Personality traits and intrapreneurial behaviour: Moderated role of knowledge sharing behaviour in diverse group of employees in developing country

Abstract

Purpose

Intrapreneurship is rapidly concerning organizations to tailor their operations and strategies for competitive advantage. Research on intrapreneurial dimensions is in the developing stage, requiring more rigorous methods of investigation and application in various contexts. This study aims to focus on individual level intrapreneurship by examining the association of personality traits (PTs) on intrapreneurial behaviour (IB) moderated by knowledge sharing behaviour (KSB) and comparison of employees in engineering and functional departments.

Design/methodology/approach

A survey has been conducted for data collection using a structured questionnaire. Partial least squares structural equation modelling has been used for hypotheses testing, moderation and multi-group analysis on a sample of 534 respondents.

Findings

Results reveal that PTs exerted a positive influence on IB. The impact of PTs on IB was more pronounced in the employees of functional departments. KSB moderates positively in the relationship between PTs and IB. Both groups significantly differ in dimensions of PTs.

Practical implications

Organizations can do little to improve PTs of employees, which impacts on intrapreneurship in organizations. However, KSB in organizations can be improved by adopting various measures. KSB eventually promotes innovation in organizations resulting in an overall competitive advantage for firms.

Originality/value

This is the first study that contributes theoretically in intrapreneurship literature by providing insights on PTs impacting IB incorporating KSB and comparing the diverse group of employees.

Citation

Alam, M.Z., Kousar, S., Shabbir, A. and Kaleem, M.A. (2020), "Personality traits and intrapreneurial behaviour: Moderated role of knowledge sharing behaviour in diverse group of employees in developing country", Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 31-46. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJIE-09-2019-0068

Introduction

Innovation and intrapreneurship are increasingly becoming a competitive strategy in existing organizations and is considered a promising area, requiring further exploration, by academic researchers (Ağca et al., 2012). Various perspectives (individual and organization) related to entrepreneurship within firms with fragmented theoretical basis have been evolved. The definition of intrapreneurship, due to the rapidly emerging field, is inconsistent (Menzel et al., 2007; Åmo and Kolvereid, 2005) resulting in various theoretical perspectives. The phenomenon, due to diverse theoretical foundations, resulted in concepts such as corporate entrepreneurship (Ireland et al., 2009), entrepreneurial orientation (Covin and Wales, 2012) and corporate venturing (Antoncic and Hisrich, 2003), building further confusion in intrapreneurship research (Valsania et al., 2016).

Studies on intrapreneurship have been conducted for investigating antecedents, outcomes and conditions of intrapreneurship (Farrukh et al., 2017; Ireland et al., 2009; Antoncic and Hisrich, 2003), effects of employee’s innovation on firm performance (Sieger et al., 2013; Augusto Felício et al., 2012; Shin and Lee, 2016) and leadership role on intrapreneurship (Mittal and Dhar, 2015). Recently, with an increase in interest in intrapreneurship, researchers have focussed on investigating personality traits (PTs) as an antecedent of intrapreneurship (Woo, 2018).

The hypotheses model in this study has been developed by including Knowledge sharing behaviour (KSB) as a moderator between PTs of employees and intrapreneurship. Knowledge sharing is a process of transferring knowledge from one aspect to some other aspect (Matzler et al., 2008). Knowledge sharing can function between individuals, teams and organizations. In this study, KSB is considered to enhance the effects of PTs on intrapreneurship as existing literature stresses employee creativity as an outcome of knowledge sharing (Imran et al., 2018). Knowledge sharing also contributes to firm performance (Argote and Ingram, 2000). This study contributes theoretically to intrapreneurship literature by providing insights on PTs impacting IB and comparing the difference between diverse groups of employees. This study also presents implications for firms seeking intrapreneurship as a competitive advantage in discovering the benefits of knowledge sharing in the development of intrapreneurship and innovation within firms.

