U2A1 & U2D1 - Advanced Searching Teachniques - please follow all instructions and read all attached documents. Due Sunday by 9pm. CST. My Field is Public Service Leadership

Article4-Therelationshipbetweentransformationalleadershipandknowledgemanagementinthepublicsector.pdf

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Operations Management homework help >U2A1 & U2D1 - Advanced Searching Teachniques - please follow all instructions and read all attached documents. Due Sunday by 9pm. CST. My Field is Public Service Leadership

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR

Donnell E. Adams

PHILLIP M. RANDALL, PhD, Faculty Mentor and Chair

JENNIFER SCOTT, PhD, Committee Member

MICHAEL WILLIAMS, PhD, Committee Member

Rhonda Allison Capron, EdD, Dean, School of Business and Technology

A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the Degree

Doctor of Philosophy

Capella University

September 2016

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,

a note will indicate the deletion.

Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.

ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway

P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346

ProQuest

Published by ProQuest LLC ( ). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.

ProQuest Number:

10196141

2016

Abstract

Transformational leadership and knowledge management are considered key contributors

to the success of an organization. However, transformational leadership and knowledge

management as overall constructs are not always considered as partners in achieving

organizational success in the public sector. The characteristics of transformational

leadership do not always correspond to serving as motivators towards the display of

knowledge management behaviors in public sector organizations. Since leadership plays

a major part in ensuring organizational success and workforce development, there is

ongoing interest to determine if transformational leadership is the most appropriate

leadership style that influences the display of knowledge management behaviors. A total

of 89 public sector human resource directors located in the Southeast United States

participated in this study. A Pearson’s coefficient correlation and linear analysis were

conducted to test the hypotheses for this study exploring the relationship between overall

transformational leadership and overall knowledge management. The study used a

Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire 5X self-assessment form and a Knowledge

Management Inventory surveys to identify the leadership traits demonstrated by human

resource leaders and knowledge management behaviors to determine the overall linkage

between the two constructs. Literature is limited on the correlation between overall

transformational leadership and overall knowledge management in the public sector. The

study results revealed no relationship between overall transformational leadership and

overall knowledge management within the public sector of the Southeast United States.

Future research might include human resource directors from a different geographical

sector is warranted.

iii

Dedication

Praise God from whom all blessings flow. This dissertation is dedicated to my

lovely wife, Shirley, whose patience and encouragement was instrumental in my pursuing

and completing this major endeavor. Thank you for your understanding and for believing

in me enough to sacrifice time and resources so I could complete this goal. I include

CosMos, my German Shepherd – Labrador Retriever family member who slept by me

when I needed company as I churned away on the chapters during the night. I thank my

daughter, Shirley Jr, for her display of love as I moved through the academic process.

Further, to my son, Dalton, for his efforts to be a positive representative within his own

family. Also, I dedicate this dissertation to the memory of my father, Albert Adams Sr.,

my mother, Gertrude Adams, my aunt, Cora Elliott, and a wonderful, supportive sister

and brother-in-law, Richard and Ella Smith. I miss them dearly and so thankful for their

sacrifices in my life.

This dissertation is dedicated to my father and mother-in-law, Frank and Faye

Dawson, for being so loving and supportive over the many years. Actually, I thank all my

immediate and extended in-laws for just being an encouragement to me and my family.

Finally, I thank all my teachers, neighbors, military mentors, and work colleagues that

entered into my life at various times and encouraged me to never give up on a dream. I

have been told that it is okay to reprioritize but never stop seeking to accomplish your

dream. At one time or another, their words of motivation have guided me through every

academic effort I have undertaken. Thank you so very much.

Acknowledgments

I thank God for His grace, the loving kindness of Jesus, my Savior, and the Holy

Spirit who gave me the strength to complete this phenomenal journey. In addition, I thank

my family and friends and the many individuals that aided and encouraged me to stay the

course. I acknowledge my brothers and sister, Albert Adams Jr, Lindberg Adams and

Patricia, and Ella Reid along with Patricia Adams, spouse of Lindberg Adams. They have

continuously been pillows of support. I thank the congregation of For Your Glory

Ministries International, my church family, for being patient with me and understanding

as I sought to meet the challenges of this academic endeavor.

I truly thank Dr. Phillip M. Randall, my mentor and chair, for his phenomenal

expertise, kick-in-the pants encouragement, and calm demeanor as this journey was being

undertaken. Additionally, I thank my committee members, Dr. Jennifer Scott, and Dr.

Michael Williams for sharing their knowledge and expertise as I moved towards the

completion of this study. I thank Dr. James Krolik for helping me with my initial efforts

to complete this dissertation. Dr. Evan Duff for providing feedback regarding my initial

research plan. Also, I extend a thank you to Dr. Leodis Scott for his guidance and insight.

Finally, Shirley and I acknowledge the lifelong friendship of Roosevelt and Gary Ann

Joyner. You are our brother, sister, and honored friends.

Table of Contents

Acknowledgments iv

List of Tables viii

List of Figures x

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 1

Introduction to the Problem 1

Background of the Study 5

Target Respondents 8

Statement of the Problem 9

Purpose of the Study 10

Rationale 11

Research Questions 12

Significance of the Study 12

Definition of Terms 13

Assumptions and Limitations 14

Theoretical/Conceptual Framework) 15

Organization of the Remainder of the Study 16

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW 18

Knowledge Management 19

General Evolution of Transformational Leadership 42

Theories of Leadership 43

Transformational Leadership Style 46

The Role of Human Resources in the Public Sector 66

Summary 71

CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY 75

Research Design 75

Sample 76

Setting 79

Instrumentation/Measures 80

Data Collection 83

Data Analysis 85

Validity and Reliability 85

Ethical Considerations 86

Summary 89

CHAPTER 4. RESULTS 91

Introduction 91

Description of Population and Sample 94

Summary of Results 96

Details of Analysis and Results 101

Summary 116

CHAPTER 5. DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS 119

Introduction 119

Discussion of Results 121

Conclusion Based on Results 124

Comparison of Findings 124

Interpretation of the Findings 125

vii

Limitations 128

Implications for Practice 128

Recommendations for Future Research 129

Conclusion 130

REFERENCES 132

APPENDIX A. STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL WORK 148

APPENDIX B. DEMOGRAPHICS SURVEY 150

viii

List of Tables

Table 1. Knowledge Management Inventory ....................................................................92

Table 2. MLQ 5X Leadership Behaviors ..........................................................................93

Table 3. Gender and Age Range Composition .................................................................97

Table 4. Current Experience and Employment Level Demographics ..............................98

Table 5. Education and Technology Usage .....................................................................99

Table 6. Descriptive Statistics KMI/Variables ...............................................................100

Table 7. Descriptive Statistics Transformational Leadership/Variables .........................101

Table 8. Descriptive Statistics Transactional Leadership/Variables ...............................101

Table 9. Descriptive Statistics Passive Avoidant/Variables ...........................................101

Table 10. Knowledge Management Inventory (KMI) Scale ...........................................102

Table 11. Descriptive Statistics for Knowledge Management (KM) Acquisition ...........103

Table 12. Descriptive Statistics for Knowledge Management Creation ..........................103

Table 13. Descriptive Statistics for Knowledge Management Application .....................103

Table 14. Independent Variable: KMI (Results for Significance) ..................................104

Table 15. Current Study Cronbach’s Alpha .....................................................................105

Table 16. Comparing KM Scores between Groups .........................................................105

Table 17. Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) Scale .......................................106

Table 18. Descriptive Statistics MLQ 5X ........................................................................107

Table 19. Current Study Cronbach’s Alpha for MLQ 5X ..............................................107

Table 20. Descriptive Statistics Idealized Influence (IIA/IIB) Variables ........................108

Table 21. Descriptive Statistics Transformational IM Variable ......................................108

Table 22. Descriptive Statistics Transformational IS Variable .......................................109

Table 23. Descriptive Statistics Transformational IC Variable .......................................109

Table 24. Descriptive Statistics Overall Transactional ....................................................109

Table 25. Descriptive Statistics Overall Transactional CR Variable ...............................110

Table 26. Descriptive Statistics for Transactional - Mgmt by Exception (Active) .........110

Table 27. Descriptive Statistics Overall Passive Avoidant Characteristic ......................110

Table 28. Descriptive Statistics for Passive Avoidant -MBEP(Passive) variable ...........111

Table 29. Descriptive Statistics for Passive Avoidant – LF variable ..............................111

Table 30. MLQ Means and SD Comparison between Groups ........................................112

Table 31. MLQ Constructs/Variable with Overall Knowledge Management .................113

Table 32. Transformational Variable with Knowledge Management Variables .............114

Table 33 Transformational Means and MLQ Self-Assessment Normative.....................116

Table 34. MLQ 5X Survey Leadership Measures ..........................................................123

List of Figures

Figure 1. Overall Transformational Leadership/Knowledge Management Scatterplot 115

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

Introduction to the Problem

Organizational leaders in the public sector are expected to be efficient and

effective at providing services to citizens and all stakeholders even though resources may

be dwindling. Scholars note that public sector managers like their counterparts in the

private sector need to provide the appropriate leadership to ensure that constituents

received needed services (Williams, 2012). Williams (2012) suggested that public sector

leaders are tasked to oversee services and must develop practices that must prevent

stagnation, decrease morale, low customer satisfaction, and political interference.

Therefore, due to uncertainty and demands from the public, the person leading a public

sector organization must be able to see through the chaos and develop strategies that

motivate workers to achieve and exceed performance expectations even in an ever-

changing public sector environment (Sirisetti, 2011).

Leadership plays a significant role in public sector agencies’ ability to meet the

expectations of internal and external stakeholders. Sirisetti (2011) presented the view

that effective leadership is integral to the success of an organization. Sirisetti (2011)

further proposed that the effectiveness of a leader is revealed when the leader receives

support from a positive organizational learning culture. That is, when the leader provides

a clear vision for subordinates, then subordinates are more apt to see the purpose of a

given goal because it occurs within an organizational atmosphere that promotes growth

and learning. As a result, a leader is more effective because a conducive atmosphere

helps to strengthen employee motivation and steer employees to outperform expectations

(Sirisetti, 2011). Therefore, in order for an organization to sustain and exceed

expectations, the appropriate leadership characteristics must be in place.

Previous traditional views about leadership promoted the perspective that leaders

fall into one of three categories: a champion, a visionary, or a servant leader (Smolenyak

& Majumdar, 1992). The researchers explained that a champion leader is characterized

by uncontested authority and is regarded as being tough and determined. This type of

leader is said to have a patronizing relationship with follower (Smolenyak & Majumdar,

1992). Smolenyak and Majumdar (1992) considered the visionary leader as someone who

inspires others by reflecting a commitment to the same vision. This type of leader is said

to be able to tap into the emotional element of followers and garners a hero persona from

followers. Finally, the servant leader is suggested to be focused on promoting the

accomplishments of followers and cultivating the leadership characteristics in

subordinates. The servant style leader values and listens to followers and then leads the

individuals in the direction that meets the followers needs (Smolenyak & Majumdar,

1992). Though organizations may find the champion, visionary, and servant leadership

style useful, another style has been the one that gained traction over the years.

In the late 1970s, Burns (1978) developed the concept of transformational

leadership, which he described as interactions between leaders and their followers that

cause them to elevate one another to achieve higher levels of morality as well as provide

each other with enhanced motivation. Researchers have found a favorable relationship

regarding the applicability of transformational leadership behaviors on organizational

behaviors. However, it has been suggested that transformational leadership is an

ineffective means for influencing organizational behaviors (Tipu, Ryan, & Fantazy,

2012). A transformational leader encourages people to look beyond their own self-

interest and focus more on the common good of the organization (Nusair, Ababneh, &

Bae, 2012). Researchers also proposed that it is the transformational leader who displays

the leadership style that is closely aligned with the characteristics to inspire workers to

perform beyond expectations to achieve and even exceed the goals of an organization

(Jyoti & Dev, 2015; Odumeru & Ogbonna, 2013).

Though leadership has been defined and studied by various scholars through the

years, a new classification of leadership surfaced in the 1990s (Day & Antonakis, 2012).

Choudhary, Akhtar, and Zaheer (2013) reflected on the work of Burns, a seminal leader,

scholar, and authority on the subject of leadership, who presented the view in the late

1970s that to be truly effective in an organization, leaders need to work from the inside

out to transform employees and the organization. Researchers postulated that the

transformational leader serves as a catalyst for making significant changes in an

organization and its employees by modifying values, expectations, aspirations, and

perspectives (Bacha, 2014).

Bass and Avolio (1994) built on Burns’ perspective and introduced a model of

leadership to help define and assess the characteristics of a transformational leader. The

researchers promoted the idea that transformational leadership is a concept that includes

the visionary characteristics of a leader and contains four dimensions: individualized

consideration, intellectual stimulation, inspirational motivation, and idealized influence.

As such, the overall influence of transformational leaders provides a pathway for success

and as a result motivate workers to look beyond themselves and focus on the overall good

of an organization (Bass, 1997; Yaghoubi, Mahallati, Moghadam, & Rahimi, 2014).

Even though leadership is important, scholars view knowledge management in an

organization to be just as important (Yaghoubi et al., 2014). The idea of managing

knowledge dates back for generations. Knowledge management (KM) is a concept that

dates back to the 1990s. Early in its conception, scholars explained KM as “the process of

capturing, distributing, and effectively using knowledge” (Koenig, 2012, p. 1). In later

years, researchers promoted the view that knowledge management is a “discipline that

promotes an integrated approach to identifying, capturing, evaluating, retrieving, and

sharing all of an enterprise’s information assets…” (Koenig, 2012, p.1). Nonaka and

Konno (1998) conveyed that knowledge can be classified into two categories, tacit and

explicit.

Knowing how to properly manage tacit and explicit knowledge within the concept

of knowledge management and introducing transformational leadership as a motivator

may permit an organization to utilize human capital to achieve and exceed organizational

goals. While conducting research for this study, the researcher learned that much of the

previous research involving the relationship between transformational leadership and

knowledge management involved studying the relationship from the purview of the

private sector. However, the significance of the two concepts implies that a study to

determine if a relationship exists in public sector organizations as well would be

reasonable and legitimate.

Individuals who work in public sector organizations generally must accomplish

more work with fewer resources (Jain & Jeppesen, 2013; Lavania, 2012). Leaders in

public sector positions must display characteristics that guide employees to the successful

accomplishment of short and long-term goals. Leaders must evaluate approaches and

determine how to best use available resources—including the most effective ways to

utilize knowledge within an organization–to meet developmental and organizational

expectations (Jacobson, 2010). Performance outcomes from individuals within an

organization are influenced by various leadership styles. A leader is expected to develop

workforce practices that effectively support the management of knowledge to not only

enhance employees’ professional abilities but also serve as a tool supporting the

achievement of organizational goals (Trottier, Van Wart, & Wang, 2008). Leaders in the

public sector must accomplish all these tasks in the face of diminishing resources and

increasing demands.

Leaders face ever-evolving demands, such as the need for employee training and

the need to overcome loss of knowledge due to retirements and promotions. Leaders must

also adapt to changing work demands and loss of funds from legislators (Jain &

Jeppesen, 2013; Muhammad & Rashid, 2011; Trottier et al., 2008). Therefore, research

aimed at understanding the relationship between overall transformational leadership and

overall knowledge is very important. Studying the relationship between transformational

leadership and knowledge management provides a means for a greater emphasis on

human capital development in order to meet and exceed organizational short- and long-

term goals to deliver governmental services to constituents (Birasnav, Rangnekar, &

Dalpati, 2011).

Background of the Study

In the modern business environment, leaders must navigate numerous operational

challenges in order to establish and effectively maintain knowledge management

practices and stay competitive (Burkhard, Hill, & Venkatsubramanyan, 2011). The public

sector leaders face no fewer challenges than those in the private sector, as they try to

identify, capture, apply, and retain organizational knowledge (Trice, Bertelli, & Ward,

2011). Andreeva and Kianto (2012) promoted the view that organizations’ efforts to

harness both tacit and explicit knowledge enable them to accomplish productivity

requirements, and efforts to determine an organization’s ability to address elements of

knowledge management are important in the private sector and vital in the public sector

(Lavania, 2012).

This study explored whether a relationship existed between overall

transformational leadership and overall knowledge management in the public sector as

viewed by public sector human resource directors in the southeastern United States.

Scholars have proposed that public sector leaders face unique challenges that include

declining resources, frequent political influences, demands from external sources, and

generally, the requirements to accomplish more with fewer resources (Lavigna, 2013).

This study analyzed variables aligned under the transformational leadership style and

specific variables applied to knowledge management practices; the study also solicited

the views of public sector human resource directors. For example, the survey used for this

study sought feedback regarding variables related to knowledge management functions so

that the researcher could analyze the organizations’ use of knowledge acquisition,

knowledge creation, and knowledge application in the overall knowledge management

practices. Though human resource directors provided ratings as responses to individual

survey questions, the analysis of the responses was accomplished based on the totality of

how the respondents rated each variable.

The same approach applied in the analysis of overall transformational leadership.

Human resource directors did not rate the effectiveness of transformational leadership;

rather, they conducted an assessment of themselves using the Multifactor Leadership

Questionnaire 5X (short) to determine the characteristics each individual possessed

related to the characteristics of a transformational leadership style. As points of analysis,

human resource directors responded to 45 statements to assess the degree to which the

leadership style of each respondent revealed transformational leadership tendencies in the

categories of Idealized Influence, Inspirational Motivation, Individual Consideration, and

Intellectual Stimulation. This approach revealed transformational tendencies of each

respondent. The goal of the questionnaire was not to specifically identify an individual as

a transformational leader but to determine if the respondent had transformational

leadership characteristics. The approach used in this study aligned with the design of the

Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire designed by Avolio and Bass (2004).

Though the various subscales were assessed, this study did not seek to measure

and analyze the various subscales of transformational leadership or knowledge

management to determine the degree to which each relates to others. This study simply

explored the relationship between the broader two variables as each was viewed by

public sector human resource directors in the Southeastern United States. A relationship

determination was based on an overall analysis of the responses provided by human

resource directors and not focused on trying to establish a specific rationale regarding

how each of the subscales of the transformational leadership style and knowledge

management related.

Target Respondents

Though views vary regarding the degree to which the human resources director

affects an organization, one perspective holds that the human resource director is an

integral partner in the strategic vision of an organization (Jacobson, 2010). The relevance

of acquiring views of human resource directors is not limited to knowledge management

practices. Researchers have sought opinions or responses from human resource directors

for a variety of research studies due to the overall expertise that they can provide

(Birasnav, 2013; Coggburn et al., 2010).

Further, Al-bahussin and El-garaihy (2013) studied the connection between

organizational culture, knowledge management, and organizational innovation to meet

organizational objectives. Using three different questionnaires based on the Likert scale,

human resource directors in large private sector companies provided responses related to

various organizational activities that included knowledge management practices. The

framework for the study suggested human resource directors were chosen as the survey

population due to the influence human resource management has on knowledge

management within an organization. Findings from the study illustrated that knowledge

management plays a unique role in the innovation capability of human capital within an

organization. Furthermore, the effective use of knowledge management affects the ability

of employees’ performance to achieve current and long-term goals of an organization

(Al-bahussin & El-garaihy, 2013).

To gain awareness of the use of knowledge management practices in

governments, this research study acquired responses from human resources (HR)

directors who work in city and state governments located in the Southeastern part of the

United States. It was appropriate to solicit responses from these individuals since HR

directors play a major role in the implementation and evaluation of knowledge

management to ensure an organization can achieve its operational performance priorities

(Birasnav, 2013; Kale & Karaman, 2011; Trice et al., 2011). Since HR directors are

generally responsible for the full array of human resources activities, it is likely that they

will be involved in overseeing the application and evaluation of knowledge management

practices (Anca-Ioana, 2013; Godbout, 2000). Comparably, the Society for Human

Resource Management (2013) suggested individuals who hold HR leadership positions

(such as managers) have the responsibility to develop and administer human resource

plans and procedures that involve knowledge management. Therefore, the survey of

individuals with the title of HR director was appropriate to assess their use of knowledge

management practices.

An informal review of the structures of random city and state governmental

organizations conducted online by the researcher revealed a variation of position titles for

HR administrators. Some governments categorized senior hierarchies with position titles

in departments and divisions, while others classified structures as agencies or sections. In

the context of this study, agencies and division structural hierarchy were classified as

departments, since the informal assessment by the researcher found that a majority of the

governmental structures reviewed used this title for organization identification for senior

level positions.

Statement of the Problem

Public sector leaders must effectively respond to constituents’ and public officials’

demands for timely service. These leaders must assess the necessity for employee

training, ways to overcome loss of knowledge due to retirements and promotions,

changing work demands, and loss of funds from legislators (Jain & Jeppesen, 2013;

Muhammad & Rashid, 2011). If public sector leaders do not pay attention to public sector

workforce development, the citizenry will not be properly served, and this inattention

could result in agencies’ being reorganized or eliminated.

The research literature on the relationship between overall transformational

leadership and overall knowledge management in the public sector indicated a gap in

literature. Numerous studies have assessed transformational leadership and knowledge

management from the perspective of the private sector. However, significantly less

literature described studies related to the relationship between overall transformational

leadership and overall knowledge management in the public sector (Massaro, Dumay, &

Garlatti, 2015). Therefore, to build on existing studies from a public sector viewpoint,

this quantitative, non-experimental study explored the relationship between overall

transformational leadership and overall knowledge management in the public sector. The

results of this study may contribute to governmental staff and government leaders’ better

utilized existing workforce personnel, improved efficiency, and improved strategic goals

with a more intellectually diverse, knowledgeable, and flexible workforce, thereby

reducing the need for more tax dollars to meet and exceed organizational goals (Vanhala

& Ahteela, 2011).

Purpose of the Study

This quantitative non-experimental study explored the relationship between

overall transformational leadership and overall knowledge management in the public

sector as viewed by human resource directors in the southeastern United States. The role

of transformational leadership and knowledge management has become a key operational

component in government due to the ever-changing and increasing demands from the

public for government employees to do more with less (Jain & Jeppesen, 2013; Lavania,

2012).

This study explored the various components of transformational leadership and

knowledge management to evaluate if a reasonable relationship existed promoting use of

knowledge management in the public sector. Further, this study provided results that will

contribute to understanding how the relationships between overall transformational

leadership and overall knowledge management are practical for use in the public sector.

The findings from this study may help governmental leaders located in the southeastern

United States better understand the significance, contribution, and role of overall

transformational leadership and overall knowledge management in applying knowledge

to meet and exceed organizational goals and objectives long-term (Gelard, Boroumand,

& Mohammadi, 2014).

Rationale

This quantitative non-experimental exploratory study assessed the relationship

between overall transformational leadership and overall knowledge management in the

public sector as viewed by human resource directors in the southeastern United States

and measured that relationship using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ)

and Knowledge Management Inventory (KMI). The research sought to validate the

relationship between transformational leadership and knowledge management as

conceptualized and tested by Crawford (2005). However, this study focused on the

relationship as viewed through the lens of public sector human resources directors.

Research Questions

This study sought to explore the relationship between overall transformational

leadership and overall knowledge management in public sector organizations in the

southeastern United States as viewed by human resources directors. The research

questions addressed the possibility that organizations in the public sector are not able to

adapt to changing environments and address stakeholders’ requests and service demands

and thus may be eliminated or lose critical operational funding. In order to operate at

maximum effectiveness, public sector organizations must have a transformational leader

who can present current knowledge management issues to effectively develop employees.

Further, it is important for the leader to have a vision that creates an atmosphere suitable

for changes that guide the organization towards its future mission (Gelard et al., 2014).

Significance of the Study

This study is significant because if public sector workforce development issues

are not addressed appropriately by governmental leaders, government agencies may not

be able to meet performance expectations, which could result in the agencies’ being

reorganized or eliminated, which in turn may negatively impact services provided to

citizenry (AlBassam, 2011; Chapman, 2008). Moreover, this study will contribute to the

field of organization and management by enhancing public sector human resources

directors’ and governmental understanding of the contributory influence of

transformational leaders on knowledge management. This study addressed public sector

organizations’ efficiency and effectiveness in providing better services to constituents.

Definition of Terms

The following terms are used in various sections throughout this dissertation:

Espoused theory. What knowledge employees say they have and how individuals

work and collaborate with each other (Argyris & Kaplan, 1994).

Individualized consideration. A leader’s ability to recognize and satisfy the

current individual needs of followers and elevate those needs to maximize individual

potential (Avolio & Bass, 2004).

Idealized influence. Characteristic of a leader who has the ability to relate to

followers and present attributes that make an individual identify and admire the leader

(Avolio & Bass, 2004; Gelard et al., 2014).

Intellectual stimulation. A leader’s ability to help followers to think differently

about old problems with new perspectives (Avolio & Bass, 2004; Gelard et al., 2014).

Inspirational motivation. The articulation of goals in a clear and concise way so

that followers understand what is expected, right, and important to the leader (Avolio &

Bass, 2004).

Knowledge management. The systematic and integrated procedure of gaining,

creating, storing, sharing and applying knowledge by individuals and groups to achieve

organizational objectives (Khajeh, Mahallati, Shaibani, & Khodarahmi, 2014).

Knowledge management theory. The systematic approach to achieving

organizational objectives through the process of capturing, developing, sharing, and

effectively using tacit or explicit organizational knowledge (Gueldenberg & Helting,

2007; Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995).

Theory-in-use. Involves the rules that individuals will follow when afforded the

opportunity to design and implement their own practices and actions (Argyris & Kaplan,

1994).

Transformational leadership. The process by which leaders and followers

collectively aid one another to higher levels of individual and group expectations (Bass &

Avolio, 1994; Gelard et al., 2014).

Transformational leadership theory. Leadership theory associated with positive

relationships related to individuals, groups, or organizations to include the management

of knowledge based on employee intellectual stimulation (Arnold & Loughlin, 2013

Assumptions and Limitations

This research involved a pool of respondents provided by Qualtrics, a professional

private research software company located in the United States. The list of respondents

and the professional background of the individuals along with contact information was

generated and maintained exclusively by Qualtrics. The individuals who replied to the

survey were assumed to have meet the eligibility criteria for participation as the criteria

was conveyed to the Qualtrics Research Consultant by the researcher. Based on the

specificity of the type of respondents necessary for this study and the limited access to

the respondent pool, the researcher assumed the professional integrity of Qualtrics and

the individual respondents to comply with the eligibility requirement.

