An Analytic Study on Constructional Relationship of Intrapersonal Factors Fostering Innovation Competency: From Taiwanese Students’ Perspectives
More details
Hide details
National Yunlin University of Science and Technology/Overseas Chinese University, TAIWAN
National Yunlin University of Science and Technology, TAIWAN
National Academy for Educational Research, TAIWAN
Online publish date: 2019-07-05
Publish date: 2019-07-05
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2019;15(12):em1780
The objective of this study was to determine the relationship among some intrapersonal factors including individual professional competency, interdisplinary ability, social skills, and team cohesion. Results showed that each of these factors could influence the innovation competency of students enrolled in design programs. To scrutinize effects of these factors on innovation competency, this study examined their correlations with innovation competency and their internal structure in order to comprehensively understand influential processes and paths for innovation competency enhancement in design education. The validated questionnaire was delivered to 296 students enrolled in design programs of universities in Taiwan. SPSS 18.0 and AMOS statistics were used to analyze collected data. To address research questions of this study, t-test, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), Pearson correlation analysis, Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), and Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) were performed. The following crucial conclusions were reached: (1) Students enrolled in design programs generally possessed high levels of professional competency, interdisplinary ability, social skills capability, team cohesion, thinking style, and innovation competency; (2) There were significant and positive relationships among these factors. This implies that these intrapersonal factors are highly relied on each other because they co-exist and interact with each other. Thus, any change in one factor would create chain effects; and (3) These highly correlated intrapersonal factors can be developed in real environment through understanding their interactive, hierarchical, and consecutive processes rather than through focusing on effects of a single factor. These conclusions could provide several suggestions for professionals, managers, and, more importantly, school educators in relevant fields. Two suggestions are provided for future high quality and comprehensive research to further understand and improve strategies needed for design education.
Amabile, T. M. (1988). A Model of Creativity and Innovation in Organizations, in Staw, B. M. & Cummings (Eds.). Research in Organizational Behavior, 10(1), 123-167.
Amabile, T. M., Conti, R., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. (1996). Assessing the work environment for creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 39(5), 123-167.
Ay, N., & Sung, Y. (2010). Aesthetic Economy Slows Taiwan ‘s Small and Medium - sized Enterprises to Construct Soft Power. Journal for SME Development, 16, 209-222.
Bandura, A. (1989). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman.
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual review of psychology, 52(1), 1-26.
Basadur, M., & Hausdorf, P. A. (1996). Measuring divergent thinking attitudes related to creative problem solving and innovation management. Creativity Research Journal, 9(1), 21-32.
Calantone, R. J., & Stanko, M. A. (2007). Drivers of Outsourced Innovation: An Exploratory Study. Product Development & Management Association, 24, 230-241.
Cefis, E., & Marsili, O. (2006). Survivor: The role of innovation in firms’ survival. Research Policy, 35(5), 626-641.
Chen, K. Y., & Wang, C. H. (2010). Statistical Analysis Practice: Application of SPSS & AMOS. Taipei: Wunan Press.
Chen, L. A. (2005). Creative Thinking Strategies & Skills. Bulletin of Educational Resources and Research, 30, 201-221.
Chen, S. Z., & Huang, W. Z. (2006). The Art of Innovative Design. Taipei: Longxi International Book, 13-18.
Chesbrough, H., & Crowther, A. K. (2006). Beyond high tech: early adopters of open innovation in other industries. R & D Management, 36(3), 229-236.
Chiou, H. (2012). Application of fuzzy composite score for scoring situational judgment tests: A integrated operation viewpoint. Quantitative Modelling in Marketing and Management. USA: World Scientific Publishing.
Chiu, S. P. (2014). A Study of Students’ Core Competencies and Competitive Advantage from Design Colleges (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). National Yunlin University of Science and Technology, Taiwan.
Cohen, M. (1995). When People Get Out of the Box: New Relationships, New Systems, In Howard A (Ed.), the changing nature of work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 365-410.
Craft, A., Jeffrey, B., & Leibling, M. (Eds.). (2001). Creativity in education. A&C Black.
Drucker, P. F. (1998). The discipline of innovation. Harvard business review, 76(6), 149-157.
Fagerberg, J., Mowery, D. C., & Nelson, R. R. (2005). The Oxford handbook of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 39-50.
