Ooi, et

al., 2012). Process innovation is an important way to achieve product innovation in addition; it has

indirect impacts on the business performance, therefore it can be said that the process performance is

as important as product performance. (Heng, et al., 2010). Considering this innovation became a

necessity of modern life for both society and organizations. Product innovation can support

organizational competence building through various attempts to develop their products, while process

innovation enhance managerial expertise and contribute to make work easier and more accurate to help

organizations to bring about change in their environment and achieve supremacy in their market.

The relationship between Innovation Performance and Knowledge Sharing

Since the essential contribution for Nonaka in the early of 1990s, the notion of innovation has been

related strongly to creation of new knowledge (Sáenz, et al., 2009), individuals contribute their own

knowledge in order to achieve better levels of innovation (Rahab, et al., 2011) owing to inability of


organizations to create knowledge without individuals contribution who have active role in achieving

innovation (Ordaz, et al., 2011) that was highlighted by Kamasak & Bulutlar in (2010) they declared

when ideas and notions are shared among groups, present ideas from first group has a unique feature

and seem novel to another, and vice versa, leading to in innovate new products or services within the

organization which makes innovation as knowledge-intensive task (Zhen, et al., 2011). Likewise Kim,

et al., (2012) noted that knowledge sharing is an essential component for the enhancement of

performance, where (Kumar & Rose, 2012; Sohail & Daud, 2009) stated that the consequence of

knowledge sharing is the creation of new knowledge and new innovation result in improving

organizational performance. Generally, knowledge sharing framework for innovation can be supported

by two dimensions: personal knowledge management and team knowledge management (Zhen, et al.,

2011) to possess the required keys to success in the era of knowledge (Geiger & Schreyogg, 2012).

The same trends are also embedded in the works of Burke in (2011) she noted to the extent to which

create and Share the knowledge are necessary for innovation between employees. The ability of

employees to solve problems and innovation affected by their ability to acquire and share knowledge,

and that is well justified because real innovation requires the transfer and share of knowledge (Sáenz,

et al., 2009). Brachos, et al., (2007) concluded that innovation could be improved if the necessary

factors for motivating people to share their knowledge are available. Based on above studies,

knowledge and knowledge sharing are indispensable to achieve high levels of innovation performance.

From the above discussions the existence of interrelated relationship between knowledge and

innovation can be seen clearly, while knowledge considers as a mean to get into the end represented by

process and technological innovations the new innovation can lead to new knowledge, on the other

hand organization earns different types of innovation depending on various knowledge sharing

activities that may occur among individuals or teams. Thus, knowledge and knowledge sharing may be

indispensable to achieve high levels of innovation performance.

PROBLEM DESCRIPTION

Due to the political and social conditions that were prevailed in Iraq since the early of 1980s to the

early 1990s, University of Northern Iraq suffered a lot of neglect and delays to keep pace up with

scientific advances, as a result of the significant deficit in physical, financial and human resources the

performance of the university and quality of education dropped significantly. The following table

illustrates the main problems within the University of Northern Iraq at different levels before

Implementation of Teaching Quality Assurance Program.

Table 1: The problems in University of Northern Iraq

Level Problem Description

Academic staff 1-Lack of encouraging factors to knowledge sharing among

academic staff themselves and students.

2-Long interruptions from international universities and

conferences.

3-Some members had problems in dealing with modern technology

like Internet, virtual libraries and data show device.

4-Adherence of some individuals with traditional methods of

teaching and Preference for self-interest on the public interest.

Infrastructures, Administrative

and Legislative issues

1-Lack of adequate classrooms, Laboratories and stadiums,

inadequate physical conditions inside buildings and performance

of libraries.

2-Weakness to provide Internet service and virtual libraries.

3-Lower rates of salaries and incentives.

4-Weak legislation which not guaranteed to employees' rights

5-Excessive bureaucracy and routine at work.