Literature review and hypotheses formation

Intrapreneurship

Intrapreneurship is used to describe entrepreneurial development and innovation efforts of employees at existing organizations (Burgers and Covin, 2016). Entrepreneurship as a notion has expanded from business start-up by entrepreneurs (Park, 2017) to value creation in existing organizations through entrepreneurial efforts by employees (Antoncic and Hisrich, 2003). Intrapreneurship is considered a much broader field that has expended towards innovation efforts of employees (Sinha and Srivastava, 2013), the joint venture (Espinosa and Suanes, 2011) and venture teams (Dushnitsky and Lavie, 2010). Firm performance-related studies as an outcome of intrapreneurship have attracted researchers in the past. In intrapreneurial domain, innovation (Wang et al., 2015), knowledge creation (Zahra, 2015), sustainability (Halme et al., 2012) and effects on the firm’s performance (Tseng and Tseng, 2019) have been studied. Corporate entrepreneurship and intrapreneurship has expanded from large organizations to small- and medium-sized enterprises and further towards not for profit or public organizations (Srivastava et al., 2017). Still, this research area requires rigorous research by incorporating mediators and moderators in theoretical frameworks of intrapreneurship to strengthen the concept (Kuratko, 2017).

Personality traits

Personality as a concept has been described as attitudes, stable motives and direction of actions and experiences of people (Meyer et al., 2014). Personality is also considered to form the behaviour of individuals in any society (Lim and Melissa Ng Abdullah, 2012). On the basis of career choice theory and various other theoretical perspectives like person environment-fit theory, personality should be the basis of an individual’s career choice (Zhao et al., 2010).

So far, intrapreneurship is an auxiliary of entrepreneurship and fewer studies have been conducted on PTs and intrapreneurship, hence, personality and entrepreneurship relations could be considered for intrapreneurship based studies (Kirkley, 2017). In entrepreneurship research “Big Five” or “Five Factor Model” is widely used (Fietze and Boyd, 2017) and dominated the previous research on individual-level PTs studies (John et al., 2008). “Big Five” PTs consist of openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, neuroticism (antonym emotional stability) and agreeableness (Goldberg, 1992).

Previous researchers have established that a high level of extraversion, conscientiousness and openness have a positive relationship with entrepreneurship (Obschonka and Stuetzer, 2017). In a meta-analysis by Zhao et al. (2010), openness and conscientiousness were found to have a strong relationship with entrepreneurial performance and intention. While, the other two PTs of “Big Five” neuroticism and agreeableness are found by researchers as negatively linked with intrapreneurship (Obschonka and Stuetzer, 2017). In lines with previous findings of researchers, this study intends to investigate the relationship of openness, extraversion and conscientiousness with IB.

Extraversion is linked with dominance, ambition and energy (Costa and McCrae, 1992), which stimulate motivation in individuals (Costa and McCrae, 1992). Extravert people seek stimulation, excitement and remain optimistic and positive (Burtăverde et al., 2017). Low extraversion leads individuals towards isolation, passiveness and loneliness. Innovation is the outcome of an individual’s stimulation and ambition. Thus, extravert people are more engaged in intrapreneurial and innovative efforts than those in traditional jobs (Farrukh et al., 2016; Sinha and Srivastava, 2013). In lines with previous research, hypothesis for direct relationship is as under:

H1.

Extraversion is positively associated with IB.

People who characterized to have high on openness are more creative, non-traditional and curious (Costa and McCrae, 1992). Those who found to be low on openness are more conservative towards norms and traditions as it reduces uncertainty and risk-taking (Choi, 2004). Openness is associated with innovation (Steel et al., 2012) and risk-taking, which are described as vital elements of intrapreneurship (Sinha and Srivastava, 2013). Our hypothesis for the direct relationship of openness with intrapreneurship is as under:

H2.

Openness is positively associated with IB.

