information school -...
TRANSCRIPT
Information School
Dissertation COVER SHEET (TURNITIN)
Module Code: INF6000
Registration Number 130143813
Family Name Amba First Name Stephen
Assessment Word Count 14031 (excluding Figures, Tables, Abstract, Acknowledgement, References and Appendixes. Coursework submitted after the maximum period will receive zero marks. Your assignment has a word count limit. A deduction of 3 marks will be applied for coursework that is 5% or more above or below the word count as specified above or that does not state the word count.
Ethics documentation is included in the Appendix if your dissertation has been judged to be Low
Risk or High Risk. (Please tick the box if you have included the documentation) A deduction of 3 marks will be applied for a dissertation if the required ethics documentation is not included in the appendix. The deduction procedures are detailed in the INF6000 Module Outline and Dissertation Handbook (for postgraduates) or the INF315 Module Outline and Dissertation Handbook (for undergraduates)
2
Employability skills: The perceptions of Information Systems postgraduate students.
A study submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
INFORMATION SYSTEMS
at
THE UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD
by
STEPHEN LUATE ALSON AMBA
September 2015
3
Abstract
Background: An extensive literature search was conducted using StarPlus, Menedely and Google
Scholar. For simplicity and easy understanding, the employability skills emerging from the literature
review were subdivided into seven subcategories. These are: basic job skills and business
knowledge, technological skills, people skills, behavioural skills or personal qualities, communication
skills or interpersonal qualities, ability to see the big picture and global awareness.
Purpose and scope: The aim of this study is to examine the relationship between employers’
perceptions of employability skills, and that of IM (Information Management), IS (Information Systems)
and ISM (Information Systems Management) postgraduate students. From an employers’
perspective, employability skills are concerned with the effective application of theory into practice.
Samples: The study involved 47 students comprising of 11 ISM postgraduate students, 12 IM
postgraduate students and 24 IS postgraduate students. This sample comprises 32 under the age of
25 years and 15 aged 25 and over.
Methodology: This study took a deductive, survey approach. Data about the perceptions of the most
relevant employability skills were collected using a survey questionnaire among postgraduate
students. A sample of students from the three programmes was given the opportunity to complete a
questionnaire during a lecture in the spring term. The questionnaire is composed of 36 elements
measuring employability skills using Likert Scaling and 2 open-ended questions. The Likert Scaling
questions range from 1 (Not important) to 5 (Very important). The data collected using the Likert
Scaling were coded and analysed using a Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS). The open-
ended questions were to enable students comment and suggest on some of the most relevant
employability skills not identified in the literature or the less relevant employability skills as they
emerged from the literature.
Results: The results show that the students rank ability to manage time effectively to meet deadlines
as the highest among the individual elements of the employability skills as they emerged from the
literature. In addition they rank the subcategory distribution when compared by Mann-Whitney U Test
p-value (sig.) from the highest to the lowest in the order of: basic job skills and business knowledge
(0.493), the ability to see the big picture (0.409), technological skills (0.249), behavioural skills or
personal qualities (0.190), people skills (0.031), global awareness (0.023), and communication skills
(0.007). Developing these characteristics requires a cultural change in teaching practice that focuses
on the development of knowledge and skills.
4
Conclusion: The hypothesis test disapproves the null hypothesis, which states that there is no
difference between the perceptions of employers and IS postgraduate students concerning the most
relevant skills can be rejected. There is a strong correlation between the perceptions of IM, and IS
and ISM postgraduate students concerning the most relevant employability skills with a p-value equal
to 0.018. From this, it can be inferred that the correlation between employers’ perceptions as identified
in the literature review and that of postgraduate IS students is statistical significant. Therefore, the
alternative which states that there is a difference between the employers’ perceptions and that of IS
postgraduate students is accepted. However, when considering each category of employability skills
independently, there appears to be mixed results.
5
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my greatest thanks to the people who have helped and supported me
throughout my course of study at the University of Sheffield. I am grateful to my supervisor, Dr Miguel
Nunes, for his continuous advice, guidance and moral support during my studies and for the final
project, from initial advice in the early stages of conceptual beginnings and through ongoing advice,
encouragement and constructive feedback to this day. He has facilitated me in completing this
dissertation project by exchanging ideas and general information about progress and issues related
to my project, which motivated me and made this project a bit easier to complete.
Special thanks also go to all my family members who allowed me to have the time to concentrate on
the project in spite of my busy work and childcare schedules. They have had an enormous impact on
my life through their moral support that made it possible for me to complete my course of study.
Without them I would have been unable to complete my project. Finally, I want to give thanks to God
who made all these things possible.
6
Table of Contents Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... 3
Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................... 5
Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................ 8
1.1. Overview ................................................................................................................................................ 8
1.2. Research Aim ......................................................................................................................................... 11
1.3. Significance of the Research.................................................................................................................... 12
1.4. Research Questions ................................................................................................................................ 13
1.5. Research Objectives ............................................................................................................................... 13
Chapter 2: Review of Related Literature ...................................................................................... 14
2.1. Introduction: Employability Skills Categories ........................................................................................... 14
2.1.1. Basic Job Skills and Business Knowledge ................................................................... 16
2.1.2. Technological Skills .................................................................................................. 17
2.1.3. People Skills ............................................................................................................ 18
2.1.4. Behavioural Skills or Personal Qualities .................................................................... 19
2.1.5. Communication Skills or Interpersonal Skills ............................................................. 19
2.1.6. Ability to See the Big Picture .................................................................................... 20
2.1.7. Global Awareness .................................................................................................... 21
2.2. Relevant Research .................................................................................................................................. 21
2.3. Concluding remarks ................................................................................................................................ 23
Chapter 3: Research Methodology .............................................................................................. 24
Chapter 4: Results and Discussion ............................................................................................... 29
4.1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 29
4.2. Sampling ................................................................................................................................................ 29
4.3. Data analysis .......................................................................................................................................... 29
4.3.1. Descriptive Statistic Analysis ........................................................................................ 30
4.3.1.1. Ability to See the Big Picture ........................................................................................ 47
4.3.1.2. Basic Job Skills and Business Knowledge ...................................................................... 48
4.3.1.3. Behavioural Skills or Personal Qualities ........................................................................ 49
4.3.1.4. Communication Skills or Interpersonal Qualities .......................................................... 50
4.3.1.5. Global Awareness ........................................................................................................ 52
4.3.1.6. People Skills ................................................................................................................ 52
4.3.1.7. Technological Skills ...................................................................................................... 53
4.4. Hypothesis Test ........................................................................................................... 56
4.5. One Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) .............................................................. 60
4.6. Correlation Analysis ............................................................................................. 63
4.7. Aggregated Employability Skills Analysis ........................................................... 67
Chapter 5: Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 74
7
References ................................................................................................................................. 76
Appendices ................................................................................................................................ 80
Appendix A: Practicalities ........................................................................................................... 80
Appendix B: Employability skills as emerged from the literature review ...................................... 81
Employability Skills from Literature Review ........................................................................ 81
i. Basic job skills and business knowledge ............................................................................................... 81
ii. Technological skills ................................................................................................................................ 81
iii. Peoples’ skills .......................................................................................................................................... 81
iv. Behavioural skills or personal qualities ............................................................................................... 81
v. Communication skills or interpersonal qualities ................................................................................. 81
vi. Ability to see the big picture .................................................................................................................. 82
vii. Global awareness ................................................................................................................................ 82
Appendix C: Questionnaire ......................................................................................................... 82
Questionnaire: Employability Skills: The perceptions of Information Systems (IS) and Information
Management (IM) postgraduate’s students. .......................................................................... 82
Section I: Personal Status. .............................................................................................................................. 83
Section II: The most relevant employability skills for Information Systems’ students to have. ............... 84
Appendix D: Ethics information and Consent Form ...................................................................... 90
Appendix E: SPSS Outputs .......................................................................................................... 92
8
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1. Overview
Discussions among people and the media report that most employers are concerned about the lack
of employability skills among some of the current university graduates compared to a decade ago. It
is this that has inspired this research project. There is broad consensus on the value in developing
certain skills in graduates as a means of enhancing their employability profile. York and Knight (2004)
citied in Jackson (2013, p. 272) states that “These employability skills are sometimes referred to as
professional, core, generic, key and non-technical skills and are inherent to enhancing graduate work-
readiness”.
Information systems are intended to supply useful information. Defining information and how closely
this relates to data and knowledge is essential (Rainer and Turban, 2009, p. 6). As Grix (2010:2)
explains, “there is nothing to animate a research question or design, or motivate research in the first
place” without some form of preconceived idea. Current perceptions of the employability skills among
graduates are often inconsistent. It is widely believed by employers and other professional bodies that
most graduates lack the relevant employability skills (Saad, Robani, Jano and Majid, 2013;
Selvadurai, Choy and Maros, 2012; Lowden, Hall, Elliot and Lewin, 2011; and Shafie and Nayan,
2010). Therefore, as Jackson (2013, p. 273) speculates, “Understanding student perceptions and
achieving student ‘buy-in’ to employability skills development is important for a number of reasons,
which includes:
the suggestion by theory that effective learning requires a clear understanding of the value of
presented material and associated activities that are enhanced by constructive alignment with explicit
learning outcomes;
students placing a high value on what they are learning and how that may impact on their ability to
transfer acquired skills across different contexts, such as from university classroom to the workplace;
the students’ appreciation of the importance of employability skills that may prompt better use of
portfolios to showcase developed skills in future job applications, thus enhancing their employment
prospects;
the students’ understanding of the importance of employability skills, and their transparent inclusion
in curricula that will enhance students’ ability to articulate to employers their own capabilities;
Therefore, as Jackson (2013, p. 273) states, there is a need for graduates to acknowledge the
increasing need to “differentiate themselves from others in a relatively soft labour market”. One of the
9
comprehensive studies to investigate this claim regarding employability skills was carried out by
Gallup in 2013. Gallup claims to be a company that “employs many of the world’s leading scientists
in education, management, economics, psychology, and sociology” (Gallup, 2013, p. 2). It maintains
that its “consultants assist leaders in identifying and monitoring behavioral economic indicators
worldwide”. It study, in collaboration with Microsoft Partners in Learning and the Person Foundation,
refers to these relevant employability skills as 21st century skills (Gallup, 2013, p. 4).
The study aims to measure 21st century skills, “alongside nationally validated measures of student
aspiration across Americans aged 18-35 who are either students or employed” (Gallup, 2013, p. 4).
According to Gallup, the skills included in the study are real problem solving, student aspiration and
engagement, good teacher-student relationships, and use of computers and technology to complete
assignments or projects.
In their article entitled the Concept of Employability, McQuaid and Lindsay (2005, p. 197) assert that
“Employability plays a crucial role in informing labour market policy in the UK, the EU and beyond”.
Employability is a term frequently used in the literature, but to date there is no consensus about its
definition (Jackson, 2014, p. 56; Beerepoot, and Hendriks, 2013, p. 823; Buntat, Jabor, Saud, Mansor,
and Mustaffa, 2013, p. 1531; The National Institute of Adult Continuing Education (NIACE), 2009, p.
2; McQuaid and Lindsay, 2005, p. 197; Robinson, 2000, p. 1; and Drummond, Nixon and Wiltshire,
1998, p. 19). In addition, Cornford (2005) quoted by Jackson (2013, p. 275) asserts that “The
confusing interchange of the terminology for attributes, capabilities, competencies, and abilities
aggravates this further”. This lack of consistency has meant that relevant reports and research
evidences regarding employability skills are difficult to interpret, apply in practice, and educators
struggle how to report and reference them. As Grix (2010, p. 3) states, “it is only with a clear
understanding of the terminology employed in research and the underlying issues this terminology
reflects that you can begin to plan your project”.
In the literature, the term employability tends to refer to transferable or softs skills. McQuaid and
Lindsay (2005, p. 198) describe the concept of employability in relation to those individuals who are
“in work and seeking to improve or sustain their position in the labour market; in education; and out
of work”. A further definition is given by Jackson (2014, p. 56) who refers to employability skills “as
generic, core, key or professional skills … which enable new graduates to effectively apply their
technical knowledge in the workplace”. For the purpose of this study, employability skills will be used
to refer to both the hard and soft skills, which IS graduates need to develop or possess to fit into the
workplace or become marketable as IS professionals.
10
For Ehlen, van der Klink, Roentgen, Curfs, and Boshuizen (2014, p. 54), employability skills are “the
ability of employees to create new knowledge, in terms of both products and of services, in order to
maintain their market value is crucial”. Jackson (2014, p. 56) states that employability skills mainly
“comprise communication, team working, self-management and problem-solving”. While Singh,
Thambusamy and Ramly (2014, p. 315) claim that critical thinking and problem solving skills are highly
regarded in the educational arena but are not “deemed as vitally important by the employers”. They
(2014, p. 136) argue that the factors that limit employability “have expanded beyond mere academic
qualifications and work experience, to embrace more non-technical or practical work related skills that
facilitate the work process of the establishment”. In broader terms, the employability skills needed by
IS professionals can be divided into five categories. These are having basic job skills and business
knowledge, people skills, behavioural skills or personal qualities, communication skills or
interpersonal qualities, and ability to see the big picture.
Gallup’s study (2013, p. 4) maintains that there is a positive correlation between “student aspiration
and engagement to work quality later in life”. Besides this, they (2013, p. 4) observe that a number of
students develop most of the 21st century skills “they use in their current job outside of school”. In
addition, they state that “those who have high 21st century skill development are twice likely to have
higher work quality compared to those who had low 21st century skill development”. Furthermore, their
study finds out that students reported they use “technology for collaboration, indicating that teaching
strategies are changing in the U.S” (2013, p. 5). However, they caution that “the largest opportunity
may lie with high school graduates who report the lowest levels of overall 21st century skills
development” (2013, p. 5).
As Jackson (2013, p. 275) points out, surprising despite the prominence given to employability skills
in graduate employability models and importance of achieving student ‘buy-in’ to the concept of work-
readiness, there appears to be little empirical evidence of student perception of skill development in
higher education. It is therefore important to study employability skills in order to have a better
understanding of how their lack amongst IS and IM graduates will make them struggle to find and
maintain employment. This study will explore the perceptions of IS and IM postgraduate students to
find out if the IS student’s perceptions are equal to the IM students’ perceptions. The findings will be
compared with concerns of the employers and other professional bodies in the ICT industry, as found
out in the literature evidence, to find if there is correlation or relationship between the student’s
perceptions, and the employers and professional bodies’ perceptions.
The perceptions of IM, and IS and ISM postgraduate students will be sought. These groups of
participants are chosen on the assumption that they are knowledgeable about some of the main
11
employability skills needed to become IT professionals. In addition, their mind set will be on how to
join the workforce, and on graduate schemes to start their careers as IT professionals. The findings
will be compared with the findings from evidence reports in research about employers’ perceptions of
IT students’ employability skills in general. As Gallup (2013, p. 11) puts it, 21st century skills
development should aim to “maximize the potential of each student to achieve success in life and
reach his or her goals”.
Rainer and Turban (2009, p. 6), make distinctions among the terminologies management information
systems (MIS), information technology (IT) and IS. They define MIS as the study that deals with “the
planning for-and development, management, and use of-information technology tools to help people
perform all the tasks related to information processing and management”. IT relates to any “computer-
based tool that people use to work with information and to support the information and information
processing of any organisation (Rainer and Turban; 2009, p. 6). And IS is defined as a “process that
collects, processes, stores, analyzes, and disseminates information for a specific purpose” (Rainer
and Turban; 2009, p. 53).
The findings of this study are expected to inform both IS academics and students about what
knowledge and skills will be expected from IS students when they join the workforce as IT
professionals. The findings would also provide understanding about how the perceptions among
academics, employers, other professional bodies, and students have impact on the employability of
the students. For example, it will give a hint to IS academics about whether they are providing the
necessary level of services to equip their students with the most relevant knowledge and skills
expected by prospective employers. Therefore, obtaining information about the perceptions of
students regarding employability skills may not only reduce the differences between these
perceptions and those of other stakeholders, but also improve working relationships among
employers, other professional bodies, IS academics and students. The Gallup (2013, p. 14) study
reveals that alongside “developing sound 21st century skills, research spearheaded by the Quaglia
Institute finds that student aspirations are key factors of student success”. Quaglia Institute for
Students Aspirations (http://www.qisa.org/), “is an independent, non-profit organisation dedicated to
promoting and putting into practice the conditions that foster student aspirations in schools and
learning communities around the world”.
1.2. Research Aim
This dissertation will explore the issue of employability skills among graduates that has been echoed
by some employers recently and consider its implications for IS graduates. It aims to investigate, and
12
compare with other stakeholders, student perceptions of the most relevant employability skills among
IS graduates. The motivation is to consider the potential impact of their perceptions on employability
outcomes, particularly in the light of gaps in certain graduate skills as they emerged from the literature.
This research topic has been chosen because of the researcher’s professional experience in working
in the ICT industry, the passion that he has developed in working within the ICT industry over the
years, and the desire to understand the differences between postgraduate’s perceptions of the most
relevant employability skills and the perceptions of most employers. Therefore, the main aim of the
research is to gain understanding about what the IS and IM postgraduate students consider to be the
most relevant knowledge and skills needed to become effective IS professionals, as required by the
industry. Industries are constantly improving their business efficiency and productivity, and there is a
general perception from employers and other professional bodies as well as government departments
that the UK is lagging behind in terms of qualified or skilled ICT professionals.
1.3. Significance of the Research
The main purpose of this research is to make a contribution to the perception of the most relevant
employability skills from postgraduate students’ perspective by better understanding what they would
expect the ICT industry to require of them. Despite the recent research interest in employability skills,
there is little research about the perceptions of postgraduate students in general and IS postgraduate
students in particular. Therefore, the significance of this research relates to the understanding of the
differences among employers, professional bodies, on the one hand, and IS postgraduate students
on the other hand, about the most relevant employability skills. As Jackson (2013, p. 273) states, “The
value of acquiring employability skills is now assumed yet whether these skills should be developed
in higher education is still subject to debate”.
This research can provide information that would be applicable to higher education concerning some
of the reasons why there are different perceptions about employability skills by different groups. Such
information can be useful to improve the collaboration in decision-making among employers,
academics and governments about what employability skills would be reasonably expected from a
postgraduate student in general and an IS postgraduate in particular. This research can also be
improved and developed to form a basis for further research into the most relevant employability skills
as perceived by employers, professional bodies, governments, academics, postgraduate students
and new postgraduate employees.
13
1.4. Research Questions
The main research questions will be:
a) What does the literature tells us are the most relevant employability skills for IS graduates as
perceived by employers?
b) What knowledge and skills do IS postgraduate students consider to be useful in the workplace after
students complete their course?
c) What potential conflicts emerge between the employers’ views and those of postgraduate students?
1.5. Research Objectives
The main objectives of this project will be:
a) To review current literature and identify the key employability skills as perceived by employers and
other professional bodies.
b) To investigate perceptions of IS and IM postgraduate students concerning the most relevant
employability skills.
c) To analyse potential conflicts between the employers’ perceptions and those emerging from the
findings of the investigation into postgraduate students’ perceptions.
14
Chapter 2: Review of Related Literature
2.1. Introduction: Employability Skills Categories
Information technology has greatly affected many aspects of life globally. The remarkable speed in
which ICT is evolving has led to rapid changes in the global economy and the challenges that come
with them. This has led most employers to seek IT graduates who have what they consider to be the
right mix of personal qualities and competencies, which can be referred to as employability skills.
Increasingly, around the world, employers and governments are recognising the value of equipping
graduates with the most relevant employability skills. The use of the internet has made entirely new
business models possible and this has led to IS professionals needing to have a set of employability
skills that had not been envisioned before. Rainer and Turban (2009, p. 6) mention that whether one
is working for the public or the private sector, for profit or for not-for-profit, he or she and his or her
organisation will “have to survive and compete in an environment that has been radically changed by
Information Technology”.
