Exploring the Mediating Role of Knowledge Sharing between ... · 349 Khaled Mahmoud Al-Shawabkeh Jensen et al., (2008) stated a comparison between Exploitation and Exploration. They

European Journal of Scientific Research

ISSN 1450-216X / 1450-202X Vol. 149 No 3 June, 2018, pp. 345-361

http://www. europeanjournalofscientificresearch.com

Exploring the Mediating Role of Knowledge Sharing between Human

Resource Development and Organizational Ambidexterity (An Empirical Study on Jordanian Telecommunication Companies)

Khaled Mahmoud Al-Shawabkeh

Business and Finance Faculty

The World Islamic Science and Education University, Amman, Jordan

P.O Box (1101), Postal Code (11947), Amman, Jordan

E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Jordanian telecommunication companies meet several challenges such as technology,

short life cycle of products or services, knowledge, globalization and the unstable competitive

environment. These challenges have led to the need of configuration intensive efforts to obtain

the potential growth opportunities; this is achieved through reducing the conflict between

moving forward from through new ideas and opportunities or to retain traditional methods,

and to achieve this balance between these contradictions the concept of organizational

ambidexterity has been emerged.

The current study aims to explore the mediating role of knowledge sharing between

human resource development and organizational ambidexterity in Jordanian

telecommunication companies. This study adopted descriptive analytical method; a simple

random sampling was selected (161) at the middle and top levels. A theoretical model has

been proposed and tested using SPSS and Amos.

Set of results have been revealed, there is statistically significant effect of human

resource development (Formal Education, Assessment & Feedback, Job Experiences and

Interpersonal Relationships) on organizational ambidexterity in Jordanian telecommunication

companies at level (α≤ 0.05); There is a statistical significant effect of knowledge sharing in

explaining the effect of human resource development on organizational ambidexterity in

Jordanian telecommunication companies at level (α≤ 0.05).

This study recommended that Jordanian telecommunication companies should pay an

attention to develop human resources as a consequence of its significant impact on achieving

organizational ambidexterity, especially attention to share knowledge and maximizing job

experiences through job enlargement, job rotation, enrichment work and empowering

employees.

Keywords: Human Resource Development; Organizational Ambidexterity; Knowledge

Sharing; Jordanian Telecommunication Companies.

Exploring the Mediating Role of Knowledge Sharing between

Human Resource Development and Organizational Ambidexterity 346

1. Introduction Today's business meets vital and critical challenges in an unstable and uncertainty environment,

Organizational Ambidexterity strives to make and create a balance between how to exploit capabilities

and explore opportunities (Vera & Grossan, 2004). Duncan (1976) was the first researcher presented the

terminology of ambidexterity for organizations concepts; which means and describes set of variances and

differences of organizational behaviours and results.

Ambidextrous organizations are competent of explore novel opportunities and exploit the current

capabilities, and can improve organizational performance and competitiveness through ambidextrous

activities (Cao, Gedajlovic & Zhang, 2009).

The theme of organizational ambidexterity is one of the most important and modern topics in

contemporary organizations, depending on its role in understanding and managing the balances in

complex organizational environments (by focusing on exploitation and exploration simultaneously); in

order to adapt to the environment that ultimately leads to achieve competitive advantage.

Business future lies steadily on the competences and enthusiasm of its personnel. On the other

hand, human resource development is a long- term improvement progress as associated to employees. It

concentrates supplementary on developing accessible and expectations employees' capabilities. The

conclusion consequence of any development series is the improvement of workers' competences for

effectively accomplishing of organizational goals (Durai, 2010, 235).

Development points to "formal education, work experiences, interpersonal relations, and

assessment to assist workers intended for the future assignments". Development organizes employees for

further situations (not in their current careers as training) in the corporations and enlarges their capabilities

to shift and progress into jobs that may not yet be available (Noe et al., 2015, 407).

Knowledge is constantly one of the major strategic assets that can create long-term competitive

priorities. Knowledge is the aptitude of individuals and institutions to recognize and perform

professionally. Knowledge takes care of daily routines and can also prepare each one to handle new

situations and take advantage of them when required. Associations need to pay particular attention to

valuable knowledge sharing, which is crucial to their achievement and to attaining competitive advantage.

Knowledge Sharing may be accomplished via IT systems, written style, or face-to-face interactions (Gaal,

Szabo, Obermayer-Kovacs & Csepregi, 2015). Knowledge sharing can be defined as a key process which

attempt to enhance institutional performance and innovation (Fernandez & Sabherwal, 2010, 60).

The current study aims to explore the mediating role of knowledge sharing between human

resource development and organizational ambidexterity in Jordanian telecommunication companies.

2. Problem Statement Jordanian telecommunication companies (Zain, Orange and Umniah) operate in a turbulence and

uncertainty environment. Telecommunication companies strive to satisfy and meet the current and future

needs of their customers by looking and capturing new opportunities and avoiding threats. Each company

also works to strengthen its own strengths and address weaknesses in order to achieve stability, continuity

and competitive advantage.

Organizational Ambidexterity supposes as a dynamic capacity that goes away from moving a

configuration of skills and competences to another, but it is aimed at more inconsistent requests at the

same time (Jensen et al., 2008; Diaz-Fernandez, Pasamar-Reyes & Valle-Cabrera, 2017).

Human resource development is an essential strategy of human resources strategies which

constitute the cornerstone of organizations. Throughout human resources, the objectives of the

organization are achieved and accomplished organizational success. Therefore, human resource

development and knowledge sharing should also be considered as means of achieving and enhancing

organizational ambidexterity.

Organizational Ambidexterity encounters several challenges, such as: (unstable environment,

resource scarcity, and high competitiveness). Organizational Ambidexterity requires extraordinary

347 Khaled Mahmoud Al-Shawabkeh

characteristics in its human resource (capabilities, skills, knowledge); in order to be ambidextrous

(exploration and exploitation). So, the current study focuses on the effect of human resource development

on organizational ambidexterity.