Hagel, J., & Brown. J. S. (2005). The Only Sustainable Edge: Why Business Strategy Depends on Productive Friction and Dynamic Specialization. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Hong, P., Nahm, A. Y., & Doll, W. J. (2004). The Role of Project Target Clarity in An Uncertain Project Environment. International Journal of Operations and Preduction Management, 24(12), 1269-1291.
Hsiao, W. J., & Lai, R. Y. (2010). The Impact of Social Skills and Team Context on Knowledge-flows. International Journal of Commerce and Stratege, 2(2), 109-123.
Hulsheger, U. R., Anderson, N., & Salgado, J. F., (2009). Team-level predictors of innovation at work: a comprehensive meta-analysis spanning three decades of research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(5), 1128-1145.
Hung, S. Y., Chen, H. G., & Yeh, P. (2006). Effectiveness of the Creativity Support Systems: An Empirical Test of the Self-Efficacy Theory. Journal of Information Management, 13(4), 1-26.
Hwang, F. M. (2015). Structural Equation Modeling (5th ed.). Taipei: Wunan Press.
Janssen, O. (2003), Innovative behaviour and job involvement at the price of conflict and less satisfactory relations with co-workers. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 76, 347-364.
Jeffrey, B., & Craft, A. (2004). Teaching creatively and teaching for creativity: distinctions and relationships. Educational studies, 30(1), 77-87.
Kerr, B., & Gagliardi, C. (2003). Measuring creativity in research and practice. In S. J. Lopez & C. R. Snyder (Eds.) Positive Psychological Assessment: A Handbook of Models and Measures. Washington D.C: American Psychological Association.
Kimble, C., Grenier, C., & Goglio-Primard, K. (2010). Innovation and knowledge sharing across professional boundaries: Political interplay between boundary objects and brokers. International Journal of Information Management, 30, 437-444.
Kodama, M. (2007). Innovation through Boundary Management - A Case Study in Reforms at Matsushita Electric. Technovation, 27, 15-29.
Kodama, M. (2009). Boundaries Innovation and Knowledge Integration in the Japanese Firm. Long Range Planning, 42(4), 463-494.
Luh, D. B., & Lu, C. C. (2012). Co-competition based Recruitment Approach. Journal of Design, 17(1), 1-24.
Morgeson, F. P., Reider, M. H., & Campionk, M. A. (2005). Selecting Individuals in Team Settings: the Importance of Social Skills, Personality Characteristics, and Teamwork Knowledge. Personnel Psychology, 58(3), 583-612.
Robbins, S. P. (2001). Organizational behavior, 14/E. Pearson Education India.
Stark, J. S., Lowther, M. A., & Hagerty, B. M. K. (1986). Responsive professional education: Balancing outcomes and opportunities. Washington, DC: ASHE.
Teigland, R., & Wasko, M. (2003). Integrating Knowledge Through Information Trading: Examining the Relationship Between Boundary Spanning Communication and Individual Performance. Decision Sciences, 34(2), 261-287.
Tien, C. T., & Lu, T. Y. (2005). The relationships of psychological contract and innovative behaviors: Cognitive style as a moderator. Paper presented at the 2005 Health Management Conference, Taiwan.
Tjosvold, D. (1988). Cooperative and competitive dynamics within and between organizational units. Human Relations, 41(6), 425-436.
Wang, L. Y., Chang, C. N., & Chiang, S. C. (2014, Sep). Network-based Recommendation Game for Increasing the Response Rate of Web Survey on Higher Education. Paper presented at the 2013 European Conference on Educational Research, Porto, Portugal.
Wen, L. Y., & Chen, M. H. (2008). A Study of the Influence on Organizational Innovation Climate and Employee Engagement to individual Innovative Behavior. Paper presented at the 2016 Health Management Conference, Taiwan.
Woodman, R. W., Sawyer, J. E., & Griffin, R. W. (1993). Psychographics and creativity. Journal of Advertising, 2(March), 32-35.
Wu, M. C., Chang, W. L., & Chen, C. C. (2012). Retrospect and Prospect of Design Education in Taiwan. Taiwan Education Review, 674, 77-80.
Yu, M. N. (2006). Latent Variable Models: The Application of SIMPLIS. Taipei: H-EDU Press.