Conscientiousness is characterized by the qualities of self-control, planning behaviour, work achievement and goal orientation (Burtăverde et al., 2017). As regards the relationship of conscientiousness and innovation or intrapreneurship, two parallel streams of literature are existent, which makes relationships vague to hypothesise. Few traits of conscientiousness such as goal-oriented behaviour, hard work and self-discipline are requirements of innovativeness (Barrick and Mount, 1991). Researchers believe that people high on conscientiousness are more compliant with existing norms and resist changes, which somewhat opposes innovativeness (George and Zhou, 2001). While, innovative people always challenge the existing norms and find out of box solutions (Bakx, 2007). Conscientious people are found to have clear goals and they put more effort towards their task as compared to less conscientious people (Barrick and Mount, 1991). According to Zhao et al. (2010), conscientiousness is an important component of motivation. Conscientious people are more motivated and goal-oriented, which attracted intrapreneurial careers over traditional jobs (Farrukh et al., 2016; Sinha and Srivastava, 2013). Hence, in lines with Farrukh et al. (2016) and Sinha and Srivastava (2013), the hypothesis of a direct relationship between conscientiousness and IB is as under:

H3.

Conscientiousness is positively associated with IB.

Moderated role of knowledge sharing behaviour in personality traits and intrapreneurial behaviour

Knowledge formation stimulates creativity (Wang, 2010), which is essential for organizations. Researchers have studied the association of individual PTs and knowledge sharing in the context of firm performance. Conscientiousness and performance relationship has been studied by Barrick et al. (2001) and argued that low conscientiousness is hard to associate in terms of better job performance due to careless, impulsive and low thirst for success. Employees high in conscientiousness develop organizational citizenship, which are contributions of employees beyond their assigned tasks and mandated role (Organ and Ryan, 1995). As knowledge sharing is part of organizational citizenship, hence, it is an important constituent of conscientiousness.

People who score high on openness are found to be more creative, flexible in thinking, curious (Digman, 1990) and have a positive attitude towards engaging, learning new ideas and things (Barrick and Mount, 1991). Openness has found to be a strong predictor of knowledge sharing as curiosity leads to seeking other people’s perceptions and experiences (Cabrera et al., 2006). Hence, people with high openness are more willing towards mutual knowledge sharing and transferring.

Extraversion is linked with ambition and energy (Hurtz and Donovan, 2000), which stimulates more engagement towards innovation and entrepreneurial activities (Farrukh et al., 2016). As innovativeness is linked with knowledge sharing (Wang, 2010), hence extraversion is a function of knowledge sharing.

Previous research has investigated the relationship of PTs with knowledge sharing (Matzler et al., 2008). Little or no research has so far examined the moderating role of knowledge sharing between PTs and IB specifically within employees of diverse firms. It is important for firms to retain a competitive advantage in the industry by raising its human resources through the acquisition of benefits of KSB of employees. To fill this gap in the literature, hypotheses for investigating the role of KSB between individual PTs and IB are as under:

H4, H5 and H6.

KSB strengthens the positive relationship between PTs (extraversion, openness, conscientiousness) and IB.

Williamson et al. (2013) have carried out a study to compare PTs between engineers and non-engineers. Engineers have been found quite different in most of the PTs. The results of Williamson et al. (2013) studies mentioned that most of the PTs are less favourable for engineers as compared to non-engineers. Employees of different firms or departments are not the same in exhibiting PTs due to obvious effects on employees due to the nature of the job. Hence, it is important to consider the diversity of the job while studying PTs as a function of IB. Research hypothesis for difference in both group of employees is as under:

H7.

The impact of PTs (extraversion, openness, and conscientiousness) on IB is likely to be different in employees of both groups (engineering, functional).

The research model of the study is presented in Figure 1.

Methods

Sampling

Data collection has been done from employees of two types of departments (engineering and functional) from 12 organizations operating in different geographical regions of Pakistan. A total of 534 responses from employees have been included in the study. The sample includes 358 (67 per cent) male and 176 (33 per cent), female employees. In total, 274 (51.3 per cent) employees are included from engineering, whereas 260 (48.7 per cent) employees are included from functional departments.