Organizational Ambidexterity has been investigated as a critical aspect for improving

organizational performance (Raisch, Birkinshaw, Probst & Tushman, 2009; Kostopoulos, Bozionelos &

Syrigos, 2015).

Recent studies on organizational ambidexterity have proposed that human resource strategies act

as a vital role on organizational ambidexterity such as (Ketkar & Puri, 2007; Junni, Sarala, Tarba &

Cooper, 2015; Flickinger, Gruber-Mucke & Marina, 2013; Kostopoulos, Bozionelos & Syrigos, 2015).

Also, Patel, Messersmith & lepak (2013) study investigated the degree to which human resource practices

may operate as an antecedent that facilitate organizations to support organizational ambidexterity.

Therefore, the current study is designed to explore the effect of knowledge sharing as a mediator

between human resource development and organizational ambidexterity. The problem statement of this

study can be summarized in the following main question:

What is the effect of knowledge sharing as a mediating variable between human resource

development and organizational ambidexterity in Jordanian telecommunication companies?

3. Study Model & Hypotheses

HO1: There is no statistically significant effect of human resource development (Formal Education,

Assessment & Feedback, Job Experiences and Interpersonal Relationships) on Organizational

Ambidexterity in Jordanian telecommunication companies at level (α≤ 0.05).

HO2: There is no statistically significant effect of Knowledge Sharing in explaining the effect of Human

Resource Development on Organizational Ambidexterity in Jordanian telecommunication

companies at level (α≤ 0.05).



4. Theoretical Background 4.1 Organizational Ambidexterity

4.1.1 Concept of Organizational Ambidexterity (OA)

The terminology of ambidexterity is "derived and originated from "ambos" as Latin word which means

both, and "dexter" which refers to right (opposite left). Therefore; Ambidexterity is the right or correct on

both sides" (Simsek, 2009).

Organizational Ambidexterity defines as the organizational ability to explore opportunities and

exploit capabilities (Internal & External approaches); in order to adapt and treat with environmental

changes and contemporary challenges (Fu, Ma, Bosak & Flood, 2016).

Organizational Ambidexterity refers to a terminology which identifies the organizational ability to

do exploration and exploitation activities (Tushman & O'Reilly, 1996; Simsek, 2009; Hiebl, 2015).

Ambidexterity can be clarified as the ability of companies to follow up exploration opportunities

and exploitation innovation together; in order to attain better performance (Benner & Tushman, 2003;

Gibson & Birkinshaw, 2004; Li, 2013).

According to Gibson & Birkinshaw (2004) organizations must be successful in an ambidextrous

status, that is, they must develop and guide two types of capabilities. The first is the ability to adapt (how

to swift speedily to novel opportunities and avoid threats). The second side is the arrangement and

alignment, which make an obvious significance of (how to create a short- term value, and how to convey

and recognize this value).

Contemporary organizations strive to achieve strategic flexibility through innovation, and they are

primarily dependent on innovation in their activities through the exploitation and exploration of

knowledge as a strategy. Exploratory innovation has been developed to satisfy the new requests from

clients or new markets, also introducing up to date technologies into products, services and processes that

have not yet been activated. Explorative Innovation demands knowledge and new information, which in

sequence requires an integrated crucial knowledge base (Gonzalez & Melo, 2018).

4.1.2 Exploration and Exploitation

March (1991) introduced for the first time twin thoughts of exploration and exploitation in the literature

review; he discussed and explained how they should be seen as two ending of one series. Based on earlier

studies by (Duncan, 1976; Tushman & O'Reilly, 1996) were the first to introduce Organizational

Ambidexterity theory. They proposed that the outstanding and supreme performance is anticipated from

ambidexterity, also they discussed about structure and regulations modifications to authorize

ambidexterity.

Previous studies are often considered organization between these two terms (exploration and

exploitation), like an instrument, but modern and recent studies explore and present ambidextrous

organizations as businesses that are able to discover and capture opportunities (Exploration) and exploit

their current resources and capabilities (Raisch, Birkinshaw, Probst & Tushman, 2009).

According to (Chang, 2015; Gibson & Birkinshaw, 2004), Organizational Ambidexterity theory

divided its actions among two key elements (Exploration vs. Exploitation); and they added that these

activities were performed by leaders who strive to persuade or induce them and to adapt behaviors about

them. He & Wang (2004) indicated that exploitation refers to ascertain through the current knowledge that

companies try to improve it, while exploration is the power to recognize detects and acquire new

knowledge.

According to Katila & Ahuja (2002); exploitation accessible capabilities required to exploit new

capabilities and skills; also improve the current organizational knowledge.

Organizational Ambidexterity indicates the organizational capability to activate two matters

altogether (Exploitation & Exploration) towards successful and gaining competitiveness (Simsek, 2009;

Walrave, 2010).


Jensen et al., (2008) stated a comparison between Exploitation and Exploration. They illustrated

that exploitation can be expressed through several sub- activities, as follows: organizational efforts to

make regular improvements and modifications on the current or existing services and products; improving

the organizational efficiency of existing services and products by focusing on cost, effort, and time;

organizational improvements about the current operations and thus reducing the cost of these operations;

expanding the current services and products to the existing or current customers; and raising and adopting

economics of scale in the current market.

They also showed that Exploration is achieved through the following procedures: innovating and

introducing new products and services in organization's market; organizational ability to promote and

market their new products and services; organizational capability to adopt and use new distribution

channels; organizational capability to seek and capture new opportunities in its business sector; and

organizational capability to seek and attract new clients in new markets continuously.

