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.