There are a significant number of reports and research evidence about the employers and other
professional bodies’ perceptions on employability skills as mentioned in the introduction. A number of
skills were identified as among the most relevant employability skills from the literature review. The
list of employability skills as they emerged from the literature review was further subdivided and
organised with similar kinds of skills being grouped together into categories. As the focus of this study
is primarily the perceptions of IS postgraduate students who will be joining the profession, in selecting
the literature, the focus was on graduates in general who will be suitable as new entrants into IT
Professions. In addition to scholarly literature on the topic, a range of other professional bodies and
government reports were consulted. This investigation aimed to obtain as complete a picture as
possible of the employability skills needed by IS postgraduate students. However, identifying
appropriate skills was problematic because there is little scholarly literature on perceptions of
employability skills by IS postgraduate students.
Tam (2013, p. 755) maintains that very little research or study has been conducted on PVE
[professional and vocational education] graduates”. She emphasises the need to evaluate whether
the education students receive meets the needs of employers and if it has contributed to the building
of a workforce with good communication skills, adaptability, abilities for cooperation, self-learning,
exploration and independent thinking, as well as creativity and other attributes demanded by a
knowledge-based society in the global economy. As Singh, Thambusamy and Ramly (2014) put it
non-technical skills or work-related skills that are most familiar as referred to as soft or generic skills.
15
These comprise of a set of achievements skills, understanding and personal attributes that makes
graduates more likely to gain employment and be successful in their chosen occupations, which
benefits themselves, the workforce, the community and the economy. However, developing these
characteristics requires a cultural change in teaching practice that focuses on the development of
knowledge and skills.
However, a report by NIACE (2009, p. 1) affirms that one of the reasons the United Kingdom is often
cited as underachieving is because of a lack of employability skills such as the skills to gain and keep
employment as well as to progress in a career. Furthermore, a study by Saad, Robani, Jano and
Majid (2013, p. 45) states that “the ability to undertake problem identification, applying problem –
solving, formulation … solutions”, are ranked most by employers. Therefore, it can be inferred that
employers are seeking IS graduates who possess a combination of soft and hard skills. According to
Singh, Thambusamy and Ramly (2014, p. 316), the generic skills that were once considered “value-
added, are no longer an addendum to a graduate’s transcript but have become integral to graduate
employability”.
Drummond, Nixon and Wiltshire (1998, p. 19) in their paper, Personal transferable skills in high
education: the problems of implementation, write that little progress has been made in addressing the
issue of lack of transferable skills, despite a high level of investment. They argue that there is “a lack
of understanding of what constitutes good practice in skills development”. To reinforce this study by
Saad, Robani, Jano and Majid (2013, p. 43) confirms that “the issue of graduate employability affects
every graduate, including engineering and technology-based graduates”. As Drummond, Nixon and
Wiltshire (1998, p. 20) assert, one of the reasons, which contributes to the lack of employability skills
of the majority of graduates is that “many academics are cynical of the arguments being used to
promote the significance of PTS [personal transferable skills] and many have little sympathy for newly
emergent definitions of quality in higher education”.
The report by NIACE (2009, p. 2) cited CBI (2007) states that there are eight top employability skills
that are sought by employers. These are self-management; team working; problem solving;
communication – application of literacy; business awareness; customer care; application of
numeracy; and application of ICT. Additionally, the report mentions that according to McDonalds
(2006), motivation and enthusiasm, team working, oral communication, flexibility/adaptability,
initiative/proactivity, ongoing development, and employability skills/qualities not qualifications are the
most important skills to recruiters. Furthermore, a research conducted by Hagan (2004) about ICT
graduates in Australia as cited by Saad, Robani, Jano and Majid (2013, p. 43) revealed that 40% of
firms that employed those graduates were “not satisfied with the level of mastery of at least two
16
generic skills, i.e. their business management skills and communication skills”. However, many may
argue that without the relevant qualifications, jobseekers will struggle to secure a job, especially in
the current economic crisis which affects global demand for university graduates in the labour market.
As McQuaid and Lindsay (2005, p. 214) put it, “employability implicitly assumes specific types of
demand that may vary across space, time and employers”. However, for the purpose of this study,
and to facilitate an understanding of the relevant employability skills necessary for IS students to
develop in order to become marketable as ICT professionals, these skills will be grouped into seven
categories. These are: basic job skills and business knowledge, technological skills, people skills,
behavioural skills or personal qualities, communication skills or interpersonal qualities, the ability to
“see the big picture”, and global awareness. Each of these categories consists of a number of sub
skills as explained below, but can be put into two broader categories described as hard or technical
skills and soft skills. Saad, Robani, Jano and Majid (2013, p. 45) conclude that equal attention should
be “given to hard or technical skills, as well as to soft skills”, because this will enable employers to
have a “workforce that is multi-tasking and able to execute their responsibilities well”.
Gallup (2013, p. 4) studied the 21st century skills that would “provide the most support for future
success in the workplace”; and how the development of these skills “relates to self-reported work
quality later in life”. They also considered the question of “students across varying education levels
developing 21st century skills in school that will prepare them for today’s knowledge based,
technology-driven, globalized environment”. Furthermore, they raised the question “How does student
aspiration in schools relate to the development of 21st century skills and future work quality”.
2.1.1. Basic Job Skills and Business Knowledge
There are many basic job skills and business knowledge that are relevant to IS students to enable
them become successful in the work place as ICT professionals and work in IT related roles in general.
Some of these are: the ability to learn and apply information literacy effectively; the ability to find and
identify information literacy effectively; the ability to assess information literacy effectively; the ability
to apply literacy and numeracy to business related problems; the ability to critically self-evaluate your
operational performance and others operational performance; the ability to design and conduct
research, as well as to analyse and interpret data; to be able to recognise professional, moral and
ethical issues; to have awareness of the business area as well as having awareness of the business
and organisational complexities.
According to Nik Hairi et al. (2012, p. 103) cited in Singh, Thambusamy and Ramly (2014, p. 316)
from the employers’ perspective employability refers to ‘work readiness’, which includes: possession
17
of skills, knowledge, attitudes and commercial understanding that will enable graduates to make
productive contributions to organizational objectives soon after commencing employment. Therefore,
as Huq and Gilbert (2013, p. 552) states, students should be “taught to not only be competitive but
also cooperative in their approach to learning“. Bastalich, Behrend, and Bloomfield (2014, p. 374)
claim that “Literacy is understood instead as embedded in social practices, signalling that specific
instances of language use are bound up with what people do in the material, social world”.
The internet provides easy access to vast amounts of information and can make life simpler for
individuals on a practical level. However, because it is relatively simple for anyone to create a website
publishing information or post information that can be accessed by others anywhere in the world, this
poses a challenge regarding authenticity and credibility. Therefore, with the abundance of information
available, especially on the internet, it is essential for IS students and graduates to be able to find and
identify sources of information; critically assess and evaluate the accuracy, authenticity, and
relevance of such information; and apply such information appropriately to enhance their learning of
new subject matter or new technologies, and acquire new knowledge and skills.
It is important for individuals to give and receive feedback which may be positive or critical but should
always be constructive for other members of their teams, regardless of their rank or position within an
organisation. Employees need to know how well they are performing in their job. They also need to
receive praise or other forms of acknowledgement for their accomplishments and efforts. If these
guidelines for feedback are exercised appropriately, they would lead to motivating employees and
affect the work output of teams. It can be argued that employees who are well motivated are usually
more willing to put in the extra efforts or time to get a job done to exceed expectations. According to
Shafie and Nayan (2010, p. 119), “fresh graduates need to adapt to the new business environment
and workplace demands” in order to keep pace with global competition. They stress that
“employability skills and traits that are imparted during tertiary education” are key elements in enabling
graduates to keep up with those demands.
2.1.2. Technological Skills
Ability to use and understand and adopt to new technologies; having an in-depth competence in a
programming language; having an in-depth competence in database design and an advance ability
to use Structural Query Language (SQL) to implement or query database; having an in-depth
competency in hardware and networks; and having an in-depth competence modelling business
requirements of a system, could be considered as the most relevant skills among the technological
skills for IS students to develop. According to Phumeechanya and Wannapiroon (2014, p. 4804), a
18
learning model should enable learners “to learn anything anywhere with the aid of portable computer
technology and wireless communication”. It can be argued learning models should emphasize the
‘context-awareness of the learners’ (Phumeechanya and Wannapiroon; 2014, p. 4804).
Since businesses environments can change quickly and with rapid advances in information
technologies, it is important that IS graduates adapt easily to work situations and they should be keen
to learn new technologies. It is therefore fortunate that, in their study regarding employers’ perception
on engineering, Information and Communication (ICT) students’ employability skills, Saad, Robani,
Jano and Majid (2013, p. 43) found that employers were very satisfied with the graduates
employability skills. This does not imply that the ability to continue learning independently to acquire
new knowledge, skills and technologies is not most relevant to IS students. One of the reasons is that
not all IS graduates come from a technical background, but will be expected to have a better
understanding of some technical aspects or the new technologies emerging in the market from time
to time to facilitate them in carrying out their roles and responsibilities effectively in the workplace.
Besides, technology continue to present opportunities for IS professionals to provide services and
interact with their clients in new and different ways, however, it also brings with it several challenges.
Therefore, it is essential they learn continuously and adapt to any new technologies. The impact of IT
is much more than the automation of procedures, providing kinds of resources, or installing new
equipment. It has brought fundamental changes to the way services are provided (Corrall, 2005, p.
26).
2.1.3. People Skills
It can be argued that people skills are among the most relevant employability skills that everyone
should develop regardless of their profession, because no one works in isolation. Thus, whether being
a member of a traditional team or a virtual team, there is always a certain level of interaction with
other people. Effective people skills involve the ability to say the right words and use the right tone at
the right time. Some of the common relevant peoples skills that IS students should possess include:
the ability to function effectively as an individual and in a group; to be able to share knowledge with
colleagues; the ability to use feedback from others to improve your work and performance; the ability
to give feedback to others to help them improve their work and performance as well as to interact
socially with co-workers. As Saad, Robani, Jano and Majid (2013, p. 45) affirm, any employee needs
“to be able to work in teams due to the fact that every individual in an organisation are interconnected
to each other”. In other words Cheruvelil et al. (2014, p. 31) maintain that “When collaborations are
successful, the outcomes surpass any one individual’s accomplishment”. Their study found that
19
successful collaborative teams involve, “positive interdependence of team members, effective
communication, and individual and group accountability (Cheruvelil et al.; 2014, p. 31)
2.1.4. Behavioural Skills or Personal Qualities
Being flexible to accept changes demonstrate ones willingness to cooperate with the changing needs
of one’s supervisor, team members, and the organisation as a whole. Some of the relevant
behavioural skills or personal qualities for IS students to develop or possess include: the ability to
have an adaptable attitude towards work; to be willing and be able to engage in continuous learning
related to work; the ability to continue learning independently in acquisition of new knowledge, skills
and technologies; and the ability to manage time effectively to prioritise activities and meet deadlines.
2.1.5. Communication Skills or Interpersonal Skills
In today’s business one needs to have good interpersonal skills, to communicate effectively with
others, and establish successful business relationships. These abilities could further be split into
ability to orally present ideas with confidence and effectiveness to different audiences; the ability to
present ideas clearly and concisely to different audiences through the written form; the ability to use
fact, information or numbers to support ideas; the ability to exercise independent thought and
judgement; and the ability to plan and execute reports and project work. Beerepoot and Hendricks
(2013, p. 828) maintain that “Communication skills have taken on central importance for jobs in many
branches of service sector”. They argue that the ability to access and then to maintain employment
includes skills such as interpersonal skills, personality and appearance and that these as crucially
significant.
The new social media such as blogs and wikis together with applications such as Google Documents
have made communication and interaction with others easier, providing opportunities for individuals
to share their knowledge, experiences and opportunities. As Cheruvelil et al. (2014) put, high-
performing collaborative teams require members to have good interpersonal skills. These includes
being socially sensitive and emotionally engaged, which positively influence interactions among team
members that then positively influence outcomes.
Cheruvelil et al. (2014, p. 34) quoted findings by Woolley et al. (2010), which state that “measures of
social sensitivity were that the main predicator of group intelligence (i.e. ability to solve problems as
a group), even more so than cognitive intelligence of group members”. On the other hand, Parker and
Heckett (2012) cited in Cheruvelil et al.; 2014, p. 34) argue that “emotional engagement, is sometimes
ignored or undervalued in science, even though emotions are central element of most – if not all –
20
collaborations”. In addition Cheruvelil et al. (2014, p. 34) anticipate in their study that a collaboration
in which the team members work well with and care about each other professionally and personally,
have a shared vision, are excited about the science being conducted, and make that science a top
priority are more effective.
2.1.6. Ability to See the Big Picture
According to Phumeechanya and Wannapiroon (2014, p. 4803), problem-solving skills are vital to
human ways of life. They state that “Human beings are solving problems all the time to achieve their
goals”. Phumeechanya and Wannapiroon (2014, p. 4803) also argue that “the development of
problem-solving skills is necessary and it is the main objective of education management”. To solve
a problem or find an appropriate solution to an issue under investigation, the first thing one needs is
to identify what a problem or an issue is exactly that need solving. Therefore, the ability to undertake
problem identification and to formulate solutions is the most relevant employability skills IS students
or graduates should develop or possess. Some skills relating to the ability to “see the big picture”
include: to be able to analyse information or ideas to draw conclusions about a topic; to be able to
apply concepts learned to different contexts or problems; and to be able to reflect a problem-solving
strategy and change to another strategy if needed. As Phumeechanya and Wannapiroon (2014, p.
4803 - 4804) maintain, any learning process should involve educational institutes encouraging
students “to learning about thinking process, and hold any activity to let students learn from real
experiences, think critically, take action and possess active learning”.
The ability to know how to effectively solve problems and see the big picture will enable one to find
quicker more creative solutions and therefore be more productive. It is arguable that people with
considerable work experience, a great deal of common sense, and a good understanding of a
situation will sometimes rely on their intuition to resolve an issue. This approach could be referred to
as an informal procedure to solve problems or resolve issues. On the other hand, a formal approach
will involve a step by step approach such as to know the problem, define the problem, gather
information, assess and evaluate the information, find an alternative solution, select the most
appropriate solution, apply the solution, and evaluate the results. This more formal approach is useful
for solving more complex problems. Therefore, it could be argued that creativity, logic, intuition and
the ability to see the big picture are all essential attributes of problem solving in the workplace.
21
2.1.7. Global Awareness
Some of the few employability skills under global awareness that IS students or graduates should
develop or possess include: the ability to understand the social, cultural, global and environmental
responsibilities; the ability to work well with people from culturally diverse backgrounds; have
knowledge of other countries or cultures; and to be aware of how the world is connected. In
Introduction to Information Systems: Enabling and Transformation Business, Rainer and Turban
(2009, p. 6) argue that organisational environments are becoming “global, massively instrumental,
intensely competitive, 24/7/365, real time, rapidly changing and information intensive”.
The understanding of global or international issues for IS graduates cannot be underestimated
because today more Information service roles are operated offshore. Beerepoot, and Hendriks (2013,
p. 284) indicate that despite the rapid expansion of employment in developing countries there is a
number of contested issues in the offshore sector such as “complexity of work, quality of employment
and long-term prospects of work”. Therefore, as many IT related jobs are on contract basis, global
awareness has become more relevant to IS graduates employability than it ever was before.
2.2. Relevant Research
In the last decade, unemployment among graduates has become a major issue of concern in many
countries, and employability skills have become one of the top agendas in higher education
institutions in some countries such as Malaysia (Beerepoot, and Hendriks, 2013) and Australia (Huq
and Gilbert, 2013). Recent research has suggested that most employers’ expectations of graduates
have not been met. Although there is lot of a research interest in employability skills there is little
research done on the perception of the graduates in general and IS postgraduates in particular.
Therefore, this study will use some of the research findings about employability skills in the last five
years as its basis.
According to Drummond, Nixon and Wiltshire (1998, p. 19), “Higher education institutions throughout
the UK are currently under a great deal of pressure to develop abilities in their students that are, in
some way, transferable to contexts outside of their academic field of study”. For example, Tam (2013)
referring to Education Commission (2000a) and Mok (2003) states that:
in order for Hong Kong to ensure and maintain its competitiveness in the global economy, it
needs an effective education system that will produce talented people who are good learners,
articulate, creative, adaptive, critical and capable of lifelong learning.
22
(p. 741).
Xie, Zhong, Wang and Lim (2013, p. 1) assert that “Higher-education institutions are increasingly
being asked to provide evidence of their effectiveness, especially in terms of students’ learning
outcomes”. They adopted a model known as ‘The Rasch modelling approach’ to assess the
development and validation of seven generic competences of undergraduates’ students. Students
were asked to assess their own achievements across an undergraduate-degree programme in seven
generic competences. These are problem-solving skills, critical-thinking skills, creative-thinking skills,
ethical decision-making skills, effective communication skills, social interaction skills and global
perspective.
It should be noted that the above model will not be appropriate to assess the development and
validation of employability skills among postgraduate students because of the intensity of their
programme and the time they spend to complete it. A study by Xie, Zhong, Wang and Lim (2013)
explain, among students across an undergraduate-degree programme concluded that:
… changes from the entry to the final year, if there are any, may be confounded by cohort
differences among student groups. As cohort differences could not be separated from changes
over time, [they] were unable to accurately estimate the extent to which students’ generic skills
had changed while proceeding with their educational journey.
(p. 12).
Gallup (2013, p. 4) in their study commissioned by Microsoft Partners in Learning and The Pearson
Foundation, identified and defined skills that are demanded of 21st Century workers to include:
“collaboration, knowledge construction, problem solving and innovation, self-regulation, the use of
technology for learning, and skilled communication”. Whereas, Drummond, Nixon and Wiltshire
(1998, p. 19) emphasise that, universities should know “how change is most effectively promoted and
managed”, in order to facilitates effective development of employability skills. They argue that
“effective skills development is difficult, if not impossible, to achieve in a system of teaching which is
fundamentally based on lectures (1998, p. 20)”. If their assumption is accurate, it can be inferred that
higher education needs to shift from lecturer-led approach to student-centred learning. According to
Huq and Gilbert (2013, p. 552), a number of studies on the potential of work-based learning (WBL) to
“enhance undergraduate skills have identified that students participating in experimental or WBL
exhibit a number of critical skills employers demand“. These include among others “maturity and
emotional intelligence, and team-building, negotiation, communication and interpersonal skills“(Huq
and Gilbert; 2013, p. 552).
23
2.3. Concluding remarks
It can be urged that most employers at all levels, and in particular those seeking IS graduates, want
them to have a range of skills in addition to their academic qualifications. For example, understanding
more about their personality will help them to recognise the way in which they are likely to approach
different situations and those where they might have to change their preferences to work more
effectively. Robinson (2000, p. 1) categorises employability skills into three sets: “basic academic
skills, higher order thinking skills [and] personal qualities”. Therefore, IS graduates will need to be
able to demonstrate and give examples of their skills and qualities when completing application forms
and answering interview questions.
A study by Papadopoulos and Armatas (2013, p. 93) shows that “Learners are motivated by structured
and tailored experiences that provide a strong alignment between the curriculum and professional
practice, providing opportunities for both personal and professional development”. A report by UK
Commission for Employment and Skills (UKCES) (2009, p. 4), emphasises that although there are
“learning providers of all kinds who recognised that in a competitive and globalising labour market,
their duty to students has to go beyond teaching specific knowledge and vocational skills”, there are
some who have different perceptions. For example, it cited that some institutions state that it is not
their role to teach ‘employability skills’. The report states that some institutions “cited apparent
unwillingness of employers to co-operate as a stumbling block” to their ability to deliver the relevant
‘employability skills’. In contrast, research findings by Lowden, Hall, Elliot and Lewin (2011, p. iii),
shows that “employers feel ignored” by Higher Education Institutions.