Organizations should make attention in exploration about set of activities such as (cultural

changes; innovation; and flexibility) throughout the organization by encouraging employees to use and

adopt new technologies and new work procedures. Therefore, the success of exploration new

opportunities depends on the organizational ability to acquire and share new knowledge (Hsiao, Chen, &

Choi, 2016). Hence, the researcher adopts knowledge sharing as a mediating variable in the current study.

4.2 Human Resource Development (HRD)

4.2.1 Concept of HRD

Human resource development is a plan for the progression of human resource in organizations; to achieve

performance development. HRD strategy is focused about providing learning, development opportunities

to improve individual, unit and organizational performance (Odumeru & Ilesanmi, 2013; Armstrong,

2006).

Dessler (2012) identifies human resource development as one effort to increase performance

through conveying knowledge varying attitudes or growing skills.

Bernardin (2010, 247) explored that human resource development refers to learning opportunities

considered to develop human resources. Such opportunities don't have to be limited to improving

employees' performance on their existing jobs.

Development refers to the gaining of behaviors, knowledge, and competences that develop an

employee's capacity to encounter changes in work prerequisites and in customers' needs (Noe et al., 2015,

406).

Stewart & Browne (2011, 382) offered explanations of four categories of programs that assist

employees develop new experiences and skills that will support them to succeeding in their occupations:

formal education, assessments and feedback, work experiences, and developmental relationships.

The conception of human resource development (HRD) has existed as a strategy to strengthen the

aptitudes of institutional staff to perform (Gberevbie, 2012).

Human resource development is one of the most important strategies of human resources

management. It is a development of individual potentials, competences, skills and the organization as a

whole (Hameed & Waheed, 2011).

Human resources development refers to actions that lead to the gaining of new skills or knowledge

for growth. Development programs are provided to employees with the aim of improving their abilities.

Human resource development is considered as the main indicator to organizational sustainability (Nda &

Fard, 2013).



4.2.2 Human Resource Development Dimensions/ Approaches

4.2.2.1 Formal Education

Formal education is a sort of development that consists of formal learning experiences such as training

courses. These courses can be a particular event or a sequence of events, but the main target is that these

programs must assist staffs ascertaining new skills that are appropriate to their upcoming works (Stewart

& Browne, 2011, 382).

Singh (2011, 203) explored that especially in huge business, formal education is given the form of

courses, remarkably in promotion and development employees to obtain new skills and knowledge.

Stewart & Browne (2011, 383) divided formal education addicted to two classes: (a) courses; which is a

type of development, consist of courses particularly considered for the corporation’s workforces; and

presented by specialist, trade organizations, universities, or courses that are part of academic degree

programs from universities and colleges. (b) Certificate and licensing.

4.2.2.2. Assessment

Noe et al., (2015, 418) describes assessment as "gathering information and make available feedback to

workers about their performance, communication techniques, or skills". Consistent with Stewart &

Browne (2011, 383- 385) there are two major categories of assessment and feedback: (1): career

assessments; which regarding career relevance and career fit, derived from a typology development that

concentrate on employees' interests (skills, values, and work life) this categorization confirm that

workforce will be further fulfilled and successful in careers that strongly meet their characteristics. (2):

Multi source assessments; is a process in which employees' supervisors, colleagues, and clients respond

questions and offer information about workers' performance and behaviors.

Developmental assessment is continuing procedures for the human resource development

throughout the entire year. Fundamentally, it is an obligatory element of the Performance management.

This evaluation will conclude the ineffective spot of worker where employee development is essential in

order to expand the employee performance (Kirkpatrick, 2006; Hameed & Waheed, 2011).

4.2.2.3 Wok Experiences

Business can apply a mixture of work experiences to develop human resources. These alternatives consist

of: "enrichment, lateral moves (rotation and transfer), upward moves, and downward moves" (Stewart &

Browne, 2011):

• Job enrichment: extra challenges or further tasks to an employee's occupation.

• Job rotation: is a time- restricted on the side job duties for the intention of serving employees

developed new skills and knowledge.

• Job transfer: an enduring lateral occupation task for the aim of assisting human resources

developed new skills and knowledge.

Noe et al., (2015, 429) showed the differences techniques that work experiences be able to utilized

for human resources' development, these consist of: "Job Enlargement: addition challenges or new tasks to

an human resources existing tasks; Job Rotation: the progression of steadily shifting a specific person

from one work to another over the path of time. The coursework may be in several practical fields of the

association".

4.2.2.4. Interpersonal Relationships

Developmental relationships are interactions that offer sustain and support for individual or proficient

development. These relationships are able to engage officially assigned mentors, coaches, supervisors,

coworkers, subordinates, or support groups (Stewart & Browne, 2011).


Interpersonal relationships can be practical in the course of various mechanisms: Coaches or

Sponsor, Mentor, Supervisor or Co-worker, Role Mode, and Support group/ Networks. (Douglas, 2001;

Stewart & Browne, 2011)

Human resources can also build up their skills and improve their knowledge concerning the corporation

and its clients by interrelate with a further experienced company associate. Mentoring and Coaching are

two categories of interpersonal relationships that are exploited to develop member of staff (Noe et al.,

2015, 428). Coaching is a vital action for the human resource development. It appoints take care of human

resources as an individual co-worker in attaining mutually individual and organizational objectives

(Agarwal, 2006; Hameed & Waheed, 2011).

4.3 Knowledge Sharing

Recently, knowledge is supposed as a vital constituent of the business. Conversely, since the intellectual

capital and intangible resources are the most essential aspects for business, so knowledge has a key

position in the contemporary business. As a result, the associations have to make available conditions for

sharing knowledge amongst members. Executives also must encourage knowledge sharing in their

organizations (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995).

Fernandez & Sabherwal (2010, 60) defines Knowledge sharing as "a process through which tacit

or explicit knowledge is distributed and communicated to other people". There are three major

explanations about knowledge sharing:

I. Firstly, knowledge sharing indicates actual transfer, with the intention that the receiver of

knowledge be able to recognize it properly.