Further, since respondents were professionals working in the community that

promotes workplace development, it was assumed that each respondent took the time to

provide honest and thoughtful responses. The researcher assumed that the list of

respondents who served as public sector human resource directors in the Southeastern

United States was accurate and current. It was assumed that the respondents were

involved in the leadership of public sector organizations and involved in knowledge

management activities. Further, a key assumption was that responses provided by human

resource directors were honest.

This research study limited the pool of respondents to those provided by Qualtrics

who met the criteria for eligibility to participate in this study. The pool of respondents

who participated in the study were from a reputable organization. The researcher had no

direct involvement in their selection other than determining and providing participating

criteria. Therefore, being able to follow-up to ensure a sufficient number of individuals

responded to the survey was done directly through communication with Qualtrics

representative instead of the researcher collectively sending reminders directly to

respondent pool. To maintain a degree of anonymity, the researcher did not request any

additional contact information from Qualtrics about the pool of respondents.

This study was limited to the southeastern United States. While survey findings

may have applicability to the geographical area in the study, a broader application

throughout public sector organizations nationwide is impractical due to the size and

limitation of the survey pool. Therefore, additional studies should be initiated to

investigate the topic from a broader perspective.

Theoretical/Conceptual Framework

The basis for this study was to explore the relationship between overall

transformational leadership and overall knowledge management in the public sector as

viewed by Human Resource Directors in the Southeastern United States.

Transformational leadership theory, conceived by Bass and Riggio (2006), was an

appropriate theory to use for this study. The theory is associated with positive

relationships related to individuals, groups, or organizations to include the management

of knowledge based on employee intellectual stimulation (Arnold & Loughlin, 2013).

Due to the exploratory nature of the study, the use of inductive reasoning was

appropriate especially for the initial gathering of data to assess if there is a pattern in the

data received from respondents and measure used to test the hypotheses for the study

investigated the relationship between transformational relationships and organizational

position on knowledge management (Crawford, 2005; Fox & Do, 2013; Trochim, 2006).

In the study, the assessment of data indicated an inductive approach was taken by first

assessing the measures, identifying hypotheses, and then drawing reasonable conclusions

based on data findings. Gelard et al. (2014) similarly explored variables by looking at

literature and then developing hypotheses to follow an inductive approach assessing the

relationship between transformational management and knowledge management.

Further, Ananthram, Nankervis, and Chan (2013) solicited responses from HR directors

during their study of knowledge management as a strategic asset.

Organization of the Remainder of the Study

This dissertation is arranged in five chapters. Chapter 1 provides an introduction

and overview of the study. Chapter 2 presents the literature review of prior research

regarding the transformational leadership and knowledge management and their

relationship. Further, a discussion of the relevance of human resources directors located

in the Southeastern United States as a source for determining the relationship between

overall transformational leadership style and overall knowledge management will be

presented. Chapter 3 demonstrates the methodology to include the design and sampling

used for the study. Chapter 4 presents results of the analysis based on survey responses

and statistical analysis of the data. Finally, Chapter 5 provides the researcher’s

conclusions regarding the results of data analysis, applicable implications, and

recommendations for further study on the topic.

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

The review of literature for this study revealed approximately 500 research

articles that involved assessing the relationship between overall transformational

leadership and overall knowledge management in the private sector. However,

significantly fewer research articles related to the interplay between transformational

leadership and knowledge management in the public sector. This gap in literature serves

as the impetus for this study. Trottier et al. (2008), in their study regarding the nature of

leadership in government, proposed that future research might include studying broad

scale leadership factors in the public sector and their influences on employees’

intellectual knowledge development. Moreover, research has conveyed the significance

of leadership and knowledge management in public sector entities and the institutions’

ability to deliver services to citizenry (Ryan, Zhang, Prybutok, & Sharp, 2012).

Since leadership and knowledge management have been suggested as key means

to achieve organizational success, it would be reasonable to further assess these

constructs as tools for use in the public sector (Analoui, Clair, & Sambrook, 2013; Arora,

2011). Therefore, the discussion for this study provided evidence-based data analysis as

to whether a relationship exists between an overall transformational leadership style and

overall knowledge management activities as viewed by human resources directors

working in governments located in the Southeastern United States. Further, this study

provided a venue to identify the right leadership style to promote a vision that creates an

atmosphere suitable for changes to guide the organization towards its future mission

(Gelard et al., 2014).

Knowledge Management

The topic of knowledge has had an evolving history among theorists throughout

the ages. Recent researchers on the topic of knowledge management have tried to provide

a practical, theoretical, and spiritual perspective directed at understanding knowledge

management and its purpose (Md & Ikeda, 2014). Kim and Ko (2014) proposed that in a

knowledge-based economy, knowledge management has increasingly garnered interest

from researchers and practitioners. Researchers have explained knowledge management

as a means by which organizations can easily find, retrieve, and utilize knowledge in

ways that benefit the users (Karkoulian, Leila, & McCarthy, 2013). Since knowledge is a

critical component of an organization’s success, it must be managed effectively to ensure

organizations meet goals and objectives.

Wigg (1997), in the seminal work on knowledge management, suggested that

managing knowledge was unsystematic at its impetus but changed over time. The

researcher suggested that earlier steps to focus on knowledge were based on an

organization’s pursuit of commercial objectives. Wigg (1997) further proposed that the

perception of knowledge gradually morphed from a commercial enterprise tool to one

that embodied the management of knowledge as a means to build effective employees.

Wigg (1997) conveyed that knowledge management migrated from a centrist approach

that focused on the needs of an organization to one that incorporates personal and

intellectual opportunities for employees.

The operational genesis of knowledge management as a term is believed to have

been spread by the consulting community (Koenig, 2012). Koenig (2012) suggested that

the term knowledge management as it matured became embedded in other disciplines.

However, being able to separate knowledge management from simply the gathering of

information or data requires a brief explanation. Zack (1999), a seminal theorist on

knowledge management, stated that knowledge is distinguished from information and

data in two ways. Data is observations not directly meaningful if used out of context.

Information may be an offshoot of data since it is the result of placing data in a proper

context, such as in a message. Consequently, knowledge relates to what an individual

believes and values and results from the accumulation of information through personal

experiences and communication between individuals and groups.

Knowledge can be extremely sensitive to an individual because it reflects the

collective efforts and expertise gained through years of networking and lived experience.

In its classical conception, knowledge is either tacit or explicit. Using knowledge to meet

needs may serve as a means for identifying the degree of services that can be provided by

an organization. Knowledge management as a concept relates to the more formal

approach to exploiting knowledge within and across organizations using human expertise

gained through education, codified work experiences, and established work relationships

(Arora, 2011; Nonaka & von Krogh, 2009). Understanding the relevance of knowledge

management may contribute to an effective and efficient means of meeting goals and

objectives in an organization (Cardoso, Meireles, & Carlos, 2012). The ability to

appropriately manage organizational knowledge is important to ensuring organizations

can meet service requirements to it stakeholders.

Based on a historical perspective, the idea of knowledge management is not new

(Andreeva & Kianto, 2012; Bogdana Pugna & Boldeanu, 2014; Riege & Lindsay, 2006).

From a philosophical viewpoint, human beings have been applying general principles of

knowledge management for decades. In the 1960s, researchers and scholars began to

create theories related to the application of knowledge management as a discipline. Some

literature suggested the impetus of the modern concept of knowledge management began

in the 1960s when the idea of a knowledge worker was introduced to identify employees

within an organization who were able to use institutional knowledge to meet

organizational needs (Leon, 2015; Marilena & Elena-Mihaela, 2008).

A number of management theorists have contributed to the evolution of

knowledge management as a component in the life of an organization. Strassmann

(1999), a seminal contributor to concepts of information and knowledge management,

stressed the relevance of knowledge as an organizational source that reveals the value of

employees, not simply based on the wages of individuals alone, but involving how

quickly individuals are able to accumulate useful knowledge that benefits the

organization. Strassmann (1999), from a historical view, proposed that productivity

resulting from the performance of employees was not only a matter of wages but also was

influenced by the knowledge base of employees. Kianto, Ritala, Spender, and Vanhala

(2014) asserted that this knowledge aggregation was based on the form of training

provided by organizations as well as the direct experience gained by employees in their

day-to-day work experiences. Therefore, both employees and organizations benefitted

from the use of knowledge and its effective management (Kianto et al., 2014).

Strassmann (1999) provided a classic illustration that explained his perspective

and suggested that from the employee’s viewpoint, when a new employee fills an entry-

level position, the employee receives the standard wage for that position. However, as the

employee gained experience and increased levels of responsibility, the individual’s wage

changed because of the accumulation of company-specific knowledge. Due to the

accumulation of knowledge, the individual may become more productive and effective at

achieving organizational goals. During the tenure of employment, the employee gained

knowledge and experience that benefitted the organization. In order to increase wage

capacity, the employee counted on the organization to invest in developmental training in

addition to what the employee pursued independently.

Comparably, researchers have suggested that the true value of an organization

rests in the knowledge stored in the minds of employees (Birasnav & Rangnekar, 2010;

Housel & Bell, 2001; Strassmann, 1999). Strassmann (1999) in his seminal work posited

that the individual employee is a repository of accumulated insight related to how an

organization works. Because of the knowledge held by employees, each can be

considered a shareholder of the most important and relevant asset of an organization, its

knowledge. Being able to effectively manage knowledge is vital to the organization’s

ability to meet performance objectives. Strassmann (1999) highlighted that organizational

leaders must rise to the challenge and realize the significance of making knowledge

management a valued asset.

Numerous studies have explored and addressed the various elements related to

knowledge management. Drucker (1999), a premier theorist on management, presented

the idea that one of the most vital contributions an organization’s management can make

to society is productivity through the effective use of knowledge and knowledge workers.

Drucker (1999) proposed that the challenge for organizations has transitioned from

simply finding better ways to accomplish productive manual work to providing the

knowledge-worker with the tools to be more productive. To achieve and exceed

performance expectations in a knowledge-based organization, leaders must view the

workforce as an asset not as an expense.

In order to promote effective knowledge management, the organization must

present a culture that encourages new knowledge exchange, knowledge acquisition, and

knowledge utilization. Drucker (1999) suggested a need to redefine the approach that

management takes towards satisfying the needs of employees to grow and develop so that

knowledge can be managed to address organizational performance needs. Therefore,

being able to effectively provide the knowledge needed by employees to achieve and

exceed expectations requires the application of knowledge management principles and

practices.

Further, Senge (1999) offered the view that the management of knowledge is a

critical element in an organization’s ability to develop an environment for learning that

results in the promotion of shared visions and group development. Researchers have

proposed that users, especially leaders of organizations, must encourage the use of

knowledge that generates new ideas and innovative ways to meet organizational goals.

Further suggestions included that the root of an organization’s success in meeting

performance expectations relates to managing new knowledge that accumulates in an

organization so that employees experience a sense of learning within the organization

(Lee, Kim, & Kim, 2012; Schiuma, Carlucci, & Lerro, 2012; Senge, 1992, 1999).

When organizations started downsizing, researchers realized that knowledge was

being lost. Conversely, as organizations grew or expanded, the need to determine how

best to manage and retain knowledge emerged. Researchers proposed that organizations

that are successful at leveraging knowledge are better able to achieve organizational goals

and support a more responsive and flexible workforce (Desouza & Awazu, 2006;

Edvardsson, 2008; Schiuma et al., 2012). Scholars proposed that the ability for

individuals to work together in the use of knowledge was based on the individuals’

perceptions of the internal works of the organization.

Argyris (1997) proposed two classical theories linked to the significance of

understanding knowledge management. One theory was the espoused theory, which is

based on what knowledge employees say they have and how individuals work and

collaborate with each other (Argyris & Kaplan, 1994). The espoused theory relates to

how individuals respond when their values, beliefs, and attitudes are questioned. The

researchers proposed that employees may claim a willingness to be open to ideas and

constructive criticism or even comments from peers about the their degree of

productivity, but, when actually presented with differing views or criticism, the

individuals may not be receptive to the new perspectives. Managers must consider what

barriers need to be overcome before knowledge management can be legitimized in an

organization (Argyris & Kaplan, 1994; Batras, Duff, & Smith, 2014).

Later, Argyris (1997) presented a second theory known as the theory-in-use,

which incorporated knowledge based on what employees do. Argyris (1997), suggested

that theory-in-use involves the rules that individuals will follow when afforded the

opportunity to design and implement their own practices and actions. As a result,

individuals applying a theory-in-use view will avoid issues that may cause

embarrassment or that could be perceived as a potential threat, such as reluctance to

speak out or the need to be overly diplomatic (Argyris & Kaplan, 1994). As such,

individual employees may be reluctant to expand on the flow of knowledge through new

learning in fear of repercussions if outcomes of new innovations are not positive in the

organization (Argyris & Kaplan, 1994; Batras et al., 2014; Rowland & Hall, 2014).

Understanding how these two theories interplay within an organization may contribute to

actionable knowledge serving as a basis for promoting knowledge management, whether

the knowledge is tacit or explicit.

The term tacit knowledge has been explained from a traditional and modern

viewpoint as being knowledge gained through personal experiences of individuals. It is

passed along in organizations through the interactions of individuals (Gau, 2011; Saint-

Onge, 1996). Previous researchers proposed that one of the seminal researchers on

knowledge, Polanyi, conveyed the view that individuals have embedded in them more

knowledge than can be conveyed to others (Ranucci & Souder, 2015; Spender, 1996).

Therefore, the literature suggested that organizations should maintain a means for

managing knowledge to ensure the latent knowledge is captured to support organizational

goals, long-term objectives, and employee development (Rasula,Vuksic, & Stemberger,

2012).

Though being able to capture and utilize tacit knowledge is important to an

organization’s well-being, organizations sometimes encounter barriers to retaining

knowledge as well. Bessick and Naicker (2013) studied tacit knowledge barriers that

potentially cause knowledge loss within an organization. The researchers proposed that

knowledge loss is a particular challenge if a public sector organization wishes to be

competitive. Since individuals contain and retain knowledge, and knowledge is a valued

asset for an organization, it is important that organizations develop practices by which to

capture and utilize knowledge for organizational success (Bessick & Naicker, 2013).

Bessick and Naicker (2013) suggested that public sector organizational managers

should not only create a vision for knowledge management but also be involved in

steering and developing strategies to implement knowledge management efforts. The

researchers purported that issues such as lack of a reward system, delays in adjusting

salaries, employee burnout, and the lack of established employee mentoring and training

systems impede the management of knowledge, which in turn has a negative impact on

performance. The ability to acquire, store, and retrieve knowledge is important to an

organization. Therefore, being able to keep knowledge in an organization contributes to

the efficiency and effectiveness of an organization (Bessick & Naicker, 2013).

Gau (2011) proposed that knowledge management in the public sector can

contribute significantly to organizational success, but various factors may hinder the

process. The researcher suggested that because of the strict division of labor among

employees and little incentive to do so, employees exhibit little interest in the exchange

of knowledge. Moreover, knowledge management in the public sector may be impacted

by the sheer size of some public sector entities. For an organization to institute a practical

system for the creation and use of knowledge, the organization must understand why it

needs and how to best apply a knowledge management component (Gau, 2011). Though

many researchers viewed knowledge management as popular in the work environment

and the proposals on how to apply tacit knowledge seem reasonable, some researchers do

not fully support the concept of knowledge management (Gau (2011).

Angela (2013) investigated the factors that affect knowledge sharing and

knowledge management within the public sector. The researcher proposed the tacit

knowledge of employees in an organization is very difficult to transfer to others since it

involves the voluntary willingness of individuals to do so. Therefore, an organization

must manage knowledge appropriately by understanding the influences that facilitate or

discourage employees’ participation in sharing knowledge (Angela, 2013).

Furthermore, researchers suggested that knowledge is just as significant in public

sector organizations as it is in the private sector (Siong, Salleh, Syed Noh, & Syed-Ikhsan

Syed, 2011). The researchers noted that the right work environment is important to

knowledge management in order to encourage knowledge sharing. Realizing the value of

the social network component in public sector organization serves as a means for creating

an organizational environment that supports knowledge management (Siong et al., 2011).

Furthermore, Angela (2013) asserted that improving knowledge processes helps ensure

employees benefit to the extent possible from senior employees' knowledge and

experience before that knowledge is lost when the elder employees retire.

Angela (2013) further posited that to have a flexible and knowledgeable

workforce requires a conducive environment that promotes learning and creativity. Other

researchers also proposed that in order for tacit knowledge to be shared, an environment

of trust and understanding must be present (Jain, Sandhu, & Goh, 2015; Williams &

Sullivan, 2011). Angela (2013) revealed that employees’ abilities to learn, create ideas,

develop new options, and test solutions can transform an organization’s environment to

one that promotes learning through knowledge management. In the promotion and

application of knowledge exchange as part of knowledge management practices, it is

important to assess the enablers and inhibitors within the organization as part of the

framework for the establishment of knowledge management in the workplace (Angela,

2013).

In terms of tacit knowledge, as society has changed with the development of a

global network, so has the need for organizations to collect, process, and utilize

knowledge to meet societal demands. Prusak (2001), from a historic standpoint,

suggested that organizational leaders transition from old approaches for using knowledge

to a new approach that addresses perspectives related to what the organization already

knows, who in the organization has the knowledge, and exactly what knowledge is

needed by the organization to be successful. Prusak (2001), as a fundamental contributor

to the study of knowledge management, proposed that if an organization can effectively

manage its knowledge environment, employees may become more efficient because they

can perform ongoing assessments of what work is really being performed. Prusak (2001)

also noted that three essential practices have enhanced the content and energy devoted to

the concept of knowledge management: information management, earlier quality

practices, and the human capital component within an organization.

Prusak (2001) explained that information management in the context of

knowledge management is a body of thought focused on the process of how information

is managed regardless of the application of technology in an organization. Information

management deals with valuation, techniques, governance, and incentives to promote

employee performance. The researcher further proposed that though information

management helped to build on knowledge management as a practice, knowledge

management is not simply focused on generating more information but rather on how that

collective knowledge is used (Prusak, 2001). Comparably, the quality movement, as an

influencer of knowledge management, focused on the internal mechanisms within an

organization by measuring processes and adjusting practices to address productivity

concerns. The concept of knowledge management does not include the multitude of

measurable practices found in other concepts developed during the quality movement but

simply utilizes processes that are available and needed by an organization to be

successful (Prusak, 2001).

Prusak (2001) presented a major view that knowledge management needs to

become embedded in the fiber of an organization to the extent that knowledge

management practices become almost invisible. It should still have practical implications

but should become so ingrained that it feels natural. Furthermore, an organization must

consider the element of human capital embedded in knowledge management. Prusak

(2001) proposed that organizations should view the development of employees as an

asset rather than a liability and noted that knowledge management builds on the element

of human capital development because it seeks to promote the perspective that the

knowledge gained by investing in individuals serves as a benefit to the organization

because individual will share knowledge to increase the capabilities of a group. Prusak

(2001) provided viewpoints that speak to the relevance of knowledge management as a

source for organizations to consider if the concept is to remain relevant in the workplace.

Seminal researchers noted that in contrast to tacit knowledge, explicit knowledge

is the knowledge that can be presented in numbers and words and shared among

employees in manuals, publications, process specifications, and other formal means

(Nonaka & Konno, 1998). From a historical perspective, Nonaka and Konno (1998)

described explicit knowledge as formal and systematic and offered a structured means for

disseminating and utilizing knowledge in an organization. A familiar example of explicit

knowledge is the formula for finding the area of a rectangle formula involving

multiplying length by width. Other examples of explicit knowledge include documenting

best practices in an organization, delineating processes established to respond to legal

complaints, or the enumerating scale and steps created by organizations to rate employee

performance.

In recent years, researchers have proposed that explicit knowledge had its

beginning in tacit knowledge. However, in actual terms, explicit knowledge is the

codification of tacit knowledge (Stevens, Millage, & Clark, 2010). Stevens et al. (2010)

revealed that explicit knowledge is vital in an organization as it relates to knowledge

creation and transference. Based on an exploratory approach, the researchers sought to

determine if a connection existed between tacit and explicit knowledge within an

organization and suggested that management of knowledge must remain an integral part

of an organization if it is to remain fertile. Therefore, the ability of an organization to

capture knowledge that resides in the heads of employees and then codify that knowledge

so it can be used in the organization is crucial. As such, it is reasonable to conclude that

an important element of knowledge management is to collect and use the best knowledge

available to achieve organizational objectives, including the development of

organizational managers. An organization must have a plan in place to gather the best

knowledge from the right people in order to promote the success of the organization

(Stevens et al., 2010).

Nonaka (1994) presented the classical view that organizations serve as sources for

knowledge because of the relationship between tacit and explicit knowledge. Whereas

tacit knowledge relates to informal, less structured, experienced-based knowledge,

explicit knowledge is the formalized component that resulted from tacit knowledge. The

conversion of tacit knowledge to explicit has served as a source for the introduction of

new ideas and creative approaches to shaping and achieving organizational goals

(Nonaka, 1994; Nonaka & Konno, 1998). At its root, the interplay between tacit and

explicit knowledge as a venue for the creation of new knowledge has been viewed as one

of the important outcomes of knowledge management (Nonaka & von Krogh, 2009).

Ahmed and Omar (2011) presented the perspective that knowledge management

is the framework within an organization that integrates human dimensions as well as

technology and processes. Researchers further proposed that knowledge management

contributes to the processes of planning, organizing, controlling, and motivating

individuals and groups towards achieving organizational goals. The researchers

conducted a study to investigate the degree of relationship between knowledge

management and the human capital in an organization. They assessed five factors that

contribute to knowledge management: knowledge acquisition, knowledge creation,

knowledge documentation, knowledge transfer, and knowledge application. Using a 5-

point Likert scale questionnaire instrument, the researchers surveyed 107 software

companies in the data collection process. The findings revealed that the knowledge

management had a significant influence on intellectual capital within the surveyed

organizations (Ahmed & Omar, 2011).

Similarly, Fibuch and Van Way (2011) conveyed that knowledge management

refers to the varying practices and techniques used by organizations to create, advance,

and share knowledge to meet organizational goals. In further review of literature,

Massaro et al. (2015) offered the view that public sector organizations may be reluctant

to fully explore knowledge management due to regulatory constraints, human resource

policies and practices, and continuous scrutiny from sources external to the organization.

However, ensuring that a legacy exists that allows employees to build on the work

experience and expertise of predecessors requires public sector leaders to create an

atmosphere that promotes knowledge management.

Since many baby boomers are quickly approaching retirement age, public sector

leader must use knowledge management as a means of replacing the potential expertise

that goes out of the door. Though boomers are in the window for retirement, many may

elect to remain in the workforce or simply downsize by working part-time instead of full-

time. Regardless of the decision, public sector leaders must implement a knowledge

management network to maintain and build on the expertise of this community of

workers (Johnson, Indvik, & Rawlins, 2009).

Fibuch and Van Way (2011) explained knowledge management as a system or

network to link specific processes or domains in the workplace. The researchers proposed

that knowledge management is not simply a tool; rather, it consists of people, processes,

technology, culture, and structure within an organization. Therefore, it is important to

understand how each component contributes to the success of an organization and its

members. Fibuch and Van Way (2011) posed the view that a viable knowledge

management network allows an organization to manage knowledge activities so that

workforce personnel may acquire, create, and use knowledge to be innovative and

competitive. Therefore, Rasula et al. (2012) postulated that one possible use of

knowledge management is to allow leaders to have a foundation for coordinating and

developing human capital and organizational processes.

Scholars have proposed that the successful implementation of knowledge

management for an organization requires a systematic and comprehensive perspective of

how an organization functions, including how it develops human capital. Researchers

suggested that the effective integration of human intellectual capital and leadership style,

along with knowledge management, keeps an organization competitive by improving

effectiveness (Khajeh et al., 2014). Drucker (1999) promoted the view that employees are

a vital element in any activity. Therefore, appropriately making and managing knowledge

available to employees provides a means for enhancing their productivity.

Earlier, Davenport (1996), another seminal leader on the subject of knowledge

management, purported that when an organization decides how it wants to use knowledge

management, it can then develop the procedures needed for the effective use of

knowledge management. Further, researchers proposed that managing knowledge has

changed the way people think and act by making leaders address the issue of how best to

embed tacit and explicit knowledge and apply practices within their organizations

(Davenport, De Long, & Beers, 1997; Davenport & Volpel, 2001).

Moreover, knowledge management has been examined from the perspective of

demonstrating its value to organizations. Massingham and Massingham (2014) studied

ways in which knowledge management can provide practical significance to an

organization. The researchers proposed that U.S. organizations expend significant funds

on knowledge management. Therefore, organizational managers are continuously

challenged with determining whether to proceed with contributing financially to

knowledge management based on the cost of investment. Massingham and Massingham

(2014) identified outcomes that may influence the decisions within organizations to

continue investing in knowledge management.

Their study involved a high-tech Australian government department, wherein 118

respondents completed a survey regarding how the department planned to address the

threat of knowledge loss due to an ageing workforce. Participants responded to questions

related to key problems that the public sector organization faced involving such issues as

a younger workforce, resource cuts, low productivity, and a perceived gap in

productivity. Findings from the study revealed that knowledge management had a

practical significance when addressing ongoing organizational concerns that tied

knowledge management to performance. In turn, having an established connection

contributed to the ability of organizational leaders to evaluate how to address the loss of

organizational experience and the application of knowledge management as a practical

means for responding to problems (Massingham & Massingham, 2014).

The value of knowledge management has gained interest in recent years as a

driver for organizational operations (Bedford, 2012). Bedford (2012) proposed

knowledge management as an offshoot of Deming’s theories of management, which have

shaped thinking and practices in businesses for decades. The researcher suggested that

knowledge management evolved from three generational concepts. The first generation

of knowledge management focused on technology and information networks. The second

generation of knowledge management shifted to a focus on using knowledge to resolve

business problems and added facets such as organizational learning, culture, intellectual

capital, and knowledge-embedded collaboration. Finally, the third generation of

knowledge management built on the first two but included the knowledge growth of

individuals and groups and knowledge leadership as part of the framework. The use of

knowledge management in this stage served as a transformational agent to shift thinking

within an organization (Bedford, 2012).

In order to be effective, an organization must be able to efficiently control, apply,

develop, and reuse knowledge through the use of knowledge management capabilities

(Shu-Mei Tseng & Pei-Shan, 2014). Shu-Mei Tseng and Pei-Shan (2014) studied the

effect of knowledge management capabilities and dynamic capabilities on performance

and noted that knowledge is the most important intangible asset an organization can

maintain. As a result, managers must strive to develop this asset to its highest level.