Instrumentation

Latent constructs in this study including PTs, KSB and IB are well-established and valid scales are available in the literature. Scale for the measurement of “Big Five” PTs has been adapted from John and Srivastava (1999) studies. Reverse coding of a few of the items was done as per the requirement of scale. This scale is widely used by researchers in various studies in the past (Farrukh et al., 2016). Items of knowledge sharing have been adopted from Davenport and Prusak (1998) and behaviour from Kim and Lee (2004) studies. This scale has also been used and validated in previous studies (Gillani et al., 2018). Items of innovativeness (first-order construct of IB) have been adopted from Scott and Bruce (1994). Items of proactiveness (first-order construct of IB) are adopted from Parker and Collins (2010). Items of risk-taking (first-order construct of IB) have been adopted from Zhao et al. (2005). A five-point Likert scale has been used to measure items of constructs (strongly disagree – strongly agree).

Data analysis

As constructs used in the model are latent constructs with multiple items of measurement, hence, multivariate technique SEM is most appropriate for this study. SEM is a widely used approach in management science and entrepreneurship based studies (Alam et al., 2019). In this study, PLS-SEM is used as it is considered suitable for complex models containing latent variables and the sole purpose is the investigation of relationships at the theoretical level (Hair et al., 2019). PLS-SEM has been used through Smart PLS 3.2.6 software package (Hair et al., 2016), due to normality of data issues, friendly interface, nature of the study, level of measurement and small sample size requirements (Chin and Newsted, 1999).

Results

Measurement model

The reliability of all reflective measures was computed by using Cronbach’s α value and composite reliability (CR). Convergent validity has been computed by using the average variance explained (AVE). Few items from scales of constructs have been excluded due to low factor loading. Remaining reflective item loadings are above the 0.7 threshold value, hence, meeting the necessary criteria (Hair et al., 2016). Table I presents the results of measurement model assessment (factor loadings, α, CR and AVE). Discriminant validity of constructs has been established through the Fornell–Larcker criteria in which AVE values are examined to be higher than correlation among the constructs (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). Table II presents the result of discriminant validity. Hence, the measurement model is appropriate for further analysis. Variance inflation factors (VIFs) were found to be less than 5, hence, multi-collinearity issues in data were not there (Hair et al., 2011).

Structural model

With the confirmation of the measurement model, the structural model has been assessed using partial least square and structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) for hypotheses testing. Bootstrapping technique with 2,000 sub-samples and t-statistics has been applied to explain relationships. Relationships of the structural models are assessed by path coefficient among the constructs (Hair et al., 2016). Bootstrapping function calculated t statistics re-sampling (Hair et al., 2016), which are presented in Table III.

H4-H6 anticipated that KSB strengthens (moderates) the relationship between three hypothesised PTs. As the direct relationship of extraversion with IB is not established (H1 not accepted), hence, the need to check the moderating effect is not there (H4 not accepted). To test the moderating effect of KSB between the remaining two of the PTs (openness and conscientiousness), moderation analysis has been performed. KSB significantly moderates and strengthens the relationship between openness (β = 0.2826, p < 0.05) and conscientiousness(β = 0.219, p < 0.05) supporting hypotheses H5 and H6. Figure 2 showed the nature of the moderating effect obtained through plotting values of unstandardized β of moderating effect, independent and dependent variables. The plot shows, with low KSB, openness and conscientiousness have less impact on IB. When KSB is high among employees, the relationship between openness, conscientiousness and IB is strengthened. Hence, KSB strengthens the positive effect of openness and conscientiousness on IB.

Multi-group analysis (MGA) has been performed to examine the statistical differences between employees of engineering and functional departments. H7 concerned the relationship of PTs and IB, which could vary across two samples. This study used PLS-MGA, which is a non-parametric approach using Henseler et al. (2009). Measurement invariance of the composite models (MICOM) approach has been used to confirm measurement invariance (Henseler et al., 2016). MICOM is a three-step approach that includes assessments for:

1. configural invariance;

2. compositional invariance; and

3. equal mean and variance assessment (Henseler et al., 2016).

During data collection and analysis, and an identical set of indicators have been used for the measurement of constructs for both groups. Further, algorithm settings or optimization criteria and data treatment have been kept identical for both groups of employees to ensure the establishment of configural invariance (Henseler et al., 2016).