II. Secondly, knowledge sharing engages the receiver attaining the shared knowledge in addition to

exploit it. It's not suggestions derived from the knowledge.

III. Third, knowledge sharing can be in various forms as individual form as well as teams, units or

organizational form.

Knowledge sharing defines as the task which assists others via knowledge and work together; to

resolve difficulties, exploit new views, or apprehend progression (Cummings, 2004).

Knowledge sharing is a broader conception than regular knowledge transferring, call attention to

the procedure or social interactions for exchanging knowledge (Gupta and Govindarajan, 2000).

Knowledge sharing also defines as an “information manners or behaviors” that requires the attempt and

readiness to be responsive and to understand information (Choo, 2016).

Al-Husseini & Elbeltagi (2015) explored that knowledge sharing expressed two aspects (donating

knowledge & collecting knowledge). Firstly, Knowledge donating (individual aspect) has set of activities

such as: employees share new something and knowledge with peers. On the other hand, Knowledge

collecting (organizational aspect) can be done through set of activities such as: organizations encourage

and support employees to share any information, knowledge, and skills with their peers in departments by

means of specialized techniques and mechanisms.

Knowledge sharing can be described as "the readiness of individual with an association to share

the knowledge he has obtained with other colleagues". Knowledge sharing is a "social action that takes

position through relations and interactions between individuals" (Ofori, Osei, Ato - Mensah, & Affum,

2015).

Fernandez & Sabherwal (2010, 61- 64) explored that Knowledge sharing can be classified into two

categories or approaches: socialization; which focuses on sharing tacit knowledge. For example: a face-to-

face meeting, brainstorming, and conferences as mechanisms to support socialization, and exchange;

which supports sharing of explicit knowledge that used to exchange and share explicit knowledge between

employees, groups, and institutions. For example: instruction manuals and documents.

Knowledge sharing in any business is vital because this is the base for the implementation of ideas

and processes that assist management in decision-making. Recognizing these factors that help to share

knowledge will help organization to benefit from them and positively influence their ability to innovate

something new (Abdallah, Khalil, & Divine, 2012).



Waheed, Qureshi, Khan & Hijazi (2013) explored that knowledge sharing acts a significant point in

developing organizational performance and attaining competitive advantages. Institutions continuously

strive to adopt improved and creative strategies. Knowledge sharing is one of those specific strategies.

Knowledge sharing is a valuable and beneficial action for any business, and organizations attain several

advantages from it. Finally, Knowledge sharing encounters many obstacles; the most critical one is

employees' unwillingness to share their knowledge (particularly tacit knowledge).

5. Research Methodology This study aims to explore the effect of human resource development on organizational ambidexterity in

the presence of a mediating variable (knowledge sharing) in Jordanian Telecommunication companies

(Zain, Orange, and Umniah).

The descriptive analytical method was used based on secondary and primary data sources.

Secondary sources represented in books, several references, periodicals, articles, researches, and previous

studies, while primary sources depended on empirical data which were gathered through designing a

specialized questionnaire.

To accomplish study's objectives, this subdivision provides a description of the study population

and sample, study's instrument, and questionnaire's validity and reliability.

5.1 Study's Population and Sample

Study's population consists of Jordanian Telecommunication companies, which are three companies (Zain,

Orange, and Umniah) with number of employees (312) members at the middle and top levels. The unit of

analysis is at the middle and top levels working in Jordanian telecommunication companies. Based on

this, the current study adopted the simple Random Sampling. A total of (175) respondents were targeted,

(166) questionnaires were retrieved, (5) of them were invalid for testing. Thus (161) questionnaires were

suitable for testing (Sekaran & Bougie, 2010, 295).

5.2 Study's tool (Questionnaire)

The questionnaire consisted of four parts; the first part is about demographical and occupational

characteristics. The second part is about the independent variable (Human Resource Development). The

third part presents items cover the dependent variable (Organizational Ambidexterity). Finally, the fourth

part covers the mediating variable (Knowledge Sharing). The questionnaire adopted the measurement of

Likert scale (five responses): (Strongly Disagree= 1; Disagree= 2; Neutral = 3; Agree = 4; and strongly

Agree = 5).

5.3 Validity

To check questionnaire's coherence and clearness, the questionnaire was presented to proficient reviewers

in the field of the current study (academic reviewers and managers in Jordanian communication

companies); in order to express their opinions and comments. In light of their suggestions and comments

some items and questions were added or corrected, while others were omitted.

5.4 Reliability

To check reliability, the internal consistency coefficient (Cronbach's Alpha) was calculated. The results

were as follows for all study variables:


Table 1: Reliability test (Cronbach's Alpha)

In Table (1), the values of the Cronbach alpha coefficient of the study instrument ranged from

(0.764 - 0.919), so that all the values are greater than 0.60. This indicates the consistency between the

items of the study instrument (Sekaran & Bougie, 2010, 290). Accordingly, the consistency coefficients

(Cronbach's Alpha) of the instrument and its items are considered acceptable and valid for statistical

analysis purposes.

5.5 Analyzing Study's Data (Relationship Between Variables)

Prior to examine study's hypotheses, certain tests were conducted in order to confirm the sufficiency of

data for regression analysis, as shown in table (2), it was confirmed that there is no high correlations

between the independent variables. Multicolinearity apply the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) and

Tolerance for each variable (VIF must not to exceed the acceptable ratio "10"). As well as, Tolerance

value must be greater than (0.05).

Table 2: Results of Collinearity Statistics (VIF & Tolerance)

Independent Variables VIF Tolerance

Formal Education 2.441 .410

Assessment and Feedback 2.470 .405

Job Experiences 2.165 .462

Interpersonal Relationships 2.021 .495

Also, to test the fit and suitability data for linear regression analysis, multiple linear correlations

was tested "Bivariate Pearson Correlations". Pearson correlation coefficients were used to detect the

multiple linear correlation problems between the independent study variables.