Therefore, researchers proposed that if an organization can use knowledge management

as a tool to enhance and reuse existing knowledge, then organizational performance

should be increased as well (Shu-Mei Tseng & Pei-Shan, 2014).

Hai and Sherif (2011) studied the relationship between leadership behaviors and

the practices of knowledge management. The researchers explained that knowledge

management is both a goal and a process. As a goal, knowledge management focuses on

knowledge that benefits an organization. As a process, knowledge management steers

users to the sharing, collaboration, and best use of available knowledge management

practices by making tacit knowledge more available (Hai & Sherif, 2011).

Hai and Sherif (2011) presented four hypotheses, one of which was to assess if

transformational leadership behaviors had a positive correlation to the use of knowledge

management. The researchers used a conceptual survey tool as a questionnaire to target

the leaders of small to medium enterprises and the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire

5X short to measure leadership characteristics. Hai and Sherif (2011) collected data from

the 157 senior ranks of private sector organizational leaders who had a holistic view of

their organization. A multiple regression analysis was used to assess the correlation

between transformational leadership and knowledge management as another of the

proposed hypotheses.

A finding from the study supported a positive correlation between transformation

leadership and knowledge management. The researchers proposed that leaders create the

atmosphere that allows knowledge management to flourish by attaching a high value on

knowledge and encouraging the creation of new knowledge (Hai & Sherif, 2011).

Therefore, the traditional involvement of leaders as simply information and knowledge

retainers has changed such that leaders must encourage creation and sharing of

knowledge. As such, the right leadership style serves as a venue for the promotion of a

culture that encourages the practice of knowledge management.

Shu-Mei Tseng and Pei-Shan’s (2014) efforts were aimed at investigating the

influence that knowledge management in the context of a broader study has on the

performance of an organization. The researchers distributed questionnaires to senior

managers of service, technology, and manufacturing industries located in China. The

researchers used a Likert-type scale to measure the research variables and Pearson’s

correlation and regression analyses to determine the linear relationship between variables

of the study. The results of the study revealed that knowledge management indeed has a

strong correlation with capability and performance of an organization (Shu-Mei Tseng &

Pei-Shan, 2014). The results of the study implied that when an organization has a strong

knowledge management capability, then employees may become better equipped to meet

organizational objectives (Shu-Mei Tseng & Pei-Shan, 2014).

Nonaka (1994) suggested that the application of knowledge management in an

organization involves the interplay between explicit and tacit knowledge, which in turn

creates organizational knowledge. Understanding the factors of knowledge management

(which include measures of knowledge acquisition, knowledge creation, and knowledge

application) plays a role in determining the success of an organization in meeting and

exceeding expectations (Analoui et al., 2013; Crawford, 2005). The variables of study

derived from another study that explored the applicability of knowledge management

from an individual perspective (Barth, 2003). The framework used for the current study

involved an inventory created to assess the variables of knowledge acquisition, creation,

and application to determine the use of knowledge management (Crawford, 2005).

Crawford (2005) presented a framework for further exploration of the relationship

between transformation leadership and knowledge management. Crawford (2005) also

investigated whether the position an individual holds within an organization affects

knowledge management. However, for the purpose of this research, the constructs for this

study involved two of the constructs, transformational leadership and knowledge

management.

Crawford’s (2005) study provided a backdrop regarding the necessity to

understand the basic role of knowledge management and the significance of identifying

the right leadership style practical for its use. Finding from the study were based on the

analysis of survey responses from a population of nontraditional college students

employed in various industries (Crawford, 2005). The use of a Knowledge Management

Inventory composed of questions that contributed to evaluating the use and understanding

on different subscales of knowledge management was instrumental to Crawford’s study.

In addition, Crawford (2005) utilized a Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire as a self-

assessment tool to identify the style of leadership most prevalent in the survey

population.

The use of regression analysis revealed a strong correlation between

transformational leadership and knowledge management. The significance of the

relationship suggested that transformational leadership and knowledge management

intertwine because of the influential nature of the leadership style. Crawford (2005) used

a practical approach to explore relationships and it was this method that lent itself well to

a similar approach used for this research study.

Knowledge Acquisition

Knowledge acquisition is the process of taking knowledge from outside an

organization and transforming that knowledge to useable knowledge within the

organization (Pacharapha & Vichita, 2012). Knowledge has been considered a valuable

resource for organizations to maintain readiness in an ever-changing environment. In

order to maintain readiness, an organization must try to leverage the knowledge that is

embedded in the organization and resides in individual employees who work for the

organization.

The acquisition of knowledge involves the willingness of individuals to share it

and the acceptance of the knowledge by the recipients. The sharer of knowledge can do

so with peers, within an organization, or through general practices among a network of

potential users (Pacharapha & Vichita, 2012). Pacharapha and Vichita (2012) suggested

that the relative value placed by others on the usefulness of the knowledge being offered

is an important determinant of knowledge acquisition. To make the knowledge effective,

the individual receiving it must first understand what is being transferred and then have a

willingness to use the knowledge given.

Mohamed (2012) conveyed that knowledge acquisition is a dynamic process of

capturing and scrutinizing knowledge that is useful to the long-term needs of an

organization. Further, the researcher proposed that capturing knowledge within an

organization leads to acceptance of the knowledge as valuable intellectual capital.

Mohamed (2012) further proposed that knowledge, whether internal or external, is

filtered and evolves through the various users or influencers of knowledge.

Analoui et al. (2013) found in a study of the relationship between knowledge

management and intellectual capital within organizations that knowledge acquisition is

influenced by those organizational activities that create knowledge value. The researchers

revealed that when knowledge management activities are used to maintain intellectual

capital through knowledge acquisition, it becomes a resource for organizations to

maintain and sustain competitive advantages (Analoui et al., 2013). Further, Kim and Lee

(2010) suggested that part of the process for managing knowledge in an organization is to

develop a process for acquiring knowledge. Kim and Lee (2010) suggested that two

approaches to acquiring knowledge were collaboration and seeking new knowledge.

Therefore, a focus on knowledge acquisition requires an organization to develop concrete

knowledge management processes, which include first a high degree of experience in

recognizing and then the ability to capture needed knowledge. Therefore, since

knowledge generates from individuals and may be housed and exploited in organizations,

it is important to consider how that knowledge moves from individuals to the

organization.

Knowledge Creation

Barker (2015) noted that knowledge creation is the generation, storage,

representation, and sharing of knowledge to benefit an organization and its employees

and to support comprehensive and understandable management initiatives and procedures

in the organization. Fong, Hills, and Hayles (2007) explained knowledge creation as

having a vital role in an organization’s ability to meet its goals. In their seminal work,

Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) suggested that knowledge creation is critical to the long-

term success of an organization. Jakubik (2011) noted a five-phase knowledge

creation process that included sharing tacit knowledge, creating concepts, justifying

concepts, building an archetype, and cross-leveling knowledge. These components of

knowledge creation may help to enforce the relevance of knowledge management.

Aside from the interactions of employees in an organization serving as a means

for knowledge creation, the culture of an organization plays a role in knowledge creation

as well. Wang, Su, and Yang (2011) studied the impact cultural features such as

individualism-collectivism, uncertainty avoidance, and power distance have on the ability

of an organization to create knowledge. The researchers suggested that to create new

knowledge, an organization must have the capability to generate knowledge. Wang et al.

(2011) explained that capability as the extent to which an organization’s members are

accessible to one another as well as the presence of external contributors who are capable

of combining information and existing knowledge into new knowledge. Communicating

the knowledge that has been generated requires a framework to effectively manage the

knowledge and then apply it to meet organizational objectives. Barker (2015) presented a

view that knowledge creation can be an outcome of communication activities in and

outside of an organization. Being able to apply the knowledge is another element of

ensuring an effective knowledge management program.

Knowledge Application

From a seminal perspective, knowledge application has been defined as an

activity that utilizes the knowledge acquired from the environment and from

technological resources to influence the events related to the strategies of an organization

(Moorman, 1995). Consequently, knowledge application implies an adjustment in the

strategic direction of problem solving within organizations. Moreover, Moorman (1995)

defined knowledge application as an organization's response to changes in the

organization’s knowledge and available technology to produce new products and

procedures. In recent years, Nesheim, Olsen, and Tobiassen (2011) conducted a study to

analyze the interplay between an organization, its employees, and the external

communities to examine how the quality and attitude of management influences

knowledge application.

Knowledge management a viable tool for the private sector, and its use may be

valuable to public sector organizations as well, as they deal with the demand from

constituents and stakeholders to receive continuous governmental services with minimal

or no reduction in those services (AlBassam, 2011; Chapman, 2008). Hence, maintaining

or even improving government productivity still remains an expectation from users of

public sector services. This obligation to their stakeholders highlights the importance of

public sector organizations’ implementing knowledge management practices as tools to

ensure they can provide optimum services (Arora, 2011). Therefore, without assessing

the extent to which knowledge management practices are used in the public sector, city

and state government leaders may be unable to determine their benefits and how best to

maintain productivity to meet operational needs. Establishing effective practices for the

management of knowledge may serve as a key to city and state governments’ remaining

competitive in the use of employee talent and meeting their organizations’ public service

objectives.

General Evolution to Transformational Leadership

Before venturing into the discussion of the transformational leadership style, it is

practical to provide a brief perspective on the general topic of leadership. Furthermore,

since leadership styles have been the topic of numerous theorists over the years, it is

appropriate to provide a brief review of several types of theories regarding leadership that

have gained attention leading up to transformational leadership. A historical definition

from a seminal theorist reflected that leadership is the process by which one individual

influences others toward the attainment of group or organizational goals (Stogdill, 1950).

Another historic view, which is more formalized, is that leadership is an

interpersonal influence through the means of communicating to followers what is

expected for the attainment of organizational goals (Tannenbaum & Massarik, 1957).

Alabi (2012) highlighted three significant points to emphasize the definition of

leadership. The first point is that it involves the process of social influence. In order for

leadership to exist, a relationship with one or more people who serve as followers must

also exist. Second, a voluntary element must also exist; an individual must agree to

comply and follow a leader. Last, one view holds that leadership results when the

behavior of followers reflects a centralized desire to achieve a collective goal identified

by the leaders. Many, although not all, studies of leadership have focused on the nature of

leadership in the workplace.

Leadership is probably the most frequently studied among organizational

activities. An online search revealed hundreds of examples of material related to the

subject of leadership. In varying sources, researchers provided their explanations of

leadership as a source to influence others to achieve greater than expected goals and

objectives. This study provided an explanation for several of the seminal leadership

theories that have been promoted over the years to present perspectives regarding

leadership characteristics.

For example, Lewin (1944) presented a classical work on the relevant influence of

group dynamics and how leadership styles affect performance. Research revealed that the

atmosphere of a group can be changed significantly with the introduction of a particular

leadership style. Therefore, it is important to understand the attributes of a leadership

type in order to change the dynamics of an organization and promote the giving and

sharing of knowledge.

Theories of Leadership

The contingency theory of leadership was one attempt to identify a practice of

leadership. Fiedler (1981), a seminal leadership contributor, proposed the contingency

theory, which holds that effective leadership reflects not only how someone leads but also

the level of control that a leader maintains. The scholar proposed that an essential

element embodied in the theory related to the magnitude of the employee’s and leader’s

relationship, the degree to which assigned tasks and goals have been made clear, and the

capability of the leader to provide rewards and levy punishments when appropriate.

Fiedler (1996) suggested that the absence of the right combination of the three elements

will result in the leader’s failure. The contingency theory serves as a means to help

convey the importance of leadership in an organization.

Greenleaf (1977) presented the seminal idea of servant leadership theory and

asserted that anyone who serves to meet the needs of followers is essentially considered a

leader. In this leadership type, the individual leads by example. The individual is viewed

as a servant first and works to ensure that the needs of people are considered at the

highest level on any priority list. Therefore, as a result of addressing the needs of

individuals or a group, the servant transitions into the role of leader naturally as a result

of responding to the well-being of those he or she serves. One characteristic of the

servant leadership theory is that this approach has the tendency to promote a positive

organizational environment and high employee morale.

Stogdill (1974) offered the trait theory, which focused on identifying personality

characteristics that are connected to being a successful leader across different kinds of

situations. The scholar proposed that assessing trait characteristics in leadership reflected

the earliest types of exploration into the nature of effective leadership. The theorist

proclaimed that some individuals are born with the right traits to be a leader, and those

traits are not ones that just any one can develop. Stogdill (1974) further suggested that

innate traits are common to leaders. The most common of the traits were intelligence,

self-confidence, determination, integrity, and sociability. This theory may conflict with

others because not every person who displays identifiable leadership characteristics

becomes a successful leader.

Hersey and Blanchard (1974) promoted the idea of a situational leadership theory

that conveyed the assumption that different situations require different leadership

characteristics. The researchers proposed that no single profile of a leader fits all

situations. Furthermore, a leader should have the ability to adjust leadership

characteristics to effectively respond to the task or behavior of a group (Hersey &

Blanchard, 1974). The researchers presented the idea that four elements drive responses

from a leader in any given situation. The leader’s responses are determined in part by the

relationship with subordinates based on task and expectations from the group. The

characteristics displayed by a leader who fits the situational leadership profile can be

effective or ineffective depending on the maturity of individuals. Further, a leader who

fits the situational leadership scenario must be ready to allow individuals to work on task

by providing the tools for them to be success (Hersey & Blanchard, 1974). However, at

the same time, the leader must be ready to assess the situation and become more involved

if necessary.

One trending theory that has gained attention is the theory of transformational

leadership. Burns (1978) introduced the concept as transforming leadership in his

assessment of political leaders. The researcher proposed that transforming leadership is a

process in which both leaders and subordinates contribute to helping each other achieve

higher levels of morale and motivation. Due to the perceived difficulty of distinguishing

management and leadership practices from each other, the researcher claimed that the

differences between the two variables lie in characteristics and behaviors (Burns, 1978).

As a result, the researcher delineated two concepts, one known as transforming leadership

and the other as transactional leadership (Burns, 1978). Burns (1978) noted that the

transforming approach promoted the opportunity for significant change in the people and

an organization by creating a focus that causes redesigning of perceptions, reassessment

of values, changes in expectations, and the development of a higher degree of aspirations

among employees. The theory is based on the leader’s personality and ability to

communicate a vision rather than a reward–punishment approach, as some theorists

rationalize (Burns, 1978; Caillier, 2014). This theory revealed an approach to leadership

that identifies a style that has surfaced in many research studies in recent years. It is the

transformation leadership style that is the focus of this study.

Transformational Leadership Style

Researchers proposed that until the late 1970s, leadership was focused on a

transactional style, which centered on a managerial style approach based on reward-

punishment approach. Later, the focus shifted to the transformational style leader whose

aim was to motivate the reprioritization of individual beliefs, needs, and values towards

the overall good of an organization (Vandenabeele, 2014). Even though the transactional

leadership sytle was an initial focus of scholars, strands of the transformational leadership

style have been found in some of the earlier writing of pioneers on the subject of

management (Follett, 1919; Humphreys & Einstein, 2003). Camps and Rodriguez (2011)

proposed that transformational leadership is the most active and involve style of

leadership, and it motivates employees to perform beyond expectations. Though

individual workers may develop knowledge, it is the organization through leadership that

plays a key role in articulating and highlighting knowledge. Therefore, having the right

leader in an organization is paramount to addressing the various elements of knowledge

management (Birasnav, 2014; Birasnav, 2013). Theodore (2013) suggested

transformational leadership approach creates a change in individuals that promotes a

change in self-interest to one that focus on organizational interest. Researchers have

posited that the transformational leadership style emphasizes the satisfaction of basic

employee needs and seeks to inspire followers to provide better work practices and

procedures that enhance the work environment so that the organization may exceed

expectations (Ghasabeh, Soosay, & Reaiche, 2015). Scholars proposed that leadership

behavior does have an important influence on the performance of public sector

employees (Orazi, Turrini, & Valotti, 2013). Researchers surmised that an organization

may not be successful unless there is a leader or leaders who are able to influence and

motivate employees to gain and stretch their knowledge to go beyond organization goals

(Alsalami, Behery, & Abdullah, 2014). Therefore, it was reasonable to have initiated this

study to take a comprehensive look at determining if there is a correlation between

overall transformational leadership and overall knowledge management in the public

sector.

Burns (1978), in his seminal work Leadership, introduced the idea of

transforming leadership and described it as style that occurs when one or more people

interact in a way that elevates each participant to higher levels of motivation and

morality. The outcome of Burns’s research revealed that a transforming leader promotes

a common purpose and energizes the collective body to focus on achieving a common

good. Burns (1978) further proposed that some confusion may emerge when researchers

try to differentiate between management and leadership activities, and that this confusion

may motivate the researchers to create the concept of transforming as a leadership style.

Burns (1978) proposed that the transforming leadership style generated significant

influence on the people of an organization as well as heightened the level of the leader.

The style is different from simply a management approach because it restructures

individual perspectives, enhances values, realigns employee expectations, and serves as a

catalyst to improve the aspirations of employees. Burns (1978) presented the view that

transforming leadership is based on the personality, traits, and ability of a leader to

motivate change within an organization so that all members benefit from the action.

Furthermore, successful leadership involves the ability to influence the attitudes,

conduct, and capability of those who follow the leader. The involvement of an active

leader or a passive leader can be a point of concern to be considered by any organization.

Burns (1978) explained that leadership is either transactional or transformational, and

other researchers have proposed that the transformational leader is best suited for

achieving long-term goals of an organization because he or she attempts to elevate the

needs of followers to align with the leader’s objectives instead of simply trying to satisfy

the materialistic needs of followers, as the transactional leader attempts to do (Bass,

Waldman, Avolio, & Bebb, 1987; Birasnav, 2013).

Later, Bass (1985) expanded on the work of Burns and developed a new model of

leadership that incorporated broader scopes of behavior that evolved into leadership types

such as laissez-faire, levels of transactional leadership, and eventually into the analysis of

the transformational leadership style using the transforming style as a backdrop. Of all

the styles of leadership, the traits of transformational leadership were seen as

characteristic of the most effective leaders (Bass & Riggio, 2006).

An early explanation of the transformational leadership style identified three

underpinning factors that influence followers: (a) charisma, (b) individualized

consideration, (c) and intellectual stimulation (Bass et al., 1987). After a series of

research studies, theorists updated the characteristics of the transformational leadership

style to reflect the factors of (a) idealized influence, (b) inspirational motivation, (c)

intellectual stimulation, and (d) individualized consideration (Bass & Avolio, 1993;

Birasnav et al., 2011).

Bass et al. (1987), in their seminal work on transformational leadership,

represented leadership as the ability to influence the attitudes, abilities, and behaviors of

those who serve as followers. They proposed that the ability to influence individuals

contributes to how followers respond to a particular style of leadership that results in the

achievement of organizational goals and objectives. Bass et al. (1987) focused on the

implications of using a particular leadership style to encourage and develop followers.

Finally, researchers asserted that true leadership is not the result of incentives for

outcomes; rather, it is revealed in the incentives that followers can receive for being

productive.

Levinson (1973) presented the seminal perspective that offering some kind of

incentive or an incentive highlighted as a tool for punishment does not reflect true

leadership. Hence, due to the characteristics of the transformational leadership, this style

of leadership has surfaced to be the most practical for motivating individuals to perform

beyond expectations, as perceived by some leadership theorists (Bass & Riggio, 2006;

Bass et al., 1987).

From a seminal perspective, Bass (1997) and later Avolio and Bass (2004)

presented a framework that described the working definitions regarding the four

characteristics of a transformational leader related to the transformational leadership

style. The researchers defined various characteristics of a transformational leader and

defined the core of a transformational leader as one who has the ability to relate to

followers and understand the concerns of a follower or followers. As a result, followers

invest trust and confidence in the leader and accept the leader’s vision. Followers develop

a desire to identify with the leader and invest time and efforts in meeting and exceeding

the mission as identified by the leader. The transformational style of leadership

incorporates the characteristics of idealized influence, inspirational motivation,

intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration as a means to inspire followers

to give extra towards the completion of task in order to have extraordinary results.

Idealized Influence

Bass and Riggio (2006) defined the characteristic of idealized influence as an

aspect of transformational leaders who have the ability to relate to followers and

understand the concerns of a follower or followers. Two aspects of idealized influence

encourage followership: the leader’s behavior and the characteristics that the followers

themselves apply to the leader to justify their admiration, trust, and respect (Bass &

Riggio, 2006). As a result, followers build trust and confidence in the leader and accept

the leader’s vision. Then, a desire develops in the followers to identify with the leader

and invest time and efforts in meeting and exceeding the mission identified by the leader.

Bass and Riggio (2006) proposed that the transformational style of leadership inspires

followers give extra towards the completion of tasks in order to achieve extraordinary

results.

Inspirational Motivation

Inspirational motivation surfaces without the need for followers to identify with

the leader. Inspirational motivation occurs through the articulation of goals in a clear and

concise way so that followers understand what is expected, right, and important to the

leader. The transformational leader provides not only a vision of what can be achieved

but also a pathway to attain the goals identified for the organization. Bass and Riggio

(2006) noted that inspirational motivation is the result of the optimism and enthusiasm

the leader displays when promoting and calling all to a single vision that individuals want

to achieve.

Individualized Stimulation

Individualized stimulation is the ability of a transformational leader to help

followers to think differently about old problems with new perspectives. The leader

encourages followers to think beyond personal beliefs and assumptions to in an effort to

find new answers and solve a current problem. The leader encourages and solicits new

from followers who themselves are part of the problem resolution team (Bass & Riggio,

2006). This type of attribute limited the need for unnecessary and costly decisions related

to problem resolution but may serve as a means for coaching the leader through a period

in the development of an organization (Avolio & Bass, 2004).

Individualized Consideration

Finally, individualized consideration is an understanding of and emphasis on the

concerns of followers, concern about the development of individuals, and treatment of

each individual based on that person’s unique needs. Further, individualized

consideration represents an attempt by the leader not only to recognize and satisfy the

current individual needs of followers but also to elevate those needs in an effort to

maximize the individual follower’s full potential. Bass and Riggio (2006) noted that

individualized consideration is visible when individuals have a nurturing, learning work

environment. The researchers suggested that this aspect of transformational leadership

involves a personal interaction between leader and follower.

The assessment of the aforementioned characteristics revealed an overall

conception of the transformational leadership tendencies of an organizational leader.

When referring to overall transformational leadership, researchers have evaluated all

elements of transformational leadership that are identified as subscales for the

conceptualized assessment of the transformational leadership as a construct (Eliophotou

Menon, 2014; Guay, 2013; Keung & Rockinson-Szapkiw, 2013; Vincent- Höper, Muser,

& Janneck, 2012). The transformational leader is considered to have the characteristics

needed to ensure the appropriate application of knowledge management. When

individuals develop knowledge, organizations play a critical role in articulating and

amplifying that knowledge using its leaders.

Muchiri, Cooksey, and Walumbwa (2012) proposed that effective leadership is

vital to the effectiveness of an organization. The researchers studied public sector entities

in Australia using a survey questionnaire to collect data. It was found that the

transformational leadership style has a positive predictive outcome on an organization.

Muchiri et al. (2012) asserted that appropriate transformational leadership programs be

developed for use by leaders of the public sector.

Previous researchers have asserted that organizations should train their managers

to develop transformational leadership behaviors, thereby benefiting the long-term needs

of the organization (Williams, 2012). Bass (1990), from a historical perspective,

suggested that superior leadership is evident when leaders broaden and elevate the

interests of subordinates, accept the group mission, and stir subordinates to go beyond

self-interest and focus on the concerns of the group. Further, Bass (1990) proposed that

the transformational style leader is the most likely to be viewed by peers and subordinates

in a positive light.

Bass (1990) asserted that training managers to be transformational could mean the

difference between success or failure. Birasnav et al. (2011) suggested that developing a

transformational leadership style in managers contributes to the creation of human

capital, which ensures competitive advantage in an organization. Investigators into the

significance of leaders’ behaviors on followers analyzed the transformational leadership

dimension of intellectual stimulation. Arnold and Loughlin (2013) explained that a

leader’s style of encouraging employees—either participative or direct—is a vital

element in achieving organizational successes.

Leadership has been viewed as one of the most critical components that

contributes to the operational well-being of an organization (Odumeru & Ogbonna,

2013). Gelard et al. (2014) provided the view that leadership is one of the most crucial

elements of an organization. Though varying types of leadership styles exist, the

transformational leadership style continued to gain attention as a useful model for

organizations (Yaghoubi et al., 2014). Gelard et al. (2014) defined transformational

leadership as a means for encouraging the enlightenment of organizational members to

understand objectives and reach collective goals. Further, the researchers advanced a

perspective that indicated the concept of transformational leadership to be the process in

which leaders and followers collectively aid one another to a higher levels of individual

and group expectations. Dartey-Bash and Ampofo (2015) posited that transformational

leadership promotes the collective effort of employees and suggested that group

performance is the best approach to achieving organizational goals and shared objectives.

From a classical perspective, the transformational leader builds the confidence

and motivation of employees by fostering unity while simultaneously displaying earnest

concern for each individual (Bass, Avolio, & Goodheim, 1987). Transformational leaders

see employees as knowledgeable beings who can intellectually contribute to solving

problems in an organization. Hence, transformational leaders have a significant degree of

decision-making authority, and employees view them as being able to make actionable

decisions (Dartey-Baah & Ampofo, 2015).

Research aimed at identifying the significance of transformational leadership on

the capability of employees to accept knowledge and apply knowledge in an organization

holds interest. Alsalami et al. (2014) examined the effect of transformational leadership

on the learning and innovation of an organization. Among the study’s hypotheses was the

question of whether transformational leadership was positively related to organizational

innovation and whether transformational leadership was positively related to

organizational learning. In evaluating the dimensions of transformational leadership, the

researchers surveyed participants from both the private and public sector. Results

included varying definitions to explain organizational innovation, but a central theme

surfaced and addressed the process for using learned knowledge to identify new

processes for solving problems to ensure the long-term survival of an organization

(Alsalami et al., 2014).

Loon, Teck, and Cai (2012) noted that leaders are able to increase employee

work-specific learning when the leader understands the growth requirements of their

followers and initiates action to provide individual guidance as well as goal-directed

development that contribute to organizational needs. As a result, the characteristics of

transformational leadership are the types of leadership characteristics needed in the

organization. Results indicated that transformational leadership behaviors are critically

important for team cohesion, efficiency, and effectiveness (Loon et al., 2012). Results

further suggested that substantial evidence existed that transformational leadership

behaviors lead to multiple individual and organizational outcomes such as employee

commitment, motivation, and a higher degree of individual performance focused on the

overall performance of the organization as a team (Hargis, Watt, & Piotrowski, 2011;

Theodore, 2013).