This study will contribute to the current literature on employability for postgraduates in general and IS
postgraduate in particular. It will also inform IS academics and curricula planners on whether there is
a need to incorporate or design some courses that would meet IT employers’ demands. For example,
IS academics might consider how to adapt or adjust some course materials and delivery methods that
would meet or exceed IT employers’ expectations. Gallup (2013, p. 4) claims that “students’
development of 21st century skills combined with student aspiration in education are the keys to
unlocking individuals’ future potential in the work place”.
24
Chapter 3: Research Methodology
This Chapter discusses the methodology and methods used for data collection. It also gives a brief
description of the techniques used for reviewing literature, sampling and data analysis. As Davies
(2007, p. 25) writes, after identifying research question(s), a researcher will have to make a critical
decision regarding ‘methodological route’. As mentioned in Chapter 1, the idea to study employability
skills among IM and IS postgraduate students came from concerns surfacing in the media and
constant reports stating that most graduates lack the most relevant skills to meet current employers’
needs. In order to validate this perception and justify that this is a feasible area of research, a literature
review was carried out.
First, a literature review was carried out through StarPlus, the University of Sheffield library catalogue,
using the phrase employability skills, and eight items were returned. Second, the same search
criterion was applied at Mendeley, a free reference manager and about 270,000 items were returned.
To narrow down the search, an advance search option was conducted for relevant journal articles
published within the last five years and about 204,000 journal were returned. Finally, the search
criterion was restricted to Open Access articles only that contained the phrase employment skills
anywhere within the journal articles, which were published within the last five years, and about 20,000
papers were returned. Skimming through the first page of the returned articles, an article titled
“Employers’ perception on engineering, information and communication technology (ICT) students’
employability skills” by Saad, Robani, Jano and Majid (2013), was found to be closely related to this
research focus.
After reading the above mentioned article in detail and discussing the feasibility of this research topic
with the supervisor, another article titled “21st Century Skills and Workplace: A 2013 Microsoft partners
in learning and Pearson Foundation Study” by Gallup (2013), was considered to be most appropriate.
Therefore, these two articles have been used as the basis of this research. In addition, the supervisor
advised the use of Google Scholar in conjunction with Mendeley and StarPlus for a further literature
review involving an investigation into employability skills in general. This approach, a literature review
carried out using several search criteria, was considered to be the most appropriate for the research
questions investigated here. Using this approach meant that the necessary data could be collected
more comprehensively and quickly.
Davies (2014) outlines some of the aims of research as to measure, understand and evaluate.
Therefore, the chosen methodology is a descriptive study that uses quantitative method of data
collection and analysis. It is a deductive and interpretative approach based on a survey among IM,
25
and IS and ISM postgraduate students. Deductive refers to perceptions or remarks about
employability skills among employers, other professional bodies, and the IM, and IS and ISM
postgraduate students, whereas quantitative research methods, as Grix (2010, p. 32) describes, are
concerned with amount and calculating or measuring of data. According to Stevenson (2000) in
Burton (2000, p. 28), a good interpretation should fit or suit the meaning of the social group being
studied.
A quantitative method is considered more suitable because this study is focusing on pre-existing
concepts, whereby a few skills about employability are considered to statistically predicate the
occurrence in a wider population of graduates. According to Davies (2007, p. 9), quantitative research
facilitates the discovery of answers to questions through the application of scientific procedures.
Therefore, deductive reasoning works from general to more specific. It is important to note that when
carrying survey research based on questionnaires, as it is with any other method, selecting a sample
of appropriate nature and sufficient size is essential (Bell, 2010).
The survey instrument, in the form of questionnaires was used to elicit IM, and IS and ISM
postgraduate students’ perceptions about the most relevant employability skills that are necessary for
IS students to become effective ICT or IS professionals. The questionnaires were mixture of Likert
scale and open-ended questions. The Likert scale response sets ranged from 1 (not important) to 5
(very important). The open-ended questions enabled the participants to add their opinions, comments
or suggestions about some other employability skills that they thought was not most relevant, as well
as those that are most relevant but not identified in the literature review.
A survey was considered to be one of the most appropriate research approaches, because it
enhances understanding, reaches many participants at a relatively low cost, is relatively quick, and
survey methods provide probability sampling from large populations. A questionnaire is the main
means of collecting quantitative primary data. It enables quantitative data to be collected in a
standardized way so that the data are internally consistent and coherent for analysis. According to
Bell (2010, p. 12), “If a survey is well structured and piloted, it can be a relatively clear and quick way
of obtaining information”. Although cost was the major determining factor for selecting a survey based
on a questionnaire, there are other reasons why a questionnaire is considered to be more appropriate
to this study. These includes:
There will be a limited effect on its validity and reliability.
Questionnaires can usually be quickly and easily quantified by either a researcher or through the use
of a software package, and the collected data be analysed more 'scientifically' and objectively than
other forms of research.
26
The participants will be busy during the time of data collection, and this area of study is not a very
sensitive one that would require prompt questions as in interview technique.
The exact same instrument can be administrated to a wider number of people.
It allows respondents to complete it at their own convenience.
Large amount of information can be collected from a large number of people in a short period of time
and in relatively cost effective way.
Therefore, the research is aimed to obtain as many responses as possible, and the fact that the
questionnaire will be a mixture of Likert Scale and Open-ended questions will compensate for some
of the weaknesses of a questionnaire technique. Although quantified data can be used to compare
and contrast other research, as well as to create new theories or test existing hypothesises, there are
a number of limitations. For example, response rates for mail surveys are often very low, and they
are not suitable for detailed written responses. Therefore, for the purpose of this study, printed copies
of the questionnaires were used to encourage responses. However, there are still other limitations
which include:
A questionnaire can only ask a limited amount of information.
There is no means of assessing how truthful a respondent has been.
It is difficult to know how much thought a respondent has put in answering the questionnaire.
It is difficult to assess if a respondent has been forgetful or thinking within a full context of the situation.
Response rates for many surveys are often very low.
This format is not suitable for detailed written responses.
A questionnaire may ask only a limited amount of information without explanation.
The respondent may be forgetful or not thinking within the full context of the situation.
Respondent may read differently into each question and therefore reply based on their own
interpretation of the question.
There is a level of researcher imposing meaning in that when designing the questionnaire, the
researcher is making decisions and assumptions as to what is and is not important. Therefore, there
is a level of subjectivity that is not acknowledged by both respondent and researcher.
The research sample was IM, IS and ISM postgraduate students. An opportunist method was applied
whereby the questionnaires were administered during a lecture which most of the students from these
three programmes were attending. Out of the 55 students who attended that lecture 47 responses
were obtained, which is a very good rate. The sample were required to rank the most relevant
employability skills for IS students using the Likert scale of 1 to 5 with 1 being not important and 5
very important. The Likert scale items were created based on the information and understanding
27
gained from the literature review. Although Likert scale measure is one-dimensional in nature, a Social
Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) make it easier to code and analyse the data, as well as compute
the aggregate employability skills.
The data obtained was analysed using SPSS and tabulated to make it easier to view and interpret.
Descriptive statistics were applied to determine the extent of similarities and differences about the
predicted tentative statement from the literature findings. According to Egghe and Rousseau (2001,
p. 22), descriptive statistics enable us to present data “in a smooth, streamlined way so that
conclusions are easy to draw”. They maintain that the main aim of descriptive statistics is “to
understand and tell something about the data itself”. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the
basic features of the data in the study. Together with simple graphical analysis, they formed the basis
of this quantitative data analysis of the data.
This study started with a general statement as it emerged from the literature review, and examined
the possibilities to reach specific, logical conclusions. In other words, it enabled the evaluation of
employers and professionals bodies perceptions of the most relevant employability skills, and
compared with the perceptions of IM, and IS and ISM postgraduate students, in order to reach
specific, logical conclusions.
Figure 1: Relationships about the different stakeholder perceptions of employability skills.
Employability Skills Perceptions
IM Students
Employers IS and ISM Students
Assumption is Employers’ Perceptions = IM postgraduate students’ Perceptions = IS
and ISM postgraduate Students’ Perceptions (Source: This author).
28
The factual data collected from the IM, and IS and ISM postgraduate students about their perceptions
of employability skills will be used to confirm or refute the reports and research evidence about
employers and other professional bodies’ perceptions. The researcher is aware as Grix (2010, p. 129)
asserts that “Questionnaires are most effective when used in conjunction with other methods,
especially one or more varieties of the interview technique”. The no observation and non-response
that can distort the sample when individuals refuse to respond, and coverage of the population, which
may be inadequate due to a poor sampling have been taken into consideration. In addition, as Smith
(2000) in Burton (2000, p. 9) postulates, individuals interpret their “observations in light of biases,
preconceptions, hypothesises and theories”.
The data were gathered with the intention to identify perceptions against which existing perceptions
can be compared, and to determine the relationship that exists between them to reach a conclusion.
As the individuals that participated in this survey did so voluntarily, the questionnaire was considered
to be suitable, because most of the students were busy during the time of conducting the survey. In
addition, a questionnaire will help in engaging their interest, encouraging their co-operation and
drawing answers as close as possible to their perceptions about the most relevant employability skills
for IS graduates. The evidence based on statistical probabilities among employers, other professional
bodies, IM postgraduate students, and IS and ISM postgraduate students will be assumed to apply
to the most relevant employability skills for IS graduates. The methodology started with a tentative
statement that most IS graduates lack the most relevant skills as perceived by employers and other
IT professional bodies. Therefore, the null hypothesis states that there is no difference between the
employers and the IS postgraduate students.
29
Chapter 4: Results and Discussion
4.1. Introduction
As mentioned in earlier chapters, employability skills among graduates have become a hot topic of
debate and an area of significant research interest during the last decade. The national polices of
many countries and the perceptions of employers of the most relevant employability skills expected
of graduates from education perspectives at university level has inevitably made a great impact on
national education systems, and the status of Higher Institutions of Learning (HIL). While the global
perceptions of employability skills have been taking place via national policies, HIL and other
professional bodies, a further question is how postgraduate students perceive and what responses
are made by them on the most relevant employability skills. Therefore, through Likert Scales
questions questionnaire and 2 opened ended questions, the perceptions of IM, IS and ISM
postgraduate students of the most relevant employability skills will be investigated in this study.
4.2. Sampling
55 questionnaires were administered to postgraduate IM, IS and ISM students during a lecture and
47 students responded. The responses were then coded by age and core programme. There were
32 under the age of 25 years, and 15 aged 25 and over. The distribution by programme is as follows:
12 IM, 24 IS and 11 ISM.
4.3. Data analysis
The focus of the analysis was on the seven categories of the employability skills as they emerged
from the literature review rather than the individual 36 elements of employability skills. As mentioned
in Chapter 3, the variables of categorical data were converted to continuous data by aggregating the
responses collected for each category of employability skills. Instead of three different groups, the
personal status was rerecorded to two groups as IM, and IS and ISM.
A descriptive analysis was then carried to determine the mean ranking among categories within each
core programme group and the output of the SPSS were compared between the two groups of
students. According to Beerepoot and Hendricks (2013, p. 827), a range of jobs that workers have
access are enhanced by the link between employability skills and multiple skills. They argued that
“skills acquired during service work are often not recognized as such given the difficult identification
of skills in service work”. It can be argued that Information and Communication Technology (ICT)
30
should cater to the needs of society and provide creative and innovative solutions to human problems
or issues. After many years of vigorous research and development, Information Technology is at the
point where users and potential users are almost universally aware that it is what they need that is
crucial. However, comparatively a few people actually know what Information and knowledge they
need, and how to capitalise on this lack of knowledge by labelling their product anyway either of
ignorance out of a deliberate attempt to mislead.
4.3.1. Descriptive Statistic Analysis
As one of the objectives of this study is to identify those employability skills that render a graduate
employable according to the perceptions of employers and IS postgraduate students, the data
obtained was tabulated according to the mean scores and standard deviation generated through the
Likert Scale responses to the items in the questionnaire. The tables below (Table 1 to table 6) present
both the IM, and ARE and ISM postgraduates’ perceptions ranked in order of importance to facilitate
comparison of the findings, with 1 being not important and 5 the most important. These tables present
the findings which cover the first and second objectives of this study. The five top employability skills
have been highlighted.
Table 1 and table 2, show the summary of the descriptive statistics outputs of the SPSS for all those
who responded to the questionnaire. They show that the postgraduate students considered managing
time effectively to meet deadlines, functioning effectively in a group, critically self-evaluation, planning
and executing report and project work, and using feedback from other people as the five most relevant
employability skills for IS students to develop to become marketable as ICT professionals. On the
other hand, they consider critically evaluating other people, knowledge of other countries or cultures,
competence in database design, competence in hardware and networks, and competence in
programme as the least relevant employability skills needed by IS students. This is not surprising
because IS students and professionals are more concerned with software applications of computing
rather than coding or hardware components.
In comparison, functioning effectively as an individual, being flexible or having adaptable attitude
towards work, presenting ideas clearly and concisely in writing, learning independently to acquire
knowledge, skills and technology, and finding information literacy are considered to be the average
relevant skills that are necessary for IS Students. This is surprising because as it emerged from the
literature review, the employers considered communication and interpersonal skills to be the most
relevant employability skills. One of the reasons is because such skills are transferable and can be
applied in various situations and in a number of industries.
31
Table 1: Frequency distributions analysis of perception of employability skills by postgraduate
students
Descriptive Statistics
Rank Employability skills N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.
Deviation
Variance
1 Manage time effectively to meet deadlines. 47 3 5 4.57 .580 .337
2 Function effectively in a group. 47 2 5 4.47 .776 .602
3 Critically self-evaluation. 47 3 5 4.43 .683 .467
4 Plan and execute report and project work. 47 3 5 4.40 .648 .420
5 Use feedback from other people. 47 3 5 4.38 .677 .459
6 Present ideas orally with confidence and
effectiveness.
47 3 5 4.36 .735 .540
7 Share knowledge with colleagues. 47 3 5 4.36 .705 .497
8 Engage in continuous learning related to work. 47 3 5 4.34 .760 .577
9 Problem identification and solution formulation. 47 3 5 4.32 .695 .483
10 Understand and adopt new technologies. 47 3 5 4.28 .772 .596
11 Use fact, information or numbers to support ideas. 47 1 5 4.23 .890 .792
12 Reflect and change on problem-solving strategy. 47 3 5 4.23 .729 .531
13 Identify information literacy. 47 2 5 4.21 .883 .780
14 Analyse information to draw conclusions. 47 2 5 4.21 .832 .693
15 Competence modelling business requirements. 47 2 5 4.21 .778 .606
16 Function effectively as an individual. 47 2 5 4.19 .711 .506
17 Flexible or adaptable attitude towards work. 47 2 5 4.17 .816 .666
18 Present ideas clearly and concisely in writing. 47 3 5 4.17 .702 .492
32
Table 2: Frequency distributions analysis of perception of employability skills by postgraduate
students cont.
Descriptive Statistics Rank
Employability skills N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.
Deviation
Variance
19 Learn independently to acquire
new knowledge, skills and
technology.
47 2 5 4.17 .842 .710
20 Find information literacy. 47 2 5 4.15 .834 .695
21 Design and conduct research. 47 2 5 4.15 .807 .651
22 Interact socially with co-workers. 47 1 5 4.13 .947 .896
23 Recognise professional, moral
and ethical issues.
47 2 5 4.13 .824 .679
24
Work well with cultural diverse
background people. 47 2 5 4.11 .866 .749
25
Understand social, cultural, global
and environmental
responsibilities.
47 3 5 4.11 .759 .575
26 Exercise independent thought and
judgement.
47 3 5 4.09 .717 .514
27 Learn and apply literacy. 47 2 5 4.06 .818 .670
28 Give feedback to other people. 47 2 5 4.06 .870 .757
29 Assess information literacy. 47 1 5 4.06 1.030 1.061
30 Awareness of business and
organisation complexities.
47 1 5 4.04 .859 .737
31 Apply concepts learned to
different problems.
47 2 5 4.04 .806 .650
32 Critically evaluate others. 47 2 5 3.85 .751 .564
33 Knowledge of other countries or
cultures.
47 2 5 3.79 .977 .954
34 Competence in database design. 47 1 5 3.51 1.061 1.125
35 Competence in hardware and
networks.
47 1 5 3.51 .953 .907
36 Competence in programming. 47 1 5 3.45 1.119 1.253
Valid N (listwise) 47
33
A study by Buntat, Jabor, Saud, Mansor and Mustaffa (2013, p. 1533) find that employers perceive
honesty, cooperating with others, using technology instruments and information systems effectively,
making decisions and managing time as the top most relevant employability skills they sought from
graduates. In a separate study by Saad, Robani, Jano and Majid (2013, p. 44) among undergraduate’s
engineering, and Information and Communication Technology (ICT) students, they found out that the
employers perceived the ability to undertake problem identification, apply problem-solving,
formulations and solutions; the ability to use techniques, skills and modern engineering/ICT tools; the
ability to present ideas with confidence and effectiveness; the ability to function effectively as an
individual and in a group; and the ability to acquire and apply knowledge of engineering/ICT
fundamental as the most relevant employability skills.
The five lower ranking employability skills as perceived by the IS postgraduate’s students are
competence in programming, competence in hardware and networks, competence in database
design, knowledge of other cultures, and the ability to critically evaluate others. They rank functioning
effectively as an individual, being flexible or have an adaptable attitude towards work, the ability to
present ideas clearly and concisely in writing, the ability to learn independently to acquire new
knowledge, skills and technology, the ability to find information literacy and design and conduct
research are characteristics of a mid-rank employee. Surprising Buntat, Jabor, Saud, Mansor and
Mustaffa (2013, p. 1533) rank lower the ability to act positively toward change, the ability to work in a
team and the ability to be creative as the employability skills sought by employers from graduates.
However, Saad, Robani, Jano and Majid (2013, p. 44) rank having basic entrepreneurial skills; having
competency in theoretical and research engineering/ICT, the ability to understand the social cultural,
global and environmental responsibilities; the ability to recognise the need to undertake life-long
learning and possessing/acquiring the capacity to do so; and the ability to acquire in-depth technical
competence in specific engineering/ICT discipline as the employability skills sought by employers in
various sectors.
However, when considering each category of the employability skills independently, there seem to be
mixed results. A study by Singh, Thambusamy and Ramly (2014, p. 316) finds that the main reasons
for non-employability are ‘strongly related to the lack of generic skills’. According to the latter, “it can
be assume that the pattern may be strongly correlated to some of the dissonance between employers’
expectations and what HLIs [Higher Learning Institutions] are offering the students”.
Table 3, shows summary of frequencies distributions analysis of the employability skills as perceived
by the postgraduate students. It is clear from these results that the students considered technological
skills as the lower ranking employability skills they need to develop.
34
Table 3: Frequencies distributions analysis of perception of the most relevant employability
skills of postgraduate students by employability category.
Employability skills category
Valid Missing Mean Median Mode Std.
Deviation
Ability to see the big picture 47 0 16.81 17.00 18.00 2.52
Basic job skills and business
knowledge
47 0 37.09 38.00 41.00 4.63
Behavioural skills or personal
qualities
47 0 17.26 18.00 18.00 2.22
Communication skills or
interpersonal skills
47 0 21.26 21.00 25.00 2.80
Global awareness 47 0 12.00 12.00 13.00 2.09
People skills 47 0 25.60 26.00 28.00 3.74
Technological skills 47 0 19.96 19.00 19.00 3.25
Table 4, shows the mean, median and standard deviation of the perception of the most relevant
employability skills by postgraduate students. Among the IM postgraduate students the mean of basic
job skills and business knowledge has the higher value (37.75) and the global awareness has the
lower value (13.00). Likewise among the IS and ISM postgraduate students the basic job skills and
business knowledge has the higher value (36.86) and global awareness has the lower value (11.66).
35
Table 4: Mean, median and standard deviation comparison between perceptions of IM, and IS
and ISM of postgraduate students by employability category.