Permutation method with minimum 1,000 permutations at a 5 per cent significance level has been used to check compositional invariance. This permutation method compared the original score correlations with correlations of empirical distribution after organizing the permutation process. If the original score correlation exceeds the 5 per cent quantile correlations, then the establishment of compositional invariance can be confirmed. Equal mean and variance assessment for the establishment of full measurement invariance for all constructs has been confirmed. Table IV shows the results of measurement invariance for all latent constructs and confirms the presence of full measurement invariance. Table V presents the difference in a path across two categories of employees. The p-values below 0.05 or higher than 0.95 depicts the significant difference in employees of engineering and functional departments. Overall, results found significant differences in both groups for conscientiousness, openness and IB paths. Hence, our hypothesis is partially confirmed.

Discussion

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship of individual PTs on IB and how KSB impacts this relationship. Further, this study also aimed to understand the PT's relationship with IB by comparing employees of engineering and functional departments.

Regarding the individual PT's relationship with IB, conscientiousness, and openness exerted a stronger influence on IB. Hence, study findings are consistent with previous research on the relationship of individual PTs (Woo, 2018). In the case of extraversion, study findings are inconsistent with previous research (Woo, 2018). As openness is linked with creativity, curiosity (Costa and McCrae, 1992) and innovation (Steel et al., 2012), which leads to risk-taking (Choi, 2004), hence, positive relationship of openness with IB is plausible. Those low on creativity and curiosity are less likely to exhibit IB at their jobs in personal or firm benefit.

Conscientiousness is characterized as self-control, planning behaviour and goal orientation (Burtăverde et al., 2017), which leads to innovation and intrapreneurship (Bakx, 2007). Hence, characteristics of high conscientiousness have been the consequence of this study as leading towards IB. A parallel stream of researchers advocates high conscientious people as compliant to existing norms (George and Zhou, 2001), which effects the consequence of intrapreneurship at the individual and firm-level. The hypothesized relationship on the basis of Farrukh et al. (2016) and Sinha and Srivastava (2013) studies have further elaborated in the present study.

Ambition, energy and dominance associated with extravert people (Costa and McCrae, 1992) stimulate motivation (Burtăverde et al., 2017) and risk-taking (Nicholson et al., 2005), results in intrapreneurial and innovative efforts in traditional jobs (Farrukh et al., 2016; Sinha and Srivastava, 2013). The findings of this study are not consistent with previous research on this antecedent of IB in terms of PT’s studies. This is perhaps due to two reasons. Firstly, previous research investigated extraversion relationship with innovation, which is a function of both entrepreneurship and intrapreneurship. Dominance, ambition and energy seem more linked with entrepreneurship and has less likely to affect individuals in traditional jobs. This seems plausible as those who are at traditional jobs are less likely to exhibit dominance, energy and their professional ambitions are somewhat linked with organizations. Secondly, less research on PT’s relationships has been done with the perspectives of a developing country. Traditional organizations in developing countries are less likely to promote innovation and intrapreneurship in job settings for the firm or individual benefits as compared to developed countries where innovation and intrapreneurship have gained greater importance.

The study finds that KSB strengthens the PT's (conscientiousness and openness) relationship with IB. Knowledge sharing improves firm performance (Argote and Ingram, 2000) and stimulates creativity (Wang, 2010). As low conscientiousness is linked with low performance at the job (Barrick et al., 2001) and employees with high conscientiousness are better organization citizens who contribute beyond their mandated role (Organ and Ryan, 1995). KSB is part of organization citizenship, which stimulates IB in high conscientious people. As openness has been found to be linked with knowledge sharing (Cabrera et al., 2006), hence, our findings support previous research on openness and KSB as a competitive advantage of firms (Wang, 2010). KSB stimulates creativity and innovation (Wang, 2010) and findings of this study, on strengthening PTs relationship with IB, open avenues for further research on the importance of KSB in organizational perspectives.

