The role of leadership in knowledge sharing of the university teachers a case study at the nguyen trai university

ĐẠI HỌC QUỐC GIA HÀ NỘI KHOA QUẢN TRỊ VÀ KINH DOANH - VŨ THỊ KIM OANH THE ROLE OF LEADERSHIP IN KNOWLEDGE SHARING OF THE UNIVERSITY TEACHERS: A CASE STUDY AT THE NGUYEN TRAI UNIVERSITY VAI TRÒ CỦA SỰ LÃNH ĐẠO TRONG CHIA SẺ TRI THỨC CỦA CÁC GIẢNG VIÊN ĐẠI HỌC: TRƯỜNG HỢP NGHIÊN CỨU TẠI ĐẠI HỌC NGUYỄN TRÃI LUẬN VĂN THẠC SĨ QUẢN TRỊ KINH DOANH Hà Nội - 2017 ĐẠI HỌC QUỐC GIA HÀ NỘI KHOA QUẢN TRỊ VÀ KINH DOANH - VŨ THỊ KIM OANH THE ROLE OF LEADERSHIP IN KNOWLEDGE SHARING OF THE UNIVERSITY TEACHERS: A CASE STUDY AT THE NGUYEN TRAI UNIVERSITY VAI TRÒ CỦA SỰ LÃNH ĐẠO TRONG CHIA SẺ TRI THỨC CỦA CÁC GIẢNG VIÊN ĐẠI HỌC: TRƯỜNG HỢP NGHIÊN CỨU TẠI ĐẠI HỌC NGUYỄN TRÃI Chuyên ngành: Quản trị kinh doanh Mã số: 60 34 01 02 LUẬN VĂN THẠC SĨ QUẢN TRỊ KINH DOANH NGƯỜI HƯỚNG DẪN KHOA HỌC: PGS.TS NGUYỄN NGỌC THẮNG Hà Nội - 2017 DECLARATION The author confirms that the research outcome in the thesis is the result of author’s independent work during study and research period and it is not yet published in other’s research and article The other’s research result and documentation (extraction, table, figure, formula,and other document) used in the thesis are cited properly and the permission (if required) is given The author is responsible in front of the Thesis Assessment Committee, Hanoi School of Business and Management, and the laws for above-mentioned declaration Date: April, 20, 2017 i ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I have gained huge knowledge, skill and insights from my MBA course The course raises my capacity of administration and management up to the next level I am now very confident in my position of management I would like to extend my sincerest thanks and appreciation to all those who have made this Thesis to be possible I woud like to express my great gratitude to my supervisor Nguyen Ngoc Thang for his useful comments, remarks and engagement during my process of doing this master thesis Also, xin chân thành cảm ơn đồng nghiệp, lãnh đạo trường đại học Nguyễn Trãi, hỗ trợ việc cung cấp thông tin, số liệu, trả lời câu hỏi khảo sát đưa nghiên cứu, để hồn thiện nghiên cứu Sincere thanks are extended to the Faculty of International Training - Vietnam National University, Hanoi for equipping me with huge knowledge and skills through various interesting and practical subjects I also would like to thanks my classmates for their friendship and reciprocal encouragement to make our class time to be unforgettable time Lastly, I would like to give my great thanks to my husband, my kids, and my family who always standby me during the past two years and encourages me to keep moving from the beginning of my study ii The role of leadership in knowledge sharing of the university teachers: A case study at the Nguyen Trai University Summary of the results In the educational environment, the issue of knowledge sharing is extremely important and has practical implications for the addition of professional knowledge, practical knowledge, enhancing teaching capacity and the quality of lecturers Therefore, the NUT also pay attentision on the sharing knowledge among faculty by organizing seminars and science activities at the school However, due to not more concern the importance of the role of the leadership in knowledge sharing activities, the results of the knowledge sharing activities at NUT are still limited Thus, the author studies the role of leadership in knowledge sharing at NUT To carry out this study, the author has systematized the theoretical foundation for knowledge sharing, factors