Employability skills
Group Core Programme
Information Management Information Systems and Information
Systems Management
Mean Median Standard
Deviation
Mean Median Standard Deviation
People skills 27.25 28.00 2.14 25.03 25.00 3.29
Technological skills 19.83 20.50 3.69 18.66 19.00 3.09
Global awareness 13.00 13.00 2.22 11.66 12.00 1.95
Basic job skills and
business knowledge
37.75 39.00 4.69 36.86 37.00 4.65
Behavioural skills or
personal qualities
17.92 18.00 1.83 17.03 18.00 2.32
Ability to see the big
picture
17.42 18.00 2.19 16.60 17.00 2.61
Communication skills or
interpersonal qualities
23.08 23.50 1.93 20.63 21.00 2.79
Table 5 and Table 6, show a summary of frequency distributions analysis outputs of the SPSS for
perceptions of the most relevant employability skills of postgraduate students by age. As mentioned
earlier there were 32 students who are under the age of 25 years, and 15 students aged 25 and over
who responded to the questionnaire.
Table 5: Frequency distributions analysis of postgraduate students by age.
Descriptive Statistics Employability skills Mean Std. Deviation N
Ability to see the big picture 16.8085 2.51637 47
Basic job skills and business knowledge 37.0851 4.62897 47
Behavioural skills or personal qualities 17.2553 2.22112 47
Communication skills or interpersonal
qualities
21.2553 2.79338 47
36
Table 6: Frequency distributions analysis of postgraduate students by age Cont.
Descriptive Statistics Employability skills Mean Std. Deviation N
Global awareness 12.0000 2.08514 47
People skills 25.5957 3.17367 47
Technological skills 18.9574 3.25013 47
Age at questionnaire 1.32 .471 47
Table 7, shows a summary of frequency distributions analysis outputs of the SPSS for perceptions of
postgraduate students by group core programme. As mentioned earlier there were 12 IM
postgraduate students, and 35 IS and ISM postgraduate students who responded to the
questionnaire.
Table 7: Frequency distributions responses of postgraduate students by grouped core
programme.
Group Core Programme
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Valid
Information Management 12 25.5 25.5 25.5
Information Systems and
Information Systems
Management
35 74.5 74.5 100.0
Total 47 100.0 100.0
Table 8, shows a summary of frequency distributions analysis outputs of the SPSS for perceptions of
postgraduate students by grouped core programme. Of the 12 IM postgraduate students, and 35 IS
and ISM postgraduate students who responded to the questionnaire, basic job skills and business
knowledge has the highest mean value (37.08), and global awareness has the lowest mean value
(12.00).
37
Table 8: Frequency distributions analysis of postgraduate students by grouped core
programme.
Statistics Ability to
see the
big
picture
Basic job
skills and
business
knowledge
Behavioural
skills or
personal
qualities
Communicatio
n skills or
interpersonal
qualities
Global
awareness
People
skills
Technologi
cal skills
Group Core
Programme
N Valid 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47
Missing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mean 16.8085 37.0851 17.2553 21.2553 12.0000 25.5957 18.9574 1.74
Median 17.0000 38.0000 18.0000 21.0000 12.0000 26.0000 19.0000 2.00
Mode 18.00a 41.00 18.00 25.00 13.00 28.00 19.00a 2
Std.
Deviation
2.51637 4.62897 2.22112 2.79338 2.08514 3.17367 3.25013 .441
Variance 6.332 21.427 4.933 7.803 4.348 10.072 10.563 .194
Range 8.00 20.00 8.00 10.00 8.00 12.00 16.00 1
Minimum 12.00 25.00 12.00 15.00 7.00 18.00 9.00 1
Maximum 20.00 45.00 20.00 25.00 15.00 30.00 25.00 2
a. Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown
It is not surprising that this study and the study by Saad, Robani, Jano and Majid (2013, p. 44) reveal
that the technological skills are perceived to rank lower among the most relevant employability skills
sought by employers from graduates. As one of the students put it the relevance of technological skills
depends of the area of specialisation or the subject a student is undertaking. While another student
states that “business awareness, cultural [awareness], independent learning and team work” are more
important than the ability of programming. In contrast, anecdotally one student proclaimed that IS
postgraduate’s students mainly focus on technology and skills to solve some specific problems rather
than being aware of global issues.
In addition, the two studies are in agreement that global awareness rank low as well among the most
relevant employability skills. However, many may argue that being aware of other cultures or countries
norms is very significant in the IT industry as most companies do outsource some or all of their IT
technical support. There are a number of reasons why the IS postgraduate students rank low global
awareness in general and the knowledge of other cultures in particular. For example, one student
perceives being aware of details during a project to be the more relevant than global awareness.
According to this student “global awareness is important for global firms but not essential to many
38
local companies”. Therefore, according to this student it is a good to pay less attention to on global
issues as it is not that relevant for IS postgraduate’s students.
Furthermore, this study reveals that few students perceive creativity; understanding the customer’s
needs, manager’s needs and requirements; being able to find boundaries between one’s personal life
and work life; being able to address security concerns with the clients; the ability to apply one’s
knowledge of IS to other disciplines which might be related to one’s work such as ‘business data
analysis’; the ability to have a concept of the whole project or system when dealing with a specific
problem that could increase the effectiveness of their job; requirement analysis; communication skills
including presentation skills and conversation skills; the ability to get on well with managers; and the
ability to be sensitive about information or data as among the most relevant employability skills.
The study by Saad, Robani, Jano and Majid (2013, p. 45) shows that the highest ranked employability
skills the various employers are satisfied with are: the ability to continue learning independently in the
acquisition of new knowledge, skills and technology; the ability to function effectively as an individual
and in a group with the capacity to be a leader and effective team member; the ability to recognize
the need to understand life-long learning and possessing/acquiring the capacity to do so; the ability
to acquire and apply knowledge of engineering/ICT tools; and the ability to undertake problem
identification, apply problem-solving, formulation and solutions. On the other hand the employers
were less satisfied with the students having basic entrepreneurial skills; the ability to design and
conduct experiments, as well as to analyses and interpret data; having competency in theoretical and
research engineering/ICT; the ability to utilise a systematic approach to design and evaluate
operational performance; and the ability to use techniques, skills and modern engineering/ICT tools.
It can be noted that most of the relevant employability skills sought by employers as they perceive
them are directly opposite to those employability skills that the students possess.
Table 9 to Table 15, show the distribution frequency analysis of the outputs of the SPSS for
employability skills by grouped core programme. The results of the means show that there are some
slight differences between the perception of the most relevant employability skills by IM, and IS and
ISM students as follows: the ability to see the big picture, IM = 17.42, and IS and ISM = 16.60; for the
basic job skills and business knowledge, IM = 37.75, and IS and ISM = 36.86; for the people skills,
IM = 27.25, and IS and ISM = 25.03; for the global awareness, IM = 13.00, and IS and ISM = 11.66;
for the behavioural skills or personal qualities, IM = 17.92, and IS and ISM = 17.03; for the
communication skills or interpersonal qualities, IM = 23.08, and IS and ISM = 20.63; and for
technological skills, IM = 19.83, and IS and ISM = 18.66. These results show that the means for IM
students are slightly higher than those for IS and ISM students.
39
Table 9: Frequency distributions analysis of perception of postgraduate students by grouped
core programme
Descriptives
Employability Skill Group Core Programme Statistic Std. Error
Ability to see the big picture
IM
Mean 17.4167 .63315
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Lower Bound 16.0231
Upper Bound 18.8102
5% Trimmed Mean 17.5741
Median 18.0000
Variance 4.811
Std. Deviation 2.19331
Minimum 12.00
Maximum 20.00
Range 8.00
Interquartile Range 2.75
Skewness -1.510 .637
Kurtosis 2.523 1.232
Is and
ISM
Mean 16.6000 .44192
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Lower Bound 15.7019
Upper Bound 17.4981
5% Trimmed Mean 16.6667
Median 17.0000
Variance 6.835
Std. Deviation 2.61444
Minimum 12.00
Maximum 20.00
Range 8.00
Interquartile Range 4.00
Skewness -.256 .398
40
Table 10: Frequency distributions analysis of perception of postgraduate students by grouped
core programme cont.
Descriptives Employability Skills Group Core Programme Statistic Std. Error
Basic job skills and business knowledge
IM
Mean 37.7500 1.35471
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Lower Bound 34.7683
Upper Bound 40.7317
5% Trimmed Mean 38.1667
Median 39.0000
Variance 22.023
Std. Deviation 4.69284
Minimum 25.00
Maximum 43.00
Range 18.00
Interquartile Range 4.50
Skewness -1.996 .637
Kurtosis 4.958 1.232
IS and ISM
Mean 36.8571 .78659
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Lower Bound 35.2586
Upper Bound 38.4557
5% Trimmed Mean 37.0079
Median 37.0000
Variance 21.655
Std. Deviation 4.65354
Minimum 26.00
Maximum 45.00
Range 19.00
Interquartile Range 7.00
Skewness -.390 .398
Kurtosis -.502 .778
41
Table 11: Frequency distributions analysis of perception of postgraduate students by grouped
core programme cont.
Descriptives Employability Skill Group Core Programme Statistic Std. Error
Behavioural skills or personal qualities
IM
Mean 17.9167 .52884
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Lower Bound 16.7527
Upper Bound 19.0806
5% Trimmed Mean 18.0741
Median 18.0000
Variance 3.356
Std. Deviation 1.83196
Minimum 13.00
Maximum 20.00
Range 7.00
Interquartile Range 1.75
Skewness -1.770 .637
Kurtosis 4.728 1.232
IS and ISM
Mean 17.0286 .39212
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Lower Bound 16.2317
Upper Bound 17.8255
5% Trimmed Mean 17.1429
Median 18.0000
Variance 5.382
Std. Deviation 2.31981
Minimum 12.00
Maximum 20.00
Range 8.00
Interquartile Range 2.00
Skewness -.726 .398
Kurtosis -.115 .778
42
Table 12: Frequency distributions analysis of perception of postgraduate students by grouped
core programme cont.
Descriptives Employability Skill Group Core Programme Statistic Std
Communication skills or interpersonal
qualities
IM
Mean 23.0833 .55675
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Lower Bound 21.8579
Upper Bound 24.3087
5% Trimmed Mean 23.2037
Median 23.5000
Variance 3.720
Std. Deviation 1.92865
Minimum 19.00
Maximum 25.00
Range 6.00
Interquartile Range 3.00
Skewness -.779 .637
Kurtosis .025 1.232
IS and ISM
Mean 20.6286 .47116
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Lower Bound 19.6711
Upper Bound 21.5861
5% Trimmed Mean 20.6984
Median 21.0000
Variance 7.770
Std. Deviation 2.78743
Minimum 15.00
Maximum 25.00
Range 10.00
Interquartile Range 5.00
Skewness -.188 .398
Kurtosis -.696 .778
43
Table 13: Frequency distributions analysis of perception of postgraduate students by grouped
core programme cont.
Descriptives Employability Skills Group Core Programme Statistic Std. Error
Global awareness
IM
Mean 13.0000 .63960
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Lower Bound 11.5922
Upper Bound 14.4078
5% Trimmed Mean 13.2222
Median 13.0000
Variance 4.909
Std. Deviation 2.21565
Minimum 7.00
Maximum 15.00
Range 8.00
Interquartile Range 1.75
Skewness -1.986 .637
Kurtosis 4.872 1.232
IS and ISM
Mean 11.6571 .33038
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Lower Bound 10.9857
Upper Bound 12.3285
5% Trimmed Mean 11.6746
Median 12.0000
Variance 3.820
Std. Deviation 1.95453
Minimum 8.00
Maximum 15.00
Range 7.00
Interquartile Range 3.00
Skewness -.088 .398
Kurtosis -.713 .778
44
Table 14: Frequency distributions analysis of perception of postgraduate students by grouped
core programme cont.
Descriptives Employability Skill Group Core Programme Statistic Std. Error
People skills
IM
Mean 27.2500 .61699
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Lower Bound 25.8920
Upper Bound 28.6080
5% Trimmed Mean 27.3333
Median 28.0000
Variance 4.568
Std. Deviation 2.13733
Minimum 23.00
Maximum 30.00
Range 7.00
Interquartile Range 3.00
Skewness -.859 .637
Kurtosis -.039 1.232
IS and ISM
Mean 25.0286 .55683
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Lower Bound 23.8970
Upper Bound 26.1602
5% Trimmed Mean 25.1429
Median 25.0000
Variance 10.852
Std. Deviation 3.29425
Minimum 18.00
Maximum 30.00
Range 12.00
Interquartile Range 4.00
Skewness -.744 .398
Kurtosis .012 .778
45
Table 15: Frequency distributions analysis of perception of postgraduate students by grouped
core programme cont.
Descriptives Employability Skill Group Core Programme Statistic Std. Error
Technological skills
IM
Mean 19.8333 1.06482
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Lower Bound 17.4897
Upper Bound 22.1770
5% Trimmed Mean 19.8704
Median 20.5000
Variance 13.606
Std. Deviation 3.68864
Minimum 14.00
Maximum 25.00
Range 11.00
Interquartile Range 6.50
Skewness -.468 .637
Kurtosis -.985 1.232
IS and ISM
Mean 18.6571 .52170
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Lower Bound 17.5969
Upper Bound 19.7174
5% Trimmed Mean 18.7937
Median 19.0000
Variance 9.526
Std. Deviation 3.08643
Minimum 9.00
Maximum 25.00
Range 16.00
Interquartile Range 4.00
Skewness -.823 .398
Kurtosis 1.851 .778
As Beerepoot and Hendricks (2013, p. 828) state, employability skills’ focuses on the “personal, social
and transferrable skills seen as relevant to all jobs, as opposed to job specific technical skills or
qualifications”. Therefore, it is interesting that the communication skills or interpersonal skills do not
rank highly in both Saad, Robani, Jano and Majid (2013) and Buntat, Jabor, Saud, Mansor and
Mustaffa (2013), as well as in this study. As it can be seen from the descriptive statistics analysis in
Chapter 4, communication skills and interpersonal skills rank second to last (sixth position) among
46
the most relevant employability skills as perceived by the IM, and IS and ISM postgraduate students
whereas, it ranks mid-way (fourth) in the hypothesis test results.
Because Information Systems are intended to supply useful information, Rainer and Turban (2009,
p. 6) maintain that it can closely related to data and knowledge. In other words they (2009, p. 6) point
out that “the purpose of Information Systems is to get the right information to the right people at the
right time in the right amount and in the right format”. Therefore, Biggs (2003) as quoted by Huq and
Gilbert (2013, p. 552) propose that at the core of teaching, it should “emphasises learners actively
constructing their own knowledge rather than passively receiving infrormation transmitted from
teachers and books“. In other words, they (2013, p. 552) advocate “a whole new level of student
involvement whereby content becomes the means to knowledge rather than the end“.
Phumeechanya and Wannapiroon (2014, p. 4804) comment: “During the problem-based learning
activity, the teachers must be well-equipped with enough skills to stimulate, to guide and to improve
relevant sources to the students”. Goring et al. (2014) cited in Cheruvelil et al. (2014, p. 32) emphasize
that successful collaborative teams are “highly productive and provide positive experiences for all
participants, maximizing net benefits for both individuals and the team as a whole”. Furthermore Huq
and Gilbert (2013, p. 552) suggest that “Teachers should inspire students to become self-directed
learners during their formal education, and to use these skills throughout their professional and
personal lives“.
47
Table 16: Descriptive analysis of perception of postgraduate students of the most relevant
employability skills.
Descriptive Statistics
Statistic Bootstrapa
Bias Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval
Lower Upper
Ability to see the big picture Mean 16.8085 -.0037 .3611 16.1064 17.5106
Std. Deviation 2.51637 -.03311 .19164 2.08494 2.82007
Basic job skills and business knowledge Mean 37.0851 .0212 .6827 35.8298 38.4463
Std. Deviation 4.62897 -.07605 .48934 3.57106 5.54305
Global awareness Mean 12.0000 -.0009 .2988 11.3617 12.6378
Std. Deviation 2.08514 -.02964 .18230 1.69704 2.41295
People skills Mean 25.5957 -.0080 .4572 24.6596 26.4468
Std. Deviation 3.17367 -.03871 .34641 2.43369 3.82950
Technological skills Mean 18.9574 .0012 .4862 17.9367 19.8936
Std. Deviation 3.25013 -.06509 .38856 2.48690 3.96782
Communication skills or interpersonal qualities Mean 21.2553 .0105 .3931 20.5325 22.0213
Std. Deviation 2.79338 -.04235 .24197 2.27850 3.24322
Behavioural skills or personal qualities Mean 17.2553 -.0105 .3128 16.6383 17.8505
Std. Deviation 2.22112 -.02582 .23721 1.71908 2.62063
a. Unless otherwise noted, bootstrap results are based on 1000 bootstrap samples
4.3.1.1. Ability to See the Big Picture
Figure 2, the scattered diagram, shows that there is a strong positive relationship between the ability
to see the big picture and the aggregated employability skills.
48
Figure 2: A diagram of perception of postgraduate students of the ability to see the big picture
4.3.1.2. Basic Job Skills and Business Knowledge
Figure 3, shows there is a strong positive relationship between basic job skills and business
knowledge, and the aggregated employability skills.
49
Figure 3: A diagram of perception of postgraduate students of basic job skills and business
knowledge
4.3.1.3. Behavioural Skills or Personal Qualities
Figure 4, shows there is a strong positive relationship between behavioural skills or personal qualities
and the aggregated employability skills. As Rowe, Frantz and Bozalek (2013, p. 2) observe students
“need to adapt to change, generate new knowledge and continue to improve their performance over
time”.
50
Figure 4: A diagram of perception of postgraduate students of behavioural skills or personal
qualities
In their study in Thailand, Laisema and Wannapiroon (2014, p. 3921) argue that education should
“encourage learners to rely on themselves, possess creativity, study hard and learn on their own in
order to solve all problems in any circumstance of daily life and as such has tried to develop creativity
as to deal with the changes which originate from globalization”. In other words as Osborne, Dunne
and Farrand (2013, P. 2), “Universities should reflect on the opportunities that are provided for
students to develop employability skills through formal learning methodologies used within the
university”.
4.3.1.4. Communication Skills or Interpersonal Qualities
Figure 5, shows there is a moderate positive relationship between communication skills or
interpersonal qualities and the aggregated employability skills.
51
Figure 5: A diagram of perception of postgraduate students of communication skills or
interpersonal qualities
Bastalich, Behrend, and Bloomfield (2014) maintain that:
Academic literacies approaches highlight the contested, multiple and changing nature of
written and spoken forms shifting focus from ‘fixing problems in student writing’ to introducing
the linguistic traditions and conventions of higher education, and the subtle relationships of
power and authority embedded in them, to enable students to succeed.
(p. 374)
According to Bastalich, Behrend, and Bloomfield (2014, p. 375), “Within a skills approach to research
training, communication and writing skills are understood to be straightforward and generalisable
across contexts”.
52
4.3.1.5. Global Awareness
Figure 6, illustrates that there is a strong positive relationship between global awareness and the
aggregated employability skills.
Figure 6: A diagram of perception of postgraduate students of global awareness
4.3.1.6. People Skills
Figure 7, shows there is a strong positive relationship between the people skills and the aggregated
employability skills.
53
Figure 7: A diagram of perception of postgraduate students of people skills
4.3.1.7. Technological Skills
Figure 8, indicates that there is a weak positive relationship between technical skills and the
aggregated employability skills. Hall, Nix, and Baker (2013, p. 207) maintain that “In the current digital
environment, it is vital for learners to develop digital literacy skills”. According to authors “The ability
to demonstrate digital skills is a key requirement for graduates, demanded both by the UK Quality
Assurance Agency for (HE) and employers. Despite the UK’s Quality Assurance Agency for HE
requirement for graduates to demonstrate digital literacy, “some learners may not fully engage in
digital skills development, instead concentrate on the subject-specific content of their modules” (Hall,
Nix, and Baker (2013, p. 207). Furthermore, they argue that “Digital literacy skills are particularly
important in work-based programmes leading to professional qualifications”.