This study compared employees of engineering and functional departments in perspectives of PTs as an antecedent of IB. Previous research found engineers quite different in PTs as compared to non-engineers (Williamson et al., 2013). The findings of this study, using MGA, are partially consistent with previous research. Conscientiousness and openness traits relationship with IB is found to be different for employees of engineering and functional departments. This advocates that PTs exhibit differently for the nature of jobs employees are engaged in. Hence, job diversity is an important function of IB while considering PTs. Path coefficients of both groups of employees indicate that the predictive power of employees of functional departments is more as compared to employees of engineering departments. PTs have a strong influence on career choice decisions (Caliendo et al., 2014). This is an interesting finding and consistent with previous research (Williamson et al., 2013). This variation of PTs on IB in both groups of employees is there probably due to the nature of the job, previous education and workplace environment.

Theoretical and practical implications

This study has contributed to intrapreneurship literature by providing insights on PTs impacting IB by incorporating KSB. PTs of individuals have less scope of improvement as regards to organizational perspectives. Organizations can do little in the form of training sessions and improving organization citizenship to effect on PTs. As regards the consequence of IB within organizations, knowledge sharing culture is a way out. KSB of employees results in innovation and creativity, which results in the firm’s competitive advantage through intrapreneurship. KSB of employees is comparatively easy to improve in organizations through management focus. The nature and role of employees in the organization have an effect on individual perceptions and PTs. In departments where employees are doing technical or engineering related jobs, overall communication, socialization and environment are different from departments where functional jobs are performed. To raise engineers to be an entrepreneur or intrapreneur, pedagogical evolution in the engineering curriculum is deemed necessary, which has now been realized by engineering institutions.

Limitations and future research directions

Few limitations of the present study open avenues for future research on PTs, KSB and IB. Firstly, though comparison with respect to PTs of employees has been done, yet generalization of this study on developing countries is difficult due to the diverse nature of jobs and effects due to individual organization culture. In the public sector, diversity due to organizational culture is envisaged to effect less as compared to private sector organizations where organization culture and norms vary considerably. Secondly, the moderated role of only KSB has been considered, whereas many more mediators and moderators are expected to exert influence on PTs and IB. Hence, a combination of more influencers of IB can better explain the phenomenon in future research. Thirdly, this study advocates the importance of KSB of employees in organizations but how this knowledge sharing will come into play in engineering or functional departments, have not been elaborated. Future research on the effects of knowledge sharing to promote intrapreneurship with the perspective of the different organizational roles of employees will bring further insights. Fourthly, only a few PTs have been incorporated in the model of this study. Future researchers to incorporate more PTs to gain deeper insights on employee diversity due to the nature of the job. The findings make an explicit comparison to explain the difference in PTs of employees in different departments. This open avenue for future research on intrapreneurship as the organizational role has effects on employees to engage in intrapreneurship.

Conclusions

As regards developing country's perspectives at the policy level, intrapreneurship is easy to manage, facilitate, legislate and sustain as compared to entrepreneurship. The importance of entrepreneurial start-ups cannot be ignored, intrapreneurial engagements are more relevant and seem effective for developing countries. Human beings have habits, nature, PTs and ways of working, which matures with experience and age. Organizations have to absorb all human-related personality effects to sustain competitive advantage in a diverse environment. The deficiencies in employee training, pedagogics and within organization culture to promote intrapreneurship, can be enhanced through effective engagement of knowledge sharing.

Intrapreneurship and knowledge sharing are increasingly recognized as an important aptitude of employees in a diverse global business environment. This study has open avenues for research on PTs relationship with intrapreneurship in various other contexts. Moreover, the findings of this study can be useful for human resource departments in corporations in selecting engineers and other professionals for employments according to PTs suitable for specific employment.

This research study proposed and tested an integrated model of determinants of intrapreneurship. Intrapreneurship as an auxiliary of entrepreneurship can altogether be defined as a function of PTs. The relevance of intrapreneurship for engineering professionals is very important. Today’s high-tech organizations solely rely on aggressive innovative ideas to retain a competitive advantage in the market. This demands highly innovative professionals in organizations who can create ventures within the organization for the global community. These highly innovative professionals in organizations cannot be created from pedagogical evolutions, rather professionals of specific PTs can be carefully selected for specified roles.