Chi, Lan, and Dorjgotov (2012) explored the effect of transformational leadership

on knowledge management and organizational effectiveness. The researchers analyzed

the survey responses from 552 professionals who worked in research institutions under

the authority of the Mongolian Academy of Sciences, an agency under the responsibility

of the government. Participants completed the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire 5X

(MLQ 5X-short) form to assess whether leadership characteristics existed in the survey

community. Chi et al. (2012) proposed three hypotheses; one was to assess if

transformational leadership serves as a moderator for knowledge management and

organizational effectiveness.

By conducting regression analysis of the data, researchers revealed that

transformational leadership indeed served as a moderator between knowledge

management and organizational effectiveness. Moreover, the results revealed that when

transformational leadership and knowledge management were at a high point, the

effectiveness of an organization was at a high point as well (Chi et al., 2012). Hence, the

transformational leadership style was found to be the most important factor related to

performance and employee knowledge development in the institutes sponsored by the

Mongolian public sector (Chi et al., 2012).

Scholars indicated that a transformational leader possesses the charisma and

ability to motivate employees to work beyond expectations (Khan, Ghazali, & Isha,

2014). Scholars noted that transformational leadership encourages employee motivation

as a core aspect of public administration (Vandenabee, 2014). Further, researchers noted

that transformational leadership promotes and supports innovation which in turn

encourages the longevity of an organization (Kim and Yoon, 2015). Hemsworth,

Muterera, and Baregheh (2013) conducted a study to measure transformational leadership

in public sector executives. The study measured transformational leadership behavior and

its subcategories by use of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire 5X (MLQ 5X-short)

form. The decision to use the MLQ 5X was based on its frequent use in research on

transformational leadership and the capability of the instrument to identify three sets of

leadership characteristics: transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire (Bass, 1997;

Hemsworth et al., 2013).

Assessing transformational leadership and knowledge management in the private

sector has been a focus of many research studies. However, few studies have assessed the

relationship between overall transformational leadership and overall knowledge

management as viewed by public sector human resource directors in the Southeastern

United States. Jain and Jeppensen (2013) offered the view that the introduction of

transformational leadership paired with knowledge management serves as key tools that

promotes organizational success.

Additionally, Nusair et al. (2012) noted that transformational leadership

influences employees drive to promote knowledge management by thinking innovatively

to meet organizational goals. Further, some studies even suggested that transformational

leadership will predict knowledge management through organizational learning (Camps,

& Rodríguez, 2011). Articles indicated that it is not enough for an organization to simply

invest in technology as a means for achieving goals, but the organizational culture must

include the earnest realization that investing in people is critical and having a

transformational leader can serve as a catalyst for success.

However, literature suggest displaying a transformational leadership style is not

enough to accurately effect organizational behaviors. Ibrahim and Al-Taneiji (2013)

studied the leadership style of government principals in 34 school districts in Dubai. The

data was collected using a Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (5X) short form

comprised of 45 items. The survey was used to find if a relationship existed between the

leadership style of principals and school performance. The survey was completed by 490

principals who conducted a self-assessment to determine their leadership characteristics.

The survey revealed the principals displayed more transformational than any other

leadership type. However, the findings of transformational leadership characteristics did

not correlate to school performance (Ibrahim & Al-Taneiji (2013).

Though literature for this research revealed some shortcoming in transformational

leadership, the prevailing view was that transformational leadership is the enabler that

can effectively cultivate knowledge and inspire followers to an enhanced degree of

knowledge management (Gelard et al., 2014; Ghasabeh et al., 2015; Odumeru &

Ogbonna, 2013). Further, Muchiri and Kiambati (2015) stated that the relationship

between transformational leadership and knowledge management has a direct influence

on the performance of an organization. The scholars suggested the association of

transformational leadership and knowledge management provides a means for a greater

emphasis on developing human capital to meet organizational objectives. Further, Self,

Self, and Schraeder (2014) emphasized that a transformational atmosphere in an

organization is essential in an organization’s achieving its long-term goals.

Nusair et al. (2011) suggested that public organizations face numerous challenges

to expediency in responding to needs of citizenries. These challenges ushered in the

requirement for public sector leaders to identify a leadership style to enhance the ability

of employees to perform at ever-increasing levels. Chegini (2011) complemented that

viewpoint by conveying that in order for an organization to achieve sustained success, it

must develop human capital and an organizational culture that emphasizes developing

and implementing transformable knowledge to achieve its goals.

However, implementing and maintaining an effective knowledge management

program requires a strong and innovative leader. Ryan, Zhang, Prybutok, and Sharp

(2012) proposed that organizations improve their efficiency by economizing on the

exchange of knowledge among managers. The researchers suggested that the leadership

structure in an organization can facilitate the flow of knowledge. Due to the hierarchical

structure of an organization, cooperation occurs within the social contexts and results in a

conducive environment for exchange of knowledge among management (Ryan et al.,

2012). Further, Yaghoubi et al. (2014) tested hypotheses to determine if transformational

leadership has a positive and significant effect on facilitating knowledge management.

The researchers analyzed the correlation between the subscales of transformational

leadership and the various aspects of knowledge management. Their research revealed

that a positive relationship does indeed exist between transformational leadership and

knowledge management.

Much interest on the subject has emerged in the private sector; however, several

studies have conducted an analysis of the relationship between transformation leadership

and knowledge management in the public sector. Nusair et al. (2012) studied how

transformational leadership style encourages the use of knowledge management in

Jordanian public sector organizations to promote an atmosphere of innovation.

Researchers collected survey data from 358 employees who worked in a public sector

organization. Among the three hypotheses developed for the study, the researchers

presented one hypothesis that sought to ascertain if transformational leadership is

positively associated with followers actions to perform and apply innovative behavior.

Using Pearson correlation as an analytical tool, the researchers’ findings reflected that

transformational leadership has a positive relationship for encouraging knowledge

innovation, and researchers concluded that organizations should invest in training for the

leadership style (Nusair et al., 2012).

Comparably, Alsalami et al. (2014) conducted a similar study in which public

sector participants provided responses regarding the relationship of transformational

leadership and organizational knowledge and that relationship’s abilities to increase

employees’ capability to be innovative in solving problems. Trottier et al. (2008) noted in

a study on the nature and significance of leadership in public sector organizations that

there may be a need for leaders to rethink an organization in approach to knowledge

management and focus on how to use institutional knowledge to maintain critical

continuity in the public sector organization.

A quantitative approach is used in several recent studies to explore facets of the

relationship between transformational leadership and knowledge management (Gelard et

al., 2014; Swee, Smyrnios, & Xiong, 2014; Yaghoubi, Mahallati, Moghadam, & Rahimi,

2014). Yaghoubi, Mahallati, Moghad, and Rahimi (2014) noted in the study investigating

transformational leadership as an enabling factor for knowledge management proposed

that knowledge management has an effect on the overall performance success of an

organization. The researchers revealed that knowledge management should be visible

throughout an organization. However, it was conveyed that it is the role of leadership in

an organization to implement and describe the objectives of knowledge management so

that every employee understands how to contribute.

Yaghoubi, Mahallati, Moghad, and Rahimi (2014) presented the main hypothesis

that transformational leadership has a positive and significant effect on knowledge

management. The researchers analyzed questionnaire responses using a Likert scale

rating from managers and related Iranian governmental oil distribution experts. Finding

from the study revealed that transformational leadership had a significant and positive

influence on knowledge management. Upon analysis of the responses, Nusair et al.

(2012) provided the view that suggested that determining the correlation between

transformational leadership and knowledge management is a viable exploration because

findings may serve as a means for effectively responding to human resource issues

related to productivity, efficiency, and development of employees in the public sector.

Determining an appropriate leadership style that motivates individuals to collectively

focus on achieving and exceed organizational expectations is a reasonable aspect of

leadership. Burns (1978) and Bass et al. (1987) presented seminal work in which various

leadership types and styles were proposed. Though all of the styles had various degrees

of relevance, it was the transformational leadership style that surfaced as the most

influential at motivating employees to regular meet and exceed expectations of an

organization. As such, it may be that the style of transformational leadership is best suited

for responding to long-term change demands expected by legislators and constituents in

the public sector (Trottier et al., 2008; Williams, 2012).

Research has shown that transformational style leadership predicts higher

categories of job performance among organizational followers (Bellé, 2014)

Vandenabeele (2014) in his study regarding leadership in the public sector, suggested that

the transformational leadership style is the primary means for shaping the of employees

towards instituting new organizational requirements beneficial to public sector

organizations. Understanding the relevance of the transformational leadership style as it

relates to public sector leadership may serve as an enabler towards the use of knowledge

management in public sector organizations.

Several studies have been initiated to assess the relationship between

transformational leadership and knowledge management in the public sector. Green

(2008) analyzed the connection between knowledge management and contemporary

leadership styles in the public sector. The researcher studied two styles of leadership,

bureaucratic and transformational, to determine which was preferred in the public sector

as a tool for enhancing knowledge management. Green (2008) noted that a different

leadership style will be necessary for 21 st century public sector organizations. This

different type of leader must have the capability to build the infrastructure of an

organization through the development of human organizational capabilities and social

connections. These leaders must be able to develop a connection between caring for

employees and making the public sector organization successful. The leader must be able

to create an organizational environment that promotes collaboration, motivation, and

employee growth and development.

Green (2008) suggested that understanding the different styles of leadership is

vital to knowledge transition in a public sector organization. The bureaucratic style of

leadership will have to be examined to determine its applicability for a new generational

workforce. Based on the traditional bureaucratic perspective of this style of leadership as

too rigid and authoritative to enhance the process of knowledge management, Green

(2008) proposed that given the changing current workforce dynamics, a transformational

leadership style is the best fit for 21 st century public sector organizations.

Green (2008) further suggested that a transformational leader will encourage

employee to focus more on the long-term benefits of the organization than on employees’

self-interest. This suggestion generates the necessity for knowledge management to

ensure employees have the tools to be successful. Moreover, Green (2008) proposed that

leaders have to think beyond the standard practices of assessing cost, processes, and

operations to evaluate and strive for new ways of promoting employee innovation and

creativity. Due to the current and projected demands on public sector workforce

employees, the transformational leadership style emerged as the best means for

addressing organizational leadership needs.

Burns (1978) and Bass et al. (1987) presented seminal work that described

various leadership types and styles. Though all of the styles had various degrees of

relevance, the transformational leadership style surfaced as the most influential at

motivating employees to regularly meet and exceed the expectations of an organization.

Therefore, the style of transformational leadership seems to be best suited for responding

to long-term changing demands expected by legislators and constituents in the public

sector (Trottier et al., 2008). Understanding the relevance of the transformational

leadership style as it relates to public sector leadership may serve as an enabler towards

the use of knowledge management in public sector organizations.

Millissa and Wong (2011) studied the relevance of the transformational leadership

style and how leader support impacts employee creativity in service and hospitality

sectors in Hong Kong. The researchers solicited responses from senior human resources

official in the various industries. The study included three hypotheses, and one sought to

determine if transformational leadership impacted employee creativity. Results revealed

that transformational leadership positively related to employee creativity. Millissa and

Wong (2011) proposed that leader support helped by promoting the environment for

creativity. The overall attributes of transformational leadership helped to encourage

positive workgroup dynamics and goal setting and recognized the value of an individual’s

contribution to the accomplishment of goals. The overall finding was that the

transformational leadership style exerted a significant influence on employees’

willingness to be creative in the application and gaining of knowledge toward the

accomplishment of established organizational goals (Millissa & Wong, 2011).

Goudarzv (2011) proposed that transformational leadership not only has the

potential for involving employees in the knowledge management process but also

enhances communications between employees that contribute to a greater focus on

organizational survival. The researcher proposed that leaders within organizations must

maintain a focus on developing human resources as a primary organizational activity.

The researcher studied various organizational factors, including leadership capabilities

and the use of knowledge management as a tool to aid in achieving and exceeding

organizational goals. Goudarzv (2011) proposed that transformational leadership plays a

major part in the knowledge management process. Comparably, the researcher promoted

the view that knowledge management can be used as tactical and strategic practice for an

organization.

Gelard et al.(2014) determined the relationship between transformational

leadership and knowledge management to be strong. The researchers suggested that

transformational leadership plays a critical role in enhancing the work environment of an

organization because that style involves the application of knowledge in an efficient way

that promotes learning (Gelard et al., 2014). The researchers took a quantitative approach

in their study and employed a two-part questionnaire to assess the different aspects of

transformational leadership and knowledge management. Further, a 5-point Likert scale

served as a rating tool.

Gelard et al. (2014) used descriptive statistical techniques and regression methods

of Spearman rho and Pearson R correlation coefficient tools to analyze responses. The

investigation into the relationship between transformational leadership and knowledge

management revealed that the presence of a transformational leader in an organization

results in an enhanced level of knowledge management (Gelard et al., 2014). Moreover,

the researchers proposed that the presence of transformational leadership in an

organization encouraged the implementation of knowledge management; in fact,

transformational leadership emerged as a premier tool in that implementation (Gelard et

al., 2014).

Some early and mid-decade studies into the correlation of transformational

leadership and knowledge management (Crawford, 2005) explored the relationship

between knowledge management and transformational leadership. The researcher

solicited survey responses from nontraditional graduate students who worked in varying

positions ranging from supervisory to executive levels. The researcher administered a

Knowledge Management Inventory (KMI), a survey instrument that focused on the

behavioral elements of knowledge management. This instrument consisted of questions

that revealed respondents’ ratings using a 5-point Likert scale on variables in categories

of knowledge acquisition, knowledge creation, and knowledge implementation.

Further, Crawford (2005) administered a second instrument, the Multifactor

Leadership Questionnaire (5X short form) originally created by Bass (1985). The 70-item

survey consisted of four subcategories of transformational leadership (charisma,

individual consideration, intellectual stimulation, and inspiration). The researcher

extended his study by applying two subscales of transactional and one subscale for

measuring laissez-faire leadership. The respondents provided a self-assessment of

leadership attributes using a 5-point Likert scale. Moreover, they provided demographic

information to determine the characteristics of the individuals taking the survey. The

researcher employed a descriptive statistics approach to assess variables, as well as

Pearson correlation coefficient to determine the variance between transformational

leadership and knowledge management. The study reported a positive correlation

between knowledge management and transformational leadership.

This review of literature regarding the relationship between transformational

leadership and knowledge management revealed that much of the material principally

focused on the private sector, and to a limited degree, the public sector. Further, based on

the literature reviewed, researchers have viewed human resource leaders, due to their

broad knowledge of an organization, as integral to identifying the right leadership style

for key positions in public sector activities. Therefore, this study will further contribute to

the body of work by studying the relationship between transformational leadership and

knowledge management from the perspective of human resource directors who work in

the public sector located in the Southeastern United States.

The Role of Human Resources in the Public Sector

Previous researchers have recognized that human resources may be the greatest

asset of an organization. Ensuring that an organization can achieve maximum capabilities

requires the development of individuals’ potential and talent as an element of human

resource management and development (Birasnav, 2013; Haslinda, 2009). Overseeing

these practices is generally the responsibility of a human resources director or manager,

depending on the title designated in an organization. Public sector human resources has

evolved from the 1800s, when it related to craftsmen and apprenticeships, through further

enhanced as a result of the industrial revolution (Bingle, Meyer, & Taylor, 2013;

Haslinda, 2009).

The public sector has been explained as generally composed of governmental

organizations that produce goods and services that are normally not provided by the

private sector. Public sector entities can consist of national and local governments, public

corporations, and quasi-autonomous non-governmental organizations (Bingle et al.,

2013). Bingle et al. (2013) proposed that public sector organizations are expected to be

efficient, effective, timely, and reliable in their regulatory responsibilities and responses

to the citizenry and elected officials. Arora (2011) presented the view that public sector

organizations have started to recognize the need for and importance of knowledge

management. The researcher noted that knowledge management can enable public sector

organizations to be efficient, accountable, decisive, responsive, and able to retain

knowledge in response the exiting of an aging workforce. The researcher also conveyed

that knowledge management could be utilized as a tool of reform because it can

effectively provide an overall strategy to manage public sector activities. The effective

use of knowledge management may result in improved governmental competencies and

increased service quality (Arora, 2011).

Another function of human resources is to address the element of workforce

planning to ensure an organization has the right people with the right skills to accomplish

its goals (Colley & Price, 2010). Colley and Price (2010) suggested the public sector has

been ill prepared to address workforce problems due to ageing workforce and shortages

of skills. The researchers noted public sector organizations have begun planning for

services and infrastructure issues but have paid less attention to their capacity to actually

deliver public services.

The history of human resource management presents a wide range of ideas and

thoughts regarding the worker–employer relationship (Vosburgh, 2007). One perspective

is that human resource management derived from the term personnel management as a

means for practitioners to distinguish themselves from other management professionals

(Haslina, 2009). Vosburgh (2007) presented a historical account of the transition of

human resources management, which proposed that the discipline has transitioned from

being an agent of business owners to filling the role of personnel administration as a tool

for dealing with issues related to workers’ rights, labor relations, and employee

efficiency. Vosburgh (2007) further proposed that initially the primary aspect of

personnel management was to address key functions related to salary, training, and the

hiring and firing of employees. Due to evolving functional activities and the need to

effectively respond to changing demands for appropriate employee management, the term

human resource management gradually replaced the term personnel management

(Haslina, 2009).

The roles of senior human resources practitioners who fill human resources

director or manager positions have dramatically changed over the years. In part, this

change was a response to new ideas about organizational restructuring, technological

advances, social and economic influences, implementation of governmental policies and

laws regarding employee relations, and new ideas about how best to structure

organizations (Kim, 2012; Vosburgh, 2007). The expansion of organizations drove the

need for more formal means to manage overall employment practices that fall essentially

under the umbrella of the human resources director. Evidence related to the expanding

role of human resources could be found in various piece of literature that discussed the

growth in the profession (Morley, Gunnigle, O'Sullivan, & Collings, 2006).

Human Resources directors are considered to have key management and

leadership roles within public sector organizations (West & Berman, 2011). Their

management styles and behaviors have the potential to affect how public sector

employees view an organization and may even have an indirect impact on overall

performance expectations. West and Berman (2011) found the role of the human

resources director, along with other senior management members, so valuable that they

included them in research to evaluate the impact that managerial habits have on public

sector employee performance.

West and Berman (2011) distributed surveys to senior managers that included

human resources directors in various U.S. cities with populations over 50,000.

Respondents rated survey items using a Likert scale of strongly agree to strongly

disagree. The findings of the study were generally positive, and researchers presented

several implications. One practical implication materialized that may require the

expertise and direct involvement of the human resources director. West and Berman

(2011) noted the value of mentorship as a tool for use of knowledge management in order

to ensure expertise is shared to help public sector colleagues with performance concerns.

A seminal study in 1979 presented findings involving personnel directors (now

called human resources directors) to assess their involvement in organizational decision-

making. Coleman’s (1979) research examined how personnel directors spent their time

within an organization. Coleman conducted interviews and distributed questionnaires to

72 public and private organizations in the Northeastern United States. Analysis of the

data revealed that as a whole, directors spent a significant amount of time in knowledge

gathering and were involved in information gathering particularly within the management

cadre. Coleman (1979) proposed that such an individual is engaged in organizational

decision-making and spends significant work-time interacting with people. Based on this

interaction, Coleman (1979) surmised that human resources directors play major part in

determining how best to utilize knowledge in a public sector organization.

Jacobson (2010) proposed that governments will face a workforce crisis because

of the pending exodus of workers from the baby boomer generation. Governments will be

challenged to address the loss of skills and knowledge required to provide quality

services when these workers depart. Jacobson (2010) conducted a study to examine the

state of workforce planning in various municipalities in North Carolina. Data from

surveys distributed to medium and large municipalities in North Carolina with

populations over 15,000 was analyzed to determine the state of planning to overcome the

loss of knowledge.

Though not directly mentioned as part of the respondent pool, activities related to

workforce development and planning usually fall under the purview of human resources.

Jacobson (2010) found that though the human resource director role is clearly changing

from a tactical to a strategic set of responsibilities, many communities had not grasped

the value of the new role and failed to include the human resource directors in the

planning process. Since the responsibility for growth and development of employees is

still under the umbrella of the senior human resources officer, it is reasonable to suggest

that human resource management departments are still members of the workforce

planning process, and their input to any effort to manage knowledge within organizations

is crucial (Jacobson, 2010). Therefore, the role of the director has a critical influence on

the success of any knowledge management initiative to address loss of skill and abilities

in organizations. Additionally, having and displaying the appropriate leadership

characteristics may allow the human resources leader to gain and maintain a seat in the

executive suite to present ideas and justify efforts that contribute to managing knowledge

that benefits employees and the public sector organization.

In order to ensure public sector organizations can provide services, human

resources directors must ensure knowledge management practices are in place and that

the appropriate leadership style be displayed in achieving organizational goals (Johnson

et al., 2009; Rowland, 2013). Determining an appropriate leadership style that motivates

individuals to collectively focus on achieving and exceeding organizational expectations

is a reasonable aspect of leadership. Based on the broad reach of human resources

directors in the performance of their duties, this research study solicited responses from

this pool of individuals to garner their input on knowledge management practices in the

public sector and determine if the respondents display characteristics of transformational

leaders that may contribute to the use of knowledge management.

Summary

Chapter 2 provided a review of relevant literature concerning knowledge

management, transformational leadership and their relevance to the public sector. The

chapter began by noting that a gap exists between the study of transformational

leadership in the private and public sector. It was revealed that studies have primarily

focused on transformational leadership and knowledge management in the private sector.

However, there has been a lesser focus on studying transformational leadership and

knowledge management in the public sector.

Knowledge management was suggested as having gained increased interest from

researchers and practitioners due to its influence on organizational outcomes (Kim & Ko,

2014). Seminal literature was reviewed to provide a foundation for understanding the

evolution of knowledge management and how the concept affects the dynamics of

organizations and organizational members. Tacit and explicit knowledge was explained

and the significance of each was discussed as elements of knowledge management.

Further, knowledge acquisition, creation, and application as subsets of knowledge

management were identified and discussed. The historical and current significance of

managing knowledge was highlighted as a critical contributor to an organization’s

success (Gau, 2011; Senge, 1999)

Chapter 2 included literature that explained the practice of leadership and the

genesis of transformational leadership as a leadership style. Classical leadership theories

such as servant leadership, contingency theory, trait theory, and situational leadership

were explained. An explanation of the subcategories of transformational leadership and

their relevance to leadership was provided. Transformational leadership was introduced

as a leadership style that moved away from past managerial leadership practices of

rewards to promote productivity to one that encouraged productivity by transforming the

mindset of employees from self-interest to a focus on the success of an organization. The

transformational leadership style was suggested as being beneficial to organizations

because it heightened the level of employees and leaders (Burns, 1978; Loon et al.,

2012).

Further, Chapter 2 identified literature that explored the relationship between

transformational leadership and knowledge management in the public sector. The chapter

noted that the public sector is faced with demands from citizenry for efficient, effective,

and expeditious services (Nusair et al. 2012). The transformational leadership style was

suggested as the best means for promoting and encouraging the use of knowledge

management to address public sector service concerns. It was noted in the chapter that

leadership support is vital to the success and implementation of knowledge management

in an organization. It is the overall attributes of transformational leadership that

encourages an environment that cultivates the use of knowledge management (Nusair et

al. 2012).

It was noted in Chapter 2 that human resources is the greatest asset of an

organization; therefore, employee knowledge needs to maintained and developed. It was

suggested that due to the ever-changing demands on public sector leaders from citizens

and all stakeholders to do more with less resources, having the right leadership style and

the right programs in place is vital. Transformational leadership and knowledge

management were viewed as two mechanisms for enduring the success of public sector

organizations to achieve goals and objectives. Chapter 2 noted the relevance and evolving

role of human resources in the public sector. Further, it was revealed that the role and

leadership style of senior human resource practitioners play a vital part in the practice of

knowledge management in public sector organizations (Coleman, 1979).

The literature review in Chapter 2 explored the scholarly research that involved

the topic so knowledge management and transformational leadership as tools for public

sector organizational leaders. Chapter 2 conveyed that the public sector will face

tremendous workforce concerns because of the coming exodus of the baby boomer

generation (Jacobson, 2010). Therefore, it would be practical to put into place the

leadership and knowledge management tools to ensure knowledge loss is kept to a

minimum. Since studies related to the relationship between transformational leadership

and knowledge management from the perspective of public sector human resources

leaders is limited, exploring this issue may benefit public sector organizations who are

trying to combat current and future loss of knowledge.

The literature in Chapter 2 suggested that transformational leadership and the

practice of knowledge management are important tools for public sector use. Therefore, it

is beneficial to continue to explore the relationship between the transformational

leadership and knowledge management as resources for public sector leaders and to

enrich the field of study.

CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY

Introduction

Chapter 3 provides a brief introduction regarding study research methodology,

research design, a description of the population surveyed and sampling procedures.

Moreover, the specific data collection instruments, data collection process, data analysis

procedures, study validity and reliability is discussed followed by the ethical

considerations regarding the study. An outcome of this study is to fill the gap in research

related to transformational leadership and knowledge management in the public sector.

The role of transformational leadership and knowledge management is perceived

to be a key operational component in government due to the ever-changing and

increasing demands from the public for government employees to do more with less (Jain

& Jeppesen, 2013; Lavania, 2012). Studying the relationship between transformational

leadership and knowledge management provides a means for a greater emphasis on

human capital development in order to meet and exceed organizational short and long-

term goals to delivery public sector services to constituents (Birasnav, Rangnekar, &

Dalpati, 2011).

Research Design

A non-experimental, exploratory quantitative approach was utilized for this study.

The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between overall

transformational leadership and overall knowledge management as viewed by public

sector human resource directors in the southeastern United States. The objective of this

study was to reveal if the use of knowledge management in the public sector is influenced

by the transformational leadership style of the human resource director. Existing survey

instruments were used in this study to collect data from public sector human resource

directors in the southeast. The quantitative approach was used to evaluate if

transformational leadership characteristics exist among public sector human resources

directors in the southeastern United States.

Additionally, demographic data was collected to identify the differences and

commonality among the respondents. The collection of information regarding

respondents’ demographics provided a means to generalize the work population among

the respondents. Evaluation of the demographic information served as a means to help

assess the background of respondents who participated in the study. A copy of the

demographic survey is located at Appendix B.

