The causal structural relationship of the factors affecting the innovative performance of personnel in department level government agencies

Abstract

The study of the causal structural relationship of the factors affecting the innovative performance of personnel in department-level government agencies in Thailand aimed at the following: 1) to make create a causal structural relationship model of the factors affecting the innovative performance of personnel in department-level government agencies; 2) to make conduct a comparison study of the size and direction of the direct influence and indirect influence of the factors affecting the innovative performance of personnel in department-level government agencies; 3) to examine the consistency of the innovative performance model of personnel in department-level government agencies. The study was conducted using a quantitative research design. The sample (participants) in the study was 130 department-level government agencies of equivalent. The key informants were 130 deputy directors of academic affairs and deputy directors responsible for innovative management. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used in the study. Structural equation modelling (SEM) was used to measure the causal relationships by means of factor analysis, path analysis, and estimation of parameters in the regression analysis.

The findings from the study showed the following. First, that 1) the developed model consists of knowledge management, transformational leadership, and human capital. The innovative capability was the mediator variable in innovative performance. The model was in harmony with the empirical data and passed the criteria; namely, Chi Squared = 66.38, Df = 51, probability = 0.073, CMIN/DF= 1.30 , CFI = 0.99 , GFI = 0.92, NFI = 0.96, RMSEA = 0.05. Second, the, 2) factors affecting innovative performance were the following: 2.1 ) the innovative capability had the highest level of positive direct influence with significance in terms of innovative performance; 2.2) knowledge management had the second level of influence on innovative performance, namely, it had both a direct and indirect influence—a; negative direct influence with significance and a positive indirect influence. The innovation capability variables were the mediator variables, where, 2.3) transformational leadership significantly had a significantly positive indirect influence on innovative performance and 2.4) human capital had a positive indirect influence on innovative performance without significance. Third, 3) the model of innovative performance was consistent with the empirical data. The model was in harmony with the empirical data, wit a Chi-Square of 0.57, Df =2, probability = 0.75, and it passed the criteria, i.e. innovative performance, knowledge management, transformational leadership, human capital, and innovation capability (probability) = 0.75, CMIN/DF= 0.29, CFI = 1.00, GFI = 1.00, NFI = 1.00, and RMSEA = 0.00