54
Figure 8: A diagram of perception of postgraduate students of technological skills
Laisema and Wannapiroon (2014, p. 3921) suggest that educational policy should involve the
“development and applying ICT to reduce economic and social inequality, especially the fundamental
ICT services necessary for a pleasant and health life, e.g., the education and health service”. They
further maintain that “There has been encouragement to develop and apply digital innovation and
media in all levels of education and to promote the creation and publication of electronic media or
lessons at all levels”.
Table 17 and Table 18, show the results of hypothesis summary test for the null hypothesis that
assume that there is no difference in the perception of the most relevant employability skills between
the IM students, and IS and ISM students. A Mann-Whitney test is used to examine the differences
in the ranking of these two groups. The Mann-Whitney test is based on a test statistic U. If the p-value
is <= 0.05, than the results indicates that there is statistically significant difference between the two
groups and the null hypothesis is rejected. However, if the p-value is > 0.05 than it can be assumed
that there is no significant difference between the two groups.
55
The Mann-Whitney U test assumes that if p-value (sig.) is equal to or less than 0.05, then the test
statistic is significant. If p <= 0.05, the null hypothesis, which states that there is no difference between
the IM students, and IS and ISM students’ perceptions is rejected, and the alternative, which states
that there is differences in their perceptions of the most relevant employability skills is accepted.
However, if p > 0.05, the null hypothesis, which states that there is no difference between the IM
students, and IS and ISM students’ perceptions of the most relevant employability skills is retained.
56
4.4. Hypothesis Test
Table 17: Hypothesis Test summary of perception of postgraduate students by grouped core
programme
57
Table 18: Hypothesis Test summary of perception of postgraduate students by grouped core
programme cont.
In today’s era of competitive work environment especially in the IT sector, one cannot deny the
importance of employability skills, soft as well as hard. However, the hypothesis test results of this
study are surprising. The fact that it indicates significant test statistics among the communication skills
or interpersonal qualities (p = 0.007), global awareness (p = 0.023) and people skills (p = 0.031) in
the postgraduate students perception of the most relevant skills may mean that most of the
participants lack industry work experience. One reasons of this significance might be because soft
skills are not easy to describe and observe in comparison to hard skills. Hard skills are often
associated with academic skills, experience and level of expertise. However, soft skills are essentially
to be grouped as self-development skills, interaction skills, leadership skills, organisation skills and
communication skills.
Some authors refer soft skills to people skills because they are needed for everyday life as much as
they are needed for work. They show how people relate to each other communicating, listening,
engaging in conversation, giving feedback, cooperating as team members, solving problems, making
decisions, planning, delegating, observing, instructing, encouraging, motivating, contributing in
meetings and resolving conflict. Therefore, soft skills are not easy to observe, quantify and learn
compared to hard skills. A technician or a professional person success depends in being able to
communicate, share, and use information to solve complex problems, in being able to adapt and
innovate in response to new demands and changing circumstances, in being able to assemble and
expand the power of technology to create new knowledge, and in expanding productivity.
Tables 19 and Table 20, show the rank of means of the perception of the most relevant employment
skills between the two grouped core programmes, IM postgraduate students, and IS and ISM
postgraduate students. Although there are small variations among the minimum values, maximum
58
values and means between the two groups, they seemed to agree in what they perceived as the most
relevant employability skills.
Table 19: Perceptions of IM Postgraduate Students of the most relevant employability skills.
Descriptive Statisticsa
Rank Category of employability skills N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.
Deviation
1 Basic job skills and business knowledge 12 25.00 43.00 37.7500 4.69284
2 People skills 12 23.00 30.00 27.2500 2.13733
3 Communication skills or interpersonal qualities 12 19.00 25.00 23.0833 1.92865
4 Technological skills 12 14.00 25.00 19.8333 3.68864
5 Behavioural skills or personal qualities 12 13.00 20.00 17.9167 1.83196
6 Ability to see the big picture 12 12.00 20.00 17.4167 2.19331
6 Global awareness 12 7.00 15.00 13.0000 2.21565
Valid N (listwise) 12
a. Group Core Programme = Information Management
Table 20: Perceptions of IS and ISM Postgraduate students of the most relevant employability
skills.
Descriptive Statisticsa
Rank Category of employability skills N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.
Deviation
1 Basic job skills and business knowledge 35 26.00 45.00 36.8571 4.65354
2 People skills 35 18.00 30.00 25.0286 3.29425
3 Communication skills or interpersonal qualities 35 15.00 25.00 20.6286 2.78743
4 Technological skills 35 9.00 25.00 18.6571 3.08643
5 Behavioural skills or personal qualities 35 12.00 20.00 17.0286 2.31981
Table 21: Perceptions of IM Postgraduate Students of the most relevant employability skills
cont.
Descriptive Statisticsa Rank Category of employability skills N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.
Deviation
6 Ability to see the big picture 35 12.00 20.00 16.6000 2.61444
7 Global awareness 35 8.00 15.00 11.6571 1.95453
Valid N (listwise) 35
a. Group Core Programme = Information Systems and Information Systems Management
59
To test the null hypothesis that there is no difference between the perceptions of IM postgraduate’s
students, and IS and ISM postgraduate students concerning the most relevant employability skills, a
number of other statistical analyses were carried out. First, histogram graphs and Q-Q Plots were
plotted for each category to check if the data are normal distribution. These were then confirmed by
a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test of normality as in Table 22 to Table 24.
Table 22: Test of normality of perceptions of postgraduate students of the most relevant
employability skills by grouped core programme
Tests of Normality
Employability skills Group Core Programme Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
Ability to see the big picture
Information Management .272 12 .015 .856 12 .044
Information Systems and Information
Systems Management
.135 35 .107 .918 35 .013
Basic job skills and business
knowledge
Information Management .188 12 .200* .811 12 .013
Information Systems and Information
Systems Management
.122 35 .200* .967 35 .359
Table 23: Test of normality of perceptions of postgraduate students the most relevant
employability skills by grouped core programme cont.
Tests of Normality
Employability skills Group Core Programme Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
People skills
Information Management .221 12 .111 .911 12 .223
Information Systems and Information
Systems Management
.154 35 .036 .925 35 .019
Global awareness
Information Management .333 12 .001 .766 12 .004
Information Systems and Information
Systems Management
.125 35 .180 .956 35 .175
Behavioural skills or personal qualities
Information Management .268 12 .017 .807 12 .011
Information Systems and Information
Systems Management
.177 35 .007 .904 35 .005
60
Table 24: Test of normality of perceptions of postgraduate students the most relevant
employability skills by grouped core programme cont.
Tests of Normality
Employability skills Group Core Programme Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
Communication skills or interpersonal
qualities
Information Management .183 12 .200* .883 12 .095
Information Systems and Information
Systems Management
.097 35 .200* .960 35 .232
*. This is a lower bound of the true significance.
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction
The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test of normality assumes that if p-value (sig.) is equal to 0.05, then the test
statistic is significant. Therefore, the data are normally distributed. This implies that if p-values are
high (p > 0.05), then the data are normally distributed and if p-values are low (p < 0.05), then the date
are not normally distributed. From the table above it can be concluded that with exception of
Information Management postgraduate students’ perception of the ability to see the big picture
(p=0.015), global awareness (p=0.001) and behavioural skills or personal qualities (p=0.007), most
of the data are normally distributed.
Since most of the data are normally distributed, it is therefore appropriate to use a non-parametric
test to test the null hypothesis for each employability skills category as they emerged from the
literature review.
4.5. One Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
ANOVA is a means of hypothesis testing across three or more groups to determine whether the
variation across these groups is due to real variation among the groups or whether it can be explained
by variation with the whole data set. In other words, it is used to examine whether the difference
among three or more means is significant. It can be used to examine differences between three or
more independent sets of observations, either between three or more groups within a single sample
or between three or more separate independent samples. Therefore, since there are seven categories
for the employability skills and the samples are independent, it is appropriate to use ANOVA.
ANOVA is based on the idea that the variability or variance, within a set of data can be divided
according to the source of the variance. In other words, the null hypothesis is that the samples or
groups are from the same population with the same mean value and the same variance. The ANOVA
F test statistic is used to determine the variance in conjunction with the p-value. If the F test statistic
61
is much greater than 1 and the p-value is very low (p<=0.05), then it can be concluded that there is
differences among the groups or sets of observations.
Table 25 and Table 26; show the results of the ANOVA for the employability skills by age group.
These results show that most of the categories of the employability skills have F test statistic of less
than 1 and p-value of greater than 0.05. Therefore, it can be concluded that the perception of the
postgraduate students of the employability skills by age among all categories have no significant
differences.
Table 25: ANOVA of the perception of postgraduate students of employability skills by age
ANOVA
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Ability to see the big picture
Between Groups 9.543 1 9.543 1.524 .223
Within Groups 281.733 45 6.261
Total 291.277 46
Basic job skills and business knowledge
Between Groups 2.726 1 2.726 .125 .726
Within Groups 982.933 45 21.843
Total 985.660 46
Behavioural skills or personal qualities
Between Groups .328 1 .328 .065 .800
Within Groups 226.608 45 5.036
Total 226.936 46
Communication skills or interpersonal
qualities
Between Groups 13.703 1 13.703 1.786 .188
Within Groups 345.233 45 7.672
Total 358.936 46
Global awareness
Between Groups 4.798 1 4.798 1.106 .299
Within Groups 195.202 45 4.338
Total 200.000 46
62
Table 26: ANOVA of the perception of postgraduate students of employability skills by age
cont.
ANOVA
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
People skills
Between Groups 3.450 1 3.450 .338 .564
Within Groups 459.869 45 10.219
Total 463.319 46
Technological skills
Between Groups 33.013 1 33.013 3.280 .077
Within Groups 452.902 45 10.064
Total 485.915 46
Table 27, shows the results of the ANOVA for the employability skills by grouped core programme.
These results show that most of the categories of the employability skills have F test statistic of less
than 1 and p-value of greater than 0.05. Therefore, it can be concluded that the perception of the
communication skills or interpersonal qualities (F = 4.846, p = 0.013) of the postgraduate’s students
by grouped core programme is the one among all categories with significant differences.
Table 27: ANOVA of the perception postgraduate students of employability skills by grouped
core programme
ANOVA
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Ability to see the big picture
Between Groups 6.856 2 3.428 .530 .592
Within Groups 284.420 44 6.464
Total 291.277 46
Basic job skills and business knowledge
Between Groups 8.000 2 4.000 .180 .836
Within Groups 977.659 44 22.220
Total 985.660 46
63
Table 28: ANOVA of the perception postgraduate students of employability skills by grouped
core programme cont.
ANOVA Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Behavioural skills or personal qualities
Between Groups 8.004 2 4.002 .804 .454
Within Groups 218.932 44 4.976
Total 226.936 46
Communication skills or interpersonal qualities
Between Groups 64.792 2 32.396 4.846 .013
Within Groups 294.144 44 6.685
Total 358.936 46
Global awareness
Between Groups 16.193 2 8.097 1.938 .156
Within Groups 183.807 44 4.177
Total 200.000 46
People skills
Between Groups 49.384 2 24.692 2.625 .084
Within Groups 413.936 44 9.408
Total 463.319 46
Technological skills
Between Groups 13.021 2 6.510 .606 .550
Within Groups 472.894 44 10.748
Total 485.915 46
4.6. Correlation Analysis
Correlation is used to measure the degree of association between continuous variables. It is used to
determine the extent to which data for the variable are higher in value, and whether the values for
other variable are higher or lower. In other words, it is used to determine if there is likely a chance of
finding or not a significant relationship between two variables. A two-tailed significance level is
provided to indicate a significant relationship between the two variables. If the two-tailed significant
value (p-value) is <=0.05, it indicates a significant relationship between the two variables. Therefore,
if p is <=0.05, the null hypothesis can be rejected and it can be concluded that there is a correlation
between the two variables. Since the categorised employability skills have been converted to scale
data in SPSS, it is appropriate to use correlations to determine the degree of association between the
various variables of the employability skills.
64
Table 29: Correlation results of the perception of postgraduate students of employability skills
by age.
Correlations
Ability to
see the
big
picture
Basic job
skills and
business
knowledge
Behavioural
skills or
personal
qualities
Communication
skills or
interpersonal
qualities
Global
awareness
People
skills
Technological
skills
Age at
questionnaire
Ability to see
the big
picture
Pearson
Correlation
1 .722** .693** .536** .609** .573** .156 .181
Sig. (2-
tailed)
.000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .296 .223
Basic job
skills and
business
knowledge
Pearson
Correlatio
n
.722** 1 .586** .538** .554** .477** .253 -.053
Sig. (2-
tailed)
.000 .000 .000 .000 .001 .086 .726
Behavioural
skills or
personal
qualities
Pearson
Correlatio
n
.693** .586** 1 .578** .568** .607** .333* -.038
Sig. (2-
tailed)
.000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .022 .800
65
Table 30: Correlation results of the perception of postgraduate students of employability skills
by age cont.
Correlations
Ability
to see
the big
picture
Basic job
skills and
business
knowledge
Behavioural
skills or
personal
qualities
Communication
skills or
interpersonal
qualities
Global
awareness
People
skills
Technological
skills
Age at
questionnaire
Communi
cation
skills or
interperso
nal
qualities
Pearson
Correlation
.536** .538** .578** 1 .556** .576** .372** -.195
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .010 .188
Global
awarenes
s
Pearson
Correlation
.609** .554** .568** .556** 1 .476** .324* -.155
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .001 .026 .299
People
skills
Pearson
Correlation
.573** .477** .607** .576** .476** 1 .211 -.086
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .001 .000 .000 .001 .154 .564
Technolo
gical skills
Pearson
Correlation
.156 .253 .333* .372** .324* .211 1 -.261
Sig. (2-tailed) .296 .086 .022 .010 .026 .154 .077
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Table 31 and Table 32, show the correlations between a numbers of employability skills variables.
With exception of the relationships between the ability to see the big picture and technological skills
(p = 0.653), the basic skills and business knowledge and technological skills (p = 0.161), behavioural
skills or personal qualities and technological skills (0.127), the global awareness and technological
skills (0.054), the people skills and technological skills (p = 0.583), most of the variables have
significant relationships or strong correlations between them. These correction coefficient range
between p<0.001 and p = 0.034.
66
Table 31: Correlation results of the perception of postgraduate students of employability skills
by group core programme.
Correlations
Ability to
see the
big
picture
Basic job
skills and
business
knowledge
Global
awareness
People skills Technologic
al skills
Communication
skills or
interpersonal
qualities
Behavioural
skills or
personal
qualities
Ability to see the
big picture
Pearson
Correlation
1 .722** .609** .573** .156 .536** .693**
Sig. (2-
tailed)
.000 .000 .000 .296 .000 .000
Basic job skills and
business
knowledge
Pearson
Correlation
.722** 1 .554** .477** .253 .538** .586**
Sig. (2-
tailed)
.000 .000 .001 .086 .000 .000
Global awareness
Pearson
Correlation
.609** .554** 1 .476** .324* .556** .568**
Sig. (2-
tailed)
.000 .000 .001 .026 .000 .000
Table 32: Correlation results of the perception of postgraduate students of employability skills
by group core programme cont.
Correlations Correlations
Ability to
see the
big
picture
Basic job
skills and
business
knowledge
Global
awareness
People
skills
Technological
skills
Communication
skills or
interpersonal
qualities
Behavioural
skills or
personal
qualities
People skills
Pearson
Correlation
.573** .477** .476** 1 .211 .576** .607**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .001 .001 .154 .000 .000
67
Table 33: Correlation results of the perception of postgraduate students of employability skills
by group core programme cont.
Correlations
Technological skills
Pearson
Correlation
.156 .253 .324* .211 1 .372** .333*
Sig. (2-tailed) .296 .086 .026 .154 .010 .022
Communication
skills or
interpersonal
qualities
Pearson
Correlation
.536** .538** .556** .576** .372** 1 .578**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .010 .000
Behavioural skills
or personal
qualities
Pearson
Correlation
.693** .586** .568** .607** .333* .578** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .022 .000
Employability skills
Pearson
Correlation
.809** .825** .749** .743** .514** .785** .809**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
4.7. Aggregated Employability Skills Analysis
Table 32, shows the frequency distributions of the aggregated employability skills by grouped core programme
as perceived by the postgraduate students. As mentioned earlier there were 12 IM, and 35 IS and IM
postgraduate students.
Table 34: Frequency analysis of the perception of postgraduate students of aggregated
employability skills by grouped core programme
Case Processing Summary
Group Core Programme Cases
Valid Missing Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
Employability skills IM 12 100.0% 0 0.0% 12 100.0%
IS and ISM 35 100.0% 0 0.0% 35 100.0%
Table 29, shows the descriptive statistics of the aggregate employability skills for all the seven
subcategories as they emerged from the literature review.
68
Table 35: Summary frequency distributions analysis of perception of postgraduate students
of aggregated employability skills.
Number Mean Median Mode Std. Dev. Minimum Maximum Range
47 148.96 151.00 149.00 15.44 109.00 171.00 62.00
Table 36, shows the frequency distributions analysis of the perception of aggregated employability
skills by the postgraduate’s students.
Table 36: Frequency distributions analysis of the perception of postgraduate students of
employability skills
Statistics
Employability skills
N Valid 47
Missing 0
Mean 148.9574
Median 151.0000
Mode 149.00a
Std. Deviation 15.43564
Range 62.00
Minimum 109.00
Maximum 171.00
a. Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown
The slight differences in values of the mean (148.96), median (151.00) and mode (149.00) suggest
that the aggregated employability skills variable comes from data that are not normally distributed. To
confirm this assumption a histogram graphs as shown in figure 8 below was plotted.
69
Figure 9: A Histogram of perception of postgraduate students of aggregated employability
skills
The histogram of the aggregated employability skills variable is slightly skewed to the right. Since the
Kolmogorov-Smirnov test is more appropriate for a number of less than 50, this showed that the data
are normally distributed with p = 0.360
70
Table 37: Summary of Kolmogorov-Smirnov test of perception of postgraduate students of
aggregated employability skills
One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test N Employability skills
Normal Parametersa,b 47
Normal Parametersa,b
Most Extreme Differences
Mean 148.9574
Std. Deviation 15.43564
Most Extreme Differences
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z
Absolute .135
Positive .077
Negative -.135
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .924
.360
a. Test distribution is Normal. b. Calculated from data.
Table 37 shows an Independent Sample t-test analysis results to examine whether there is any
difference in the most relevant employability skills as perceived by the IM postgraduate students, and
the IS and ISM postgraduate students. The descriptive group statistics shows that there is a significant
mean differences between these two groups with IM postgraduate students (mean = 156.25, Std.
Deviation = 14.44), and IS and ISM postgraduate students (mean = 146.46, Std. Deviation = 15.16).
Table 38: Summary of perception of postgraduate students of aggregated employability skills
by group core programme
Group Statistics
Group Core Programme N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
Employability skills
Information Management 12 156.2500 14.43559 4.16720
Information Systems and
Information Systems
Management
35 146.4571 15.15672 2.56195
71
Figure 10: Box plot of perception of the most relevant employability skills of postgraduate
students by core programme
Figure 11: Box plot of perception of the most relevant employability skills of postgraduate
students by group core programme
72
Table 39, shows the detailed Independent Sample Test. The Levene’s test was used to check if the
variance outcome of aggregate employability skills is the same in each of the two groups: Information
Management, and Information Systems and Information Systems Management. It is used to test the
null hypothesis, which states that the variances in these two different groups are equal. Using the
Levene’s test SPSS output, it can be assumed that the variances are roughly equal, because the
result is non-significant with F = 0.249 and p = 0.057. Therefore, the assumption is acceptable.
Table 39: T-test summary of perception of aggregated employability skills by postgraduate
students
Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test for
Equality of
Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-
tailed)
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Employability
skills
Equal variances
assumed
.249 .620 1.954 45 .057 9.79286 5.01235 -.30254 19.88826
Equal variances
not assumed
2.002 19.964 .059 9.79286 4.89174 -.41232 19.99803
The Mann-Whitney U test for the perception of the postgraduate students of the aggregated
employability skills has p = 0.018 as in the table 36 below.