Administration staff 1-The interaction among departments is not obvious.

2-Limited technical and administrative staff.


3-Hire people who are not specialized in the field of work.

4-New employees cannot be familiar with their new jobs quickly.

Study materials and teaching

methods

1-Obsolescence of scientific sources and non suitability with the

requirements of the era.

2-Teaching theoretical aspects more than practical aspects.

Students 1-Students feel with frustration as a result of environmental

conditions.

2-Enrollment of students in some colleges that may do not wish to

study in.

3-High cost of living especially for students from outside the city

All these various factors have had a direct impact in weakening the process of knowledge sharing

within the University at al levels.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Considering all these issues study determines its subject “Knowledge Sharing and Innovation

performance: A case study of Teaching Quality Assurance Program”.

EFFORTS TO CONTROL THE CASE SCENARIO -TQAP

In light of such circumstances and after carefully studying of these factors that result in weakness of

the dissemination and sharing of knowledge which lead to droop of academic performance level

significantly, The Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research and in collaboration with the

University of Northern Iraq have taken real efforts in the early of 2010 to find concrete and long term

solutions to all these problems through Teaching Quality Assurance Program (TQAP), according to the

University needs and the capabilities of the ministry of higher education, this program involves

highlighting both the weaknesses and strengths of all aspects of the work of the university:

administration, teaching and learning, based on systematic way for input, process, and outputs of

learning and knowledge sharing process, these aspects can be concluded as follows:

THE STRATEGIC SOLUTIONS THROUGH TQAP A committee for TQAP has been nominating in the university to follow up the implementation

of the program to achieve the highest standards in each part of academic instructions, learning and

administration. Sub-committees have been nominating within faculties and colleges to follow up the

project in all aspects. Also within each department, a committee has been nominating to implement

quality assurance within departments. The members of that committee serve as “course coordinators”.

The number of these coordinators depends on the department’s needs, and one of them serves as the

chairman of the committee provided that s/he does not occupy any administrative position in the

University. The chairmen of these departmental committees will become members of the college’s

Quality Assurance Committee. One member will serve as the chairman of this college committee and

another will serve as the deputy chairman provided that s/he does not occupy any administrative

position in the University. The chairmen of the colleges' committees serves as member of the Quality

Assurance Committee of the university, and this committee work under the university’s vice-president

for scientific affairs and higher education, while one of the committee members appointed as the

deputy for vice-president.

External evaluator

At the end of each academic year the colleges will select several courses for external evaluation. The

external evaluator is brought in from outside the university to evaluate the work of the lecturer

including the grading, and the students’ performance.

Review Selection and appointment Strategies

Under the guidance of the ministry of higher education the university has appointed the first three

distinctive students from each department annually in order to encourage students to study and collect

the highest scores on the one hand, and to ensure an efficient people from within the university


environment resulting in easy interaction with the nature of the work on the other hand, the university

has also opened the doors to Iraqi academics in exile and encourage them to return to the university as

an important source of knowledge. The university has also endeavored to hire people who have

experience in information technology working field. In addition to increasing salaries to double

quantities according to scientific title in order to compete the private universities, which have become

an attractive for many academic staff.

Review daily work policies

Daily work policies have also a share of the development program; by allowing employees to work

their usual number of hours in fewer days per week and give them the benefit of an extra one day off

in addition to increasing salaries to double amounts, furthermore, Job rotation technique has been

adopted for new trainees as knowledge acquisition and learning mechanism, in addition to adoption of

staff housing project; which is still under study, all of these policies and efforts in order to encourage

staff members to innovation at work and exchange information among themselves.

Developing of study materials and teaching methods

Duties of academic staff and teaching methods and duties of students have been reconsidered to ensure

the best results; both roles can be discussed as follows:

The Responsibility of the Lecturer The most important job of the lecturer is to insure that the learning process is scientific, efficient and

going in evolving way. Following are some of the tasks that are assigned to the lecturer under TQAP:

Write out the lecture notes for the assigned subjects and to provide a copy of these notes to the course coordinator to be included in the student’s course book.