Table (3) shows the correlation matrix for the independent study variables. The correlation

coefficient values between the independent study variables (Human Resource Development) were all

statistically significant at the level (0.01), indicating that there is no linear correlation between

independent study variables.

Table 3: Matrix Correlations matrix (Pearson correlation coefficients)

Variable Formal Education Assessment and

Feedback

Job Experiences Interpersonal

Relationships

Formal Education 1

Assessment and Feedback

.725**

.000 1

Job Experiences

.639**

.000

.623**

.000 1

Interpersonal Relationships .588**

.000

0.618**

.000

.650**

.000 1

** Correlation is significant at (0.01) level.

Variables Items Cronbach's Alpha

Formal Education 4 .806

Assessment. & Feedback 4 .820

Job Experiences 4 .811

# Human Resource Development 16 .919 Exploitation 4 .819

Exploration 4 .764

# Organizational Ambidexterity 8 .874

# Knowledge Sharing 5 .842



As shown in Table (3), the highest correlation between the independent variables is (0.725) between

(formal education) and (Assessment & Feedback), while the correlation coefficient values among the

other independent variables were lower. This indicates the absence of the phenomenon of multiple linear

correlations between the independent variables, the correlation above (0.80) is an indication of the

existence of this problem, so this confirms that study's sample is free of the high linear correlation

problem (Montgomery, Peck & Vining, 2012).

6. Data Analysis & Testing Study Hypothesis 6.1. Respondents Profile

A number of demographic and functional factors were selected to identify some of the information

associated to the study's sample. Results indicated the characteristics of the sample members in terms of

(Gender, Age & Work Experience).

Table 4: Study sample in relation to demographic variables

Variable category frequency percentage

Gender Males 103 64%

Females 58 36%

Age Less than thirty years 40 24.8%

From thirty - less than forty years 67 41.6%

From forty - less than fifty years 40 24.8%

50 years and above 14 8.7%

Work Experience Less than 5 years 16 9.9%

From 5- less than 10 years 99 61.5%

From 10- less than 15 years 44 27.3%

15 years or more 2 1.2%

It is noticeable from the above table that the "Male" involve (64%) from the sample, whereas the

"age" rank (30-less than 40 years) is the major through (41.6%), as well year of Experiences sort (From 5-

less than 10 years) shaped the maximum proportion (61.5%), these outcomes are coherent and reliable

with the expected organizational structure in the searched sector (Zain, Orange & Umniah), and consistent

with unit of analysis (Top & Middle levels).

6.2. Descriptive Analysis for Study Variables

In order to categorize the trends and attitudes of study's sample on the variables of the study model, the

arithmetic mean, standard deviations, and relative importance were extracted and used for each paragraph.

The results were as follows:

Table 5: Descriptive analysis for study variables

Variables Mean Std. Deviation Importance

Formal Education 4.1366 .52138 High

Assessment & Feedback 3.9503 .60066 High

Job Experiences 4.1134 .56868 High

Interpersonal Relationships 4.0031 .57281 High

# Human Resource Development 4.0509 .48368 High

Exploitation 3.7127 .60092 High

Exploration 3.9099 .57930 High

# Organizational Ambidexterity 3.8113 .54810 High

# Knowledge Sharing 4.0534 .47474 High


The results of Table (5) indicate that the level of the measure of human resource development in terms of

relative importance is high. The mean is (4.0509). The table also shows that formal education ranked as

the first dimension with an average of (4.1366). While Assessment & Feedback came at the last rank with

an average of (3.9503), with high relative importance. This indicates that the Jordanian telecommunication

companies are conscientious in the adoption of human resource development.

As well as, Table (5) shows that Organizational Ambidexterity has a high relative importance with

a mean (3.8113). The table also shows that Exploration ranked as the first dimension of Organizational

Ambidexterity with a high relative importance (3.9099). As for knowledge sharing indicates a high

relative importance (4.0534). It is clear from the above that Jordanian telecommunication companies are

paying attention in (human resource development; Organizational Ambidexterity, and knowledge sharing)

with a high degree and relative importance.

6.3 Testing Hypotheses

HO1: There is no statistically significant effect of human resource development (Formal Education,



To test the first main hypothesis, multiple regression analysis was used, and the results were as

follows:

Table 6: Standard Multiple regression analysis for the first main hypothesis

Dependent. v (R) (R2) F .calc DF Sig* Sub-Indep-variables (β) T. calc Sig*

Organizational

Ambidexterity

0.821 0.674 80.607 4 0.000

Formal Education .256 3.584 .000

Assessment & Feedback .273 3.804 .000

Job Experiences .042 .630 .530

Interpersonal.

Relationships .376 5.781 .000

The results of Table (6) show that the correlation coefficient (R = 0.821) refers to the relationship

between independent and dependent variables. The effect of the independent variables (human resource

development) on the dependent variable (organizational ambidexterity) is statistically significant. Where

the value of R2 (0.674), this indicates that (67.4%) of the variation in (organizational ambidexterity) can

be explained by the variation in (Dimensions of human resource development). Where the calculated

value of (F) is (80.607), and the level of significance (Sig = 0.000), which is less than (0.05).

The table of coefficients showed that the value of Beta at (formal education) was (0.256) and that

the value of t is (3.584) and the significance level is (Sig = 0.000), indicating that the effect of this

dimension is significant. The value of Beta at Assessment & Feedback reached (0.273), the t value is

(3.804) and the significance level is (Sig = 0.000), indicating that the effect of this dimension is

significant. The value of Beta at Job Experiences is (0.042) and t (0.630), with a significance level (Sig =

0.530), indicating that the effect of this dimension is insignificant. The value of Beta at Interpersonal

Relationships is (0.376) and the value of t is (5.781) and the level of significance (Sig = 0.000), indicating

that the effect of this dimension is significant. Based on the above, we reject the first main hypothesis and

accept/ support the alternative hypothesis which affirms:

There is statistically significant effect of human resource development (Formal Education,


Ambidexterity in Jordanian telecommunication companies at level (αααα≤≤≤≤ 0.05).



