Knowledge Management, Organizational Innovativeness, and Adversity Quotient on Institutional Performance of Local Economic Enterprises

Authors

  • Eduardo C. Delgado Jr College of Business Bukidnon State University Main Campus

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55927/eajmr.v2i5.4051

Keywords:

Adversity Quotient, Institutional Performance, Knowledge Management, Organizational Innovativeness

Abstract

This study attempted to assess the influence of knowledge management, organizational innovativeness, and adversity quotients manifested through the institutional performance. There are 221 local economic enterprise employees of the local government units in Bukidnon participated in the study, which employed a quantitative descriptive design, to evaluate the relationship between two or more variables as well as the multiple regression analysis in determining variables that predict institutional performance. Findings revealed that knowledge management, organizational innovativeness, and adversity quotient are predictors, positively correlated and have a statistically significant relationship to institutional performance. The overall predictive model is presented as follows; Institutional performance = 1.123 + 0.189*Ownership. The overall model tested was highly significant with F = 3.654, p=.000. The regression model further discloses that for every unit change in ownership, there is a corresponding increase by .189 of the institutional performance. Based on this result, the null hypothesis is rejected. The independent variable, taken as a whole, can predict the institutional performance of the local economic enterprise employees. The data implies that the higher level of ownership in adverse situations of the local economic enterprise employees, the more they have performed well in their institutional performance. Therefore, one of the practical implications of this result in the management of organizational innovation processes is that to manage the innovation process effectively, owners and, or managers need to understand knowledge management and innovativeness factors that affect different innovation types in their institutional performance.

References

Ablaña MJ and Isidro DJ (2015). Correlation between Adversity Quotient® and Job Performance of LGU Employees of Tayabas City: Input to Effective Public Anvari-e-rostami, A. A., and Shahabi, B. (2015). Knowledge management and organizational learning: An analysis of the role of knowledge and experience documentation. Journal of Information Technology Management

Balares N (2013). School Management Competencies: Their Influence on Institutional Performance. Unpublished Dissertation, Naga College Foundation, Inc. Naga City

Baroa A,D (2015). Adversity Quotient® and Leadership Skills of School Administrators: Basis for Leadership Enhancement Program. Date retrieved December 3, 2019: http://www.peaklearning.com/documents/PEAK_GRI_Baroa.pdf

Bibiso, Mesfin. (2017). Institutional Quality Enhancement and Assurance Director, Wolaita Sodo University, P.O.Box 138, Wolaita Sodo, Ethiopia

Chang, C. L.-h. & Lin, T.-C. (2015). The Role of Organizational Culture in the Knowledge Management Process. Journal of Knowledge Management.

Fisher (2017) The Role of Training in a Changing Workplace and Workforce. New Perspective and Approaches. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishing.Retrieved November 2019.

Harriman L. (2016) ―Measuring Millennial‘ Adversity Quotient® and Its Correlation with Individual Performance in Project Teams‖. Date retrieved December 8, 2019 from http://www.peaklearning.com/documents/PEAK_GRI_harriman.pdf

Hegazy, F. & Ghorab, K. (2014. The Influence of Knowledge Management on Organizational Business Processes' and Employees' Benefits. International Journal of Business and Social Science.

Kendra Cherry, (2017). ―Importance of Resilience: Coping With Crisis‖. Date retrieved Decembery 15, 2019 https://www.verywell.com/what- is resilience-2795059

Khan, R. A. (2014. Sustainable Competitive Advantage through Knowledge Management. International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Engineering &Technology.

Kurt Darr (2017). Introduction to Management and Leadership Concepts, Principles and Practices. Chapter 2. Jone and Barlett Learning Center. Retrieved November 28, 2019 Lee Tan Luck (2018). School Principals‘ Effectiveness and Leadership, Quality in Educational Management. Retrieved Novemeber 2019 from the Internet.

Linton, G. (2019). Innovativeness, risk-taking, and proactiveness in startups: A case study and conceptual development. Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research.

Merlo, T. R. (2016. Factors Influencing Knowledge Management Use in Technology Enterprises In Southern United States. Vienna, Austria, Elsevier.

Naperi J.N (2019) Adversity Quotient® And Management Skills Of School Principals:Their Influence On Institutional Performance. Naga College Foundation, Naga City

Ousman, Kedir. (2017). Quality Enhancement and Planning Unit, Wolaita Sodo University, P.O.Box 138, Wolaita Sodo, Ethiopia

OuYang, Y.-C. (2014. A Cyclic Model for Knowledge Management Capability - A Review Study. Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review.

Politis, J.D. (2015) Entrepreneurial Orientation, Creativity, and Productivity: The Influence of Self-leadership Strategies. Charles Darwin University, Sydney, Australia

Republic Act No.7160: ―Local Government Code of 1991.Republic of the Philippines, Congress of the Philippines.

Shibru, Sintayehu. (2017). Quality Audit and Information Processing Unit, Wolaita Sodo University, P.O.Box 138, Wolaita Sodo, Ethiopia

Stoltz P.G& Weihenmayer E (2010). ―The Adversity Advantage: Turning Everyday Struggles into Everyday Greatness‖: updated with new stories from the seven and summits expedition photographs. New York

Xue., Colin Ting Si (2017)Research in Business and Management ISSN 2330-8362 2017,Vol. 4, No. 1

Downloads

Published

2023-05-30

How to Cite

Eduardo C. Delgado Jr. (2023). Knowledge Management, Organizational Innovativeness, and Adversity Quotient on Institutional Performance of Local Economic Enterprises. East Asian Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 2(5), 2129–2144. https://doi.org/10.55927/eajmr.v2i5.4051

Issue

Section

Articles