that affect knowledge sharing, and choice of research models From that, based on the results of the survey, analyze the status of knowledge sharing and clarify the impact of factors on knowledge sharing at the NUT The results show that the factors of Trust in leader; Leader – follwer relationship and Leaders behavior have positive effect on knowledge sharing Based on this analysis, the author proposes a group of solutions to enhance knowledge sharing in NUT in the future Applicability in practice With the results of the study, from the assessment of the situation and proposed solution based on regression results, combined with the opinions of the lecturers, NUT’s leaders, the author believes that, if the solutions are synchronized implemented, it will contribute significantly to improving the efficiency of knowledge sharing among the lecturers of the NUT Further research orientations Research will be improved further if additional factors can be added to knowledge sharing (such as factors belong to the lectuers, management policies, etc.) Therefore, the direction of the next study needs to explore more factors to make more detailed conclusions At the same time, I would like to express my sincere thanks to my colleagues and leaders of Nguyen Trai University for providing me information, documents, surveys and suggestions to help me complete this research iii TABLE OF CONTENT DECLARATION .i ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ii TABLE OF CONTENT iv LIST OF TABLES vii LIST OF FIRGURES viii INTRODUCTION CHAPTER 1: THEORICAL FRAMEWORK AND ASSESSMENT MODEL OF THE ROLE OF LEADERSHIP ON THE KNOWLEDGE SHARING 11 1.1 The knowledge definition 11 1.2 The definition of knowledge sharing 12 1.3 Factors affecting knowledge sharing 13 1.3.1 Belief 13 1.3.2 Communication 13 1.3.3 Leadership 14 1.3.4 Cohesion 14 1.3.5 Reward and incentive system 15 1.3.6 Information technology 15 1.4 The concept of leadership and the expression of the leadership 16 1.4.1 Concept 16 1.4.2 Expression of leadership 16 1.5 The role of leadership in knowledge sharing 17 1.6 Some empirical research model 18 1.6.1 The Billy Whisnant & Odai Khasawneh (2014) model 18 1.6.2 The Mansor Kenny model (2013) 19 1.6.3 The Phuong, T.T.L and Thuy, N.N (2011) Model 21 1.6.4 Research model of Pham Anh Tuan (2013) 22 1.6.5 Research model of Lin 23 1.7 Proposed research model 24 1.8 Technical quantitative analysis 26 1.8.1 Adjustment and test the fit 26 iv 1.8.2 Regression analysis 27 CHAPTER 2: CURRENT STATUS OF ROLE OF LEADERSHIP IN KNOWLEDGE SHARING OF TEACHERS AT NGUYEN TRAI UNIVERSITY 28 2.1 Overview of Nguyen Trai University 28 2.1.1 History and development 28 2.1.2 Structure and cultural characteristics 29 2.1.3 Scale of training and the quality of training these years 31 2.1.4 Characteristics of the leadership and lecturers of the university 36 2.2 The role of the leadership to share knowledge in the lecturers of Nguyen Trai University 37 2.2.1 Design scales 37 2.2.2 Adjustment and test the suitability of the scale 38 2.2.3 Some basic statistics 43 2.2.4 OLS regression analysis 52 2.2.5 Hypothesis test and the meaning 53 2.3 Group of promoting and inhibiting factors to the role of leaders to the knowledge sharing of the lecturers in the Nguyen Trai University 54 2.3.1 The promoting factors and causes 54 2.3.2 The inhibiting factors and causes 55 CHAPTER 3: SOLUTION TO PROMOTE KNOWLEDGE SHARING OF THE TEACHERS AT NGUYEN TRAI UNIVERSITY 57 3.1 Declaration of mission, vision and development orientations of Nguyen Trai University 57 3.2 Solutions to promote knowledge sharing among the lecturers of Nguyen Trai University 58 