Table 40: Mann-Whitney U test analysis of perception of postgraduate students of aggregated
employability skills.
73
Therefore, the null hypothesis, which states there, is no difference between IM postgraduate students’
perceptions, and IS and ISM postgraduate students’ perceptions concerning the most relevant
employability skills are rejected.
74
Chapter 5: Conclusions
According to Osborne, Dunne and Farrand (2013, p. 1) student employability skills is “currently
something of a hot topic in Higher Education (HE), and perhaps for good reason given the importance
placed on employability by those thinking of attending university”. There seems to be a gap on what
employers expect and what graduate students have to offer. It has been argued that the purpose of
information systems is to get the right information to the right people at the right time in the right
content and in the right format (Rainer and Turban, 2009, p. 6).
Graduates need to understand the language of workplace, how to engage with employers and
colleagues as well as how to dress appropriately. For example, they need to be aware of global issues
and be polite with everyone regardless of where they are from. They should have a flexible approach
to work and embrace the constant and fundamental changes taking place in the marketplace. They
be able to find boundaries between personal life and professional or work life. Be able to find
information and be able to inspire security to the clients. In addition, they should have the ability to
support customers and partners with cost effective solutions. Furthermore, they should be able to
lead teams and successful write business plans for actually clients as well as have a genuine passion
for the IT industry. Rowe, Frantz and Bozalek (2013, p. 2) argue that these characteristics require
more from postgraduate students than just a set of knowledge and technical skills. According to them
in order to effectively operate with a complex work environment, postgraduate students “need abilities
that go beyond the knowledge and basic technological skills that are emphasised in undergraduate
training”. They assert that these attributes should include “positive attitudes towards continuing
professional development, lifelong learning, evidence-based practice, information and knowledge
management and inter-personal collaboration”. According to Hall, Nix and Baker (2013, p. 207),
“Employers consider these skills essential”.
To end it can be pointed that some caution must be taken when interpreting these results. This study
provided areas where employers and IS postgraduate students’ perceived the areas that needed to
be improved. The findings from the postgraduate students can improve and increase the standard of
education to create a better curriculum to fulfil the needs of students, employers, society and nation.
Suggestions from employers and students from time to time can be used to overcome the weakness
of preparing students in their workforce so that the educational system is meeting the needs of the
current market and professional needs. The lack of employability skills among graduates could be
improved by attending a work placement. Students should have a concept of the whole project or
system when dealing with a problem, which can increase the effective of their job.
75
Total Word Count = 14031 Words (excluding Figures, Tables, Abstract, Acknowledgement,
References and Appendixes).
76
References
Barkley, A., P. (2003). Learning the Economics of International Trade by teaching it to others: A class
project on globalization. NACTA Journal, pp. 25 -31. Retrieved March, 02/2014 from
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CEsQFjAE&url=http
%3A%2F%2Fwww.nactateachers.org%2Fattachments%2Farticle%2F515%2FBarkleyAPMar03Jour
nal.pdf&ei=SHITU9ekCMqThgfIloC4DQ&usg=AFQjCNGSWoG2AygWxo3g_lCIxX2U1eGYYg
Bastalich, W., Behrend, M., & Bloomfield, R. (2014). Is non-subject based research training a ‘waste
of time’, good only for the development of professional skills? An academic literacies perspective.
Teaching in Higher Education, 19(4), 373-384. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2013.860106
Beerepoot, N., & Hendriks, M. (2013). Employability of offshore service sector workers in the
Philippines: opportunities for upward labour mobility or dead-end jobs? Work, Employment & Society
27(5), pp. 823 - 841. doi: 10.1177/0950017012469065
Bell, J. (2010). Doing your research project: A guide for first-time researchers in education, health and
social sciences. Fifth edition. Maidenhead: Open University Press
Buntat, Y., Jabor, M. K., Saud, M. S., Mansor, S. M. S. S., & Mustaffa, N. H. (2013). Employability
skills element's: difference perspective between teaching staff and employers industrial in Malaysia.
Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93, 1531-1535. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.077
Burton, D. (2000). Research training for social scientists: A handbook for postgraduate researchers.
London: Sage Publications
Cheruvelil, K. S., Soranno, P. A., Weathers, K. C., Hanson, P. C., Goring, S. J., Filstrup, C. T., &
Read, E. K. (2014). Creating and maintaining high-performing collaborative research teams: the
importance of diversity and interpersonal skills. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 12(1), 31-
38. doi: 10.1890/130001
Corrall, S. (2005). Developing models of professional competence to enhance employability in the
network world. IFLA publications, 116, pp. 26 – 40
Cornford, I. (2005). Challenging current policies and policy makers' thinking on generic skills. Journal
of Vocational Education and Training, 57(1), 25-45.
77
Davies, M. B. (2007). Doing a successful research project: using qualitative and quantitative methods.
Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
Davies, M., & Hughes, N. (2014). Doing a successful research project: using qualitative and
quantitative methods (Second Edition). Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
Drummond, I., Nixon, I., & Wiltshire, J. (1998). Personal transferable skills in higher education: the
problems of implementing good practice. Quality Assurance in Education, 6(1), p. 19 – 27. doi:
10.1108/09684889810200359
Egghe, L., & Rousseau, R. (2001). Part 2: Descriptive statistics in Egghe, L. and Rousseau, R. (2001).
Elementary statistics for effective library and information service management. London: Aslib-IMI.
Ehlen, C., van der Klink, M., Roentgen, U., Curfs, E., & Boshuizen, R. (2014). Knowledge productivity
for sustainable innovation: social capital as HRD target. European Journal of Training and
Development, 38(1/2), p.54-74. doi: 10.1108/EJTD-10-2013-0119
Gallup (2013) 21st Century Skills and the workplace: A 2013 Microsoft partners in learning and
Pearson Foundation Study. pp. 1 – 19. Retrieved March, 03/2014 from
http://www.gallup.com/strategicconsulting/162821/21st-century-skills-workplace.aspx
Grix, J. (2010). The foundations of research (2nd Edition). Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan
Hall, M., Nix, I., and Baker, K. (2013). Student experiences and perceptions of digital literacy skills
development: engaging learners by design? Electronic Journal of e-Learning 2013, Vol. 11, Issue 3.
pp 207 – 225. URL:
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&btnG=Search&q=intitle:Student+experiences+and+percep
tions+of+digital+literacy+skills+development+:+engaging+learners+by+design+?#0
Huq, A., & Gilbert, D. H. (2013). Enhancing graduate employability through work-based learning in
social entrepreneurship: A case study. Education+ Training, 55(6), 550-572.
Jackson, D. (2014). Self-assessment of employability skill outcomes among undergraduates and
alignment with academic ratings. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(1), 53-72.
http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ecuworks2013/16 [Accessed on 12/02/15]
Jackson, D. (2013). Student perceptions of the importance of employability skill provision in business
undergraduate programs. Journal of Education for Business, 88(5), 271-279.
http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ecuworks2013/18 [Accessed 12/02/15]
78
Laisema, S., & Wannapiroon, P. (2014). Design of Collaborative Learning with Creative Problem-
solving Process Learning Activities in a Ubiquitous Learning Environment to Develop Creative
Thinking Skills. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 3921-3926. doi:
10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.867
Lowden, K., Hall, S., Elliot, D.’ & Lewin, J. (2011). Employers’ perceptions of employability skills of
new graduates. Retrieved February, 22/2014 from
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CDEQFjAA&url=http
%3A%2F%2Fwww.edge.co.uk%2Fmedia%2F63412%2Femployability_skills_as_pdf_-
_final_online_version.pdf&ei=mCMMU-
KEO7Le7AaWy4DgCw&usg=AFQjCNFJnsZozG_SN0tp1fSY5wWwf0FQmg&bvm=bv.61725948,d.Z
GU
McQuaid, R. W., & Lindsay, C. (2005). The concept of employability. Urban studies, 42(2), 197-219.
NIACE (2009). NIACE Briefing Sheet 88: Empolyability. Retrieved February, 22/2014 from
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=NIACE+Briefing+Sheet+88&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-
8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=fflb&gws_rd=cr&ei=ToYIU4nJFO-
g7Aab9oDQCw
Osborne, R., Dunne, E., & Farrand, P. (2013). Integrating technologies into ‘‘authentic’’assessment
design: an affordances approach. Research in Learning Technology, 21.
Papadopoulos, T., & Armatas, C. (2013). Evaluation of an ICT skills program: Enhancing graduate
capabilities and employability. International Journal of Electronic Commerce Studies, 4(1), pp. 93 –
102. doi: 10.7903/ijecs.1115
Phumeechanya, N., & Wannapiroon, P. (2014). Design of Problem-based with Scaffolding Learning
Activities in Ubiquitous Learning Environment to Develop Problem-solving Skills. Procedia-Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 116, 4803-4808. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.1028
Quaglia Institute for Student Aspirations (n.d). Retrieved December, 22/2014 from
http://www.qisa.org/about/
Rainer, R. K., & Turban, E. (2009). Introduction to Information Systems: Supporting and Transforming
Business. Second Edition: International Student Version. Asia: John Wiley & Sons
79
Rowe, R., Frantz, j., & Bozalek, V. (2013). Beyond knowledge and skills: the use of a Delphi study to
develop a technology-mediated teaching strategy. BMC Medical Education 2013, 13:51
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6920/13/51 (DOI: 10.1186/1472-6920-13-51. pp. 1 – 8)
Robinson, J. P. (2000). What are employability skills? The Workplace, 1(3), pp. 1 – 3. Retrieved
February, 20/2014 from
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CEoQFjAE&url=http
%3A%2F%2Fwww.fremont.k12.ca.us%2Fcms%2Flib04%2FCA01000848%2FCentricity%2FDomain
%2F189%2Femployability-skills.pdf&ei=44EFU_CdGKiv7Abu94CgCA&usg=AFQjCNH47NxMz0-
Nx1mLsSKldBuA2legiw&bvm=bv.61725948,d.ZGU
Saad, M. S., Robani, A., Jano, Z., & Majid, I. (2013). Employers’ perception on engineering,
information and communication Technology (ICT) students’ employability skills. Global Journal of
Engineering Education, 15(1). pp 42 – 47. url:
http://www.wiete.com.au/journals/GJEE/Publish/vol15no1/06-Saad-M-S.pdf
Selvadurai, S., Choy, E. A., & Maros, M. (2012). Generic Skills of Prospective Graduates from the
Employers’ Perspectives. Asian Social Science, 8(12), pp. 295 – 303. doi: 10.5539/ass.v8n12p295
Shafie, L., A., & Nayan, S. (2010). Employability Awareness among Malaysian Undergraduates.
International Journal of Business and Management, 5(8), pp. 119 – 123. url: www.ccsenet.org/ijbm
Singh, P., Thambusamy, R. X., & Ramly, M. A. (2014). Fit or Unfit? Perspectives of Employers and
University Instructors of Graduates’ Generic Skills. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 123,
315-324. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.1429
Tam, M. (2013). Increasing professionalization and vocationalization of continuing education in Hong
Kong: trends and issues. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 32(6), p.741-756. doi:
10.1080/02601370.2013.774066
UKCES (2009). The Employability Challenge UK Commission for Employment and Skills. Retrieved
February, 22/2014 from http://www.ukces.org.uk/publications/employability-challenge-full-report
Xie, Q., Zhong, X., Wang, W-C., & Lim, C. P (2013). Development of an item bank for assessing
generic competences in a higher-education institute: a Rasch modelling approach. Higher Education
Research & Development, p.1-15. doi: 10.1080/07294360.2013.863847
80
Appendices
Appendix A: Practicalities
To ensure the practicality of this project, a few important factors have been taken into consideration.
First the time and cost constraints are considered. The project will be conducted in the University of
Sheffield and the participants will be the IS academics and IS students. Since the researcher is an IS
student, some of the participants will be acquaintances of the researcher. It can be assumed that this
would make the data collection process more efficient. Therefore, the main concerns are cash to
purchase research articles, as most recent articles about ‘employability skills’ are not available in the
library or as Open Access articles; cash to pay for reliable Internet access; and insurance for a laptop
because as a part-time student, the researcher carries out most of his literature review, methodology
design and writing of the dissertation at home.
Since the researcher is undertaking the programme on part-time basis, he aims to submit the final
dissertation by 31/08/2015. The timetable to complete this research is as follows:
Timetable
Task Start Date Complete Date Duration
Literature Review 30/04/2014 21/05/2014 3 Weeks
Complete Final Proposal 22/05/2014 25/05/2014 3 Days
Submit Final Proposal - 26/05/2014 -
Questionnaire Design 10/06/2014 19/08/2014 10 Weeks
Data Collection 26/08/2014 18/11/2014 12 Weeks
Data Analysis 02/12/2014 10/02/2015 10 Weeks
Writing Dissertation 17/02/2015 12/05/2015 12 Weeks
Post-writing Work 19/05/2015 11/05/2015 12 Weeks
Submit Dissertation - 31/08/2015 -
81
Appendix B: Employability skills as emerged from the literature review
Employability Skills from Literature Review
i. Basic job skills and business knowledge
Ability to learn and apply information literacy effectively.
Ability to apply literacy and numeracy to business related problems.
Ability to use a systematic approach to design and evaluate operational performance.
Ability to design and conduct research, as well as to analyse and interpret data.
Be able to recognise professional, moral and ethical issues.
Have awareness of the business area.
ii. Technological skills
Ability to use and understand new technologies.
Ability to acquire in-depth competence in a programming language.
Ability to acquire in-depth competence Structural Query Language (SQL).
Ability to acquire in-depth competence Unified Modelling Language (UML).
Ability to acquire in-depth competence modelling business requirements of a system.
iii. Peoples’ skills
Ability to function effectively as an individual and in group.
Be able to share knowledge with colleagues.
Ability to use feedback from other to improve your work and performances.
Ability to give feedback to others to help them improve their work and performances.
Ability to interact socially with co-workers.
iv. Behavioural skills or personal qualities
Ability to have flexible/adaptable attitude towards work
Ability to continue learning independently in acquisition of new knowledge, skills and technologies
Ability to manage time effectively to prioritise activities and meet deadlines
Be willing and able to acquire new information related to work
v. Communication skills or interpersonal qualities
Ability to orally present ideas with confidence and effectiveness to different audiences.
Ability to present ideas clearly and concisely to different audiences through written form
82
Ability to use fact, information or numbers to support your ideas
Ability to exercise independent thought and judgement
Ability to plan and execute reports and project works
vi. Ability to see the big picture
Ability to undertake problem identification and to formulate solutions
Be able to analyse information or ideas to draw conclusions about a topic.
Be able to apply concepts learned to different contexts or problems.
Be able to reflect on a problem-solving strategy and change to another strategy if needed.
vii. Global awareness
Ability to understand the social, cultural, global and environmental responsibilities.
Ability to work well with people from cultural diverse backgrounds.
Have knowledge of other countries or cultures and be aware of how the world is connected.
Appendix C: Questionnaire
Questionnaire: Employability Skills: The perceptions of Information
Systems (IS) and Information Management (IM) postgraduate’s students.
Dear Volunteer,
This questionnaire aims to gain understanding about the perceptions of Information Systems’
postgraduate’s students concerning the relevant skills students should develop to become marketable
as ICT professionals. Therefore, I would be grateful if you can take a few minutes to complete it.
Thank you for agreeing to complete this questionnaire. It is only accessed by me for research
purposes, and it will be destroyed once the dissertation is completed in September 2015. I would like
to stress that the data of this questionnaire will be treated as confidential and your personal status will
be made anonymous.
Yours sincerely,
Stephen Amba
83
Section I: Personal Status.
Please can you tick the category below in order to put you in the correct category during in the data
analysis.
1. Which one these best describe your status?
Academic
Student
2. What is your programme of specialization or in which you teach most of the core modules?
Information Management
Information Systems
Information Systems Management
3. What were your specialist subjects during your first degree?
Arts
Social sciences
Computer Sciences
Pure Sciences
Engineering
Other. Please specify ______________________________________________
4. In which of these ranges is your age?
Less than 25
25 to 29
30 to 34
35 to 39
40 to 44
45 to 49
50 and over
84
Section II: The most relevant employability skills for Information Systems’ students to
have.
Please circle the number that most closely describes your perception about the relevant skills to
Information Systems’ students to get and keep jobs as Information Systems professionals; ranging
from 1 to 5, where 1 is Not Important and 5 is Very Important.
1. Basic job skills and business knowledge
Ability to learn and apply information literacy effectively.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
Ability to find information literacy effectively.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
Ability to identify information literacy effectively.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
Ability to assess information literacy effectively.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
Ability to critically self-evaluate your operational performance.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
Ability to critically evaluate others operational performance.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
85
Ability to design and conduct research, as well as to analyse and interpret data.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
Be able to recognise professional, moral and ethical issues.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
Have awareness of the business and organisational complexities.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
2. Technological skills
Ability to understand and adopt to new technologies.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
Have an in-depth competence in a programming.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
Have an in-depth competence in database design.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
Have an in-depth competence in hardware and networks.
86
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
Have an in-depth competence modelling business requirements.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
3. People skills
Ability to function effectively as an individual.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
Ability to function effectively in a group.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
Be able to share knowledge with colleagues.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
Ability to use feedback from other to improve your work and performances
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
Ability to give feedback to others to help them improve their work and performances.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
87
Ability to interact socially with co-workers.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
4. Behavioural skills or personal qualities
Ability to have flexible or adaptable attitude towards work.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
Be willing and able to engage in continuous learning related to work.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
Ability to continue learning independently in acquisition of new knowledge, skills and technologies.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
Ability to manage time effectively to prioritise activities and meet deadlines.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
5. Communication skills or interpersonal qualities
Ability to orally present ideas with confidence and effectiveness to different audiences.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
Ability to present ideas clearly and concisely to different audiences through written form.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
88
Ability to use fact, information or numbers to support your ideas.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
Ability to exercise independent thought and judgement.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
Ability to plan and execute reports and project work.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
6. Ability to see the big picture
Ability to undertake problem identification and to formulate solutions.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
Be able to analyse information or ideas to draw conclusions about a topic.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
Be able to apply concepts learned to different contexts or problems.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
89
Be able to reflect on a problem-solving strategy and change to another strategy if needed.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
7. Global awareness
Ability to understand the social, cultural, global and environmental responsibilities.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
Ability to work well with people from cultural diverse backgrounds.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
Have knowledge of other countries or cultures and be aware of how the world is connected.
Not important 1 2 3 4 5 Very
important
8. Which among the above list skills would consider not to be relevant for Information Systems’ students
to get and keep jobs?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. Please list any skills missing from the above lists that you consider to be most relevant for Information
Systems’ students to get and keep jobs.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
90
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
END: Thank you very much for completing the questionnaire for the survey on Employability skills:
The perceptions of Information Systems (IS) academics and students. All replies will be treated in
strictest confidential. Please email any questions to [email protected].
Best regards
Stephen Amba
Appendix D: Ethics information and Consent Form
The University of
Sheffield.
Information School
Title of Research Project: Employability Skills: The perceptions
of Information Systems (IS) academics and students
Researchers
Stephen Luate Alson Amba
Purpose of the research
This research aims to gain understanding about the perceptions of the Information Systems’ academics and students
concerning the relevant skills students should develop to become marketable in the Information Technology industry.
The findings will be compare with the concerns of the employers and other professionals’ bodies as identified from a
review of a current literature. The objectives are to identify key employability skills as perceived by employers and
other professionals, and academia; and to analyse if there are any potential differences between the employers’
perception and that one emerging from academia.
Who will be participating?
91
Masters students in Information Systems, Information Systems Management, and Information Management
programmes as well as the staff involve in teaching in these programmes.
What will you be asked to do?
You will be asked to complete a printed copy of questionnaire
What are the potential risks of participating?
There is no potential physical and psychological harm for participating such no names nor will email addresses be
required.
What data will we collect?
Only hard copy format data will be collected.
What will we do with the data?
I will be analyzing the data for inclusion in my master’s dissertation. After that point, the data will be destroyed.
Will my participation be confidential?