HO2: There is no statistically significant effect of Knowledge Sharing in explaining the effect of Human

Resource Development on Organizational Ambidexterity in Jordanian telecommunication


To examine this hypothesis, the current study uses the (path analysis); to ensure the mediating role

of Knowledge Sharing in explaining the effect of Human Resource Development on Organizational

Ambidexterity. As shown in Tables (7 & 8).

Table 7: Path analysis test results of the mediating effect

RMSEA GFI CFI Chi2 Sig.

0.106 0.958 0.977 22.274 0.004

Effect of knowledge sharing in explaining the

effect of human resource development in

organizational ambidexterity

GFI: "Goodness of Fit Index must Proximity to 1"

CFI: "Comparative Fit Index must Proximity to 1"

RMSEA: "Root Mean Square Error of Approximation must Proximity to 0"

Table 8: Direct and indirect effect for study's variables

path Standardized direct

effects

Standardized indirect effect Standardized total effect

HRD OA 0.808 0.055 0.863

HRD KS 0.744

KS OA 0.073

HRD: Human Resource Development

KS: Knowledge Sharing

OA: Organizational Ambidexterity

Figure 2: Standardized effect for Study's Variables

From table (7) we can notice that Knowledge Sharing has a mediating role (effect) between

Human Resource Development and Organizational Ambidexterity. The Chi2 was (22.274) with sig

(0.004) at level (α≤ 0.05), whereas the GFI was (0.958) Goodness of Fit Index approaching to one. On the

other hand, the CFI was (0.977) Comparative Fit Index approaching to one, while the RMSEA is (0.106)

approaching to zero.


As shown in Table (8) the standardized direct effect was (0.808) between Human Resource Development

and Organizational Ambidexterity, (0.744) between Human Resource Development and Knowledge

Sharing, and (0.073) between Knowledge Sharing and Organizational Ambidexterity. Also the

standardized Indirect effect was (0.055) between Human Resource Development on Organizational

Ambidexterity through Knowledge Sharing. And the Standardized total effect was (0.863).

These results indicate that Knowledge Sharing has indirect effect (Mediating role) in explaining the effect

of Human Resource Development on Organizational Ambidexterity in Jordanian telecommunication


As a result, rejected the zero hypothesis and supported the alternative one that affirms:

There is a statistical significant effect of knowledge sharing in explaining the effect of human

resource development on organizational ambidexterity in Jordanian telecommunication

companies at level (αααα≤≤≤≤ 0.05).

6. Discussion The current study aims to explore the mediating role of knowledge sharing between human resource

development and organizational ambidexterity as an experimental study in Jordanian telecommunication

companies. This study has been revealed set of findings and results.

Firstly, the current study revealed that human resource development (Formal Education,

Assessment & Feedback, Job Experiences and Interpersonal Relationships) has a significant statistical

effect on Organizational Ambidexterity in Jordanian telecommunication companies. This result is

consistent with the results of Chang (2015) study which included assumptions of transformational

leadership and organizational ambidexterity in the presence of strategic human resource management.

The current study also consisted with Ketkar & Puri (2007) study which proposed a relationship

between human resource practices and organizational ambidexterity leading to employees' performance.

As well as, the current study is consistent with Junni, Sarala, Tarba & Cooper (2015) which

investigated the impact of human resource and organizational antecedents in organizational ambidexterity,

and it revealed that organizational ambidexterity is accomplished when both human resource and

organizational factors perform to assist organizational ambidexterity. This study also revealed that

compensation strategies as a strategy of human resource strategies has affected the motivation for

achieving organizational ambidexterity; it focuses on consideration how human resource can be a factor to

attaining organizational ambidexterity.

The current study is consistent with Flickinger, Gruber-Mucke & Marina (2013) study which

aimed to examine the association between human resource management practices and organizational

ambidexterity pertain to especially skilled personnel addicted to the organization. As well as,

Kostopoulos, Bozionelos & Syrigos (2015) study explored that human resource practices significantly

affect organizational ambidexterity. It also revealed that the relationship between organizational

ambidexterity and performance becomes higher in the presence of effectively and efficiency human

resource practices.

Patel, Messersmith & lepak (2013) study also agrees and consistent with the current study. This

study explored the relations between human resources and its capacity to reveal organizational

ambidexterity.

Secondly, the current study also revealed that there is a statistically significant effect of

Knowledge Sharing in explaining the effect of Human Resource Development on Organizational


This result is consistent with the results of Gonzalez & Melo (2018) study which explored the

impact of organizational aspects (Human Resource, Leadership, Technology, Culture, and Autonomy) in

association to innovation throughout knowledge.



As well as, the current study is consistent with Hsiao, Chen & Choi (2016) study which investigated the

moderating role of the attributes and knowledge transfer in the association among organizational

potentials; innovation and economic performance. It revealed that the organizational potentials of

exploitation and exploration are completely associated to innovation & performance. Additionally, this

study examined the effect of exploration activity on performance is completely moderated via implicit

knowledge and the adoption of knowledge transfer. On the contrary, exploitation activity is a stronger

forecaster of performance as associations obtain well- knowledge and exploit knowledge transfer tools.

According to the prior discussion, the researcher revealed that human resource development and

knowledge sharing have a key role in facilitating and attaining organizational ambidexterity in Jordanian

telecommunication companies. Since, organizational ambidexterity requires specific skills, capabilities

and knowledge to verify their activities (Exploration & Exploitation).

7. Recommendations The researcher recommends that Jordanian telecommunication companies should inquire about exploiting

opportunities and acquire new opportunities to achieve competitive advantage, also encouraging

innovation in order to provide new services for the first time to customers (Exploration).