3.2.1 The basis for the proposed solution 58 3.2.2 Solutions for enhancing the role of the leader in the knowledge sharing 60 3.3 Recommendations 65 3.3.1 Recommendation to the Government and Ministry of Education and Training 65 3.3.2 Recommendation for the BOD of the NTU 65 CONCLUSIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS AND LIMITATIONS OF RESEARCH 66 REFERENCES 68 v ANNEX 70 Annex 01: Questionnaire 70 Annex 02: Code 76 Annex 03: Survey results 77 vi LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1 Scale of the training 32 Table 2.2 Code and study scales content 37 Table 2.3 Test the realiability of the scales on factor "Trust in Leaders" 39 Table 2.4 Test the realiability of the scales on factor "Leader - Follower relationship" 39 Table 2.5 Test the realiability of the scales on factor "Leader behavior" 40 Table 2.6 Test the realiability of the scales on factor " Knowledge sharing " 40 Table 2.7 Test on factor " Independent variables" 41 Table 2.8 Matrix rotation of independent variables 41 Table 2.9 Test on factor " Dependent variables" 42 Table 2.10 Matrix rotation of "dependent variables" 43 Table 2.11 Statistics on characteristics of respondents 43 Table 2.12 Evaluation of " Trust in Leaders" 46 Table 2.13 Evaluation of Leader - Follower relationship 48 Table 2.14 Evaluation of Leader Behavior 49 Table 2.15 Evaluation of knowledge sharing activities 51 Table 2.16 Parameter regression model 52 Table 2.17 Variance testing of the model 52 Table 2.18 Regression coefficient 53 Table 3.1 Basis for the proposed solution 58 vii LIST OF FIRGURES Firgure 1.1: Theoretical model of knowledge sharing 19 Figure 2.2: The Mansor and Kenny model 21 Figure 2.3: The Phuong, T.T.L and Thuy, N.N model 22 Figure 2.4: The Pham A, T model 23 Figure 2.5: The Lin model 24 Figure 2.6: The proposed research model 26 Digram 2.1 Organizational Structure of Nguyen Trai University 29 Chart 2.1 Areas of NTU 34 Chart 2.2 Application oriented model 34 Chart 2.3 Graduation rate 35 viii I feel honored (and be CSTT respected) when contributing and sharing information with colleagues We often exchange information CSTT with other lecturers (in the faculty and other faculties) about the way (method) of completing the tasks Knowledge and information CSTT (that be shared) often are high application value and are widely supported by most people We are very appreciate your respondent and cooperation The research team will send the results of the analysis and the main conclusions to the teacher's reference All the personal information is secured and guaranteed the private right Your sincerely 75 Annex 02: Code Question Guidances The main function of Theoret your ical Department/Faculty Your training Scienc e researc h Note Func Adm inistr Student ative manage supp ment ort Practic tiona Advi e l sory trainin depar Boar g tmen d (inters ts hip) Indep ende nt Detail Cent er main duties/tasks in your Detail Department/Faculty Your qualification Bechal level or PhD Master stude Doctor nt Number of working Under - 3 - Over years years years Your monthy income (all the income sources) How often you the science research? Under Never -10 Rarely years 10 12 years Millions Over 12 Quite Frequen often tly dong Number of research works, published articles in Not yet magazines (domestic 20 Annex 03: Survey results Gender Frequency Percent Male Valid Female Total Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 56 48.3 48.3 48.3 60 51.7 51.7 100.0 116 100.0 100.0 Age Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative Percent Percent < 30 29 25.0 25.0 25.0 30-40 42 36.2 36.2 61.2 Valid 40-50 26 22.4 22.4 83.6 > 50 