This study used research methods that have been applied by other researchers.

The quantitative approach has been used in several studies to explore facets of the

relationship between transformational leadership and knowledge management (Gelard,

Boroumand, & Mohammadi, 2014; Swee, Smyrnios, & Xiong, 2014; Yaghoubi,

Mahallati, Moghadam, & Rahimi, 2014). Crawford (2005) in earlier research used a

nonexperimental, quantitative approach to collect data to from a sample of non-traditional

graduate school student to assess the correlation between transformational leadership,

positioning, and knowledge management in organizations.

Sample

Sample Population

The role of transformational leadership and knowledge management has become a

key operational component in government due to the ever-changing and increasing

demands from the public for government employees to do more with less (Jain &

Jeppesen, 2013; Lavania, 2012). Public sector HR directors in the southeastern United

States served as the sample population for this study.

The population for this study were individuals who serve in senior HR

management positions within the public sector. As of May 2015, there were 122,780

individuals reflecting an occupation code of 11-3121 working in senior HR positions

nationally in the United States (USBLS, 2016). An estimated 5778 work in senior HR

positions within the Southeast United States (USBLS, 2016). Further, it is estimated that

1500 individuals work as HR directors or in senior HR management positions in the

public sector of the Southeast United States based on data retrieved from the U.S. Bureau

of Labor Statistics (2015). The national mean age for those working in senior human

resource management positions was 44.8 years of age. The age range of 45 – 54 had the

highest number of HR employed filling management positions, closely followed by those

between the age of 35 – 44 years of age (USBLS, 2015). National data indicated that 73%

of those filling senior HR management positions are female.

National demographics pertaining to education indicated that 19% of those filling

senior HR management positions have attained a master’s degree, 34.8% have a

bachelor’s degree, 7.9% have an associate’s degree, and 20.8% have attended but not

earned a degree from college. The rationale for using HR directors is based on the view

that this sample population is considered to play a critical role in management and

leadership within public sector organizations (West & Berman, 2011).

The population was determined due to the researcher’s desire to focus on a

specific region of employment, the expense to administer surveys, and to relay findings

that may benefit leaders within the public sector of the southeastern United States.

Further, the actual respondents were from a larger population of volunteer panel members

maintained by Qualtrics who met the criteria for participation in this study.

Sample Frame

The sample for this study were members of an expert panel serving as public

sector human resource directors in the southeastern United States. The rationale for using

HR directors was based on the view that this sample population is considered to play a

critical role in management and leadership within public sector organizations (West &

Berman, 2011). Their management styles and behaviors have the potential to affect how

public sector employees view an organization and may even have an indirect impact on

overall performance expectations.

To be eligible to participate in this study, a respondent had to have at least five

years of cumulative experience in human resources and hold the position of human

resource director. In addition, respondents must have had at least one year in their current

position as a director within the public sector. Qualtrics panel members volunteered to

participate in this research study. The pool of respondents was asked via an introduction

letter to confirm their eligibility to take part in this study. The panel membership was

maintained and contacted by Qualtrics; a web-based survey company, located in the

United States. Qualtrics identified 89 volunteer panel members who met the criteria for

participate in this study.

During this study, respondents identified their gender and data was collected

regarding the age range of respondents. This category of data was based on six options

for which respondents could make a selection. The six brackets included the ranges, 18

and 29, 30 and 39, 40 and 49, 50 – 59, 60 and 69, and 70 years of age or over.

Respondents were also asked to provide information regarding their education level

obtained and whether their place of employment was within city, state, or county

government. Further, respondents provided information regarding the number of years in

their present position and the frequency they used computers or technology when

performing daily duties. The researcher’s selection of these categories was based on an

instrument used in prior research (Crawford, 2005).

Power Analysis

The sample pool was composed of 89 respondents. The sample number was

determined by use of a statistical software program called G*Power, an electronic sample

size estimator. An A priori analysis was used as a type of analysis to generate the

appropriate sample size data. Additionally, the sample size was calculated using the t-test

and regression model from the G*Power family of test options and statistical tests. The

analysis used a small effect size of .15, an alpha of .05, and power of 1-β of .95 (Faul,

Erdfelder, Buchner, & Lang, 2009; Kühberger, Fritz, & Scherndl, 2014; Trochim, 2006).

Pearson Correlation was applied to test for the linear relationship between overall

transformational leadership and overall knowledge management in the public as viewed

by Human Resource Directors in the Southeast United States. Once the data was

analyzed, a correlation of .05 was used as a significance test against the hypotheses being

presented in this study (Trochim, 2006).

Setting

To be eligible to participate in this study, a respondent had to have at least five

years of cumulative experience in human resources and hold the position of human

resource director. In addition, respondents must have had at least one year in their current

position as a director within the public sector. Qualtrics panel members volunteered to

participate in this research study. The pool of respondents was asked via an introduction

letter to confirm their eligibility to take part in this study.

Instrumentation/Measures

The following information provides an overview of the instruments used in this

study. One instrument is a Knowledge Management Inventory (KMI) composed of

surveys structured to gage responses from participants related to knowledge acquisition,

knowledge creation, and knowledge application. The other instrument used in the study

was a Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ 5X) short form that assessed the

leadership characteristics displayed by respondents. The instrument did not identify a

type of leadership but the characteristics of leadership style based on the responses from

study participants.

Knowledge Management Inventory (KMI)

A Knowledge Management Inventory (KMI) pertaining to knowledge

management behaviors was administered to collect responses. The instrument focused on

knowledge behaviors and the content of the questions were based on those in an original

survey previously used in knowledge management research (Crawford, 2005). A five-

point Likert scale ranging from “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree” was used to

measure the report knowledge management behaviors. The rating scale was from 1 – 5

with 3 being assigned as neutral or no opinion (Choudhary, Akhtar, & Zaheer, 2013;

Crawford, 2005). The data collected was categorized into three subscales, knowledge

acquisition, knowledge creation, and knowledge application (Crawford, 2005). The

subscales for the overall knowledge management inventory were described in the

following manner based on historical and modern viewpoints:

Knowledge acquisition. The process of collecting information from a range

of external resources by reading, listening, observing, and experiencing events resulting

in knowledge gathering (Bairi, Manohar, & Kundu, 2013; Crawford, 2005).

Knowledge creation: The process by which individuals, groups, or organizations

receive tacit and explicity knowledge and generate new ideas and process (Crawford,

2005; Nonaka, 1994; Nonaka & Toyama, 2003; Wang, 2011).

Knowledge application: The use of knowledge and technology that has been

acquired or created and then applied within an organization’s knowledge management

cycle (Birasnav, 2014; Crawford, 2005; Song, van der Bij, & Weggeman, 2005).

The subsets were used as part of the overall knowledge management inventory

and provided questions relevant to the respondents’ views of overall knowledge

management behaviors within their organizations.

Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (5X) Short Form

Further, this study used the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire 5X short form

(MLQ 5X) to collect data based on each respondents’ self-assessment of their leadership

style. The MLQ 5X responses were assessed to determine if characteristics of the

transformational leadership style were present in public sector HR directors. Bass (1985)

developed the MLQ 5 X instrument to measure characteristics of transformational,

transactional, and laissez-faire leadership types. A five-point Likert scale ranging from

“Not at All” to “Frequently, If Not Always” was used. A rating score from 0 to 4 was

used with 2 being assigned to the “Sometimes” response. Principally, the focus of this

study measured four subscales related to transformational leadership activities. The

subscales were individualized consideration, idealized influence, intellectual stimulation,

and inspirational motivation (Bass, 1985). The sub-scales were described as indicated

below:

Individualized consideration. A leader’s ability to recognize and satisfy the

current individual needs of followers and elevate those needs to maximize individual

potential (Avolio & Bass, 2004).

Idealized influence. Characteristic of a leader who has the ability to relate to

followers and present attributes that make an individual identify and admire the leader

(Avolio & Bass, 2004; Gelard et al., 2014).

Intellectual stimulation. A leader’s ability to help followers to think differently

about old problems with new perspectives (Avolio & Bass, 2004; Gelard et al., 2014).

Inspirational motivation. The articulation of goals in a clear and concise way so

that followers understand what is expected, right, and important to the leader (Avolio &

Bass, 2004).

The MLQ instrument has been used in multiple studies over the years to ascertain

leadership types (Birasnav, 2014; Crawford, 2005; Eliophotou Menon, 2014; Guay,

2013). Recommendation from prior studies suggested continued research related to the

correlation between transformational leadership and knowledge management to further

expose the effect that leadership has on knowledge management factors involved with

organizational learning (Crawford, 2005; Loon et al., 2012; Tipu, Ryan, & Fantazy,

2012).

Descriptive Statistics

Descriptive statistics were used to analyzed the different variables in the study to

aid in visualizing and conveying what the study data shows. The use of a regression

analysis was applied since the research assessed if there was a relationship between

overall transformational leadership and overall knowledge management behaviors

(Crawford, 2005; Muda, Rafiki, & Harahap, 2014; Muhammad Madi, Uli, & Tarí, 2008).

This researcher received approval from the survey instrument creator to use the KMI tool

for this study (Crawford, 2005). Moreover, the researcher purchased user rights from

Mind Garden, a psychological assessments and instruments provider, to distribute the

MLQ 5X form for this study (Mind Garden, 2015).

Data Collection

Qualtrics served as the data collection source for this study. The survey was

electronically based so that the respondent pool needed to only activate a link to the

survey to begin the response process after confirming acceptance on the electronic

consent form. Respondents accessed the survey instruments via a secure account

managed by the researcher. Data was electronically tabulated using analytical SPSS

software when each respondent finalize and formally submitted responses. The survey

account was composed of an overview regarding the purpose of the survey, a statement

of anonymity, and consent authorization from the respondent based on the decision to

proceed further with the electronic survey.

Individuals in the sample pool were required to click “I accept” or “I decline” on

the consent form before the respondent could proceed to take the survey. This action

assigned an identification number established by Qualtrics that served as a signature.

Upon acceptance, the panel member completed the KMI and MLQ instruments. Clicking

the “I decline” button on the consent form terminated the request and the respondent was

denied access to the survey but provided a “thank you” acknowledgement notice. A three-

week period was designated to distribute and collect responses. The survey rate was

monitored to determine if the response rate was sufficient. Reminder emails were not

necessary due to receipt of the required number of responses.

Qualtrics was provided written criteria regarding the eligibility requirement for

panel members to participation in this study. Qualtrics performed a review of its expert

panel members and garnered enough volunteers who met the study participation criteria

and were willing to serve as respondents. The participants were provided information

regarding the purpose of this study, consent form, and the survey instruments. The

introduction, consent form, and survey instruments were hosted and administered to the

pool of respondents by Qualtrics. Further, a filter system was created to have panel

members confirm eligibility to participate in the study. The completed surveys are

retained in a Qualtrics secure electronic system under an account managed by the

researcher. The data was downloaded and store in a secure file cabinet located in the

researcher’s residence.

The number of responses was monitored by the researcher via a secure account

established with Qualtrics. Upon reaching the desired sample size, access to the account

was closed for further responses. Approximately 30-days prior to releasing the survey

instruments, information regarding survey eligibility, type of survey instruments, and

account security requirements was given and discussed with a Qualtrics Account

Representative. Three weeks was dedicated for the distribution and collection of surveys

to a sample pool of HR directors. A reminder message to the survey pool was not

necessary since the number of required responses was achieved.

This study used a stratified random sampling method to collect data. This

sampling technique permits the survey population to be divided into subgroups and in

turn, randomly select the final subjects proportionally from the identified subgroups (i.e.

city and states). Laith Ali and Hassan (2013) used stratified random sampling during a

study about knowledge management practices and noted how it is an essential element to

innovation and organizational performance.

Data Analysis

Descriptive statistics was used to describe and summarize the sample and

measured during this study to reflect what the data revealed (Trochim, 2006). Pearson

correlation was utilized to test for the linear relationship between overall transformational

leadership and overall knowledge management as viewed by human resource directors in

the southeastern United States (Trochim, 2006). Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was

used to assess the demographic data provided by respondents for years of employment

and place of employment. A significance test for correlation of .05 was used against the

hypotheses being presented in this study (Trochim, 2006). Data was electronically

tabulated using the analytical SPSS software.

Validity and Reliability

This study used a knowledge management inventory to solicit responses related to

knowledge management functions from survey participants. The knowledge management

inventory measured responses involving questions about knowledge acquisition,

knowledge creation, and knowledge application (Analoui, Clair, & Sambrook, 2013;

http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/statdesc.php

Crawford, 2005). Crawford (2005) initially estimated an alpha reliability of 0.86 during

initial testing of the KMI instrument. The instrument actually achieved a reliability rating

of 0.89 (Crawford, 2005).

The MLQ 5X is a commonly used leadership behavioral questionnaire found in

many studies to measure characteristics of transformational leadership in individuals

(Hemsworth, Muterera, & Baregheh, 2013; Loon, Lim, Teck, & Cai, 2012). This study

included the use of the MLQ 5X developed by Bass and Avolio (2004). Avolio & Bass

(2004) propose that the current version of the MLQ 5X has been used in nearly 300

research programs and academic endeavors internationally in the last decade. The current

version of the MLQ has been translated into multiple languages for applicability in

various assessment and training research projects.

The reliabilities for each of the MLQ 5X leadership factor scales ranged from .63

to .92 in the initial sample set, and .64 to .92 in the replication set. The reliabilities

presented here for each scale was consistent with earlier results reported for the MLQ

(Bass & Avolio, 1990). However, the average inter-correlation among the 5

transformational scales was .64 and the internal consistency were above .70%.

Crawford’s (2005) use of the MLQ yielded reliability scores of alpha 0.63 to .84 which

align with Cronbach’s alpha rating of +1, 0, & -1 to show strength of correlation. In a

similar study, a reliability of measures exceeded .70 for alpha which demonstrated

satisfactory validity and reliability of the instrument (Yang, Wu, Chang, & Chien, 2011).

Ethical Considerations

The conduct of this scholarly research encompassed the expectation that data and

participants’ information would be properly managed and safeguarded. Ethical

consideration for this study followed tenets of the Belmont Report. The Belmont Report

provided an explanation of the ethical principles for the conduct of research as identified

by the United States Department of National Commission for the Protection of Human

Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research (United States Department of Health

and Human Services, 1979). Effective and accurate compliance with research practices

resulted in minimizing activities that could negatively affect survey participants.

Conducting research for this study required the use of computer technology with

an online survey organization called Qualtrics. Qualtrics was used as the accredited

survey service to provide a panel of respondents for this study. Qualtrics hosted and

administered the survey instruments. Specific names of the Qualtrics panel members who

participated in this study were not provided to the researcher. The panel members served

as volunteers and could op-out from participating in the study at any time. An

introduction letter was provided to the respondents by the researcher as part of the

notification process by Qualtrics. As part of the introduction letter, a consent statement

form embedded in the overall survey instrument was provided to all participants. Only

after the participant acknowledged agreement to participate in the study was access

granted to the actual survey instruments.

Qualtrics secured the data to minimize conflict and maintain confidentiality.

Vulnerability checks were regularly performed by Qualtrics. Moreover, Qualtrics data

system is restricted to those who have specific authorization and is monitored for

compliance. Data is processed and stored on a server located in the United States and is

not assigned to a “cloud” format for storage. Qualtrics generated and maintained all

contact information regarding the panel of respondents. The researcher had no access to

personal data regarding respondents. Therefore, there was minimum risk to respondents.

However, there is the very remote possibility of information being used without

knowledge of the researcher since a third-party organization was involved in hosting,

administering, and collecting data. Consequently, an agreement of confidentiality was

established with Qualtrics as part of the overall contract for controlling the information.

Every effort was made to minimize or eliminate the opportunity for any harm being

experienced by participants as a result of their participation in this study.

The researcher has significant experience in human resources programming and

may have some limited biases in anticipating responses. The researcher benefited from

the responses of participants because the responses will contribute towards completion of

the researcher’s academic requirements. Further, the human resources profession within

the Organization and Management field of study may benefit from enhanced knowledge

available to the community as a result of this study. Aside from the above, additional

ethical factors were addressed as part of this study.

No financial benefits were received by the respondents from the researcher as a

result of their participation in the study. The risk of harm was minimized during this

study. Compliance was achieved by the design of the survey to ensure minimum

demographic information was requested. The study only acquired enough data to analyze

and yield results that were useful for the study. Justice was relevant to the selection of

subjects for this study at two levels. The social and the individual justice required was

display through fairness in providing benefits of this research to all participants. The

researcher was not involved in any direct compensation to study participants. If

respondents received any compensation it would have been provided by Qualtrics as the

panel manager.

Survey participation was voluntary and participants could withdraw at any time.

Informed Consent was gained through the use of a statement on the front page of the

survey instrument offering the participant an opportunity to ask questions via the use of a

web-based account maintained by Qualtrics. Informed Consent was requested to ensure

participants acknowledged awareness and purpose of the study. Research data for this

study will be safeguarded by the researcher for 7 years at which time the data will be

destroyed. Qualtrics will terminate the data upon notification by the researcher.

Summary

Chapter 3 provided an explanation regarding the methodology used for this study

to explore the relationship between overall transformational leadership and overall

knowledge management as viewed by public sector human resource directors in the

southeast. In Chapter 3, the research design, sampling approach, instrumentation and

measurements, and the data collection and analysis approach were discussed. Moreover,

the chapter included an explanation regarding instrument validity and reliability and

ethical considerations relative to the study.

In this chapter, the types of research instruments were explained. The KMI survey

was discussed and conveyed as the means used to evaluate the use and understanding on

different subscales of knowledge management by human resource directors. In addition, a

Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire was used as a self-assessment tool to identify the

style of leadership most prevalent in the survey population. Validity and reliability of this

instrument was provided as part of this study. In Chapter 4, the results of the survey

instruments and an analysis of the data will be presented.

CHAPTER 4. RESULTS

Introduction

In this chapter, results from data collected are presented to reveal if there is a

relationship between overall transformational leadership and overall knowledge

management within public sector organizations located in the southeastern United States.

The research questions and hypotheses for this study served as the foundation on which

to conduct the study, collect data, and perform the evaluations provided by the sample

pool. The research used two survey instruments to collect data from human resources

directors who work in public sector for the geographical region studied. This study tested

the hypotheses as indicated below:

Ho: There is no significant relationship between overall transformational

leadership and overall knowledge management in public sector as viewed by HR

Directors in the Southeast United States.

H1: There is a significant relationship between overall transformational leadership

and overall knowledge management practices in public sector as viewed by HR Directors

in the Southeast United States.

This chapter begins with the sample data summary, the description of

demographic variables, and the description of study variables by presenting descriptive

statistics, followed by the investigation of assumptions for conducting a parametric test,

which is the test for normality for the study variables. The results of the correlational

statistical tests are then presented to determine the connection between overall

transformational leadership and overall knowledge management in the public sector as

viewed by human resource directors in the Southeastern United States. A summary of the

results of all statistical tests concludes this chapter.

The aforementioned knowledge management inventory (KMI) was used to collect

responses from public sector human resource directors in the southeast United States

regarding their views of knowledge management behaviors that included knowledge

management acquisition, knowledge management creation, and knowledge management

application (Crawford, 2005). Table 1 reflects the inventory categories that were focused

specifically on knowledge management functions as viewed by the respondents. The

specific instruments used are identified and apply to the variables that were measured.

The KMI surveys included a framework to assess the overall degree of personal

knowledge management. A seven category framework was developed that involved

accessing, evaluating, organizing, analyzing, conveying, collaborating, and securing

knowledge (Crawford, 2005). There were four questions for each category with a rating

scale of 1-5. The propensity for one or more of the categories to reflect behavior of the

respondents is a reflection of the overall score for the individual categories.

Table 1. Knowledge Management Inventory

Construct Measures Behaviors

Knowledge Management KM Functions KM Acquisition

KM Communication KM Creation

KM Technology KM Application

Also, respondents were asked to provide a self-assessment of their leadership

approach using a MLQ 5X composed of 45 questions to determine the leadership

characteristics of the various respondents with the primary focus being the

transformational leadership style (Avolio & Bass, 2004). Table 2 reflects the categories

used on the MLQ 5X instrument. The questionnaire responses were focused on four

category of leadership characteristics that included Idealized Influences (II) which

highlighted attributes (IIA) or behaviors (IIB), (2) Inspirational Motivation (IM), (3)

Intellectual Stimulation (IS), and (4) Individualized Consideration (IC). The MLQ

instrument also measured characteristics of transactional and passive avoidance

leadership.

Transactional leadership was evaluated by assessing the frequency of responses

that fell into the contingency reward and management by exception (Active) measures.

Moreover, management by exception (passive) and laissez-faire measures were evaluated

to assess the degree of passive avoidance characteristics reveal by survey respondents.

Also, the MLQ 5X instrument measured the effects of leadership such as satisfaction,

extra effort, and effectiveness. Data for these categories was evaluated but only responses

related to leadership characteristics that revealed the relationship between overall

transformational leadership and overall knowledge management was considered.

Table 2. MLQ 5X Leadership Behaviors

Construct Instrument Behaviors

Transformational MLQ 5X Form Idealized Influence (IIA) (IIB)

Inspirational Motivation (IM)

Intellectual Stimulation (IS)

Individualized Consideration (IC)

Transactional Contingency Reward

Management by Exception (Active)

Passive Avoidance Management by Exception (Passive)

Laissez-Faire

_______________________________________________________________________

The researcher employed a descriptive approach so findings were analyzed to aid

in conveying and visualizing what the study data showed. Moreover, Chapter 4 contains

descriptive categories as each relates to assessing variables used in this study. Pearson

correlation coefficient was applied to determine the variance between transformational

leadership and knowledge management. The results were evaluated by analyzing the

means of each construct against the significance level of .05 (Trochim, 2006). Analysis of

Variance (ANOVA) was used to assess the demographic data provided by respondents.

Data was electronically tabulated using the analytical SPSS software. Furthermore, tables

and figures have been included in the data analysis as a summary of data for research

results.

Description of Population and Sample

Eighty-nine public sector human resource directors participated in this study.

Respondents were identified to participate in this study as expert panel members

belonging to Qualtrics, a professional private research software company located in the

United States. Members of the sample pool were volunteers through Qualtrics to

participate in this study. The criteria to participate in this study required respondents to

currently be serving as a human resources director for at least one year, be employed in

the public sector located in the southeast United States, and have five years of cumulative

human resources experience.

Since the respondents were members of a panel of experts maintained by

Qualtrics and were volunteers, all surveys were completed and returned to the researcher

via a secure account yielding a 100% return rate. Various tables listed in this study

provided the specifics regarding the survey demographics for the 89 individuals

participating in the study. The tables provide information related to the age, gender, and

experience level of the respondents in their current position. Further, the tables provide

information pertaining to the education level, location of employment, the respondents’

view of how much they use computers or other technology in the public sector

workplace.

The age ranges reflexed six brackets for selection. Responses revealed that 28

respondents were between the ages of 18 and 29, 38 between the ages of 30 and 39, 14

between 40 and 49, 6 individuals were between 50 – 59, 3 were between 60 and 69, and

zero individuals responding were 70 or over. The next highest rate of responses came

from individuals between 18 and 29 years of age reflecting a 31.46 rate of response.

A review of the current career experience level revealed the majority of the

respondents had 5 to 9 years of current experience in their position as human resource

director within the public sector. The next largest group of human resource director

respondents were those with 10 to 14 years of experience. Demographics regarding the

level of employment showed that the majority of respondents work at the city level in the

public sector followed by those who work at the county level.

The demographic responses revealed that most of the respondents have bachelor

degree or have attended college at some point in their career. Finally, respondents were

asked about their frequency regarding the use of workplace computers or other

technology. The majority of the participants responded that the use a computer is

involved in their daily activities most of the day.

Participants in the study were members of an expert pool of practitioners

maintained by Qualtrics. The demographics analyzed for this study reflected a

representation of the population of human resources directors who work in public sector

organizations in the southeast United States. Crawford (2005) used similar demographic

categories to collect data for a study undertaken to explore the effect of transformational

leadership and organizational position on knowledge management.

Summary of Results

Responses were provided by 89 public sector human resources directors located

in the southeast United States. All respondents volunteered to participate in this study.

Individuals consented to participation in the study and submitted responses to the surveys

electronically via a secure account hosted and administered by a third-party survey

distribution organization. All participants acknowledged prior to accessing the

instruments that they met the criteria for participation in this study. The knowledge

management inventory composed of three separate surveys was used during this study.

Permission to use the instruments was given by the originator (C. Crawford, personal

communication, October 27, 2015).

Further, user-rights were purchased by the researcher from MindGarden for the

use of the MLQ 5X instrument (MindGarden, personal communication, February 4,

2016). The MLQ 5X provided the means for respondents to self-assess their leadership

style based on a series of 45 – closed ended questions. The result identified leadership

characteristics of transformational, transaction, or passive avoidant/laissez-faire

leadership types. The MLQ 5X has been used in several research studies to evaluate

leadership characteristics of study respondents (Choudhary, Akhtar, & Zaheer, 2013;

Hemsworth, Muterera, & Baregheh, 2013). The knowledge management surveys,

demographics questions, and the MLQ 5X were accessible to the respondents via

permission from the researcher through a secure account hosted by Qualtrics.

The basis for this study was to explore the relationship between overall

transformational leadership and overall knowledge management in the public sector. The

question posed for this study sought to determine is there a relationship between overall

transformational leadership and overall knowledge management as viewed by public sector HR

Directors in the Southeast United States? Though individual subsets of transformational

leadership and knowledge management were analyzed, the responses were combined so

that an overall analysis could be accomplished for each construct. Data results for this

study start with demographic information to acquire an understanding of the similarities

and differences between the respondents.

Demographics

Noted in Table 3, females comprised the largest percentage of respondents at

56.18% compared to 43.82% for male respondents. The age range categories revealed

that the highest number of respondents were between the ages of 30 and 39 which

reflected 42.7% of the participants. The next highest number rate of responses came from

individuals between 18 and 29 years of age reflecting a 31.46 rate of response.

Table 3. Gender and Age Range Composition

Name N Percentage 18-

30-

40-

50-

60-

70 -

above

Gender

Male 39 43.82

Female 50 56.18

Age 89 28 38 14 6 3 0

Percentage 31.46 42.7 15.73 6.74 3.37 0

Table 4 reflects the respondents’ current career experience level revealed that five

individuals had five years of experience, 44 had between 5 and 9 years of experience, 20

had 10 to 14 years of experience, 16 respondents had between 15 and 19 years of

experience, and 4 had 20 years or over of current human resource experience.