As well as, the necessity to continuously improve the existing provided services to customers

according to customers' needs and desires. This study also recommends the importance of knowledge

sharing as an approach to human resources development and organizational ambidexterity achievement;

through enhancing the mechanisms and techniques of knowledge sharing.

Moreover, Jordanian telecommunication companies should pay an attention to develop human

resources as a consequence of its significant impact on achieving organizational ambidexterity, especially

attention to job experiences through job enlargement, job rotation, enrichment work and empowering

employees.

References: [1] Abdallah, S., Khalil, A. & Divine, A. (2012). The Impact of Knowledge Sharing on Innovation

Capability in United Arab Emirates Organizations. International Scholarly and Scientific

Research & Innovation, 6 (12), 3588- 3591. scholar.waset.org/1999.10/3250.

[2] Agarwal, R., C. M. Angst & Magni (2006). The performance effects of coaching: a multilevel

analysis using hierarchical linear modeling, Robert H. Smith School of Business Research Paper

Series.

[3] Al-Husseini, Sawasn & Elbeltagi, Ibrahim (2015). Knowledge Sharing Practices as a Basis of

Product Innovation: A Case of Higher Education in Iraq. International Journal of Social Science

and Humanity, 5(2), 185- 185. DOI: 10.7763/IJSSH.2015.V5.449 182- 185.

[4] Armstrong, M (2006). A Handbook of Human Resources Management (16th

ed.), London: Kogan

Page.

[5] Benner & Tushman (2003). Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity

dilemma revisited. Acad. Management Rev. 28 238–256.

[6] Bernardin, H., John (2010). Human Resource Management: An Experential Approach (5th ed.).

MCGRAW Hill- International. Edition.

[7] Cao, Q., Gedajlovic, E. & Zhang, H. (2009), Unpacking organizational ambidexterity: dimensions,

contingencies, and synergistic effects. Organization Science, 20 (4), 781-796. Doi

10.1287/orsc.1090.0426.

[8] Chang, Yi-Ying (2015). Strategic human resource management, transformational leadership

organizational ambidexterity: evidence from Taiwan. Asia Pacific Business Review, 21 (4), 517–

533. Doi.org/10.1080/13602381.2015.1029298.


[9] Choo, C.W. (2016), The Inquiring Organization: How Organizations Acquire Knowledge and

Seek Information, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.

[10] Cummings, J. N. (2004) Work groups, structural diversity, and knowledge sharing in a global

organization, Management Science, 50 (3), 352- 364.

[11] Dessler, G. (2012). Human Resource Management. Global edition (13 ed.), Pearson Education.

[12] Diaz-Fernandez, Mirta, Pasamar-Reyes, Susana, & Valle-Cabrera, Ramon (2017). Human capital

and human resource management to achieve ambidextrous learning: A structural perspective. BRQ

Business Research Quarterly, (20), 63-77. Doi.org/10.1016/j.brq.2016.03.002

[13] Duncan, R. B. (1976). The ambidextrous organization: Designing dual structures for innovation. R.

H. Kilmann, L. R. Pondy, D. P. Slevin, eds. The Management of Organization Design, 1.

Strategies and Implementation. North-Holland, New York, 167–188.

[14] Durai, Pravin (2010). Human Resource Management (10th

ed.). Pearson.

[15] Eisenhardt, K.M., & J.A. Martin, (2000). Dynamic Capabilities: What Are They? Strategic

Management Journal, 21(10/11), 1105-1122.

[16] Fernandez, Irma Becerra & Sabherwal, Rajiv. (2010). Knowledge management systems and

processes, Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data M.E. Sharpe, Inc. United State of

America, USA.

[17] Flickinger, Miriam, Gruber-Mu¨cke, Tina & Fiedler, Marina (2013). The linkage between human

resource practices and organizational ambidexterity: An analysis of internal labor market dynamics

in a port-of-entry context. Journal of Business Economics, 83 (8), 1- 24. DOI 10.1007/s11573-013-

0671-7.

[18] Fu, Na, Ma, Bosak, Janine & Flood, Patrick, (2016). Intellectual capital and organizational

ambidexterity in Chinese and Irish professional service firms. Journal of Organizational

Effectiveness: People and Performance, 3 (2), 94 – 114. Doi.org/10.1108/JOEPP-03-2016-0021.

[19] Gaál, Z, Szabó, L, Obermayer-Kovács, N & Csepregi, A. (2015). Exploring the role of social

media in knowledge sharing. The Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management, 13 (3), 185-197.

Available online at www.ejkm.com.

[20] Gberevbie, Daniel Eseme (2012). Impact of Human Resource Development and Organizational

Commitment on Financial Sector Employees in Nigeria. Scientific Annals of the „ Alexandru Ioan

Cuza” University of Iaşi Economic Sciences, 59 (2), 29-41. DOI 10.2478/v10316-012-0030-9.

[21] Gibson, C.B. & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of

organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47 (2), 209- 226.

[22] Gonzalez, R. & Melo, Tatiana Massaroli (2018). Innovation by knowledge exploration and

exploitation: an empirical study of the automotive industry. Gest. Prod., São Carlos, 25(1), 1-15.

Doi.org/10.1590/0104-530X3899-17.

[23] Gupta, A., & Govindarajan, V. (2000). Knowledge flows within multinational corporations.

Strategic management journal, 21(4), 473-496.

[24] Hameed, Abdul & Waheed, Aamer (2011). Employee Development and It's Affect on Employee

Performance A Conceptual Framework. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2

(13), 224- 229.

[25] He, Z., & Wong, P. (2004). Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity

hypothesis. Organization Science, 15(4), 481-494. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0078.