19 16.4 16.4 100.0 Total 116 100.0 100.0 Income level Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 12 20 17.2 17.2 100.0 Total 116 100.0 100.0 Valid 10 – 12 77 Working experiences Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative Percent Percent 4 Total Qualification Frequency Percent Valid Valid Cumulative Percent Percent Doctor 11 9.5 9.5 9.5 Master 86 74.1 74.1 83.6 Bechalor 19 16.4 16.4 100.0 116 100.0 100.0 Total Working position (contract types) Frequency Percent Visiting lecturers Valid Formal lecturers Total Percent Percent 62.9 62.9 62.9 43 37.1 37.1 100.0 116 100.0 100.0 N of Items Alpha 920 Cumulative 73 Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Valid 78 Item Statistics Mean Std N Deviation NT 3.37 1.205 116 NT 3.27 1.145 116 NT 3.47 1.275 116 NT 3.41 1.293 116 NT 3.62 1.269 116 NT 3.39 1.163 116 Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Scale Corrected Cronbach's Item Deleted Variance if Item-Total Alpha if Item Item Deleted Correlation Deleted NT 17.16 27.234 799 903 NT 17.27 28.058 773 906 NT 17.06 26.701 790 904 NT 17.12 26.733 773 906 NT 16.91 27.506 723 913 NT 17.15 27.744 787 904 Reliability Statistics Cronbach's N of Items Alpha 908 79 Item Statistics Mean Std N Deviation MQH 3.25 1.003 116 MQH 3.42 1.006 116 MQH 3.44 1.066 116 MQH 3.27 954 116 MQH 3.16 1.046 116 MQH 3.49 1.043 116 MQH 3.18 956 116 Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Scale Corrected Cronbach's Item Deleted Variance if Item-Total Alpha if Item Item Deleted Correlation Deleted MQH 19.97 24.103 724 894 MQH 19.79 23.731 765 889 MQH 19.78 24.523 624 905 MQH 19.95 24.276 750 891 MQH 20.05 23.667 735 892 MQH 19.72 23.732 731 893 MQH 20.03 24.329 741 892 Reliability Statistics Cronbach's N of Items Alpha 897 80 Item Statistics Mean Std N Deviation HVLD 3.36 1.008 116 HVLD 3.53 1.122 116 HVLD 3.39 1.185 116 HVLD 3.47 1.240 116 HVLD 3.66 1.209 116 HVLD 3.59 1.231 116 Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Scale Corrected Cronbach's Item Deleted Variance if Item-Total Alpha if Item Item Deleted Correlation Deleted HVLD 17.64 23.937 760 875 HVLD 17.47 23.642 692 883 HVLD 17.61 22.970 711 880 HVLD 17.53 22.251 740 876 HVLD 17.34 22.071 785 869 HVLD 17.41 23.132 659 889 Reliability Statistics Cronbach's N of Items Alpha 899 81 Item Statistics Mean Std N Deviation CSTT 3.34 722 116 CSTT 3.29 769 116 CSTT 3.41 699 116 CSTT 3.43 713 116 CSTT 3.35 676 116 Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Scale Corrected Cronbach's Item Deleted Variance if Item-Total Alpha if Item Item Deleted Correlation Deleted CSTT 13.49 5.922 767 873 CSTT 13.53 5.816 735 881 CSTT 13.41 6.001 773 872 CSTT 13.40 6.067 729 881 CSTT 13.47 6.165 749 877 KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy Bartlett's Sphericity Test of Approx Chi-Square 838 1437.362 df 171 Sig .000 82 Total Variance Explained Compo Initial Eigenvalues nent Total % of Variance Extraction Sums of Rotation Sums of Squared Squared Loadings Loadings Cumulati Total ve % % of Variance Cumulati Total ve % % of Cumulati Variance ve % 5.445 28.660 28.660 5.445 28.660 28.660 4.557 23.982 23.982 4.353 22.913 51.573 4.353 22.913 51.573 4.332 22.798 46.779 3.135 16.498 68.071 3.135 16.498 68.071 4.045 21.292 68.071 720 3.791 71.862 692 3.641 75.504 630 3.318 78.821 563 2.961 81.782 480 2.529 84.311 462 2.429 86.740 10 374 1.967 88.707 11 359 1.892 90.599 12 327 1.719 92.318 13 311 1.639 93.957 14 248 1.306 95.263 15 223 1.173 96.435 16 210 1.107 97.543 17 186 981 98.524 18 169 889 99.412 19 112 588 100.000 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis 83 Component Matrixa Component HVLD 650 