Prepare detailed, lectures on the related subjects with updated information and illustrations and power-point presentations.

For each course three forms of questions with standard answers should be included and the exam committee how chooses one of these forms.

Advise students about the nature and preparations of the exams and answering strategies. The Rights of the Student

Students have specific and legitimate rights hat ensure and protect the integrity of the educational

process, these rights include:

Student has the right to receive course books before the beginning of course.

The right to provide the feedback at the end of the each course to the department’s coordinator.

The right to provide feedback on the examination process according to objective standards, which used as source to assess departments and the entire faculty.

The right to receive a photocopy of his/her examination papers, if need be.

Continuing in funding students’ monthly amount sufficient to cover transportation costs. The Duties of the Student

Students have certain obligations toward the university as well, especially the agreements (a number of

terms and conditions) which must be sign at the beginning of each academic year; states that students

should behave according to university guidelines and instructions.

Developing of infrastructures

University has taken several effective steps and released the infrastructures development plan to

complement the steps that have taken in the development of its intellectual resources, a new campus

has been built under the supervision of efficient international companies; includes several classrooms

which built according to international standards in addition to modern laboratories, huge libraries and

immense stadiums, furthermore the university has been equipped with all modern technological

requirements and devices that facilitate knowledge sharing process. In addition to the release of

university website which provides a personal page for each academic staff member to upload lectures

and courses and to enhance knowledge participation efforts.

Opening scholarship program in massively way An ambitious program of full scholarship has been developed with a budget of (US$100 million)

allocated to the scheme, this program aim to build and develop human resources able to manage the


restructuring and reconstruction process, benefit from the expertise of developed nations to help in the

process of knowledge sharing and developing scientific research skills by linking with international

universities.

All the administrative facilities to implement this program have been established; also enrollment in

this program was within easy and clear requirements without ethnic or religious discrimination.

DISCUSSION OF CASE

This case study has provided an overview into the implementation of Teaching Quality Assurance

Program (TQAP) in the University of Northern Iraq. It can be seen that the higher education

institutions can have a wide framework of knowledge sharing and enhancing innovation performance

initiatives but not necessarily to the same standard as in other organizations. In order to activate the

knowledge sharing process, the University have to understand the factors that encourage people and

make them willing to share their own knowledge voluntarily, especially by providing a supportive

environment, such as reward and motivations, training courses and investing in scholarship to study

abroad and bring new knowledge, in addition to the support and commitment of senior management

towards knowledge sharing process and innovation performance enhancement.

Although TQAP initiatives have achieved a dramatic success in the level of quality education in

comparison with previous periods, the authors believe there are some areas that need to be reviewed;

such program focuses mostly on the academic staff roles and gives less concentration on the students

and some types of infrastructures like virtual libraries and publishing facilities in international

scientific journals and their role in educational process, make teaching staff feel threatened, because

their University like other public universities consider knowledge and its intellectual capital as public

good, while academic staff consider their own knowledge as private goods. Moreover, the university

does not specify what type of knowledge is required to share and do not provide adequate protection

especially with regard to the upload of lectures online. In fact not all type of knowledge should be

shared or is supposed to be shared; that because some knowledge regard as intellectual property;

therefore a suitable criteria like possibility and exchangeability should be use to determine knowledge

sharing veracity.

Furthermore, there was a pressing emphasis on information technology as a main way to share

knowledge; while individual factors are remain the most important influential on the individual's

willingness to share knowledge. Add to that the urgently fulfillment of TQAP resulted in some

confusion with some units and individuals especially the old staff, and like any change process there

was a strong resistance to the program at the beginning were dissipate later.

Last but not least, the University did not take into account the opinion of academic staff in some

procedural aspects as the first affected of the program reflected on the weakness of some instructions

with reality.