Respondents who have between 5 and 9 years of human resource experience participated

in this study reflecting a 49.44 response rate.

Additionally, Table 4 shows the demographic information about the employment

level of the respondents. Data collection revealed that 33 respondents worked as directors

in county governments, 39 worked in city governments, and 17 worked in state

governments. The majority of the respondents work as human resources directors at the

city level yielding a 43.82 participation rate for this study.

Table 4. Current Experience and Employment Level Demographics

Name N Percentage County City State

Current

Experience

1-5 years 5 5.62

5-9 years 44 49.44

10-14 years 20 22.47

15-19 years 16 17.98

20 years or

4 4.49

Employment

Level

Percentage 37.08 43.82 19.1

Furthermore, survey demographics regarding educational levels revealed that 18

respondents hold at least an associate degree, 16 have earned some college credit towards

a degree, 36 hold a bachelor degree, and 19 have earned graduate credentials. The

majority of the respondents have a four-year degree and make up 40.45% of the overall

respondents.

Finally, respondents were asked about their frequency regarding the use of

workplace computers or other technology. Three stated they do not use computers or

other technology on a daily basis, 11 revealed the use of a computer or other technology

daily but infrequently, 14 respondents confirmed the daily use of a computer or other

technology but not the majority of their day. However, 61 respondents stated the use of a

computer or other technology most of their day. This resulted in 68.54% of the

respondents indicating their use of a computer in their activities most of the day.

Demographic data related to the education level of respondents’ and the use of computers

or technology is located in Table 5. Descriptive statistics for presenting the data results

used in the testing of the hypothesis subsequent section of this Chapter.

Table 5. Education and Technology Usage

Name N Percentage Not

daily

Daily, but

Infrequently

Daily,

not most

of the

day

Most of

the day

Education Level

Some college 16 17.98

Associate degree 18 20.22

Bachelor degree 36 40.45

Master’s degree 19 21.35

Computer/Technology

Use

3 11 14 61

Percentage 3.37 12.36 15.63 68.54

Collecting information regarding respondents’ demographics provided a means to

assess the generalization of the work population among the respondents. The

demographics analyzed for this study reflected a representation of the population of

human resources directors who work in public sector organizations in the Southeast

United States. Demographics information was used as a subset to understanding the

respondents background history. This helped with the analysis of the null hypothesis that

suggest there is no significant relationship between overall transformational leadership

and overall knowledge management in the public sector. Additionally, the demographic

100

information contributed to assessing the alternate hypothesis that suggested there is a

significant relationship between overall transformational leadership and overall

knowledge management in the public sector.

Crawford (2005) used similar categories for data collect for a study undertaken to

explore the effect of transformational leadership and organizational position on

knowledge management. In this study, several data analyses were conducted to determine

the extent of the relationship between overall transformational leadership and overall

knowledge management. Calculations identifying the minimum, maximum, mean, and

standards deviations (SD) for constructs and variables was conducted. Table 6 reveals the

overall descriptive statistics for the knowledge management inventory and its variable

subsets that were part of the study. Specific descriptive results for variables identified in

this study are reflected in ongoing tables.

Table 6. Descriptive Statistics KMI/Variables

Names N Min Max Mean SD

Knowledge Management

Inventory 89 77 302 159.81 42.00

Knowledge Acquisition 89 28 117 50.26 20.60

Knowledge Creation 89 26 108 62.38 16.38

Knowledge Application 89 20 87 47.17 14.67

Table 7 provides the findings for the data calculation for transformational

leadership characteristics as a result of analyzing MLQ 5X survey responses. Further, the

min, max, mean, and SD outcomes of the transactional and passive avoidant leadership

MLQ 5X constructs and variables were studied and are reflected in the survey results

noted below in Tables 8 – 9. The scoring for variables ranged from 0 – 4 based on

guidelines established by the survey originator (Avolio & Bass, 2004).

101

Table 7. Descriptive Statistics Transformational Leadership/Variables

Names N Min Max Mean SD

Transformational 89 2.93 3.40 3.22 .119

Idealized Influence (IIA) 89 3.12 3.34 3.22 .095

Idealized Influence (IIB) 89 2.93 3.36 3.16 .185

Inspirational Motivation

(IM) 89 3.20 3.38 3.27 .082

Intellectual Stimulation (IS) 89 3.10 3.40 3.21 .132

Individualized (IC)

Consideration 89 3.11 3.36 3.25 .102

Table 8. Descriptive Statistics Transactional Leadership/Variables

Names N Min Max Mean SD

Transactional 89 2.96 3.29 3.11 .158

Contingent Reward (CR) 89 3.18 3.29 3.27 .053

Mgmt by Exception - Active

(MBEA) 89 2.96 3.01 2.97 .027

Table 9. Descriptive Statistics Passive Avoidant/Variables

Names N Min Max Mean SD

Passive Avoidant 89 1.91 2.53 2.19 .183

Mgmt by Exception -

Passive (MBEP) 89 2.21 2.53 2.30 .154

Laissez-Faire (LF) 89 1.91 2.18 2.09 .124

Details of Analysis and Results

Data was collected from 89 human resource directors who work in the public

sector located within the southeast United States. All consented to be participants. Each

replied to the survey questions within the Knowledge Management Inventory (KMI) and

Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) 5X instruments. Specific KMI results are

listed in several tables below and were compared to those findings in prior research that

assessed knowledge management behaviors (Crawford, 2005). Also, the results of the

MLQ 5X survey are identified in several tables in this chapter and were compared with

102

measures established to determine the leadership characteristics of respondents based on

their self-assessment scores (Avoilo & Bass, 2004). Participants hold the senior human

resource position within their specific public sector organization. The respondents were

asked to provide responses to the knowledge management questions using a five-point

Likert scale reflected in Table 10. The scale ranged from “strongly agree” to “strongly

disagree” as measures of knowledge management behaviors. The scales were assigned

values of 1-5 with the Number 3 being assigned to the “neutral” or “no opinion”

response (Choudhary, Akhtar, & Zaheer, 2013; Crawford, 2005). Value ranges replicated

those used in prior research (Crawford, 2005). All questions were answered and tabulated

separately to determine central tendency. The research conclusion based on the data

analysis are presented in the summary section of this chapter.

Table 10. Knowledge Management Inventory (KMI) Scale

Strongly Agree

(SA)

Agree

(A)

Neutral

(N)

Disagree

(D)

Strongly Disagree

(SD)

1 2 3 4 5

Note: Knowledge Management Inventory was comprised of the subset knowledge

acquisition, knowledge creation, and knowledge application.

Table 11 provides the descriptive analysis for knowledge management acquisition

as a subset variable within the overall knowledge management inventory. The outcome of

the analysis revealed the lowest score as a result of the responses provided by

respondents was 28.00. The responses yielded a maximum score of 117.00 and the mean

or average score resulting from the responses was 50.26. Any outliners scores were

included in the analysis since the data assessed did not skew the results.

103

Table 11. Descriptive Statistics for Knowledge Management (KM) Acquisition

Name N Minimum Maximum Mean SD

Acquisition 89 28 117 50.26 20.60

Note: KM acquisition is the capability to identify, acquire and accumulate knowledge (Mills & Smith, 2011)

Table 12 reflects the descriptive data for knowledge management creation as a

subset of overall knowledge management yield a minimum data assessment score of 26.

The maximum score assessed was 108.00 and the overall average or mean score of 62.38

determined based on a scale of 1 – 5 rating for each question. Any outliner scores were

included in the analysis since the data assessed did not skew the results.

Table 12. Descriptive Statistics for Knowledge Management Creation

N Minimum Maximum Mean SD

KM Creation 89 26 108 62.38 16.38

Note: KM creations refers to knowledge development, discovery, and capture (Gelard,

Boroumand, & Mohammadi, 2014)

The data for knowledge management application as a subset of overall knowledge

management yielded a minimum score of 20, a maximum score of 87, and a mean of

47.17 reflected in Table 13. All survey responses for this subset were included in the

analysis to ensure an accurate calculation.

Table 13. Descriptive Statistics for Knowledge Management Application

N Minimum Maximum Mean SD

Application 89 20 87 47.17 14.67

Note: KM application represents the applying of knowledge in an organization (Mills &

Smith, 2011)

Standard deviations were calculated to further determine the variability of the

various scores and how much the data is dispersed among the data sets. Each of the

overall knowledge management subsets was assessed and reflected the relationship of the

104

scores to the mean of the specific survey responses. On average, respondents scored

highest in the subset of knowledge management creation. The mean scores for knowledge

management acquisition and application were within a 3 data points but the number of

questions requiring a response was higher for knowledge management acquisition.

Respondents were required to respond to 28 items related to the knowledge

acquisition subset and only 20 items with the knowledge application subset. Table 14

reflects data statistics from an analysis of variance (ANOVA) comparing overall

transformation leadership and overall knowledge management to test the null hypothesis

for a relationship. When conducting the analysis, the outcome revealed an alpha level for

equality of variance was .012 which is higher than the standard level of .05. This reflects

an unequal variance for transformational leadership.

The statistical significance of transformational leadership yielded a f-score of .887

associated with an alpha level of .601. The null hypothesis suggesting no significant

relationship between overall transformational leadership and overall knowledge

management can be accepted since the alpha score of .601 is greater than the standard

alpha of .05 for significance testing. The Cronbach’s alpha calculations for prior KMI

instruments were established at 0.70 for KM acquisition, 0.79 for KM creation, and 0.71

for KM application (Crawford, 2005). Table 15 reflects the Cronbach’s alpha for the

knowledge management variables reflected in this study related to the scale of reliability

compared to the previous instruments.

Table 14. Independent Variable: KMI (Results for Significance)

Source F score Significance

Transformational .887 .601

105

Table 15. Current Study Cronbach’s Alpha

KM Variables Cronbach's Alpha N

Acquisition .968 28

Creation .894 24

Application .905 20

Note: KM Acquisition questions totaled 28 items, KM Creation totaled 24, and KM

Application totaled 20

Table 16 reflects the results of an analysis conducted on the demographic location

category of work held by the respondents. Item 4 of the demographic questionnaire

allowed respondents to indicate whether the current position occupied is a county, city, or

state level public sector position. Mean and standard deviations were calculated to assess

the average scores among the county, city, and state respondents in order to explore

knowledge management behaviors among the groups. Knowledge management

application and acquisition among county and state respondents yielded the lowest means

of 46.85 and 46.82, respectively. Respondents working at the city level tended to have

higher average scores for knowledge management behaviors. Any outliners scores were

included in the analysis since the data assessed did not skew the results.

Table 16. Comparing KM Scores between Groups

KMI

Variable

State City County

Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD

Acquisition 46.82 20.60 50.00 20.51 52.33 19.86

Creation 62.53 17.66 64.69 15.03 59.57 17.31

Application 47.12 14.67 47.46 14.51 46.85 15.30

Note: SD column shows the statistics associated between the survey groups

106

A descriptive analysis was conducted on the responses for the MLQ 5X survey

instrument. The MLQ 5X was composed of three major leadership categories:

transformational, transactional, and passive-avoidance or laissez-faire. The MLQ 5X

instrument utilized a five-point Likert scale ranging from “Not at All” to “Frequently, if

not always”. The Likert scale used assigned values of 0-4 with the Number 2 being

assigned for the “Sometimes” response category. Reflected in Table 17 is the rating scale

established by the originator of the MLQ 5X to ensure reliability and validity of the

instrument used in prior research by the originator (Avolio & Bass, 2004).

Table 17. Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) Scale

Not at all Once in a while

Sometimes

Fairly often Frequently, if

not always

0 1 2 3 4

The MLQ 5X survey in the current study contained behavioral items for all

leadership scales, except charisma that was used in a prior version of the survey. Since

charisma was previously viewed as either a behavior or impact (Bass, 1990), a separate

scale was included in the current version of the survey to capture non-behavioral and/or

impact items with the designation IIA and IIB (Avolio & Bass, 2004). Data for each of

the survey instruments was calculated to determine the sample pool minimum, maximum,

and mean statistics. Identifying the minimum revealed the lowest score in the survey

among respondents. Also, the maximum score was determined among the surveys. In

addition, the mean among the surveys was calculated to determine the average rating.

The MLQ 5X survey contained 45 questions that identified and measured various

leadership characteristics and effectiveness behaviors determined by researchers to be

linked to the success of an organization and an individual (Avolio & Bass, 2004). Table

107

18 reflects the descriptive statistics of the MLQ 5X survey for the transformational

construct. Table 19 denotes the Cronbach’s alpha rating of .934 for the 45-item MLQ

instrument which reflects reliability of the instrument used in this study. But for overall

transformational leadership characteristics the rating is .115.

The descriptive data for transformational characteristics yielded a minimum

statistical value of 2.93 for responses. The maximum score assessed was 3.40 and the

overall average or mean score was 3.22 among the 89 respondents. The standard

deviation for the collective MLQ focused on the transformational construct was .119. A

0-4 scale was used by respondents to rate each item on the questionnaire. All survey

responses were included in the analysis to ensure an accurate calculation.

Table 18. Descriptive Statistics MLQ 5X

N Minimum Maximum Mean SD

Transformational

2.93

3.40

3.22

.119

Table 19. Current Study Cronbach’s Alpha for MLQ 5X

Cronbach's Alpha N of Items

.934 45

.115 20

Note: Cronbach’s alpha reflected the average value of correlations (Trochim, 2006)

The MLQ 5X survey was composed of three major leadership categories;

transformational, transactional, and passive-avoidance or laissez-faire. The subsets of

MLQ 5X were analyzed independent of overall transformational leadership to assess the

influence of the behavior as expressed by the respondents. Variables related to

transformational leadership included Idealized Influence (IIA/IIB), Inspirational

Motivation (IM), Intellectual Stimulation (IM), and Individualized Consideration (IC).

The MLQ scoring for transformational leadership characteristics was calculated on an

108

average by scale. Four survey items were paired to each of the variables to reveal the

degree of transformational leadership characteristics self-assessed by the respondents.

Table 20 presents the descriptive data for IIA as a variable within overall

transformational leadership, which yielded a minimum data assessment score of 3.12.

The maximum score assessed was 3.34 and the overall average or mean score was 3.22

based on a scale of 0 – 4 rating for each question. Similarly, the descriptive data for IIB

showed a minimum rating of 2.93 and maximum of 3.36 for knowledge behavior. The

mean score was 3.16. The standard deviation was calculated at .095. Any outliners

ratings were included in the analysis since the data assessed did not skew the results.

Table 20. Descriptive Statistics Idealized Influence (IIA/IIB) variables

Names N Minimum Maximum Mean SD

Idealized

Influence (IIA) 89 3.12 3.34 3.22 .095

IIB 89 2.93 3.36 3.16 .185

Note: Idealized Influence composes attributes and/or behaviors (Avolio & Bass, 2004)

Table 21 reflects the descriptive statistics for IM as a variable of overall

transformational leadership, which yielded a minimum score of 3.20, a maximum score

of 3.38, and a mean of 3.27. Data for this subset is reflected below. Any outliner ratings

were included in the analysis since the data did not significantly skew the subset rating

results.

Table 21. Descriptive Statistics Transformational IM Variable

Name N Minimum Maximum Mean SD

IM 89 3.20 3.38 3.27 .082

Note: IM means Inspirational Motivation (Avolio & Bass, 2004)

Table 22 reflects the data for IS as a variable subset of overall transformational

leadership that yielded a minimum score of 3.10, a maximum score of 3.40, and a mean

109

of 3.21. Any outliner ratings were included in the analysis since the data did not

significantly skew the subset rating results. All survey responses were included in the

analysis to ensure an accurate calculation.

Table 22. Descriptive Statistics Transformational IS Variable

Name N Minimum Maximum Mean SD

IS 89 3.10 3.40 3.21 .132

Note: IS means Intellectual Stimulation (Avolio & Bass, 2004)

Table 23 describes the data statistics for IC as a subset of overall transformational

leadership yielded a minimum data assessment score of 3.11. The maximum score

assessed was 3.36 and the overall average or mean score was 3.25 based on a scale of 0-4

rating for each survey item. A standard deviation rating of .102 was revealed by the

calculation of data. Any outliners were included in the analysis to ensure an accurate

calculation.

Table 23. Descriptive Statistics Transformational IC Variable

N Minimum Maximum Mean SD

IC 89 3.11 3.36 3.25 .102

Note: IC means Individualized Consideration (Avolio & Bass, 2004)

Table 24 reflects the descriptive data for overall transactional leadership which

yield a minimum data assessment score of 2.96. The maximum score assessed was 3.29

and the overall average or mean score was 3.11 based on a scale of 0-4 rating for each

question. Four survey items were paired to each of the variables to reveal the degree of

transactional leadership characteristics self-assessed by the respondents. Any outliner

scores were included in the analysis since the data did not skew results.

Table 24. Descriptive Statistics Overall Transactional

Names N Minimum Maximum Mean SD

Transactional 89 2.96 3.29 3.11 .158

110

Table 25 reflects the descriptive data for CR as a subset of overall transactional

leadership. The analysis yields a minimum score of 3.27, a maximum score of 3.29, and a

mean score of 13.03 based on a 0-4 rating scale. Outliners were included in the analysis.

Table 25. Descriptive Statistics Overall Transactional CR Variable

Name N Minimum Maximum Mean SD

CR 89 3.18 3.29 3.27 .053

Table 26 provides the descriptive data for MBEA as a subset of overall

transactional leadership. The analysis of the subset yields a minimum score of 2.96, a

maximum score of 3.01 and a mean score of 2.97. Outliners were included in the

calculations. The standard deviation was calculated .027.

Table 26. Descriptive Statistics for Transactional - Mgmt by Exception (Active) variable

Name N Minimum Maximum Mean SD

MBEA 89 2.96 3.01 2.97 .027

Reflected in Table 27 is the descriptive data for the overall passive avoidant

leadership characteristic. The analysis for this characteristic yielded a minimum score of

1.91, a maximum score of 2.53, and a mean of 2.19 based on a scale of 0-4 rating for

each question. Any outliners were included in the analysis. Four survey items were paired

to each of the variables to reveal the degree of the passive variable self-assessed by the

respondents.

Table 27. Descriptive Statistics Overall Passive Avoidant Characteristic

Name N Min Max Mean SD

Passive Avoidant 89 1.91 2.53 2.19 .183

The results noted in Table 28 are the descriptive data for the MBEP as a subset of

the passive avoidant leadership characteristic. The analysis for this characteristic yielded

111

a minimum score of 2.21, a maximum score of 2.53, and a mean of 2.30 based on a scale

of 0-4 rating for each question. Any outliners were included in the analysis. Four survey

items were paired to each of the variables to reveal the degree of the passive variable self-

assessed by the respondents. The standard deviation calculated resulted in a score of .154.

Table 28. Descriptive Statistics for Passive Avoidant – MBEP (Passive) variable

Name N Minimum Maximum Mean SD

MBEP 89 2.21 2.53 2.30 .154

Table 29 reveals the descriptive data for LF as a subset of the passive avoidant

leadership characteristic. The minimum score revealed was 1.91, a maximum score of

2.18, and a mean score of 2.09 based on a scale of 0-4 rating for each question. Any

outliner grades were included in the analysis to ensure a complete assessment of the

responses. The standard deviation was scored at .124.

Table 29. Descriptive Statistics for Passive Avoidant – LF variable

Name N Minimum Maximum Mean SD

LF 89 1.91 2.18 2.09 .124

Standard deviations were calculated to assess the reliability of the various scores

and how much the data was dispersed among the data sets. Each of the overall

transformational leadership subsets was assessed and reflected the relationship of the

scores to the mean of the specific survey responses. The mean scores for knowledge

management acquisition and application were within statistical points but the number of

questions requiring a response was higher for knowledge management acquisition.

Participants volunteered to respond to a 45-item leadership characteristics survey as a

means to self-assess and identify characteristics related to their leadership style. The

MLQ 5X questionnaire was structured to identify the transformational, transactional, or

112

passive avoidant/laissez-faire leadership characteristics of the respondents (Avolio &

Bass, 2004).

Table 30 reflects data statistics comparing means and standard deviation between

the group of respondents. This analysis was conducted to determine if the means and

standard deviations between the various public sector entities was statistically different

among the respondents based on transformational leadership characteristics. Moreover, a

comparison between the years of employment and place of employment to determine if

either might influence the display of specific leadership characteristics. A standard alpha

level of .05 was used as a point of analysis. Findings from the analysis revealed an f score

of .256 and a significant of 775. As a result, data suggest no specific relevance between

employment location and years of experience leading to the display of transformational

leadership.

Table 30. MLQ Means and SD Comparison between Groups

MLQ

Behavior

State City County

Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD

IIA 14.00 2.24 12.74 2.47 12.48 2.66

IIB 13.47 1.74 12.31 2.26 11.55 3.47

IM 13.88 2.41 13.00 2.19 12.73 2.71

IS 13.65 2.52 12.72 2.27 12.61 2.94

IC 13.59 2.48 12.59 2.43 13.15 2.65

CR 13.03 2.45 12.89 2.07 12.94 2.78

MBEA 12.59 2.94 11.97 2.48 11.42 3.38

MBEP 9.65 5.02 8.77 4.70 9.45 5.14

LF 8.29 5.74 7.90 5.00 8.94 5.48

113

As part of this study analysis, a Pearson’s correlation was conducted to explore if

there is a linear relationship between overall transformational leadership and overall

knowledge management in the public sector as viewed by Human Resource Directors in

the Southeast United States. The correlation analysis was conducted using the overall

category of transformational leadership and its various variables measured against the

category of overall knowledge management, which included measures of knowledge

management acquisition, creation, and application. The results of the assessment are

listed in Table 31.

Table 31. MLQ Constructs/Variable with Overall Knowledge Management

Names R Coefficient Significance

Overall Transformational -.051 .829

IIA .152 .848

IIB .889 .111

IM -.222 .778

IS -.155 .845

IC -.506 .494

Transactional -115 .787

CR .805 .195

MBEA .839 .161

Passive Avoidant -098 .818

MBEP -.202 .798

LF -.639 .361

114

Additionally, a Pearson’s correlation was conducted to measure the relationship

between overall transformation leadership and the transformational leadership variables

against overall knowledge management and its variables. In Table 32, the results of the

Pearson’s correlation regarding the overall variables of transformational leadership and

knowledge management are identified and presented. Furthermore, Table 32 includes the

Pearson’s correlation for overall transactional characteristics along with its variables.

Also, the statistical correlations and significance for the characteristic of passive avoidant

and its variables are included in the results.

Table 32. Transformational Variable with Knowledge Management Variables

Names KM Acquisition KM Creation KM Application

Overall

Transformational

-.051 .226 .318

IIA .152 .337 .240

IIB .889 -.572 .233

IM -222 -.237 .303

IS -.155 -.243 .527

IC -.506 .218 .659

Transactional -.115 .013 .471

CR .805 -.574 .585

MBEA .839 -.582 -.374

Passive Avoidant -091 .068 -.278

MBEP -202 .558 .628

LF -639 .482 .704

Note: A significance test for correlation of .05 was used against the hypotheses presented

in this study (Trochim, 2006).

115

A scatter plot diagram was created to provide a visual representation reflecting the

degree of linear relationship between overall transformational leadership and overall

knowledge management. Transformational leadership was based on 20 items used for

analysis and identified by the MLQ developer (Avolio & Bass, 2004). The scatter plot

data did not reveal a linear pattern but does reflect a cluster pattern in the upper right

quadrant of the chart. However, based on the pattern of relationship displayed on the

diagram, the diagram reflects little or no direct relationship between overall

transformational leadership and overall knowledge management. The plot points on the

diagram are noted in Figure 1.

Transformational

3.503.403.303.203.103.002.90

KM I

1.90

1.80

1.70

1.60

1.50

R Sq Linear = 0.003

Figure 1. Overall Transformational Leadership/Knowledge Management Scatterplot

In Table 33, the data reflects a comparison of the means revealed by this study to

those established as normative by the original MLQ 5X researcher. This information

contributed to determining the average for each of the variables and the score established

for the rating category (Avolio & Bass, 2004).

116

Table 33. Transformational Means and MLQ Self-Assessment Normative

Note: The follow categories were established ratings for the score sheet: “Not at all” = 0,

“Once in a While” = 1, “Sometimes” = 2, “Fairly often” = 3, and “Frequently, if not

always” = 4 (Avolio & Bass, 2004).

Summary

In Chapter 4, data is reveal to test the hypotheses for this study to determine the

relationship between overall transformational leadership and overall knowledge

management as viewed by public sector human resource directors working in the

Southeast United States. Conclusions regarding the hypotheses were drawn based on the

data collected and analyzed for this study. The null hypothesis presented the view that

there is no significant relationship between overall transformational leadership and

overall knowledge management in public sector as viewed by HR Directors in the

Southeast United States. The null hypotheses could not be disproved as a result of the

data collected. The data collected and analyzed did not reveal a specific pattern for

interpretation that would suggest a linear relationship between the two overall

transformational leadership and overall knowledge management.

However, findings from the knowledge management inventory surveys did reveal

high means scores in the area of knowledge creation. Moreover, findings noted in Table

34 from the MLQ 5X survey indicated respondents showed a tendency towards

Variables Research Mean MLQ 5X Mean Interpretation

IIA 3.22 2.95 Fairly Often

IIB 3.16 2.99 Fairly Often

IM 3.27 3.04 Fairly Often

IS 3.21 2.96 Fairly Often

IC 3.25 3.16 Fairly Often

117

transformational leadership characteristics based on the normatives for self-assessments

(Avolio & Bass, 2004). However, when overall transformational leadership was explored

as a factor for overall knowledge management behaviors, a linear relationship between

overall transformational leadership and overall knowledge management could not be

ascertained based on the responses from the sample survey pool. The alternate hypothesis

examined if there is a significant relationship between overall transformational leadership

and overall knowledge management practices in public sector as viewed by HR Directors

in the Southeast United States. The hypothesis was rejected based on the data collected

for this study.

Chapter 4 presented the results of the data collected for this study. The data

collected and presented was from two separate survey instruments. The knowledge

management inventory which involved respondents providing rating to items related to

knowledge acquisition, creation, and application using a five-point Likert scale. The

second instrument used to collect data was a MLQ 5X 45-item survey in which

respondents identified their leadership characteristics through means of a self-assessment.

