Research methodology
A survey was searched out from MIS literature which was reviewed for
related job skills and skill gaps. The most relevant survey that meets
the aims and objectives of this study was adopted from Wilkerson (2012),
An alumni assessment of MIS related job skill importance and skill gaps
by Jerod W. Wilkerson. The adopted survey items from Wilkerson (2012)
were further modified to ensure consistent wording of the remaining
items. Additional items were added, and the resulting survey was
reviewed by two MIS faculty members who further advised few
modifications and refinements.
The resulting survey (appendix A) consists of 78 items. The first 16
items consist of demographic and employment questions. The second part
of the survey consists of 62 MIS related skill and knowledge questions
organized into categories according to the Fang et al. (2005)
classification scheme. An additional category—Technical
Competencies—was added. The method of Meier, Williams, and Humphreys
(2000) was used for all the 62 skills of the survey. Respondents were
asked to rate their level of competence and importance from a scale of 1
to 5. 5= ‘Very competent’ or ‘Very important’ and 1= ‘Not at all
competent’ or ‘Not at all important’.
To develop the results in terms of comprehension and to conserve the
accuracy with prior results(Meier et al., 2012; Wilkerson, 2012), the
scores of both the competency and importance were transfigured into a
100-point scale, which was achieved by subtracting the score by 1 and
then multiplying it by 25. To calculate the skill gap of the competency,
the scored mean of the current competency is subtracted from the scored
mean of the current importance. The positive scores designate the skills
which contain skill gaps as the importance exceeds the competency. The
higher the number, the bigger the skill gap. Meier et al. (2000) stated
that results alone are not adequate enough to prioritize the skills with
accuracy to make curriculum changes. Making inaccurate changes in the
curriculum coulee result in new skill gaps. Thus, Meier et al. came up
with a formula to calculate the priority taking into consideration the
skill gap and importance:
Priority = (i + (i - c)) / 2
where ‘i’ is skill importance and ‘c’ is skill competency. The priority
score highlights the items with the highest importance and the highest
skill gaps, which are the items that should receive the greatest
attention when making curricular adjustment decisions.