SUGGESTIONS

To overcome such situations that are discussed above, which can be occur at any higher education

institution, the university has to follow strict quality assurance requirements imposed by scientific

international affiliations and federation in order to build a much stronger foundation for society

development especially through dissemination and sharing of knowledge. In addition, University

should take into account the opinion of affected individuals by such program to ensure the best results

at the implementation level and tracking the gradual way in the implementing of various stages of this

program.

Moreover, it is important to bear in mind how to activate the role of all parties that will be involved in

knowledge sharing process in equal way to achieve efficient sharing of knowledge. Finally, this paper

focuses on the internal determinants of knowledge sharing. However, future studies should pay more

attention to external determinates and factors, which, in fact, might affect knowledge sharing process.

CONCLUSION


Nowadays knowledge and innovation considered as elixir to provide organizations with competitive

advantage. The figuration and establishing of any knowledge management program depended heavily

up on top management support and willingness of individuals to acquire and share their own

knowledge voluntary, therefore organization should understand clearly the incentives and required

environment to achieve that. In general and in the case of TQAP it is important that all affected of

administrative and academic staff to be aware of these developments and why such changes will have

to occur, and what are the expected benefits of knowledge sharing at organizational and individual

levels, therefore this case study came to shed light on the role of knowledge sharing on innovation

performance in the University of Northern Iraq and the problems faced by the university and the

provided solutions.

REFERENCES

Abubakar, L.J., and Ahmad, H. “Assessing the relationship between firm resources and product

innovation performance: A resource-based view.” Bus. Pro. Mgt J., vol. 16, no. 3, 420 – 435, 2010.

Brachos, D., Kostopoulos, K., Soderquist, K. E., and Prastacos, G. « Knowledge effectiveness, social

context and innovation.” J. of Kldg. Mgt, vol. 11, no. 5, 31 – 44, 2007.

Burke, M. E. “Knowledge sharing in emerging economies.” Lib. Rvw, 60, no. 1, 5 – 14, 2011.

Cao, Y., and Xiang, Y. “The impact of knowledge governance on knowledge sharing.” Management

Decision, vol. 50, no. 4, 591 – 610, 2012.

Casimir, G., Lee, K., and Loon, M.. “Knowledge sharing: influences of trust, commitment and cost.” J.

of Kdge. Mgt, vol. 16, no. 5, 740 – 753, 2012.

Emelo, R. “Why personal reputation matters in virtual knowledge sharing.” Indl and Com. Tr., vol. 44,

no. 1, pp. 35 – 40, 2012.

Fong, C., Ooi, K., Lee, V., and Chong, A. “HRM practices and knowledge sharing: an empirical

study.” Int. J. of Mpwr, vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 704 – 723, 2011.

Geiger, D., and Schreyögg, G. “Narratives in knowledge sharing: challenging validity.” Journal of

Knowledge Management, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 97 – 113, 2012.

Han, B. M., and Anantatmula, V. S. “Knowledge sharing in large IT organizations: a case study.”

VINE, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 421 – 439, 2007.

Heng, C., Bao, Z., and Weihong, C. Research on Evaluation of MNCs’ technological innovation

performance. URL://ieeexplore.ieee.org. Retrieved on 23rd

September, 2010

Hooff, B. V., Schouten, A. P., and Simonovski, S. “What one feels and what one knows: the influence

of emotions on attitudes and intentions towards knowledge sharing.” J. of Kwldg. Mgt, vol. 16, no. 1,

pp. 148 – 158, 2012.

Husted, K., Michailova, S., Minbaeva, D. B., and Pedersen, T. “Knowledge-sharing hostility and

governance mechanisms: an empirical test.” J of Kldg. Mgt, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 754 – 773, 2012.

Kamasak, R., and Bulutlar, F. “The influence of knowledge sharing on innovation.” Eupn Bus. Rw,

vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 306 – 317, 2010.