The results of each were present to provide an overall assessment of the views held by

human resource directors working in the public sector within the southeast United States.

Additionally, Chapter 4 presented demographic information provided by the

respondents which included gender, age, education level, experience, employment level,

and use of technology. Demographic information about the respondents was requested to

help assess the level transformation leadership and knowledge management behavior in

their organizations. Statistical analysis was conducted using Pearson Correlation to test

the hypotheses. Further, the data from the responses to the survey were tested statistically

118

using ANOVA to further test the hypotheses for the study comparing overall

transformational and overall knowledge management factors. Cronbach (1951) alpha

analysis was conducted for the knowledge management variables to compare with prior

study findings. Findings from the data analysis are discussed in Chapter 5.

119

CHAPTER 5. DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS

Introduction

The purpose of this research study was to explore the relationship between overall

transformational leadership and overall knowledge management as viewed by public

sector human resource directors in the southeast United States. Survey population that

participated in the study were members of a panel of volunteer experts among the pool of

national professions maintained by Qualtrics as a service provider. All confirmed

eligibility to participate in the study through acknowledgement of the research consent

form located in a secure account maintained by the researcher and hosted by Qualtric.

The survey group responded to questions presented in two categories of survey

instruments. One was a knowledge management inventory composed of three subsets that

evaluated knowledge acquisition, knowledge creation, and knowledge application among

the respondents. Also, a MLQ 5X instrument composed of 45 questions was utilized to

explore transformational, transactional, and passive avoidant leadership characteristics

among the research participants. Responses to the KMI and MLQ 5X instruments were

correlated to determine if a linear relationship existed between two overall

transformational leadership and overall knowledge management. In addition,

demographic information from 89 survey respondents was assessed as a means to further

evaluate the type of background may have transformational leadership tendency and the

degree knowledge management behaviors are displayed in the organizations. Descriptive

statistics on the responses were developed to help convey findings of the study.

A Pearson’s correlation was used to test the hypotheses and answer the research

question. The independent variables identified for evaluating transformational

120

leadership characteristics were represented by the initials IIA, IIB, IM, IC, and IS. The

outcomes of leadership as a category were not explored since they were not the focus of

this research. The results of the research indicate no significant statistical relationship

between overall transformational leadership and overall knowledge management as

viewed by public sector human resource directors in the southeast United States.

However, the study did reveal a trend among human resources directors towards

transformational leadership characteristics.

The mean score among the transformational leadership variables was 3.22 placing

overall transformational leadership characteristics of respondents in the 60-percentile

category based on the MLQ score sheet ratings defined by the MLQ originators (Avolio

& Bass, 2004). Also, the mean for overall transactional leadership characteristics among

study participants yielded a 3.11 score which placed these characteristics in the 60

percentile for transactional leadership behaviors among respondents. The characteristics

of overall passive avoidant behavior scored at a mean of 2.19, which identified this

feature in the 90 percentile of the scores. Outcome variables of extra effort, effectiveness,

and satisfaction on the MLQ 5X instrument were not scored since they were not part of

the research question being explored.

The KMI instrument was composed of three individual subsets that evaluated

knowledge acquisition, knowledge creation, and knowledge application behaviors among

respondents. Scoring was based on a five-point Likert scales with values of 1 – 5 with 3

meaning no opinion or neutral. The mean score for the overall KMI was 159.81. This

indicated an overall significance tendency towards knowledge management behaviors

121

among respondents. Each variable was evaluated yielding a score of 50.26 for knowledge

acquisition, 62.38 for knowledge creation, and 47.17 for knowledge application.

Discussion of Results

The results of this study contributes to the body of work related to the research

regarding transformational leadership and its relationship to knowledge management. The

results provide additional knowledge into the community of study that seeks to explore

what type of transformational leadership characteristics are associated with knowledge

management behaviors the public sector workplace. The results revealed there is little or

no direct relationship between overall transformational leadership and overall knowledge

management in the public sector as viewed by human resources directors.

Prior research suggested that public sector organizational success is associated

with the relationship between leadership and knowledge management (Ryan, Zhang,

Prybutok, & Sharp, 2012). Since leadership and knowledge management are considered

as key means to achieving organizational success, it was reasonable to investigate and

test this view. The study findings did not disprove the null hypothesis that

there is no significant relationship between overall transformational leadership and

overall knowledge management in the public sector as viewed by HR Directors in the

southeast United States. The data analysis noted in Table 29 regarding the correlation

between the MLQ 5X and KMI variables did not reveal a linear relationship. However,

the individual scores do reflect a trend towards respondents having transformational

leadership characteristics. The assessment was based on an analysis of the mean scores

for MLQ 5X and comparing the scores with a rating scale developed by the MLQ 5X

originators (Avolio & Bass, 2004).

122

In prior research, Crawford (2005) explored the relationship between

transformational leadership and knowledge management. However, the researcher

collected data from a different population of respondents. Using a MLQ instrument and a

self-designed KMI survey, the researcher collected data from 1,046 sample of non-

traditional students taking graduate level courses. Using correlation analysis, the study

revealed a significant correlation between knowledge management behaviors and

transformational leadership (Crawford, 2005)

One of the most significant findings from the study revealed a relationship

between the MLQ 5X variables and the KM application variables within the KMI survey.

The study suggested a strong relationship between all of the MLQ 5X variables with

knowledge application. In addition, a correlation relationship was found between overall

transformational leadership and the specific MLQ 5X variables of “Idealized Influence

(Attributes)” and “Individualized Consideration” with “knowledge creation” within the

KMI survey. However, when considering the overall constructs of transformational

leadership and knowledge management, the relationship was not sustained based on

responses for this study. The results of this study differ from earlier research studies by

finding no overall relationship between transformational leadership and knowledge

management in the public sector compared to the majority of the research literature found

for this study that suggest a relationship exists.

Assessment of the data that was revealed in Table 5 indicates a trend toward

transformational leadership characteristics among the respondents. However, similar

scores revealed transactional characteristics as well. This may be due to the varying

number of questions per survey as each was assessing different characteristics. For

123

instance, the MLQ 5X measured 45-items to determine the various leadership

characteristics of respondents. However, only 20 of the 45-item survey measured

transformational leadership characteristics. In addition to determining transformational

characteristics, the MLQ 5X presented 8 separate items of the 45-item survey to

determine transactional leadership and an additional separate 8 items to determine

passive avoidant leadership characteristics of respondents. The remaining 8 items in the

survey did not measure leadership characteristics but the outcomes of specific leadership

types. Table 34 reflects the categories of the MLQ 5X survey and the items that measured

the specific characteristics of leadership for transformational, transactional, and passive

avoidant styles of the respondents. Included in Table 34 are the items that measured

leadership outcomes as part of the overall MLQ 5X instrument but these items were not

evaluated as part the analysis to determine the relationship between overall

transformational leadership and overall knowledge management.

Table 34. MLQ 5X Survey Leadership Measures

Construct Variable Items

Transformational Idealized Influence Attributes (IIA) 10,18,21,25

Idealized Influence Behaviors (IIB) 6,14,23,34

Inspirational Motivation (IM) 9,13,26,36

Intellectual Stimulation (IS) 2,8,30,32

Individualized Consideration (IC) 15,19,29,31

Transactional Contingency Reward 1,11,16,35

Management by Exception (Active) 4,22,24,27

Passive Avoidance Management by Exception (Passive) 3,12,17,20

Laissez-Faire 5,7,28,33

Outcomes Extra Effort 39,42,44

Outcomes Effectiveness 37,40,43,45

Outcomes Satisfaction 38,41

124

Conclusion Based on Results

This study explored the relationship between overall transformational leadership

and overall knowledge management. HR directors working in the public sector located in

the Southeast United States were participants in the study. The data generated and

analyzed for this research study suggested no significant relationship between overall

transformational leadership and overall knowledge management in the public sector as

viewed HR directors. The findings from the research may serve as a reflection of the

views held by HR directors who work in geographical areas other than the Southeast

United States.

The findings that appeared in Table 6 revealed that respondents have similar views

of the knowledge acquisition, knowledge creation, and knowledge application based on

the mean levels that were calculated. This may suggest that HR directors in the Southeast

geographical areas working in the public sector may have similar structures and

experiences in their workplace. In addition, the MLQ 5X mean scores for

transformational leadership characteristics revealed that respondents personally viewed

themselves as displaying transformational leadership characteristics.

Comparison of Findings

The findings of this study did not disprove the null hypothesis that no significant

relationship exists between overall transformational leadership and overall knowledge

management in the public sector of the Southeast United States. The findings are

different from prior research which suggested a positive relationship between the two

constructs (Crawford, 2005; Gelard et al., 2014; Odumeru & Ogbonna, 2013). This study

used a legacy KMI instrument to measure knowledge management as a construct as well

125

as the variables being studied. The KMI instrument was a viable source to collect data

for this study (Crawford, 2005).

In Crawford’s (2005) study, the score for the overall knowledge management

inventory instrument was a mean of 115.16. A mean score of 33.15 for knowledge

management acquisition, a mean of 48.31 for knowledge creation, and a mean score of

33.51 for knowledge application. However, analysis for this study revealed a mean score

of 159.81 for overall knowledge management. The variables of knowledge acquisition,

knowledge creation, and knowledge application resulted in mean scores of 50.26, 62.38,

and 47.17 respectively. The significant difference does not invalidate the instrument.

The significant mean differences were due to a different population being studied and

level within the respondents’ organizations.

As part of the research approach, the study used a MLQ instrument to measure

leadership characteristics (Avolio & Bass, 2004). The instrument has been used in

numerous studies regarding the subject of transformational leadership (Eliophotou

Menon, 2014; Guay, 2013). Leadership in an organization has been perceived as one of

the most critical components to an organization’s success (Odumeru & Ogbonna, 2013).

Researchers have suggested the display of transformational leadership characteristics

encourages the performance responses needed from employees (Vandenabee, 2014).

Interpretation of the Findings

Prior research suggested a direct link between transformation leadership and the

many facets of organizational behaviors that include enhanced knowledge management

behaviors (Ghasabeh, Soosay, & Reaiche, 2015; Gelard, Boroumand, & Mohammadi,

2014). Research conveys that transformational leadership and knowledge management

126

have an effect on organization performance which encourages a greater emphasis on

human capital development (Muchiri & Kiambati (2015). Ghasabeh, Soosay, and

Reaiche (2015) proposed the view that new ideas and knowledge are instrumental to

organizational innovation. It is transformational leadership that instills in organizations

knowledge practices that generate new ideas and creativeness.

Gelard, Boroumand, and Mohammadi (2014) suggested that leadership vital to the

application of knowledge management efforts in an organization. The researchers’

posited that transformational leadership has a significant role in the creation of an

organization’s work environment and is crucial to the use of knowledge in an efficient

way by managing the knowledge in a manner that enhanced learning. Jain and Jeppensen

(2013) even offered the view that the transformation leadership and knowledge

management are vital to the success of an organization. Nusair, Ababneh, and Bae (2012)

in their study of transformational leadership in the public sector presented the view that

the transformational leadership style is worth the investment by organizations.

Researchers are not always certain that the transformational leadership style is the

most effective style. A different style may be needed depending on the situation and the

capabilities of a leader. Ibrahim and Al-Taneiji (2013) suggested that though leaders may

display transformational characteristics, those characteristics do not necessarily translate

to enhanced performance of staff.

However, a common theme among the research literature is that transformational

leadership practices do influence organizational behaviors. The literature overwhelmingly

suggest that the transformational leadership style is the most effective at encouraging

127

high performance and motivating employee knowledge development in order to achieve

organizational goals.

This study sought to replicate a prior study which assessed the relationship

between transformational leadership and knowledge management (Crawford, 2005). Prior

research revealed that transformational leadership was a significant predictor to the use of

knowledge management behaviors (Crawford, 2005). This study sought to close the gap

in literature that explores the relationship between transformational leadership and

knowledge management in the public sector. Comparably, the data collection instruments

used for this study aligned with those used in prior research (Crawford, 2005). However,

the data analysis outcomes were significantly different. The variation in mean scores

between the two studies may have been influence by two factors. The population number

for the original study was composed of 1,046 respondents. The number of respondents

for this study totaled 89.

Secondly, Crawford (2005) used a different, broader population for his study

compared to the population of human resource professionals used in this study to explore

the relationship between overall transformational leadership and overall knowledge

management. This broader population may have had a different view regarding

transformational leadership and knowledge management since the Crawford study was

not simply focused on the public sector. Moreover, prior research primarily focused on

determining relationships between transformational leadership and knowledge

management as a private sector issue. Birasnav (2014) conducted a study that examined

the relationships between various leadership types including transformational leadership

and its relationship to knowledge management. Birasnav (2014) used a sample group of

128

human resources managers from multiple industries to participate in his study. The study

found a correlation between transformational leadership and an organization’s

performance but only an indirect relationship involving transformational leadership and

the knowledge management process. Due to the varying populations studied included in

research studies on the subject, it is plausible to garner different data findings to address

the research question regarding the relationship between the constructs.

Limitations

Several limitations were present during the analysis of this study. The sample

frame for this study was limited to the sample size calculated in G*Power that were

required for this study. Prior research collected and evaluated responses from a larger

sample group ranging between 119 and 1046 respondents (Birasnav, 2014; Crawford,

2005; Hai & Sherif, 2011). Moreover, the study was limited to a specific geographical

area in the United States and to only public sector respondents serving as human resource

directors. A broader geographical perspective and population may have been more

beneficial to the study assessment if a broader range of respondents would have

participated. Moreover, only the human resource directors were involved in the study and

provided a self-assessment revealing their leadership characteristics. An option would

have been for direct reports or peer groups who work for or who work with human

resource directors to provide an assessment of the leadership type of the human resource

directors.

Implications for Practice

This study added to the body of knowledge that investigated leadership and

knowledge management in the public sector. Further, the findings of this study revealed

129

another perspective regarding the relevance of the transformational leadership style as a

motivator for the use or display of knowledge management behaviors in the public

sectors as viewed by human resource directors. The findings imply that the

characteristics of overall transformational leadership style is not viewed as directly

related to the overall display of knowledge management behaviors in the public sector of

Southeast United States. The additional relevance was revealed when comparing the

relationship between individual characteristics of transformational leadership and the

individual knowledge management variables. Therefore, public sectors leaders must be

prepared to evaluate which style of leadership is a best fit towards the achievement of

organizational goals and not focus primarily on the transformational leadership style as

the principle source for pursue success. The study presented additional academic

information for exploring the significance and influence of leadership on the practice of

knowledge management.

Recommendations for Future Research

This research study examined the explored the relationship between overall

transformational leadership and overall knowledge management in the southeast United

States as viewed by public sector human resource directors. Future research should

expand the study to other regions of the United States or conduct a complete nationwide

assessment among public sector human resource directors. Further research may also

expand to studying the view of private sector human resource directors who work in the

southeast United States to gain a comparison of views express by the two groups.

Though the research had no direct knowledge of the survey instruments used in this

study prior to undertaking this research, these instruments may be practical for use in

130

future research to reflect consistency when evaluating the relationship between

transformational leadership and knowledge management.

Finally, a qualitative approach might be considered to permit and reveal more in-

depth data and provide respondents an opportunity to fully provide their views about the

significance of leadership styles and if knowledge management is displayed in their

organizations and its practical use to the professional community.

Conclusion

This non-experimental, quantitative research study explored the relationship

between overall transformational leadership and overall knowledge management in the

public sector within southeast United States. Human Resource Directors provided their

view of the use and display of knowledge management variables related to knowledge

acquisition, creation, and application in their organizations. Further, since human

resource directors are key leaders in public sector organizations, each provided a self-

assessment of their leadership style by use of a MLQ 5X instrument. The result yielded

scores that suggested a trend among participants towards transformational

characteristics. However, when these characteristics were compared to scores for KMI

results, little correlation was noted.

As a final overview, Chapter 1 provided the purpose and background for

conducting the exploration into the research subject. Chapter 2 provided literature review

related to this research was presented in to note applicable theories, concepts, and ideas

from other researchers. Interestingly, noted in the search of material for the literature

review, a significantly higher number of research about transformational leadership and

knowledge management in the private sector was revealed compared to the public sector.

131

Chapter 3 provided the methodology used for this study. The research design was

presented identifying the use of a KMI surveys to assess variable of knowledge

management and a MLQ 5X to assess leadership characteristics among respondents. The

sample population was identified, the sample frame, approach to data and analysis and

the presentation of ethical consideration for this study. Chapter 4 presented the results of

the data collected, specifics regarding the survey population, and details regarding the

analysis of the data.

Finally, Chapter 5 provided a summary based on the results of the data analyzed,

The Chapter presented the researcher’s discussion regarding the interpretation of data and

the comparison to the hypotheses. The research presented views based on the data

regarding the meaning of the findings to the community of professionals within the

public sector. The researcher provided implications, suggestions for future research, and

an overall conclusion.

Because of undertaking this study, the researcher was able to broaden his

knowledge of the subject as an academic endeavor. Moreover, findings from the study

may have practical use for public sector leaders when determining the type of leadership

needed within public sector organizations to meet future performance needs.

132

REFERENCES

Ahmed A.S. Seleim, & Omar E.M. Khalil. (2011). Understanding the knowledge

management-intellectual capital relationship: A two-way analysis. Journal of

Intellectual Capital, 12(4), 586-614.

doi:10.1108/14691931111181742

Alabi, G. (2012). Understanding the relationship among leadership effectiveness, leader-

member interactions and organizational citizenship behaviour in higher

institutions of learning in Ghana. Journal of International Education

Research,8(3), 263.

AlBassam, B. (2011). State and local government fiscal crises: Causes and solutions. The

Business Review, Cambridge, 17(1), 24-30.

Al-bahussin, S., & El-garaihy, W. (2013). The impact of human resource management

practices, organisational culture, organisational innovation and knowledge

management on organisational performance in large Saudi organisations:

Structural equation modeling with conceptual framework. International Journal

of Business and Management, 8(22), 1-19.

Alsalami, E., Behery, M., & Abdullah, S. (2014). Transformational leadership and its

effects on organizational learning and innovation: Evidence from Dubai. Journal

of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 19(4), 61-81.

Analoui, B. D., Clair, H. D., & Sambrook, S. (2013). Leadership and knowledge

management in UK ICT organisations. The Journal of Management

Development, 32(1), 4-17. doi:10.1108/02621711311286892

Anca-Ioana, M. (2013). New approaches of the concepts of human resources, human

resource management and strategic human resource management. Research

Division of Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. Retrieved from

https://ideas.repec.org/a/ora/journl/v1y2013i1p1520-1525.html#download

Ananthram, S., Nankervis, A., & Chan, C. (2013). Strategic human asset management:

Evidence from North America. Personnel Review, 42(3), 281-299.

doi:10.1108/00483481311320417

Andreeva, T., & Kianto, A. (2012). Does knowledge management really matter? Linking

knowledge management practices, competitiveness and economic

performance. Journal Knowledge Management, 16(4), 617-636.

doi:10.1108/13673271211246185

Angela, T. A. (2013). Determinants of knowledge sharing in a public sector

organization. Journal of Knowledge Management, 17(3), 454-471.

doi:10.1108/JKM-11-2012-0369

133

Argyris, C. (1997). Initiating change that perseveres. The American Behavioral

Scientist, 40(3), 299-309.

Argyris, C., & Kaplan, R. S. (1994). Implementing new knowledge: The case of

activity-based costing. Accounting Horizons, 8(3), 83-105.

Arnold, K. A., & Loughlin, C. (2013). Integrating transformational and participative

versus directive leadership theories. Leadership & Organization Development

Journal, 34(1), 67-84. doi:10.1108/01437731311289974

Arora, E. (2011). Knowledge management in public sector. Researchers World, 2(1,

165-170.

Avolio, B. J., & Bass, B. M. (2004). Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire Manual. Third

Ed. Mind Garden Inc. Retrieved from www.mindgarden.com.

Bacha, E. (2014). The relationship between transformational leadership, task

performance and job characteristics. The Journal of Management

Development, 33(4), 410-420. doi:10.1108/JMD-02-2013-0025

Bairi, J., Manohar, B. M., & Kundu, G. K. (2013). Knowledge acquisition by outsourced

service providers from aging workforce of oil and gas industry. VINE, 43(1), 39-

56. doi:10.1108/03055721311302133

Barker, R. (2015). Management of knowledge creation and sharing to create virtual

knowledge-sharing communities: A tracking study. Journal of Knowledge

Management, 19(2), 334. doi:10.1108/JKM-06-2014-0229

Barth, S. (2003). A framework for personal knowledge management tools. KM World,

12(1), 20-21. Retrieved from

http://www.kmworld.com/Articles/Editorial/Features/Personal-toolkit-A-

framework-for-personal-knowledge-management-tools-9416.aspx

Bass, B. M. (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to

share the vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18(3), 19-31.

Bass, B. M. (1997). Does the transactional-transformational leadership paradigm

transcend organizational and national boundaries? American Psychologist, 52(2),

130-139. doi:10.1037/0003-66X.52.2.130.

Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Transformational leadership and organizational

culture. International Journal of Public Administration, 17(3-4), 541-554.

doi:10.1080/01900699408524907

134

Bass, B. M., Avolio, B. J., & Goodheim, L. (1987). Biography and the assessment of

transformational leadership at the world-class level. Journal of Management,

13(1), 7-19. doi:10.1177/014920638701300102

Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectation. New York, NY:

Free Press. doi:10.1002/hrm.3930250310

Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1993). Transformational leadership and organizational

culture. Public Administration Quarterly, 17(1), 112-121.

Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational Leadership. Mahwah, NJ: Taylor

& Francis e-library.

Bass, B. M., Waldman, D. A., Avolio, B. J., & Bebb, M. (1987). Transformational

leadership and the falling dominoes effect. Group & Organization Studies (1986-

1998), 12(1), 73-87. doi: 10.1177/105960118701200106

Batras, D., Duff, C., & Smith, B. J. (2014). Organizational change theory:

Implications for health promotion practice. Health Promotion International.

doi:10.1093/heapro/dau098.

Bedford, D. A. D. (2012). The role of knowledge management in creating

transformational organizations and transformational leaders. Journal of

Knowledge Management Practices, 13(4), 1-15. Retrieved from

http;//www.tlainc.com/articl320.htm.

Bellé, N. (2014). Leading to make a difference: A field experiment on the performance

effects of transformational leadership, perceived social impact, and public

service motivation. Journal of Public Administration Research & Theory, 24(1),

109-136. doi:10.1093/jopart/mut033

Bessick, J., & Naicker, V. (2013). Barriers to tacit knowledge retention: An

understanding of the perceptions of the knowledge management of people inside

and outside the organisation. South African Journal of Information

Management, 15(2), 1-8. doi:10.4102/sajim.v15i2.556

Bingle, B. S., Meyer, C. K., & Taylor, A. (2013). Nonprofit and public sector human

resources management: A comparative analysis. International Journal of

Management & Information Systems (Online), 17(3), 135-162.

Birasnav, M. (2014). Knowledge management and organizational performance in the

service industry: The role of transformational leadership beyond the effects of

transactional leadership. Journal of Business Research, 67(8), 1622-1629.

doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.09.006

135

Birasnav, M. (2013). Implementation of supply chain management practices: The role of

transformational leadership. Global Business Review 14(2), 329–342.

doi:10.1177/0972150913477525

Birasnav, M., Rangnekar, S., & Dalpati, A. (2011). Transformational leadership and

human capital benefits: The role of knowledge management. Leadership &

Organization Development Journal, 32(2), 106-126.

doi:10.1108/01437731111112962

Birasnav, M., & Rangnekar, S. (2010). Knowledge management structure and human

capital development in Indian manufacturing industries. Business Process

Management Journal, 16(1), 57-75. doi:10.1108/14637151011017949

Bogdana Pugna, I., & Boldeanu, D. (2014). Factors affecting establishment of an

institutional knowledge management culture - a study of organizational

vision.Accounting and Management Information Systems, 13(3), 559-583.

Burkhard, R. J., Hill, T. R., & Venkatsubramanyan, S. (2011). The emerging challenge of

knowledge management ecosystems: A Silicon Valley high tech company signals

the future. Information Systems Management, 28(1), 5-18.

doi:10.1080/10580530.2011.536105

Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York, NY: Harper & Row.

Caillier, J. G. (2014). Toward a better understanding of the relationship between

transformational leadership, public service motivation, mission valence, and

employee performance: A preliminary study. Public Personnel

Management, 43(2), 218-239. doi:10.1177/0091026014528478

Camps, J., & Rodríguez, H. (2011). Transformational leadership, learning, and

Employability: Effects on performance among faculty members. Personnel

Review, 40(4), 423-442. doi:10.1108/00483481111133327

Cardoso, L., Meireles, A., & Carlos, F. P. (2012). Knowledge management and its critical

factors in social economy organizations. Journal of Knowledge

Management, 16(2), 267-284. doi:10.1108/13673271211218861

Chapman, J. I. (2008). State and local fiscal sustainability: The challenges. Public

Administration Review, S115-S131. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2008.00983.x

Chegini, M. G. (2011). The study of relationship between knowledge management and

organizational culture indicators. World Journal of Social Sciences, 1(5), 188-

196.

136

Chi, H., Lan, C., & Dorjgotov, B. (2012). The moderating effect of transformational

leadership on knowledge management and organizational effectiveness. Social

Behavior and Personality, 40(6), 1,015-1,023. doi:10.2224/sbp.2012.40.6.1015

Choudhary, A. I., Akhtar, S. A., & Zaheer, A. (2013). Impact of transformational and

servant leadership on organizational performance: A comparative analysis.

Journal of Business Ethics, 116(2), 433-440.

doi:10.1007/s10551-012-1470-8

Coggburn, J. D., Battaglio, R. P., Bowman, J. S., Condrey, S. E., Goodman, D., & West,

J. P. (2010). State government human resource professionals' commitment to

employment at will. American Review of Public Administration, 40(2), 189-208.

doi:10.1177/0275074009333596

Colley, L., & Price, R. (2010). Where have all the workers gone? Exploring public sector

workforce planning. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 69(2), 202-213.

doi:10.1111/j.1467-8500.2010.00676.x

Coleman, C. J. (1979). The personnel director: A cautious hero indeed. Human Resource

Management (Pre-1986), 18(4), 14-20. doi:10.1002/hrm.3930180404

Crawford, C. B. (2005). Effects of transformational leadership and organizational

position on knowledge management. Journal of Knowledge Management, 9(6),

6-16. doi:10.1108/1367327051062929927

Cronbach, L.J. (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structures of tests.

Psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334. doi:10.1007/BF02310555

Dartey-Baah, K., & Ampofo, E. Y. (2015). Examining the influence of transformational

and transactional leadership styles on perceived job stress among Ghanaian

banking employees. International Journal of Business and Management, 10(8),

161-170.

Davenport, T. H. (1996). Some principles of knowledge management. Strategy &

Business, 2, 1-13. Retrieved from

http://www.strategy-business.com/article/8776?pg=0

Davenport, T. H., De Long, D. W., & Beers, M. C. (1997). Building successful

knowledge management projects. Center for Business Innovation. Retrieved from

http://www.providersedge.com/Docs/Km_Articles/Building_Successful_KM_

Projects.Pdf

Davenport, T. H., & Volpel, S. C. (2001). The rise of knowledge towards attention

management. Journal of Knowledge Management, 5(3), 212-221.

doi:10.1108/13673270110400816

strategy-business.co

137

Day, D. V., & Antonakis, J. (2012). The nature of leadership (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks,

CA: SAGE

Desouza, K. C., & Awazu, Y. (2006). Knowledge management at SMEs: Five

peculiarities. Journal of Knowledge Management, 10(1), 32-43.

doi:10.1108/13673270610650085

Drucker, P. F. (1999). Knowledge-worker productivity: The biggest challenge. California

Management Review, 41(2), 79-94. doi:10.2307/41165987

Edvardsson, I. R. (2008). HRM and knowledge management. Employee Relations, 30(5),

553-561. doi:10.1108/01425450810888303

Eliophotou Menon, M. (2014). The relationship between transformational leadership,

perceived leader effectiveness and teachers' job satisfaction. Journal of

Educational Administration, 52(4), 509-528. doi:10.1108/JEA-01-2013-0014

Fibuch, E., & Van Way, C. W. (2011). What is a knowledge management system ... and

why should I care? Physician Executive, 37(5), 34-38.

Fiedler, F. E. (1996). Research on leadership selection and training: One view of the

future. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(2), 241-250. doi:10.2307/2393716

Fiedler, F. E. (1981). Leadership effectiveness. The American Behavioral Scientist, 24(5),

619-632.

Follett, M. (1919). Community is a process. The Philosophical Review, 28(6), 576-588.

Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2178307

Fong, P. S., Hills, M. J., & Hayles, C. S. (2007). Dynamic knowledge creation through

value management teams. Journal of Management In Engineering, 23(1), 40-49.

doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X(2007)23:1(40)

Fox, S., & Do, T. (2013). Getting real about big data: Applying critical realism to analyse

big data hype. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business,6(4), 739-

760. doi:10.1108/IJMPB-08-2012-0049

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.G. (2009). Statistical power analyses

using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior

Research Methods, 41, 1149-1160. doi:10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149

Gau, W. (2011). A study of tacit knowledge management in the public sector. Journal of

Knowledge Management Practice, 12(1), 1-13.

138

Gelard, P., Boroumand, Z., & Mohammadi, A. (2014). Relationship between

transformational leadership and knowledge management. International Journal of

Information Science and Management, 12(2), 67-82. Retrieved from

http://ijism.ricest.ac.ir/index.php/ijism/article/view/393/226

Ghasabeh, M. S., Soosay, C., & Reaiche, C. (2015). The emerging role of

transformational leadership. The Journal of Developing Areas, 49(6), 459-467.

doi:10.1353/jda.2015.0090

Godbout, A. J. (2000). Managing core competencies: The impact of knowledge

management on human resources practices in leading-edge organizations.

Knowledge and Process Management, 7(2), 76-86.

Goudarzv, M. (2011). Knowledge management and transformational leadership in

organizational success. International Journal of Information and Education

Technology, 1(5), 377. doi:10.7763/IJIET.2011.V1.61

Green, D. (2008). Knowledge management for a postmodern workforce:

rethinking leadership styles in the public sector. Journal of Strategic Leadership,

1(1), 16-24.

Greenleaf, R. K. (1977). Servant Leadership. Mahwah, NJ Paulist Press. Retrieved from

http://www.american.edu/spa/leadership/application/upload/Greenleaf,

%20Servant%20Leadership.pdf

Guay, R. P. (2013). The relationship between leader fit and transformational leadership.

Journal of Managerial Psychology, 28(1), 55-73.

doi:10.1108/02683941311298869

Gueldenberg, S., & Helting, H. (2007). Bridging 'the great divide': Nonaka's synthesis of

'western' and 'eastern' knowledge concepts reassessed. Organization, 14(1), 101-

122. doi:10.1177/1350508407071862

Hai, N. N., & Sherif, M. (2011). Leadership behaviors, organizational culture and

knowledge management practices. The Journal of Management Development,

30(2), 206-221. doi:10.1108/02621711111105786

Hargis, M. B., Watt, J. D., & Piotrowski, C. (2011). Developing leaders: Examining the

role of transactional and transformational leadership across business

contexts. Organization Development Journal, 29(3), 51-66.

Haslinda, A. (2009). Evolving terms of human resource management and development.

Journal of International Social Research, 2(9), 180-186. Retrieved from

https://doaj.org/search?source

139

Hemsworth, D., Muterera, J., & Baregheh, A. (2013). Examining Bass's transformational

leadership in public sector executives: A psychometric properties review. Journal

of Applied Business Research, 29(3), 853-862. doi:10.19030/jabr.v29i3.7785

Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1974). What's Missing in MBO? Management Review,

63(10), 25.

Housel, T., & Bell, A. H. (2001). Measuring and managing knowledge. Calhoun Naval

Postgraduate School Institutional Archive. Retrieved from

http://calhoun.nps.edu/handle/10945/41074

Humphreys, J. H., & Einstein, W. O. (2003). Nothing new under the sun:

Transformational leadership from a historical perspective. Management

Decision, 41(1), 85-95. doi:10.1108/00251740310452934

Ibrahim, A. S., & Al-Taneiji, S. (2013). Principal leadership style, school performance,

and principal effectiveness in Dubai schools. International Journal of Research

Studies in Education, 2(1), 41-54. doi: 10.5861/ijrse.2012.86

Jacobson, W. S. (2010). Preparing for tomorrow: A case study of workforce

planning in North Carolina municipal governments. Public Personnel

Management, 39(4), 353-377. doi:10.1177/009102601003900404

Jain, A. K., & Jeppesen, H. J. (2013). Knowledge management practices in a public

sector organisation: The role of leaders' cognitive styles. Journal of Knowledge

Management, 17(3), 347- 362. doi:10.1108/JKM-11-2012-0358

Jain, K. K., Sandhu, M. S., & Goh, S. K. (2015). Organizational climate, trust and

knowledge sharing: Insights from Malaysia. Journal of Asia Business

Studies,9(1), 54-77. doi:10.1108/JABS-07-2013-0040

Jakubik, M. (2011). Becoming to know. Shifting the knowledge creation paradigm.

Journal of Knowledge Management, 15(3), 374-402.

doi:10.1108/13673271111137394

Johnson, P. R., Indvik, J., & Rawlins, C. (2009). Will you still love me when I’m 64? The

boomers at work. Allied Academies International Conference.Academy of

Organizational Culture, Communications and Conflict.Proceedings, 12(2), 15-21.

Jyoti, J., & Dev, M. (2015). The impact of transformational leadership on employee

creativity: The role of learning orientation. Journal of Asia Business Studies, 9(1),

78-98. doi:10.1108/JABS-03-2014-0022

140

Kianto, A., Ritala, P., Spender, J., & Vanhala, M. (2014). The interaction of intellectual

capital assets and knowledge management practices in organizational value

creation. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 15(3), 362-375.

doi:10.1108/JIC-05-2014-0059

Kale, S., & Karaman, E. A. (2011). Evaluating the knowledge management practices of

construction firms by using importance-comparative performance analysis

maps. Journal of Construction Engineering & Management, 137(12), 1142-1152.

doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000369

Karkoulian, S., Leila, C. M., & McCarthy, R. (2013). The intriguing art of knowledge

management and its relation to learning organizations. Journal of Knowledge

Management, 17(4), 511-526. doi:10.1108/JKM-03-2013-0102

Keung, E. K., & Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. (2013). The relationship between

transformational leadership and cultural intelligence. Journal of Educational

Administration, 51(6), 836-854. doi:10.1108/JEA-04-2012-0049

Khajeh, M., Mahallati, T., Shaibani, A., & Khodarahmi, S. (2014). The role of

intellectual capital in facilitating knowledge management practices. Journal of

Management and Sustainability, 4(3), 184-191.

Khan, N. H. A. L., Ghazali, Z., & Isha, A. S. N. (2014). The role of leadership and

leaders' behavioral characteristics on employees' safety behavior in plant

turnaround maintenance of PETRONAS petrochemical companies in

Malaysia. Global Business and Management Research, 6(3), 256-261.

Kim, S. (2012). The impact of human resource management on state government

IT employee turnover intentions. Public Personnel Management, 41(2), 257-279.

doi:10.1177/009102601204100204

Kim, S., & Lee, H. (2010). Factors affecting employee knowledge acquisition and

application capabilities. Asia - Pacific Journal of Business Administration, 2(2),

133-152. doi:10.1108/17574321011078184

Kim, S., & Yoon, G. (2015). An innovation-driven culture in local government: Do

senior manager's transformational leadership and the climate for creativity

matter? Public Personnel Management, 44(2), 147-168.

doi:10.1177/0091026014568896

Kim, Y. W., & Ko, J. (2014). HR practices and knowledge sharing behavior: Focusing on

the moderating effect of trust in supervisor. Public Personnel Management, 43(4),

586-607. doi:10.1177/0091026014542342

Koenig, M. E. D., (2012). What is km? Knowledge management explained. KM World,

Retrived from http://www.kmworld.com/Articles/Editorial/What-Is-.../What-is-

KM-Knowledge-Management-Explained-82405.aspx

141

Kühberger, A., Fritz, A., & Scherndl, T. (2014). Publication bias in psychology: A

diagnosis based on the correlation between effect size and sample size. Plos

ONE, 9(9), 1-8. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0105825

Laith Ali, Y. A., & Hassan, S. (2013). Knowledge management strategies, innovation,

and organisational performance. Journal of Advances in Management Research,

10(1), 58-71. doi:10.1108/09727981311327767

Lavania, D. (2012). Knowledge management in the public sector: A blueprint for

sustainable competitive advantage. Review of Knowledge Management, 2(2), 26-

36.

Lavigna, B. (2013). Improving employee engagement - the special case of the public

service. PA Times, 36(1), 11-12.

Lee, S., Kim, B. G., & Kim, H. (2012). An integrated view of knowledge management

for performance. Journal of Knowledge Management, 16(2), 183-203.

doi:10.1108/13673271211218807

Leon, R. (2015). The future knowledge worker: An intercultural perspective.

Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, 3(4), 675-691.

Levinson, H. (1973). Asinine attitudes toward motivation. Harvard Business Review,

51(1), 70-76.

Lewin, K. (1944). The dynamics of group actions. Educational Leadership, 1(4), 195-

200.

Loon, M., Lim, Y. M., Teck, H. L., & Cai, L. T. (2012). Transformational leadership and

job-related learning. Management Research Review, 35(3), 192-205.

doi:10.1108/01409171211210118

Marilena, C., & Elena-Mihaela, I. (2008). Knowledge management in the public sector.

Annals of The University Of Oradea, Economic Science Series, 17(4), 164-168.

Massaro, M., Dumay, J., & Garlatti, A. (2015). Public sector knowledge management: A

structured literature review. Journal of Knowledge Management, 19(3), 530-558.

doi:10.1108/JKM-11-2014-0466

Massingham, P. R., & Massingham, R. K. (2014). Does knowledge management produce

practical outcomes? Journal of Knowledge Management, 18(2), 221-254.

doi:10.1108/JKM-10-2013-0390

142

Md, A. I., & Ikeda, M. (2014). Convergence issues of knowledge management in digital

libraries. VINE, 44(1), 140-159. doi:10.1108/VINE-05-2013-0029

Millissa F.Y. Cheung, & Chi-Sum Wong. (2011). Transformational leadership, leader

support, and employee creativity. Leadership & Organization Development

Journal, 32(7), 656-672. doi:10.1108/01437731111169988

Mind Garden. (2015). Mind garden: Tools for positive transformation. Retrieved from

http://www.mindgarden.com

Morley, M. J., Gunnigle, P., O'Sullivan, M., & Collings, D. G. (2006). New directions in

the roles and responsibilities of the HRM function. Personnel Review, 35(6), 609-

617. doi:10.1108/00483480610702683

Mohamed, G. A. (2012). Harvesting organizational knowledge and innovation

practices. Business Process Management Journal, 18(5), 712-734.

doi:10.1108/14637151211270126

Moorman, C. (1995). Organizational market information processes: Cultural antecedents

and new product outcomes. JMR, Journal of Marketing Research, 32(3), 318-335.

doi:10.2307/3151984

Muchiri, M. K., Cooksey, R. W., & Walumbwa, F. O. (2012). Transformational and

social processes of leadership as predictors of organisational outcomes.

Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 33(7), 662-683.

doi:10.1108/01437731211265241

Muchiri, M., & Kiambati, K. (2015). Relating leadership processes, societal culture and

knowledge management: A theoretical model. Journal of Global Business Issues,

9(1), 29-38.

Muda, I., Rafiki, A., & Harahap, M. R. (2014). Factors influencing employees’

performance: A study on the Islamic banks in Indonesia. International Journal of

Business and Social Science, 5(2, 73-80. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net

Muhammad, Z. I., & Rashid, A. K. (2011). The growing concept and uses of training

needs assessment. Journal of European Industrial Training, 35(5), 439-466.

doi:10.1108/03090591111138017

Nesheim, T., Olsen, K. M., & Tobiassen, A. E. (2011). Knowledge communities in

matrix-like organizations: Managing knowledge towards application. Journal of

Knowledge Management, 15(5), 836-850. doi:10.1108/13673271111174357

Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization

Science, 5(1), 14-37. doi:10.1287/orsc.5.1.14

143

Nonaka, I., & Konno, N. (1998). The concept of "ba": Building a foundation for

knowledge creation. California Management Review, 40(3), 40-54.

doi:10.2307/41165942

Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge creating company: How Japanese

companies create the dynamics of innovation. Retrieved from

https://books.google.com/books

Nonaka, I., & Toyama, R. (2003). The knowledge-creating theory revisited: Knowledge

creation as a synthesizing process. Knowledge Management Research & Practice,

1(1), 2-10. doi:10.1057/palgrave.kmrp.8500001

Nonaka, I., & von Krogh, G. (2009). Tacit knowledge and knowledge conversion:

Controversy and advancement in organizational knowledge creation

theory. Organization Science, 20(3), 635-652. doi:10.1287/orsc.1080.0412

Nusair, N., Ababneh, R., & Bae, Y. K. (2012). The impact of transformational leadership

style on innovation as perceived by public employees in Jordan. International

Journal of Commerce & Management, 22(3), 182-201.

doi:10.1108/10569211211260283

Odumeru, J. A., & Ogbonna, I. G. (2013). Transformational vs. transactional leadership

theories: Evidence in literature. International Review of Management and

Business Research, 2(2), 355-361.

Orazi, D. C., Turrini, A., & Valotti, G. (2013). Public sector leadership: New

perspectives for research and practice. International Review of

Administrative Sciences, 79(3). doi:10.1177/0020852313489945

Pacharapha, T., & Vichita, V. R. (2012). Knowledge acquisition: The roles of perceived

value of knowledge content and source. Journal of Knowledge

Management, 16(5), 724-739. doi:10.1108/13673271211262772

Prusak, L. (2001). Where did knowledge management come from? IBM Systems Journal,

40(4), 1002-1007.

Ranucci, R. A., & Souder, D. (2015). Facilitating tacit knowledge transfer: Routine

compatibility, trustworthiness, and integration in M&As. Journal of

Knowledge Management, 19(2), 257-276. doi:10.1108/JKM-06-2014-0260

Rasula, J., Vuksic, V. B., & Stemberger, M. I. (2012). The impact of knowledge

management on organizational performance. Economic and Business Review for

Central and South - Eastern Europe, 14(2), 147-168.

144

Riege, A., & Lindsay, N. (2006). Knowledge management in the public sector:

Stakeholder partnerships in the public policy development. Journal of Knowledge

Management, 10(3), 24-39. doi:10.1108/13673270610670830

Rowland, C. (2013). Managing team performance: Saying and paying. International

Journal of Organizational Analysis, 21(1), 38-52.

doi:10.1108/19348831311322524

Rowland, C., & Hall, R. (2014). Management learning, performance and reward: Theory

and practice revisited. The Journal of Management Development, 33(4), 342-356.

doi:10.1108/JMD-08-2012-0110

Ryan, S. D., Zhang, X., Prybutok, V. R., & Sharp, J. H. (2012). Leadership and

knowledge management in an E-government environment. Administrative

Sciences,2(1), 63-81. doi:10.3390/admsci2010063

Saint-Onge, H. (1996). Tacit knowledge: The key to the strategic alignment of

intellectual capital. Strategy & Leadership, 24(2), 10-16.

doi.org/10.1108/eb054547

Schiuma, G., Carlucci, D., & Lerro, A. (2012). Managing knowledge processes for value

creation. VINE, 42(1), 4-14. doi:10.1108/03055721211207815

Self, T. B., Matuszek, T., Self, D. R., & Schraeder, M. (2014). The weaver's loom: A

conceptual framework for facilitating transformational human resource

management through the strategic integration of knowledge management and

continuous improvement. Journal of Business and Management, 20(1), 87-104.

Senge, P. (1999). It's the learning: The real lesson of the quality movement. The Journal

for Quality and Participation, 22(6), 34-40.

Senge, P. (1992). Building learning organizations. The Journal for Quality and

Participation, 15(2), 30-35.

Shu-Mei Tseng, & Pei-Shan, L. (2014). The effect of knowledge management capability

and dynamic capability on organizational performance. Journal of Enterprise

Information Management, 27(2), 158-179. doi:10.1108/JEIM-05-2012-0025

Siong, C. C., Salleh, K., Syed Noh, S. A., & Syed-Ikhsan Syed, O. S. (2011). KM

implementation in a public sector accounting organization: An empirical

investigation. Journal of Knowledge Management, 15(3), 497-512.

doi:10.1108/13673271111137457

Sirisetti, S. (2011). Quality leadership in the public sector: Strategies and challenges. The

Journal of Commerce, 3(4), 45-48.

145

Smolenyak, M., & Majumdar, A. (1992). What is leadership? The Journal for Quality

and Participation, 15(4), 28-31.

Song, M., van der Bij, H., & Weggeman, M. (2005). Determinants of the level of

knowledge application: A knowledge-based and information processing

perspective. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 22(5), 430-444.

doi:10.1111/j.1540-5885.2005.00139.x

Spender, J.C. (1996). Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm.

Strategic Management Journal (1986-1998), 17(52), 45-62.

doi:10.1002/smj.4250171106

Stevens, R. H., Millage, J., & Clark, S. (2010). Waves of knowledge management: The

flow between explicit and tacit knowledge. American Journal of Economics and

Business Administration, 2(1), 129-135.

Strassmann, P. A. (1999). Measuring and managing knowledge capital: Knowledge

executive report. Knowledge Inc. Retrieved from

http://www.providersedge.com/docs/km_articles/Measuring_and

Managing_KnowledgeCapital.pdf

Stogdill, R. M. (1974). Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research.

American Political Science Association, 5(3), 1159-1160. doi:10.2307/1960145

Stogdill, R. M. (1950). Leadership, membership and organization. Psychological

Bulletin, 47(1), 1-14. doi:10.1037/h0053857

Swee, L. T., Smyrnios, K.,X., & Xiong, L. (2014). What drives learning orientation in

fast growth SMEs? International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour &

Research, 20(4), 324-350. doi:10.1108/IJEBR-02-2013-0032

Tannenbaum, R., & Massarik, F. (1957). Leadership: A frame of reference.

Management Science (Pre-1986), 4(1), 1-19. doi:10.1287/mnsc.4.1.1

Theodore, J. (2013). Absence of transformational leadership in Greek enterprises results

in the inability of forming learning organizations. The International Business &

Economics Research Journal (Online), 12(6), 701-706.

Tipu, S. A. A., Ryan, J. C., & Fantazy, K. A. (2012). Transformational leadership in

Pakistan: An examination of the relationship of transformational leadership to

organizational culture and innovation propensity. Journal of Management and

Organization, 18(4), 461-480. doi:10.1017/S1833367200000705

Trice, A., Bertelli, K., & Ward, D. (2011). Workforce shaping models and metrics in the

public sector. People and Strategy, 34(3), 18-27.

146

Trochim, W. M. K. (2006). Research Methods Knowledge Base. Web Center for Social

Research Methods. Retrieved from

http://socialresearchmethods.net/kb/dedind.php

Trottier, T., Van Wart, M., & Wang, X. (2008). Examining the nature and significance of

leadership in government organizations. Public Administration Review, 68(2),

319-333. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00865.x

United States Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2015). Occupational employment statistics

[Data file]. Retrieved from

http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_research_estimates.htm

United States Department of Health and Human Services. (1979). Belmont Report.

Retrieved from http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-

report/index.html

Vandenabeele, W. (2014). Explaining public service motivation: The role of leadership

and basic needs satisfaction. Public Personnel Management, 34(2), 153-173.

doi:10.1177/0734371X14521458

Vanhala, M., & Ahteela, R. (2011). The effect of HRM practices on impersonal

organizational trust. Management Research Review, 34(8), 869-888.

doi:10.1108/01409171111152493

Vincent-Höper, S., Muser, C., & Janneck, M. (2012). Transformational leadership, work

engagement, and occupational success. Career Development International, 17(7),

663-682. doi:10.1108/13620431211283805

Vosburgh, R. M. (2007). The evolution of HR: Developing HR as an internal

consulting organization. HR. Human Resource Planning, 30(3), 11-23.

Wang, D., Su, Z., & Yang, D. (2011). Organizational culture and knowledge creation

capability. Journal of Knowledge Management, 15(3), 363-373.

doi:10.1108/13673271111137385

West, J. P., & Berman, E. M. (2011). The impact of management work

habits on public sector performance: A study of local government managers.

Public Personnel Management, 40(1), 63-87. doi:10.1177/009102601104000105

Wigg, K. M. (1997). Knowledge management: Where did it come from and where did it

go? Science Digest, 13(1), 1-14. doi:10.1016/S0957-4174(97)00018-3

Williams, H. E. (2012). Influential managers in the public sector: How can OD prepare

managers in the public sector for today's challenging working environment.

Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics, 9(5), 125-136.

147

Williams, P., & Sullivan, H. (2011). Lessons in leadership for learning and knowledge

management in multi‐organisational settings. International Journal of Leadership in Public Services, 7(1), 6-20. doi:10.5042/ijlps.2011.0089

Yaghoubi, H., Mahallati, T., Moghadam, A. S., & Rahimi, E. (2014). Transformational

leadership: Enabling factor of knowledge management practices. Journal of

Management and Sustainability, 4(3), 165-174.

Yang, F., Wu, M., Chang, C., & Chien, Y. (2011). Elucidating the relationships among

transformational leadership, job satisfaction, commitment foci and commitment

bases in the public sector. Public Personnel Management, 40(3), 265-278.

doi:10.1177/009102601104000306

Zack, M. H. (1999). Managing codified knowledge. Sloan Management Review, 40(4),

45-58.

148

APPENDIX A: STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL WORK

Academic Honesty Policy

Capella University’s Academic Honesty Policy (3.01.01) holds learners accountable for

the integrity of work they submit, which includes but is not limited to discussion

postings, assignments, comprehensive exams, and the dissertation or capstone project.

Established in the Policy are the expectations for original work, rationale for the policy,

definition of terms that pertain to academic honesty and original work, and disciplinary

consequences of academic dishonesty. Also stated in the Policy is the expectation that

learners will follow APA rules for citing another person’s ideas or works.

The following standards for original work and definition of plagiarism are discussed in

the Policy:

Learners are expected to be the sole authors of their work and to acknowledge the

authorship of others’ work through proper citation and reference. Use of another

person’s ideas, including another learner’s, without proper reference or citation

constitutes plagiarism and academic dishonesty and is prohibited conduct. (p. 1)

Plagiarism is one example of academic dishonesty. Plagiarism is presenting

someone else’s ideas or work as your own. Plagiarism also includes copying

verbatim or rephrasing ideas without properly acknowledging the source by

author, date, and publication medium. (p. 2)

Capella University’s Research Misconduct Policy (3.03.06) holds learners accountable for

research integrity. What constitutes research misconduct is discussed in the Policy:

Research misconduct includes but is not limited to falsification, fabrication,

plagiarism, misappropriation, or other practices that seriously deviate from those

that are commonly accepted within the academic community for proposing,

conducting, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results. (p. 1)

Learners failing to abide by these policies are subject to consequences, including but not

limited to dismissal or revocation of the degree.

http://www.capella.edu/assets/pdf/policies/academic_honesty.pdf

http://www.capella.edu/assets/pdf/policies/research_misconduct.pdf

149

Statement of Original Work and Signature

I have read, understood, and abided by Capella University’s Academic Honesty Policy

(3.01.01) and Research Misconduct Policy (3.03.06), including Policy Statements,

Rationale, and Definitions.

I attest that this dissertation or capstone project is my own work. Where I have used the

ideas or words of others, I have paraphrased, summarized, or used direct quotes following

the guidelines set forth in the APA Publication Manual.

Learner name

and date Donnell Adams, September 8, 2016

http://www.capella.edu/assets/pdf/policies/academic_honesty.pdf

http://www.capella.edu/assets/pdf/policies/research_misconduct.pdf

150

APPENDIX B. DEMOGRAPHICS SURVEY

For each of the following questions clearly mark the correct response.

1. I am: ___ Male ___Female

2. I am: ___ between 18 and 29 years of age ___ between 30 and 39 years of age

___ between 40 and 49 years of age ___ between 50 and 59 years of age

___ between 60 and 69 years of age ___ over 70 years of age

3. I have been employed in a career for: ___ less than 5 years

___ between 5 and 9 years

___ between 10 and 14 years

___ between 15 and 19 years

___ over 20 years

4. I work in a: ___ County government _____ City government ______ State government

5. I have received: ___ an Associate’s degree ____some college

___ a Bachelor’s degree ___ a Graduate degree.

6. I work with computers or other technology: ___ not on a daily basis.

___ daily, but infrequently.

___ daily, but not most of the day.

___ most of every day