Your participation will be confidential as you will not be required to mark the questionnaire with specific personal
information. The data and the computer files will be coded with a random number. No identifying information will be
retained.
What will happen to the results of the research project?
The results of this study will be included in my master’s dissertation which will be publicly available. Please contact
the School in six months from September 2015.
I confirm that I have read and understand the description of the research project, and that I have had an
opportunity to ask questions about the project.
I understand that my participation is voluntary and that I am free to withdraw at any time without any negative
consequences.
I understand that I may decline to answer any particular question or questions, or to do any of the activities. If I
stop participating at all time, all of my data will be purged.
I understand that my responses will be kept strictly confidential, that my name or identity will not be linked to any
research materials, and that I will not be identified or identifiable in any report or reports that result from the
research.
92
I give permission for the research team members to have access to my anonymised responses.
I give permission for the research team to re-use my data for future research as specified above.
I agree to take part in the research project as described above.
Participant Name (Please print) Participant Signature
Stephen Luate Alson Amba
Researcher Name (Please print) Researcher Signature
Date
Note: If you have any difficulties with, or wish to voice concern about, any aspect of your
participation in this study, please contact Dr. Angela Lin, Research Ethics Coordinator, Information
School, The University of Sheffield ([email protected]), or to the University Registrar
and Secretary.
Appendix E: SPSS Outputs
Descriptives
Descriptive Statistics
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
Manage time effectively to meet deadlines 47 3 5 4.57 .580
Function effectively in a group 47 2 5 4.47 .776
criticallly self-evaluation 47 3 5 4.43 .683
Plan and execute report and project work 47 3 5 4.40 .648
Use feedback from other people 47 3 5 4.38 .677
Present ideas orally with confidence and effectiveness 47 3 5 4.36 .735
Share knowledge with colleagues 47 3 5 4.36 .705
Engage in continuous learning related to work 47 3 5 4.34 .760
Problem identification and solution formulation 47 3 5 4.32 .695
Understand and adopt new technologies 47 3 5 4.28 .772
93
Use fact, information or numbers to support ideas 47 1 5 4.23 .890
Reflect and change on problem-solving strategy 47 3 5 4.23 .729
Identify information literacy 47 2 5 4.21 .883
Analyse information to draw conclusions 47 2 5 4.21 .832
Competence modelling business requirements 47 2 5 4.21 .778
Function effectively as an individual 47 2 5 4.19 .711
Flexible or adaptable attitude towards work 47 2 5 4.17 .816
Present ideas clearly and concisely in writing 47 3 5 4.17 .702
Learn independently to acquire new knowledge, skills
and technology
47 2 5 4.17 .842
Find information literacy 47 2 5 4.15 .834
Design and conduct research 47 2 5 4.15 .807
Interact socially with co-workers 47 1 5 4.13 .947
Recognise professional, moral and ethical issues 47 2 5 4.13 .824
Work well with cultural diverse background people 47 2 5 4.11 .866
Understand social, cultural, global and environmental
responsibilities
47 3 5 4.11 .759
Exercise independent thought and judgement 47 3 5 4.09 .717
Learn and apply literacy 47 2 5 4.06 .818
Give feedback to other people 47 2 5 4.06 .870
Assess information literacy 47 1 5 4.06 1.030
Awareness of business and organisation complexities 47 1 5 4.04 .859
Apply concepts learned to different problems 47 2 5 4.04 .806
critically evaluate others 47 2 5 3.85 .751
Knowledge of other countries or cultures 47 2 5 3.79 .977
Competence in database design 47 1 5 3.51 1.061
Competence in hardware and networks 47 1 5 3.51 .953
Competence in programming 47 1 5 3.45 1.119
Valid N (listwise) 47
Frequencies
Statistics
Ability to see
the big picture
Basic job skills
and business
knowledge
Behavioural
skills or
personal
qualities
Communication
skills or
interpersonal
qualities
Global
awareness
People skills Technological
skills
N Valid 47 47 47 47 47 47 47
Missing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mean 16.8085 37.0851 17.2553 21.2553 12.0000 25.5957 18.9574
Median 17.0000 38.0000 18.0000 21.0000 12.0000 26.0000 19.0000
Mode 18.00a 41.00 18.00 25.00 13.00 28.00 19.00a
Std. Deviation 2.51637 4.62897 2.22112 2.79338 2.08514 3.17367 3.25013
a. Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown
Histogram
94
95
96
Descriptives
Descriptive Statistics
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation Variance
Basic job skills and business knowledge 47 25.00 45.00 37.0851 4.62897 21.427
People skills 47 18.00 30.00 25.5957 3.17367 10.072
Communication skills or interpersonal qualities 47 15.00 25.00 21.2553 2.79338 7.803
Technological skills 47 9.00 25.00 18.9574 3.25013 10.563
Behavioural skills or personal qualities 47 12.00 20.00 17.2553 2.22112 4.933
Ability to see the big picture 47 12.00 20.00 16.8085 2.51637 6.332
Global awareness 47 7.00 15.00 12.0000 2.08514 4.348
Valid N (listwise) 47
97
Custom Tables
Group Core Programme
Information Management Information Systems and Information Systems
Management
Mean Median Standard
Deviation
Mean Median Standard
Deviation
People skills 27.25 28.00 2.14 25.03 25.00 3.29
Technological skills 19.83 20.50 3.69 18.66 19.00 3.09
Global awerness 13.00 13.00 2.22 11.66 12.00 1.95
Basic job skills and business knowledge 37.75 39.00 4.69 36.86 37.00 4.65
Behavioural skills or personal qualities 17.92 18.00 1.83 17.03 18.00 2.32
Ability to see the big picture 17.42 18.00 2.19 16.60 17.00 2.61
Communication skills or interpersonal qualities 23.08 23.50 1.93 20.63 21.00 2.79
Core Programme = Information Management
Descriptive Statisticsa
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
Use feedback from other people 12 4 5 4.83 .389
Plan and execute report and project work 12 4 5 4.83 .389
Share knowledge with colleagues 12 4 5 4.75 .452
Present ideas orally with confidence and effectiveness 12 4 5 4.75 .452
Manage time effectively to meet deadlines 12 4 5 4.75 .452
Understand and adopt new technologies 12 3 5 4.67 .651
Function effectively in a group 12 3 5 4.67 .651
Reflect and change on problem-solving strategy 12 4 5 4.67 .492
Use fact, information or numbers to support ideas 12 4 5 4.58 .515
Present ideas clearly and concisely in writing 12 4 5 4.58 .515
Understand social, cultural, global and environmental
responsibilities
12 3 5 4.58 .669
Competence modelling business requirements 12 4 5 4.50 .522
Engage in continuous learning related to work 12 3 5 4.50 .674
Critically self-evaluation 12 3 5 4.50 .674
Function effectively as an individual 12 4 5 4.42 .515
Flexible or adaptable attitude towards work 12 4 5 4.42 .515
Recognise professional, moral and ethical issues 12 2 5 4.42 .900
Problem identification and solution formulation 12 4 5 4.33 .492
98
Give feedback to other people 12 2 5 4.33 .888
Exercise independent thought and judgement 12 3 5 4.33 .778
Analyse information to draw conclusions 12 2 5 4.33 .985
Interact socially with co-workers 12 1 5 4.25 1.215
Knowledge of other countries or cultures 12 2 5 4.25 .965
Learn independently to acquire new knowledge, skills and
technology
12 2 5 4.25 .965
Identify information literacy 12 2 5 4.25 .965
Design and conduct research 12 3 5 4.25 .866
Work well with cultural diverse background people 12 2 5 4.17 .937
Learn and apply literacy 12 3 5 4.17 .577
Find information literacy 12 3 5 4.17 .835
Assess information literacy 12 2 5 4.17 .937
Apply concepts learned to different problems 12 2 5 4.08 .900
Awareness of business and organisation complexities 12 1 5 4.00 1.128
critically evaluate others 12 2 5 3.83 .835
Competence in database design 12 1 5 3.67 1.371
Competence in hardware and networks 12 1 5 3.58 1.240
Competence in programming 12 1 5 3.42 1.443
Valid N (listwise) 12
a. Core Programme = Information Management
Core Programme = Information Systems and Information Systems Management
Descriptive Statisticsa
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
Manage time effectively to meet deadlines 35 3 5 4.51 .612
Function effectively in a group 35 2 5 4.40 .812
Critically self-evaluation 35 3 5 4.40 .695
Problem identification and solution formulation 35 3 5 4.31 .758
Engage in continuous learning related to work 35 3 5 4.29 .789
Plan and execute report and project work 35 3 5 4.26 .657
Use feedback from other people 35 3 5 4.23 .690
Share knowledge with colleagues 35 3 5 4.23 .731
Present ideas orally with confidence and effectiveness 35 3 5 4.23 .770
Identify information literacy 35 2 5 4.20 .868
Analyse information to draw conclusions 35 3 5 4.17 .785
Understand and adopt new technologies 35 3 5 4.14 .772
Learn independently to acquire new knowledge, skills and
technology
35 3 5 4.14 .810
Find information literacy 35 2 5 4.14 .845
Function effectively as an individual 35 2 5 4.11 .758
Competence modelling business requirements 35 2 5 4.11 .832
Use fact, information or numbers to support ideas 35 1 5 4.11 .963
Design and conduct research 35 2 5 4.11 .796
99
Work well with cultural diverse background people 35 2 5 4.09 .853
Interact socially with co-workers 35 2 5 4.09 .853
Flexible or adaptable attitude towards work 35 2 5 4.09 .887
Reflect and change on problem-solving strategy 35 3 5 4.09 .742
Awareness of business and organisation complexities 35 3 5 4.06 .765
Apply concepts learned to different problems 35 3 5 4.03 .785
Recognise professional, moral and ethical issues 35 2 5 4.03 .785
Learn and apply literacy 35 2 5 4.03 .891
Assess information literacy 35 1 5 4.03 1.071
Present ideas clearly and concisely in writing 35 3 5 4.03 .707
Exercise independent thought and judgement 35 3 5 4.00 .686
Give feedback to other people 35 2 5 3.97 .857
Understand social, cultural, global and environmental
responsibilities
35 3 5 3.94 .725
critically evaluate others 35 2 5 3.86 .733
Knowledge of other countries or cultures 35 2 5 3.63 .942
Competence in hardware and networks 35 2 5 3.49 .853
Competence in programming 35 1 5 3.46 1.010
Competence in database design 35 1 5 3.46 .950
Valid N (listwise) 35
a. Core Programme = Information Systems and Information Systems Management
NPar Tests
One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
Group Core Programme Basic job skills
and business
knowledge
Information Management
N 12
Normal Parametersa,b Mean 37.7500
Std. Deviation 4.69284
Most Extreme Differences
Absolute .188
Positive .161
Negative -.188
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z .652
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .788
Information Systems and Information Systems Management
N 35
Normal Parametersa,b Mean 36.8571
Std. Deviation 4.65354
Most Extreme Differences
Absolute .122
Positive .067
Negative -.122
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z .720
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .678
a. Test distribution is Normal.
100
b. Calculated from data.
One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
Group Core Programme Technological
skills
Information Management
N 12
Normal Parametersa,b Mean 19.8333
Std. Deviation 3.68864
Most Extreme Differences
Absolute .138
Positive .112
Negative -.138
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z .479
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .976
Information Systems and Information Systems Management
N 35
Normal Parametersa,b Mean 18.6571
Std. Deviation 3.08643
Most Extreme Differences
Absolute .130
Positive .110
Negative -.130
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z .769
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .595
a. Test distribution is Normal.
b. Calculated from data.
One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
Group Core Programme People skills
Information Management
N 12
Normal Parametersa,b Mean 27.2500
Std. Deviation 2.13733
Most Extreme Differences
Absolute .221
Positive .123
Negative -.221
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z .764
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .604
Information Systems and Information Systems Management
N 35
Normal Parametersa,b Mean 25.0286
Std. Deviation 3.29425
Most Extreme Differences
Absolute .154
Positive .079
Negative -.154
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z .909
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .380
a. Test distribution is Normal.
b. Calculated from data.
101
One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
Group Core Programme Behavioural skills
or personal
qualities
Information Management
N 12
Normal Parametersa,b Mean 17.9167
Std. Deviation 1.83196
Most Extreme Differences
Absolute .268
Positive .149
Negative -.268
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z .929
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .354
Information Systems and Information Systems Management
N 35
Normal Parametersa,b Mean 17.0286
Std. Deviation 2.31981
Most Extreme Differences
Absolute .177
Positive .109
Negative -.177
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z 1.045
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .225
a. Test distribution is Normal.
b. Calculated from data.
One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
Group Core Programme Communication
skills or
interpersonal
qualities
Information Management
N 12
Normal Parametersa,b Mean 23.0833
Std. Deviation 1.92865
Most Extreme Differences
Absolute .183
Positive .160
Negative -.183
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z .633
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .818
Information Systems and Information Systems Management
N 35
Normal Parametersa,b Mean 20.6286
Std. Deviation 2.78743
Most Extreme Differences
Absolute .097
Positive .084
Negative -.097
102
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z .571
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .900
a. Test distribution is Normal.
b. Calculated from data.
One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
Group Core Programme Ability to see the
big picture
Information Management
N 12
Normal Parametersa,b Mean 17.4167
Std. Deviation 2.19331
Most Extreme Differences
Absolute .272
Positive .152
Negative -.272
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z .941
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .339
Information Systems and Information Systems Management
N 35
Normal Parametersa,b Mean 16.6000
Std. Deviation 2.61444
Most Extreme Differences
Absolute .135
Positive .116
Negative -.135
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z .798
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .547
a. Test distribution is Normal.
b. Calculated from data.
One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
Group Core Programme Global awareness
Information Management
N 12
Normal Parametersa,b Mean 13.0000
Std. Deviation 2.21565
Most Extreme Differences
Absolute .333
Positive .183
Negative -.333
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z 1.155
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .139
Information Systems and Information Systems Management
N 35
Normal Parametersa,b Mean 11.6571
Std. Deviation 1.95453
Most Extreme Differences
Absolute .125
Positive .117
Negative -.125
Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z .742
103
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .641
a. Test distribution is Normal.
b. Calculated from data.