Figures

Figure 1.

Research model

Figure 2.

Moderating effect of KSB on PTs and IB

Table I.

Assessment of measurement model

Construct/associated items		Engineering	Functional	Engineering			Functional
		Factor loading		α	CR	AVE	α	CR	AVE
Conscientiousness	Con_1	0.714	0.79	0.906	0.895	0.588	0.904	0.903	0.609
	Con_2	0.708	0.753
	Con_3	0.758	0.764
	Con_4	0.812	0.851
	Con_5	0.854	0.775
	Con_6	0.744	0.745
Extraversion	Ext_1	0.847	0.753	0.953	0.866	0.57	0.937	0.618	0.574
	Ext_2	0.863	0.852
	Ext_3	0.535	0.757
Openness	Ope_1	0.635	0.732	0.903	0.917	0.614	0.902	0.777	0.589
	Ope_2	0.836	0.842
	Ope_3	0.806	0.816
	Ope_4	0.792	0.812
KSB	KSB_1	0.855	0.868	0.823	0.911	0.596	0.85	0.932	0.663
	KSB_2	0.788	0.802
	KSB_3	0.74	0.795
	KSB_4	0.796	0.791
	KSB_5	0.761	0.81
	KSB_6	0.712	0.779
	KSB_7	0.744	0.851
Proactiveness	Pro_1	0.764	0.827	0.786	0.864	0.681	0.789	0.901	0.753
	Pro_2	0.886	0.888
	Pro_3	0.821	0.886
Risk taking	RT_1	0.906	0.952	0.794	0.869	0.692	0.752	0.869	0.7
	RT_2	0.736	0.816
Innovativeness	Inn_1	0.841	0.894	0.867	0.935	0.827	0.872	0.945	0.852
	Inn_2	0.935	0.94
	Inn_3	0.854	0.87

Table II.

Discriminant validity (Fornell and Larker’s criteria)

Construct	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
Conscientiousness	0.775
Extraversion	0.615	0.665
Innovativeness	0.422	0.279	0.916
KSB	0.449	0.284	0.719	0.776
Openness	0.526	0.523	0.404	0.44	0.699
Proactiveness	0.405	0.286	0.652	0.709	0.408	0.846
Risk taking	0.406	0.196	0.666	0.668	0.44	0.656	0.833

Table III.

Direct hypotheses testing

Hypotheses		β	t-statistics	Decision
Extraversion → IB	H1	−0.041	0.725	Not accepted
Openness → IB	H2	0.14	2.204	Accepted
Conscientiousness → IB	H3	0.151	2.169	Accepted

Table IV.

Invariance measurement testing using permutation

Constructs	Compositional invariance		Equal mean assessment			Equal variance assessment
	Original correlation	5%	Difference	Confidence interval	Equal	Difference	Confidence interval	Equal	Full measurement invariance established
CON	1	1	−0.003	−0.168-0.165	Yes	0.007	−0.194-0.224	Yes	Yes
EXT	1	1	−0.004	−0.16-0.163	Yes	0.009	−0.253-0.294	Yes	Yes
OPE	1	1	−0.004	−0.171-0.163	Yes	0.007	−0.19-0.227	Yes	Yes
IB	0.985	0.974	−0.004	−0.166-0.163	Yes	0.008	−0.211-0.241	Yes	Yes

Table V.

Permutation test path coefficient results

Path	Path coefficient		Confidence interval 95%
	Engineering	Functional	Engineering		Functional
			2.50%	97.50%	2.50%	97.50%	Path coefficient difference	p-value engineering vs functional	Difference (Yes/No)
Extraversion → IB	−0.125	0.069	−0.28	0.01	−0.10	0.21	0.195	0.071	No
Conscientiousness → IB	0.081	0.143	−0.10	0.28	−0.05	0.36	0.041	0.954	Yes
Openness → IB	0.29	0.395	0.11	0.49	−0.08	0.31	0.076	0.963	Yes