Global Journal of Management and Business Research, E: Marketing, Volume 21 Issue 4

The internal consistency was also examined by calculating the Composite Reliability (CR) and the Average Variance Extracted (AVE). The construct values for the AVE are>. 5, and CR is >.7 (Hair et al., 1998; Fornell & Larcker, 1981). The values for both the constructs are above the cut off values which confirms the validity of both the construct and the individual items are high and meet the measurement requirements for further analysis (Refer to Table 6) Table 6: Reliability of Item Construct Construct No. of Items AVE Composite Reliability Market Orientation (MO) 7 0.71 0.94 Diffusion (DF) 10 0.63 0.93 To measure the operationalised accuracy of the construct, the construct validity was checked using both convergent validity and discriminant validity. The discriminant validity is measured by squaring the correlation and then the squared correlation is compared with the AVE, which should be greater (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). The results meet the requirement establishing the discriminant validity of the two constructs (Refer Table 7). Table 7: Discriminant Validity Variable Mean St. Deviation Variables MO DF MO 3.22 1.06 0.71 0.68 DF 3.49 0.76 0.60 In the factor analysis, all correlation coefficients of inter construct were within the range of .3 - .9, indicating the absence of multi-collinearity and all factor loadings were above .7. Thus, the value of the construct was established. A comparison of means was run by carrying out an independent t-test by ownership as the study was conducted in a national framework that included two distinct patent ownership groups. The independent t-test was selected as it compares the means between two unrelated groups on the same continuous dependent variable. The variance in the Standard Deviation shows a difference in the mean scores of the two constructs for the two ownership groups, as reported in Table 8. Table 8: Result from the Independent t-test for ownership Variable Ownership Mean SD Levene’s Test t df Sig(2 tailed) F Sig MKT Orientation (MO) Individual 2.86 1.024 0.003 0.957 5.005 218 0.000 Organisation 3.55 0.996 Diffusion (DF) Individual 3.31 0.689 9.565 0.002 -348 216 0.000 Organisation 3.66 0.799 N Organizations 114, Individuals 106 The result of the t-test indicates a difference between the mean scores of the two ownership groups. The t-test result of the independent variable MO shows a significant difference between the mean score of MO for Organisations (M=3.55, SD=.99) and Individuals (M=2.86, SD=1.02), conditions; t (218) =-.5.00, p=0.001 indicating organisations are significantly more market Oriented throughout the innovation process. The result of the t-test for the independent variable Diffusion (DF) shows a difference between the mean score of DF for Organisations (M=3.66, SD=.798) and Individuals (M=3.31, SD=.689), conditions; t (218) =-3.4, p=0.001. This indicates organizations innovations comply more with the diffusion product characteristics than those patents owned by Individuals. The regression analysis was used to test the hypothesis relationships of the study with the sample population. The analysis indicates a positive relationship between each independent variable: Market Orientation and Diffusion with the dependent variable commercialisation. In addition, ownership as a variable showed a positive relationship with the dependent variable as well (Refer Table 9). © 2021 Global Journals Global Journal of Management and Business Research Volume XXI Issue IV Version I Year 2021 ( ) E 38 The Impact of Market Orientation and Diffusion on Commercial Success of Patented Innovation in Sri Lanka