1. BY
AHMAD PALLADAN ALIYU
The Moderating Effect of Cyberloafing
on Innovative Work Behaviour and
Lecturers Job Performance

2. Introduction
 The essentiality of innovation for organizational
effectiveness and performance is widely recognised by
several scholars (Rapp, Baker, Bachrach, Ogilvie, &
Beitelspacher, 2015; Thurlings, Evers, & Vermeulen,
2014; Yuan & Woodman, 2010)
 Innovative Work Behaviour (IWB) refers to deliberate generation,
introduction and application of new ideas in a place of work, in a
group or within an organization for the purpose of performance
enhancement (Janssen, 2000)

3.  Not only for profit organizations that are desirable for innovative
employees; non-profits such as educational institutions are equally in
dear need of innovative workers (Arif, Zubair, & Manzoor, 2006; Bos-
nehles, Bondarouk, & Nijenhuis, 2016; Klausen & Pihl-thingvad,
2016; Thurlings et al., 2014)
 Several reasons suggest that lecturer’s innovative behaviour in the
Nigerian colleges of education is seriously needed. Some of these
reason as argued (Klausen & Pihl-thingvad, 2016), innovative
behaviour is important for the lecturers in order to keep track with
the rapidly changing society; new emerging technologies as well as
latest discoveries about teaching demands.

4.  This act of using computers to surf the internet for
personal purposes while on duty is called
cyberloafing (Lim, 2002).
 More so, Johnson, (2004) and Mastrangel, and
Jolton, (2006) posits that in addition to computers,
the use of cell phone, tablets, iPad etc during
working hours for personal purposes also falls into
this cyberloafing or cyberslacking
Introduction (Cont)

5.  Problem Statement
 Informational capacity is directly related to
employee’s innovative work behaviour
practices, since they may be instrumental for
securing ‘new aptitudes and adapting new
way or strategies’(Yogun, 2015)
 Dorner, Gassmann, and Morhart, (2012) and
Ashraf, Abd Kadir, Lope Pihie and Mat Rashid,
(2014) argued that there are few studies that
empirically examined the relationship
between IWB and employee performance

6. OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY
• To determine the effect of IWB on lecturers
teaching permeance
• To investigate the effect of IWB on lecturer’s
research performance
• To examine the effect of IWB on lecturer’s
community service performance
• To inquire whether cyberloafing moderate the
effect of IWB on lecturers teaching performance
• To investigate the wether cyberloafing moderate
the effect of IWB on lecturer’s research
performance
• To evaluate whether cyberloafing moderate the
effect of IWB on lectures community service
performance.

7. FRAMEWORK OF THE STUDY
LECTURERS
INNOVATIVE
WORK
BEHAVIOUR
(IWB)
LECTURERS
CYBERLOAFING
ACTIVITY
LECTURERS
TEACHING
PERFORMANCE
LECTURERS
RESEARCH
PERFORMANCE
LECTURERS
COMMUNITY
PERFORMANCE

8. Measurement of Constructs
IWB: nine (9) popular items from
Janssen, (2000) were adapted
To measure lecturers cyberloafing
activities, questions were taken from
Roebuck, Siha and Bell, (2013)
Twelve (12) items and six (6) items were adapted from
Moreno-Murcia, Silveira Torregrosa and Pedreño, (2015) and
Sampson, Driscoll, Foulk and Carroll, (2010) respectively to
measure lecturers job performance

9. Population of the Study and Sample
Size
The sample for the study was determine
using Dillman, (2000) and Weaver, (2006)
sampling formulae. Out of 215 questionnaires
distributed, 196 were retrieved and 189 were
considered for further analysis. 7
questionnaires were discarded due univariate
and multivariate issues. This indicate 91.1 %
response rate.

10. Method of Data Analysis
Combinations of both descriptive and inferential
statistics were used.
 The PLS 3 approach was employed for the analysis
(Joseph, Hair Jr, Tomas, Christain, & Serstedt, 2016).
 PLS 3 technique is referred to as the second
generation structural equation modelling (Wold, 1982).
 The technique works well with structural equation
models that contain latent variables and a series of
cause-and-effect relationships (Gustafsson & Johnson,
2004).

11.  DATA ANALYSIS
Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)

12. Latent Variable Correlation
Latent variable correlation
Variable 1 2 3 4 5
1. Community Performance .844
2. Innovative Work Behaviour .460 .735
3. Positive Cyberloafing .405 .639 .770
4. Research Performance .606 .331 .403 .785
5. Teaching Performance .503 .576 .682 .546 .789

13. Hypothesis Testing
Hypothesis Relationship Beta value
Standard
Error T value P value Decision
H1
Innovative Work Behaviour
-> Teaching Performance .237 .079 3.013 .001 Supported
H2
Innovative Work Behaviour
-> Research Performance .124 .093 1.337 .091 Supported
H3
Innovative Work Behaviour
-> Community Performance .341 .079 4.323 .000 Supported
H4
Innovative Work Behaviour
* Positive Cyberloafing ->
Teaching Performance -.373 .048 7.870 .000 Rejected
H5
Innovative Work Behaviour
* Positive Cyberloafing ->
Research Performance -.224 .089 2.514 .006 Rejected
H6
Innovative Work Behaviour
* Positive Cyberloafing ->
Community Performance -.130 .071 1.824 .035 Rejected
***p<.01, **p<.05

14. PREDICTIVE RELEVANCE
Cross-validated redundancy measuring (Q²) was
applied to examine the predictive relevance of
the research model (Chin, 2010; Hair et al.,
2013). The Q² is a measure to evaluate how
worthy a model is in predicting the data of
omitted cases (Chin, 1998; Hair et al., 2014).
Henseler et al. (2009), opined that a research
model with Q2 statistic (s) greater than zero is
regarded to have predictive relevance; while a
research model with higher positive Q2 values
connotes more predictive relevance

15. PREDICTIVE RELEVANCE (Cont)
Q2 - Cross Validated Redundancy
SSO SSE
1-
SSE/SSO
Community
Performance 567 491.791 0.1326
Research
Performance 567 538.147 0.0509
Teaching
Performance 1512 1124.21 0.2565

16. DISCUSSION
 The findings of the study lend support to the
role of employee’s innovative work behaviour
(IWB) in fostering lecturers performance at
work. This is not surprising, since individual
employee innovative behaviours in the
workplace are the foundation of any high-
performance organization (Carmeli et al.,
2006)

17. DISCUSSION (cont)
 Xerri, Brunetto and Shacklock, (2009) posits that
evidence from the extant literature reveals that
growing innovative behaviour among employees can
give organisations an edge and competitive advantage
 The finding here demonstrates that innovative work
behaviour (IWB) in schools assist faculties in enhancing
their strength in teaching by allow them to provide
clear information about the objectives for the cause
they thought as well as permit them to seek for
scientific informations that will better their
understanding om the causes they teach to their
students

18. ALHAMDULILLAH!
THANK YOU FOR LISTENING!!!