510 NT 633 NT 622 NT 613 HVLD 608 NT 591 HVLD 586 569 HVLD 573 543 NT 534 507 521 MQH 703 MQH 671 MQH 659 MQH 643 MQH 638 MQH 637 MQH -.501 NT HVLD 602 523 597 HVLD -.523 617 578 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis a components extracted 84 Rotated Component Matrixa Component MQH 839 MQH 828 MQH 813 MQH 808 MQH 805 MQH 798 MQH 719 NT 865 NT 863 NT 852 NT 845 NT 836 NT 781 HVLD 856 HVLD 823 HVLD 819 HVLD 796 HVLD 779 HVLD 769 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization a Rotation converged in iterations 85 KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling 847 Adequacy Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx Chi-Square 338.153 df 10 Sig .000 Total Variance Explained Component Initial Eigenvalues Total Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings % of Cumulative Variance % 3.569 71.382 71.382 468 9.351 80.734 437 8.738 89.471 301 6.010 95.481 226 4.519 100.000 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis Component Matrixa Component CSTT 859 CSTT 857 CSTT 843 CSTT 834 CSTT 831 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis a components extracted 86 Total 3.569 % of Cumulative Variance % 71.382 71.382 Correlations Knowledge Trust in Leaders - Leaders sharing leaders follower behavior relationship Knowledge sharing Trust in leaders Pearson Leaders Correlation follower 1.000 644 333 566 644 1.000 -.046 236 333 -.046 1.000 -.129 566 236 -.129 1.000 000 000 000 000 312 005 000 312 085 000 005 085 116 116 116 116 116 116 116 116 116 116 116 116 116 116 116 116 - relationship Leaders behavior Knowledge sharing Trust in leaders Sig (1-tailed) Leaders - follower relationship Leaders behavior Knowledge sharing Trust in leaders N Leaders - follower relationship Leaders behavior 87 Model Summaryb Mo R del R Adjusted Std Change Statistics Squar R Square Error of R Square e the F 878a 770 df2 Watson Sig F Change Chang Estimate df1 Durbin- Change e 764 2936596 770 125.09 112 000 2.230 a Predictors: (Constant), Leaders behavior, Leaders - follower relationship, Trust in leaders b Dependent Variable: Knowledge sharing ANOVAa Model Sum of df Mean Square F Sig Squares Regression 32.364 10.788 9.658 112 086 42.022 115 Residual Total 000b 125.097 a Dependent Variable: Knowledge sharing b Predictors: (Constant), Leaders behavior, Leaders - follower relationship, Trust in leaders Coefficientsa Model Unstandardized Standardized Coefficients Coefficients B Std Error t Sig Collinearity Statistics Beta Toleranc VIF e (Constant) 143 178 Trust in leaders 317 027 314 313 Leaders follower 802 424 547 11.735 000 944 1.059 034 421 9.213 000 983 1.017 030 491 10.461 000 931 1.075 - relationship Leaders behavior a Dependent Variable: Knowledge sharing 88 Collinearity Diagnosticsa Mode Dimensio Eigenvalu Condition l n e Index Variance Proportions (Constant Trust in Leaders - Leaders ) leaders follower behavior relationshi p 1 3.847 1.000 00 01 00 00 078 7.010 01 30 39 10 058 8.128 00 59 02 59 017 15.074 99 10 59 30 a Dependent Variable: knowledge sharing 89 ... practical training Percentage of graduates With the increase in the training quality, the increase of graduate rate at Nguyen Trai University is indispensable In recent years, the graduate rate... moving from the beginning of my study ii The role of leadership in knowledge sharing of the university teachers: A case study at the Nguyen Trai University Summary of the results In the educational... more attention to knowledge sharing activities 2.1.3 Scale of training and the quality of training these years 2.1.3.1 Scale of the training The Nguyen Trai University was established under the