Kim, Y. M., Bennett, D. N., and Song, H. J. “Knowledge sharing and institutionalism in the healthcare

industry.” J. of Kwlg. Mgt, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 480 – 494, 2012.

Ko, H., and Lu, H. “Measuring innovation competencies for integrated services in the communications

industry.” J. of Serv. Mgt, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 162 – 190, 2010.

Kumar, N., and Rose, R. “The impact of knowledge sharing and Islamic work ethic on innovation

capability.” Cr. Cult. Mgt: An Int. J., vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 142 – 165, 2012.

Lin, H. F. “Knowledge sharing and firm innovation capability: An empirical study.” International

Journal of Manpower, vol. 28, no. 3/4), pp. 315-332, 2007.

Marouf, L. N. “Social networks and knowledge sharing in organizations: a case study.” J. of Kwldg.

Mgt., vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 110 – 125, 2007.

Nan, N. A principal-agent model for incentive design in knowledge sharing. J. of Kwldg. Mgt., 12(3),

101 – 113, 2008.

//ieeexplore.ieee.org/


Neira, C. O., Lindman, M. T., and Fernández, M. J. “Innovation and performance in SME furniture

industries: An international comparative case study." Mkt Intlg. & Pln., vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 216 – 232,

2009.

Ooi, K., Lin, B., Teh, P., and Chong, A. Y. “Does TQM Support Innovation Performance in

Malaysia’s Manufacturing Industry?” J. of Bus. Ecc. and Mgt, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 366–393, 2012.

Ordaz, C. C., Cruz, J. G., Ginel, E.S., and Cabrera, R. “The influence of human resource management

on knowledge sharing and innovation in Spain: the mediating role of affective commitment.” The Int. J

of HRM, vol. 22, no. 7, pp. 1442–1463, 2011.

Parida,V., Westerberg, M., and Frishammar., J. “Inbound Open Innovation Activities in High-Tech

SMEs: The Impact on Innovation Performance.” J of Sml. Bus. Mgt, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 283–309, 2012.

Rahab, Sulistyandari and Sudjono. “The Development of Innovation Capability of Small Medium

Enterprises Through Knowledge Sharing Process: An Empirical Study of Indonesian Creative

Industry.” Int J of Bus and Soc. Sci., vol. 2, no.21, pp. 112-123, 2011.

Sáenz, J., Aramburu, N., and Rivera, O. “Knowledge sharing and innovation performance: A

comparison between high-tech and low-tech companies.” J. of Intl. Cap, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 22 – 36,

2009.

Sohail, M. S., and Daud, S. Knowledge sharing in higher education institutions: Perspectives from

Malaysia. VINE, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 125 – 142, 2009.

Suppiah, V., and Sandhu, M. S. Organizational culture's influence on tacit knowledge-sharing

behavior. J. of Kwldg. Mgt, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 462 – 477, 2011.

Tohidinia, Z., and Mosakhani, M. (2010). Knowledge sharing behaviour and its predictors. Ind. Mgt &

Data Sys., vol. 110, no. 4, pp. 611 – 631.

Ussahawanitchaki, P. Administrative Innovation, Technical Innovation, Competitive Advantage,

Competitive Environment, and Firm performance of Electronics Business in Thailand. Rvw. of Bus.

Resh, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1-10, 2012.

Zboralski, K. Antecedents of knowledge sharing in communities of Practice. J. of Kwldg. Mgt, vol. 13,

no. 3, pp. 90 – 101, 2009.

Zhen, L., Jiang, Z., & Song, H. Distributed knowledge sharing for collaborative product development.

Int. J. of Prod. Resh, vol. 49, no. 10-15, pp. 2959–2976, 2011.

Table of Contents Mohammed Galib Hussain · 2017. 2. 2. · Mohammed Galib Hussain The Effect of Brainstorming Strategy on Grade Eight Students Achievement in General Science in Ajlun

Documents