Group Statistics
Group Core Programme N Mean Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
Basic job skills and business knowledge
Information Management 12 37.7500 4.69284 1.35471
Information Systems and Information
Systems Management
35 36.8571 4.65354 .78659
Ability to see the big picture
Information Management 12 17.4167 2.19331 .63315
Information Systems and Information
Systems Management
35 16.6000 2.61444 .44192
Technological skills
Information Management 12 19.8333 3.68864 1.06482
Information Systems and Information
Systems Management
35 18.6571 3.08643 .52170
Behavioural skills or personal qualities
Information Management 12 17.9167 1.83196 .52884
Information Systems and Information
Systems Management
35 17.0286 2.31981 .39212
People skills
Information Management 12 27.2500 2.13733 .61699
Information Systems and Information
Systems Management
35 25.0286 3.29425 .55683
Communication skills or interpersonal
qualities
Information Management 12 23.0833 1.92865 .55675
Information Systems and Information
Systems Management
35 20.6286 2.78743 .47116
Global awareness
Information Management 12 13.0000 2.21565 .63960
Information Systems and Information
Systems Management
35 11.6571 1.95453 .33038
Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test for
Equality of
Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-
tailed)
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Basic job skills and business
knowledge
Equal variances
assumed
.577 .452 .572 45 .570 .89286 1.55993 -2.24901 4.03473
Equal variances
not assumed
.570 18.970 .575 .89286 1.56651 -2.38624 4.17195
Ability to see the big picture Equal variances
assumed
2.025 .162 .970 45 .337 .81667 .84233 -.87987 2.51320
104
Equal variances
not assumed
1.058 22.593 .301 .81667 .77213 -.78219 2.41552
Technological skills
Equal variances
assumed
1.244 .271 1.084 45 .284 1.17619 1.08518 -1.00948 3.36186
Equal variances
not assumed
.992 16.605 .335 1.17619 1.18575 -1.33007 3.68245
Behavioural skills or personal
qualities
Equal variances
assumed
2.000 .164 1.201 45 .236 .88810 .73947 -.60127 2.37746
Equal variances
not assumed
1.349 24.067 .190 .88810 .65835 -.47048 2.24667
People skills
Equal variances
assumed
1.451 .235 2.176 45 .035 2.22143 1.02103 .16496 4.27789
Equal variances
not assumed
2.673 29.817 .012 2.22143 .83111 .52364 3.91922
Communication skills or
interpersonal qualities
Equal variances
assumed
1.983 .166 2.818 45 .007 2.45476 .87103 .70043 4.20910
Equal variances
not assumed
3.366 27.787 .002 2.45476 .72936 .96022 3.94931
Global awareness
Equal variances
assumed
.428 .516 1.986 45 .053 1.34286 .67623 -.01913 2.70485
Equal variances
not assumed
1.865 17.255 .079 1.34286 .71989 -.17426 2.85998
Explore
Case Processing Summary
Cases
Valid Missing Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
Ability to see the big picture 47 100.0% 0 0.0% 47 100.0%
Basic job skills and business knowledge 47 100.0% 0 0.0% 47 100.0%
People skills 47 100.0% 0 0.0% 47 100.0%
Global awareness 47 100.0% 0 0.0% 47 100.0%
Behavioural skills or personal qualities 47 100.0% 0 0.0% 47 100.0%
Communication skills or interpersonal qualities 47 100.0% 0 0.0% 47 100.0%
Descriptives
Statistic Std. Error
Ability to see the big picture
Mean 16.8085 .36705
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Lower Bound 16.0697
Upper Bound 17.5473
5% Trimmed Mean 16.8983
105
Median 17.0000
Variance 6.332
Std. Deviation 2.51637
Minimum 12.00
Maximum 20.00
Range 8.00
Interquartile Range 4.00
Skewness -.484 .347
Kurtosis -.920 .681
Basic job skills and business knowledge
Mean 37.0851 .67520
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Lower Bound 35.7260
Upper Bound 38.4442
5% Trimmed Mean 37.3322
Median 38.0000
Variance 21.427
Std. Deviation 4.62897
Minimum 25.00
Maximum 45.00
Range 20.00
Interquartile Range 7.00
Skewness -.726 .347
Kurtosis .130 .681
People skills
Mean 25.5957 .46293
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Lower Bound 24.6639
Upper Bound 26.5276
5% Trimmed Mean 25.7730
Median 26.0000
Variance 10.072
Std. Deviation 3.17367
Minimum 18.00
Maximum 30.00
Range 12.00
Interquartile Range 4.00
Skewness -.895 .347
Kurtosis .370 .681
Global awareness Mean 12.0000 .30415
106
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Lower Bound 11.3878
Upper Bound 12.6122
5% Trimmed Mean 12.0792
Median 12.0000
Variance 4.348
Std. Deviation 2.08514
Minimum 7.00
Maximum 15.00
Range 8.00
Interquartile Range 2.00
Skewness -.451 .347
Kurtosis -.460 .681
Behavioural skills or personal qualities
Mean 17.2553 .32398
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Lower Bound 16.6032
Upper Bound 17.9075
5% Trimmed Mean 17.3865
Median 18.0000
Variance 4.933
Std. Deviation 2.22112
Minimum 12.00
Maximum 20.00
Range 8.00
Interquartile Range 3.00
Skewness -.909 .347
Kurtosis .251 .681
Communication skills or interpersonal qualities
Mean 21.2553 .40746
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Lower Bound 20.4352
Upper Bound 22.0755
5% Trimmed Mean 21.3783
Median 21.0000
Variance 7.803
Std. Deviation 2.79338
Minimum 15.00
Maximum 25.00
Range 10.00
Interquartile Range 5.00
107
Skewness -.406 .347
Kurtosis -.625 .681
Tests of Normality
Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
Ability to see the big picture .171 47 .001 .914 47 .002
Basic job skills and business knowledge .129 47 .050 .949 47 .040
People skills .128 47 .053 .915 47 .002
Global awareness .174 47 .001 .943 47 .024
Behavioural skills or personal qualities .206 47 .000 .884 47 .000
Communication skills or interpersonal qualities .114 47 .164 .943 47 .024
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction
Group Core Programme
Case Processing Summary
Group Core Programme Cases
Valid Missing Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
Ability to see the big picture
Information Management 12 100.0% 0 0.0% 12 100.0%
Information Systems and
Information Systems
Management
35 100.0% 0 0.0% 35 100.0%
Basic job skills and business
knowledge
Information Management 12 100.0% 0 0.0% 12 100.0%
Information Systems and
Information Systems
Management
35 100.0% 0 0.0% 35 100.0%
Behavioural skills or personal
qualities
Information Management 12 100.0% 0 0.0% 12 100.0%
Information Systems and
Information Systems
Management
35 100.0% 0 0.0% 35 100.0%
Communication skills or
interpersonal qualities
Information Management 12 100.0% 0 0.0% 12 100.0%
Information Systems and
Information Systems
Management
35 100.0% 0 0.0% 35 100.0%
Global awareness
Information Management 12 100.0% 0 0.0% 12 100.0%
Information Systems and
Information Systems
Management
35 100.0% 0 0.0% 35 100.0%
People skills
Information Management 12 100.0% 0 0.0% 12 100.0%
Information Systems and
Information Systems
Management
35 100.0% 0 0.0% 35 100.0%
Technological skills Information Management 12 100.0% 0 0.0% 12 100.0%
108
Information Systems and
Information Systems
Management
35 100.0% 0 0.0% 35 100.0%
Descriptives
Group Core Programme Statistic Std. Error
Ability to see the big picture
Information Management
Mean 17.4167 .63315
95% Confidence Interval for
Mean
Lower Bound 16.0231
Upper Bound 18.8102
5% Trimmed Mean 17.5741
Median 18.0000
Variance 4.811
Std. Deviation 2.19331
Minimum 12.00
Maximum 20.00
Range 8.00
Interquartile Range 2.75
Skewness -1.510 .637
Kurtosis 2.523 1.232
Information Systems and
Information Systems
Management
Mean 16.6000 .44192
95% Confidence Interval for
Mean
Lower Bound 15.7019
Upper Bound 17.4981
5% Trimmed Mean 16.6667
Median 17.0000
Variance 6.835
Std. Deviation 2.61444
Minimum 12.00
Maximum 20.00
Range 8.00
Interquartile Range 4.00
Skewness -.256 .398
Kurtosis -1.188 .778
Basic job skills and business
knowledge Information Management
Mean 37.7500 1.35471
Lower Bound 34.7683
109
95% Confidence Interval for
Mean Upper Bound
40.7317
5% Trimmed Mean 38.1667
Median 39.0000
Variance 22.023
Std. Deviation 4.69284
Minimum 25.00
Maximum 43.00
Range 18.00
Interquartile Range 4.50
Skewness -1.996 .637
Kurtosis 4.958 1.232
Information Systems and
Information Systems
Management
Mean 36.8571 .78659
95% Confidence Interval for
Mean
Lower Bound 35.2586
Upper Bound 38.4557
5% Trimmed Mean 37.0079
Median 37.0000
Variance 21.655
Std. Deviation 4.65354
Minimum 26.00
Maximum 45.00
Range 19.00
Interquartile Range 7.00
Skewness -.390 .398
Kurtosis -.502 .778
Behavioural skills or personal
qualities Information Management
Mean 17.9167 .52884
95% Confidence Interval for
Mean
Lower Bound 16.7527
Upper Bound 19.0806
5% Trimmed Mean 18.0741
Median 18.0000
Variance 3.356
Std. Deviation 1.83196
Minimum 13.00
Maximum 20.00
Range 7.00
Interquartile Range 1.75
110
Skewness -1.770 .637
Kurtosis 4.728 1.232
Information Systems and
Information Systems
Management
Mean 17.0286 .39212
95% Confidence Interval for
Mean
Lower Bound 16.2317
Upper Bound 17.8255
5% Trimmed Mean 17.1429
Median 18.0000
Variance 5.382
Std. Deviation 2.31981
Minimum 12.00
Maximum 20.00
Range 8.00
Interquartile Range 2.00
Skewness -.726 .398
Kurtosis -.115 .778
Communication skills or
interpersonal qualities
Information Management
Mean 23.0833 .55675
95% Confidence Interval for
Mean
Lower Bound 21.8579
Upper Bound 24.3087
5% Trimmed Mean 23.2037
Median 23.5000
Variance 3.720
Std. Deviation 1.92865
Minimum 19.00
Maximum 25.00
Range 6.00
Interquartile Range 3.00
Skewness -.779 .637
Kurtosis .025 1.232
Information Systems and
Information Systems
Management
Mean 20.6286 .47116
95% Confidence Interval for
Mean
Lower Bound 19.6711
Upper Bound 21.5861
5% Trimmed Mean 20.6984
Median 21.0000
Variance 7.770
Std. Deviation 2.78743
Minimum 15.00
111
Maximum 25.00
Range 10.00
Interquartile Range 5.00
Skewness -.188 .398
Kurtosis -.696 .778
Global awareness
Information Management
Mean 13.0000 .63960
95% Confidence Interval for
Mean
Lower Bound 11.5922
Upper Bound 14.4078
5% Trimmed Mean 13.2222
Median 13.0000
Variance 4.909
Std. Deviation 2.21565
Minimum 7.00
Maximum 15.00
Range 8.00
Interquartile Range 1.75
Skewness -1.986 .637
Kurtosis 4.872 1.232
Information Systems and
Information Systems
Management
Mean 11.6571 .33038
95% Confidence Interval for
Mean
Lower Bound 10.9857
Upper Bound 12.3285
5% Trimmed Mean 11.6746
Median 12.0000
Variance 3.820
Std. Deviation 1.95453
Minimum 8.00
Maximum 15.00
Range 7.00
Interquartile Range 3.00
Skewness -.088 .398
Kurtosis -.713 .778
People skills Information Management
Mean 27.2500 .61699
95% Confidence Interval for
Mean
Lower Bound 25.8920
Upper Bound 28.6080
5% Trimmed Mean 27.3333
Median 28.0000
112
Variance 4.568
Std. Deviation 2.13733
Minimum 23.00
Maximum 30.00
Range 7.00
Interquartile Range 3.00
Skewness -.859 .637
Kurtosis -.039 1.232
Information Systems and
Information Systems
Management
Mean 25.0286 .55683
95% Confidence Interval for
Mean
Lower Bound 23.8970
Upper Bound 26.1602
5% Trimmed Mean 25.1429
Median 25.0000
Variance 10.852
Std. Deviation 3.29425
Minimum 18.00
Maximum 30.00
Range 12.00
Interquartile Range 4.00
Skewness -.744 .398
Kurtosis .012 .778
Technological skills
Information Management
Mean 19.8333 1.06482
95% Confidence Interval for
Mean
Lower Bound 17.4897
Upper Bound 22.1770
5% Trimmed Mean 19.8704
Median 20.5000
Variance 13.606
Std. Deviation 3.68864
Minimum 14.00
Maximum 25.00
Range 11.00
Interquartile Range 6.50
Skewness -.468 .637
Kurtosis -.985 1.232
Mean 18.6571 .52170
Lower Bound 17.5969
113
Information Systems and
Information Systems
Management
95% Confidence Interval for
Mean Upper Bound
19.7174
5% Trimmed Mean 18.7937
Median 19.0000
Variance 9.526
Std. Deviation 3.08643
Minimum 9.00
Maximum 25.00
Range 16.00
Interquartile Range 4.00
Skewness -.823 .398
Kurtosis 1.851 .778
114
Frequencies
Statistics
Employability skills
N Valid 47
Missing 0
Mean 148.9574
Median 151.0000
Mode 149.00a
Std. Deviation 15.43564
Range 62.00
Minimum 109.00
Maximum 171.00
a. Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown
Group Core Programme
Case Processing Summary
Group Core Programme Cases
Valid Missing Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
Information Management 12 100.0% 0 0.0% 12 100.0%
115
Employability
skills
Information Systems and Information Systems
Management
35 100.0% 0 0.0% 35 100.0%
Descriptives
Group Core Programme Statistic Std. Error
Employability
skills
Information Management
Mean 156.2500 4.16720
95% Confidence Interval for
Mean
Lower
Bound
147.0781
Upper
Bound
165.4219
5% Trimmed Mean 157.6111
Median 160.5000
Variance 208.386
Std. Deviation 14.43559
Minimum 117.00
Maximum 171.00
Range 54.00
Interquartile Range 14.00
Skewness -2.035 .637
Kurtosis 4.940 1.232
Information Systems and Information Systems
Management
Mean 146.4571 2.56195
95% Confidence Interval for
Mean
Lower
Bound
141.2506
Upper
Bound
151.6637
5% Trimmed Mean 147.2381
Median 149.0000
Variance 229.726
Std. Deviation 15.15672
Minimum 109.00
Maximum 169.00
Range 60.00
Interquartile Range 18.00
Skewness -.927 .398
Kurtosis .482 .778
Tests of Normality
Group Core Programme Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
116
Employability
skills
Information Management .215 12 .130 .796 12 .009
Information Systems and Information Systems
Management
.147 35 .052 .924 35 .019
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction
Correlations
Descriptive Statistics
Mean Std. Deviation N
Ability to see the big picture 16.8085 2.51637 47
Basic job skills and business knowledge 37.0851 4.62897 47
Behavioural skills or personal qualities 17.2553 2.22112 47
Communication skills or interpersonal qualities 21.2553 2.79338 47
Global awareness 12.0000 2.08514 47
People skills 25.5957 3.17367 47
Technological skills 18.9574 3.25013 47
Age at questionnaire 1.32 .471 47
Correlations
Ability to
see the big
picture
Basic job
skills and
business
knowledge
Behavioural
skills or
personal
qualities
Communication
skills or
interpersonal
qualities
Global
awareness
People
skills
Technological
skills
Age at
questionnaire
Ability to see the
big picture
Pearson
Correlation
1 .722** .693** .536** .609** .573** .156 .181
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .296 .223
N 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47
Basic job skills and
business
knowledge
Pearson
Correlation
.722** 1 .586** .538** .554** .477** .253 -.053
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .001 .086 .726
N 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47
Behavioural skills
or personal
qualities
Pearson
Correlation
.693** .586** 1 .578** .568** .607** .333* -.038
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .022 .800
N 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47
Communication
skills or
Pearson
Correlation
.536** .538** .578** 1 .556** .576** .372** -.195
117
interpersonal
qualities
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .010 .188
N 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47
Global awareness
Pearson
Correlation
.609** .554** .568** .556** 1 .476** .324* -.155
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .001 .026 .299
N 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47
People skills
Pearson
Correlation
.573** .477** .607** .576** .476** 1 .211 -.086
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .001 .000 .000 .001 .154 .564
N 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47
Technological
skills
Pearson
Correlation
.156 .253 .333* .372** .324* .211 1 -.261
Sig. (2-tailed) .296 .086 .022 .010 .026 .154 .077
N 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47
Age at
questionnaire
Pearson
Correlation
.181 -.053 -.038 -.195 -.155 -.086 -.261 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .223 .726 .800 .188 .299 .564 .077
N 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Correlations
Descriptive Statistics
Statistic Bootstrapa
Bias Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval
Lower Upper
Ability to see the big picture
Mean 16.8085 -.0037 .3611 16.1064 17.5106
Std. Deviation 2.51637 -.03311 .19164 2.08494 2.82007
N 47 0 0 47 47
Basic job skills and business knowledge
Mean 37.0851 .0212 .6827 35.8298 38.4463
Std. Deviation 4.62897 -.07605 .48934 3.57106 5.54305
N 47 0 0 47 47
Global awerness
Mean 12.0000 -.0009 .2988 11.3617 12.6378
Std. Deviation 2.08514 -.02964 .18230 1.69704 2.41295
N 47 0 0 47 47
People skills
Mean 25.5957 -.0080 .4572 24.6596 26.4468
Std. Deviation 3.17367 -.03871 .34641 2.43369 3.82950
N 47 0 0 47 47
118
Technological skills
Mean 18.9574 .0012 .4862 17.9367 19.8936
Std. Deviation 3.25013 -.06509 .38856 2.48690 3.96782
N 47 0 0 47 47
Communication skills or interpersonal qualities
Mean 21.2553 .0105 .3931 20.5325 22.0213
Std. Deviation 2.79338 -.04235 .24197 2.27850 3.24322
N 47 0 0 47 47
Behavioural skills or personal qualities
Mean 17.2553 -.0105 .3128 16.6383 17.8505
Std. Deviation 2.22112 -.02582 .23721 1.71908 2.62063
N 47 0 0 47 47
Employability skills
Mean 148.9574 .0099 2.2273 144.6809 153.1691
Std. Deviation 15.43564 -.23274 1.75432 11.65702 18.52886
N 47 0 0 47 47
a. Unless otherwise noted, bootstrap results are based on 1000 bootstrap samples
Correlations
Ability
to see
the big
pictur
e
Basic job
skills and
business
knowledg
e
Global
awernes
s
Peopl
e skills
Technologica
l skills
Communicatio
n skills or
interpersonal
qualities
Behavioura
l skills or
personal
qualities
Employabilit
y skills
Ability to see
the big picture
Pearson Correlation 1 .722** .609** .573** .156 .536** .693** .809**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .296 .000 .000 .000
N 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47
Bootstrap
c
Bias 0 -.005 -.007 .004 -.010 -.001 -.006 -.002
Std. Error 0 .081 .104 .129 .157 .121 .107 .056
95%
Confidenc
e Interval
Lowe
r
1 .521 .375 .293 -.188 .252 .429 .680
Uppe
r
1 .840 .785 .788 .433 .736 .850 .894
Basic job skills
and business
knowledge
Pearson Correlation .722** 1 .554** .477** .253 .538** .586** .825**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .001 .086 .000 .000 .000
N 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47
Bootstrap
c
Bias -.005 0 -.012 .008 -.007 .000 -.009 -.001
Std. Error .081 0 .123 .147 .138 .114 .115 .045
95%
Confidenc
e Interval
Lowe
r
.521 1 .260 .152 -.049 .294 .306 .716
Uppe
r
.840 1 .744 .718 .488 .731 .766 .895
Global
awareness
Pearson Correlation .609** .554** 1 .476** .324* .556** .568** .749**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .001 .026 .000 .000 .000
N 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47
Bootstrap
c
Bias -.007 -.012 0 .007 -.011 -.006 -.008 -.006
Std. Error .104 .123 0 .124 .141 .101 .122 .067
119
95%
Confidenc
e Interval
Lowe
r
.375 .260 1 .244 .033 .339 .299 .587
Uppe
r
.785 .744 1 .710 .576 .732 .767 .852
People skills
Pearson Correlation .573** .477** .476** 1 .211 .576** .607** .743**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .001 .001 .154 .000 .000 .000
N 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47
Bootstrap
c
Bias .004 .008 .007 0 -.011 .000 .000 .003
Std. Error .129 .147 .124 0 .151 .119 .143 .116
95%
Confidenc
e Interval
Lowe
r
.293 .152 .244 1 -.132 .314 .293 .468
Uppe
r
.788 .718 .710 1 .470 .784 .842 .905
Technological
skills
Pearson Correlation .156 .253 .324* .211 1 .372** .333* .514**
Sig. (2-tailed) .296 .086 .026 .154 .010 .022 .000
N 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47
Bootstrap
c
Bias -.010 -.007 -.011 -.011 0 -.017 -.011 -.016
Std. Error .157 .138 .141 .151 0 .152 .128 .126
95%
Confidenc
e Interval
Lowe
r
-.188 -.049 .033 -.132 1 .031 .066 .233
Uppe
r
.433 .488 .576 .470 1 .633 .554 .719
Communicatio
n skills or
interpersonal
qualities
Pearson Correlation .536** .538** .556** .576** .372** 1 .578** .785**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .010 .000 .000
N 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47
Bootstrap
c
Bias -.001 .000 -.006 .000 -.017 0 -.005 -.003
Std. Error .121 .114 .101 .119 .152 0 .111 .063
95%
Confidenc
e Interval
Lowe
r
.252 .294 .339 .314 .031 1 .327 .646
Uppe
r
.736 .731 .732 .784 .633 1 .761 .884
Behavioural
skills or
personal
qualities
Pearson Correlation .693** .586** .568** .607** .333* .578** 1 .809**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .022 .000 .000
N 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47
Bootstrap
c
Bias -.006 -.009 -.008 .000 -.011 -.005 0 -.007
Std. Error .107 .115 .122 .143 .128 .111 0 .066
95%
Confidenc
e Interval
Lowe
r
.429 .306 .299 .293 .066 .327 1 .640
Uppe
r
.850 .766 .767 .842 .554 .761 1 .901
Employability
skills
Pearson Correlation .809** .825** .749** .743** .514** .785** .809** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
N 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 47
Bias -.002 -.001 -.006 .003 -.016 -.003 -.007 0
120
Bootstrap
c
Std. Error .056 .045 .067 .116 .126 .063 .066 0
95%
Confidenc
e Interval
Lowe
r
.680 .716 .587 .468 .233 .646 .640 1
Uppe
r
.894 .895 .852 .905 .719 .884 .901 1
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
c. Unless otherwise noted, bootstrap results are based on 1000 bootstrap samples
Graph
121
122
123
124
Histograms
125
Graph
126
Basic job
skills and business knowledge
Histograms
127
128
129
Technological skills
130
Histograms
131
132
133
People skills
Histograms
134
People skills
135
Histograms
136
Behavioural skills or personal qualities
137
Histograms
138
139
140
Communication skills or interpersonal qualities
Histograms
141
142
143
Ability to see the big picture
144
Histograms
145
146
147
Global
awareness
Histograms
148
149
150
151
152
Access to Dissertation
A Dissertation submitted to the University may be held by the Department (or School) within which the
Dissertation was undertaken and made available for borrowing or consultation in accordance with University
Regulations.
Requests for the loan of dissertations may be received from libraries in the UK and overseas. The Department
may also receive requests from other organisations, as well as individuals. The conservation of the original
dissertation is better assured if the Department and/or Library can fulfill such requests by sending a copy. The
Department may also make your dissertation available via its web pages.
In certain cases where confidentiality of information is concerned, if either the author or the supervisor so
requests, the Department will withhold the dissertation from loan or consultation for the period specified below.
Where no such restriction is in force, the Department may also deposit the Dissertation in the University of
Sheffield Library.
To be completed by the Author – Select (a) or (b) by placing a tick in the appropriate box
If you are willing to give permission for the Information School to make your dissertation available in these ways,
please complete the following:
X (a) Subject to the General Regulation on Intellectual Property, I, the author, agree to this dissertation being made
immediately available through the Department and/or University Library for consultation, and for the
Department and/or Library to reproduce this dissertation in whole or part in order to supply single copies for
the purpose of research or private study
(b) Subject to the General Regulation on Intellectual Property, I, the author, request that this dissertation be
withheld from loan, consultation or reproduction for a period of [ ] years from the date of its submission.
Subsequent to this period, I agree to this dissertation being made available through the Department and/or
University Library for consultation, and for the Department and/or Library to reproduce this dissertation in
whole or part in order to supply single copies for the purpose of research or private study
Name
Stephen
Luate Alson
Amba
Department Information School
Signed
Stephen
Amba
Date
31/08/15
To be completed by the Supervisor – Select (a) or (b) by placing a tick in the appropriate box
153
(a) I, the supervisor, agree to this dissertation being made immediately available through the
Department and/or University Library for loan or consultation, subject to any special restrictions
(*) agreed with external organisations as part of a collaborative project.
*Special
restrictions
(b) I, the supervisor, request that this dissertation be withheld from loan, consultation or reproduction
for a period of [ ] years from the date of its submission. Subsequent to this period, I, agree to this
dissertation being made available through the Department and/or University Library for loan or
consultation, subject to any special restrictions (*) agreed with external organisations as part of a
collaborative project
Name
Department
Signed Date
THIS SHEET MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH DISSERTATIONS BY DEPARTMENTAL REQUIREMENTS.