MIICEMA 2014 10-11 November 2014
Hotel Bangi-Putrajaya, Malaysia
180
respondents within the sample population to identify and eliminate potential problems Hunt and Wilcox 1982. Therefore, the sample size for this study was chosen based on random sample of
50 academic staff in higher education in Iraq. Analytical methods included Correlation and Regression, reliability and validity. The SPSS version 21 was used to carry out the dissipative
statistical analysis.
4. Findings
4.1 Reliability Analysis
Reliability was tested for each variable of Transformational Leadership and organizational Innovation. To measure the consistency of the scale, Cronbachs alpha was used as a measure of
reliability. After factor loading was carried out, , reliability coefficients of 0.7 or more are considered adequate for social studies Hair et al., 2006 table 2 showed an acceptable range of
reliability where the results score.
Table 2. The Reliability result variables Transformational Leadership Dimensions and Organizational Innovation.
No. Variables Number of items
Cranachs Alpha 1
Idealized Influence Attribute 4
0.85
2
Idealized Influence Behavioral 4
0.80
3
Inspirational Motivation 4
0.83
4
Intellectual Stimulation 4
0.84
5
Individualized Consideration 4
0.78
6
Organizational innovation 16
0.90 4.2
Correlation Analysis
In this section, Pearson Correlation Coefficient was used to determine the relationship among the study variables. In addition, it identifies significant that opposites the potential value of the
error from first type, and it is the amount probability uncertainty value is at significance 0.05 and 0.01 to determine the moral differences between the study variables. The statistical results
given in Table3 show that there are significant correlations between the transformational leadership dimensions Idealized Influence Attribute, Idealized Influence Behavioral,
Inspirational Motivation, Intellectual Stimulation and Individualized Consideration and organizational innovation. The details are as in the following.
Table 3. The Correlation result Transformational Leadership Dimensions and Organizational Innovation.
Variable 1
2 3
4 5
6 Mean Standard
Deviation Transformational
leadership
1.Idealized 0.85
3.84 0.75
MIICEMA 2014 10-11 November 2014
Hotel Bangi-Putrajaya, Malaysia
181
Influence Attribute 2.Idealized
Influence Behavioral
0.63 0.80 3.92
0.72
3.Inspirational Motivation
0.62 0.63 0.83 3.84
0.72
4.Intellectual Stimulation
0.63 0.50 0.65 0.84 3.91
0.73
5.Individualized Consideration
0.63 0.71 0.66 0.65 0.78 3.61
0.72
6.Organizational innovation
0.79 0.78 0.80 0.75 0.78 0.90 3.96 0.56
Number of items 4
4 4
4 4
16
As the statistical results shown in table 3, Pearson Correlation Coefficient value on the relationship between transformational leadership dimensions and the organizational innovation is
Idealized Influence Attribute= 0.79, Idealized Influence Behavioral =0.78, Inspirational Motivation =0.80, Intellectual Stimulation =0.75, Individualized Consideration =0.78 at a
significance smaller than 0.01. It is a significant positive correlation. This means transformational leadership dimensions has strong significant relationship with organizational innovation. This in
turn supports the first hypothesis mentioned below.
4.3 Testing Hypothesis
H1: There are significant relationship between transformational leadership dimensions Idealized Influence Attribute, Idealized Influence Behavioral, Inspirational Motivation, Intellectual
Stimulation and Individualized Consideration and organizational innovation. Statistical results regarding the correlation between transformational leadership dimensions and
organizational innovation are shown in table Pearson Correlation Coefficient value on the relationship between Idealized Influence
Attribute and organizational innovation was 0.79at a significance smaller than 0.01. It is a significant positive correlation. This means Idealized Influence Attribute has strong significant
relationship with organizational innovation. This in turn supports the sub-hypothesis mentioned above.
Pearson Correlation Coefficient value on the relationship between Idealized Influence Behavioral and organizational innovation was 0.78at a significance smaller than 0.01. It is a
significant positive correlation. This means Idealized Influence Behavioral has strong significant relationship with organizational innovation. This in turn supports the sub-hypothesis mentioned
above. Pearson Correlation Coefficient value on the relationship between Inspirational Motivation and
organizational innovation was 0.80, at a significance smaller than 0.01. It is a significant positive correlation. This means Inspirational Motivation has strong significant relationship with
continuance organizational innovation. This in turn supports the sub-hypothesis mentioned above Pearson Correlation Coefficient value on the relationship between Intellectual Stimulation and
organizational innovation was 0.75, at a significance smaller than 0.01. It is a significant positive correlation. This means Intellectual Stimulation has strong significant relationship with
organizational innovation. This in turn supports the sub-hypothesis mentioned above Pearson Correlation Coefficient value on the relationship between Individualized Consideration
and Organizational innovation was 0.78 at a significance smaller than 0.01. It is a significant