[26] Hiebl, Martin R. W. (2015), Family involvement and organizational ambidexterity in later-

generation family businesses. Management Decision, 53 (5), 1061 - 1082

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MD-04-2014-0191

[27] Hsiao, Yung-Chang, Chen, Chung-Jen & Choi, Young Rok (2016). The innovation and economic

consequences of knowledge spillovers: fit between exploration and exploitation capabilities,

knowledge attributes, and transfer mechanisms. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management,

29(8), 872- 558.



[28] Jensen, J.J., George, G., Van Den Bosch, F.A. & Volberda, H.W. (2008). Senior team attributes

and organizational ambidexterity: the moderating role of transformational leadership. Journal of

Management Studies, 45 (5), 982-1007. Doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2008.00775.x.

[29] Junni, P., Sarala, R., Taras, V., & Tarba, S. (2013). Organizational ambidexterity and performance:

A meta-analysis. Academy of Management Perspectives, 27, 299–312. Doi:10.5465/amp.2012.

0015

[30] Katila, R. & Ahuja, G. (2002). Something old, something new: a longitudinal study of search

behavior and new product introduction. Academy of Management Journal, 45 (6), 1183-1194.

[31] Ketkar, Sumita & Puri, Roma (2017). Ambidextrous Human Resource Practices and Employee

Performance. Proceedings of International Conference on Strategies in Volatile and Uncertain

Environment for Emerging Markets July 14-15, 2017 Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New

Delhi pp.170-178. http://westminsterresearch.wmin.ac.uk/id/eprint/20009.

[32] Kirkpatrick, D. L. (2006). Improving Employee Performance Through Appraisal and Coaching.

American Management Association Publication.

[33] Kostopoulos, K. C., Bozionelos, N. & SYRIGOS, Evangelos (2011). Ambidexterity and Unit

Performance: Intellectual Capital Antecedents and Cross level Moderating Effects of Human

Resource Practices. Human Resource Management, 54 (S1), 111–132. DOI:10.1002/hrm.21705.

[34] Li, Ci-Rong (2013). How top management team diversity fosters organizational ambidexterity.

Journal of Organizational Change Management, 26 (5), 874 – 896.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-06-2012-0075

[35] March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization

Science, 2(1), 71-87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71

[36] Montgomery, D. C., Peck, E. A., & Vining, G. G. (2012). Introduction to linear regression

analysis (5th

ed.), New York, NK: John Wiley & Sons.

[37] Nda, Maimuna & Fard, Rashad (2013). The Impact of Employee Training and Development on

Employee Productivity. Global Journal of Commerce & Management Perspective, 2(6), 91-93.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260219097

[38] Noe, Raymond A, Hollen beck, John R, Gerhrty, Barry, & Wright, Patrick M. (2015),

Fundamentals of human resource management (4th

ed.). Boston: Mc Graw-Hill.

[39] Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge-Creating Company. Oxford University Press,

Oxford.

[40] O’Reilly, C. A., M. L. Tushman (2004). The ambidextrous organization. Harvard Business

Review. 82, 74–81.

[41] O’Reilly, C. A., M. L. Tushman (2008). Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the

innovator’s dilemma. Res. Organ. Behav., 28, 185–206.

[42] Odumeru1, James & Ilesanmi, Oladele (2013). The Effects of Human Resources Development on

Financial Performance of Organizations. Asian Business Review, 2 (1/3), 19- 23.

[43] Ofori, Daniel, Osei, Abraham, Ato – Mensah, Shadrach, & Affum, Ernest Kwame (2015).

Innovation and Knowledge Sharing: A New Competitive Advantage in the Mobile

Telecommunication Industry in Ghana. Science Journal of Business and Management, 3, (5), 157-

163. Doi: 10.11648/j.sjbm.20150305.14

[44] Patel, P. C., Messersmith, J. G., & Lepak, D. P. (2013). Walking the tightrope: An assessment of

the relationship between high-performance work systems and organizational ambidexterity.

Academy of Management Journal, 56, 1420–1442. doi:10.5465/amj.2011.0255

[45] Raisch, Sebastian, Birkinshaw, Julian, Probst, Gilbert, & Tushman, Michael L. (2009).

Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance.

Organization Science, 20 (4), 685-695. DOI: 10.1287/orsc.1090.0428

[46] Sekaran, Uma, & Bougie, Roger (2010). Research methods for business: A skill-building approach

(5th

ed.). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Inc.


[47] Simsek, Z. (2009). Organizational ambidexterity: towards a multilevel understanding. Journal of

Management Studies, 46 (4), 597-624. Doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00828.x.

[48] Singh, Colonel (2011). Human Resource Management. University Science Press.

[49] Stewart, Gregl & Brown, Kenneth (2011). Human Resource Management- Linking Strategy to

Practice (2nd

ed.). John Wiley & Son Inc.

[50] Tushman, M.L. & O’Reilly, C.A. (1996). Ambidextrous organizations: managing evolutionary and

revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38, (4), 8- 30.

[51] Vera, D. & Crossan, M. (2004). Strategic leadership and organizational learning. Academy of

Management Review, 29 (2), 222-240.

[52] Waheed, Hira, Qureshi, Tahir Masood, Khan, M. Aslam & Hijazi, Syed Tahir (2013). Mediating

role of knowledge sharing: Organizational performance for competitive advantage and innovation.

African Journal of Business Management, 7(7), 536-547 DOI: 10.5897AJBM11.125. Available at

http://www.academicjournals.org/AJBM.

[53] Walrave, Bob, Oorschot, Kim E. van, Romme, A. Georges L. (2010). Ambidexterity and getting

trapped in the suppression of exploration, a simulation model Conference: Proceedings of the 17th

international product development management conference At: Murcia, Spain.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254845125.

Documents

Exploring the Mediating Role of Knowledge Sharing between ... · 349 Khaled Mahmoud Al-Shawabkeh Jensen et al., (2008) stated a comparison between Exploitation and Exploration. They