{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023335804299481098, 'fraction_numerical': 0.014914751667902149, 'mean_word_length': 5.349021084337349, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 4, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 3, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Role of Knowledge Sharing and Learning Orientation in Improving Innovative Work Behavior among Millennials in Indonesia

Millennials in Indonesia are now perceived as the main actor of the future generation in the country. As Indonesia is approaching the demographic benefit in 2030-2020, they are expected to innovate in all industrial sectors to support the nationwide development. The purpose of this study is to conduct a prediction on innovative work behavior based on knowledge sharing and learning orientation among millennial workers in Indonesia. This research was conducted under a quantitative approach with a questionnaire-based survey involving 246 millennial respondents working in several sectors. Using partial least square, the finding of this explanatory research implies that learning orientation does have no significant influence on innovative work behavior. However, knowledge sharing has a significant effect on innovative work behavior among Indonesian millennials at the workplace.


Introduction
Innovation is nowadays intensively required to support human capital and technology to contribute to a nation's economic growth significantly. Innovation, along with its creativity feature, has been a key to the economic added value in delivering products and services to the broader global market to gain a higher profit for the company. On a smaller scale, innovation also plays an essential role in improving the performance of an organization. For instance, management innovation can vigorously promote optimization of operational and production and become positively impactful on the competitive advantage in the middle of emerging markets (Pala, 2019).
As the largest country in Southeast Asia, Indonesia has a more significant opportunity over its neighborhood countries to increase innovation due to the powerful support of human resources. However, based on an assessment conducted by the Global Innovation Index (GII) in 2019, Indonesia is still left behind from other ASEAN countries. Indonesia is ranked seventh among other Southeast Asian countries and eightyfifth globally in terms of innovation capability. The most critical indicators in evaluating innovation activities formulated by GII are research and development investment, international patents, brands owned by a country, application development on mobile phones, and exports of high-tech products. The GII report shows that countries prioritizing innovation in their policies successfully raise their rankings significantly (World Intellectual Property Organization, 2019). Dziallas & Blind (2019) discovered that the level of innovation produced by a company or a country through a process begins with innovative work behavior. In his research, Dereli (2015) also explains that global competition and competitive advantage also start from innovation management so that it affects the work behavior of innovative human resource companies and ultimately increases innovation of the products or services produced. Furthermore, it is strongly recommended for developing countries such as Indonesia to encourage the workers, regardless of the industrial sector, to sharpen their innovative work behavior to support the enterprise and the industry. This recommendation is formulated due to considering the demographic benefit that Indonesia will face between 2020-2040 (Lubis & Mulianingsih, 2019).
During the demographical benefit, Indonesia will be supported by productive generations with their contribution both in major and minor industries dominated by millennials born between 1981 and 1995. In 75 other words, this advantage cannot be executed without any significant roles and contributions of the millennials (Lubis & Mulianingsih, 2019). Moreover, one of the keys to maximizing this advantage during Indonesia's future demographical benefit decade is to improve each worker's innovation capacity, which is also known as innovative work behavior. Chatchawan et al. (2017) state that innovative work behavior can be simultaneously influenced by learning orientation. In this context, learning orientation is an activity that encourages workers to learn deeper about various things related to work. The learning outcomes carried out by workers also give insight so that it affects innovation at work, then lessons learned to stimulate workers to understand various work materials enable them to generate various alternative solutions to the problems encountered. According to an empirical study conducted by Akram et al. (2018) and Chatchawan et al. (2017), innovative work behavior is also impacted by knowledge sharing and knowledge sharing is also able to encourage workers to improve learning orientation. This study also found that knowledge sharing influences innovative work behavior; however, the difference is in the magnitude of the effect of knowledge sharing on innovative work behavior. According to the statistical test results of Akram et al. (2018), it is implied that the effect of knowledge sharing on innovative work behavior is 52.5%, while the research of Hassan et al. (2018) found that the effect of knowledge sharing on innovative work behavior was 54.5%. Likewise, with the research of Ologbo et al. (2015), it was found that the effect of knowledge sharing on innovative work behavior was 57%.
On the contrary, the research of Nguyen (2020) revealed that the effect of knowledge sharing on innovative work behavior only 12.4%. This significant difference finding between the variables of each of these studies shows that there are still evidence gaps in the previous works on the effect of knowledge sharing on innovative work behavior. In addition, this study also offers a population gap reflected on the chosen population, the millennial workers born in 1981-1995 who are now holding the nearest future of the country as an entire productive generation. They are also expected to bring innovation in all industrial sectors. We perceive that this novel study on millennials' innovation is crucial at the moment. We aim to predict their innovative work behavior from the knowledge sharing activity and the learning orientation among them in all industrial sectors that require innovation support nationwide development.
As an archipelago country, Indonesia is geographically divided into two central regions: the west area and the east area. It is also commonly known that west Indonesia is perceived as improved more in infrastructures and public facilities than east Indonesia. Thus, we specifically aim to compare how knowledge sharing influences innovative work behavior among millennials in the west and east parts of Indonesia.

Research Questions and Objective
According to the delineation of the backgrounds, the research questions of this study are formulated as the following: RQ1: Does knowledge sharing have a significant impact on innovative work behavior among millennials in Indonesia? RQ2: Does knowledge sharing have a significant impact on learning orientation among millennials in Indonesia? RQ3: Does learning orientation have a significant impact on innovative work behavior among millennials in Indonesia? RQ4: Can learning orientation play the role as the intervening variable between knowledge sharing innovative work behavior?
Simultaneously with the formulated research questions, the purpose of this study is to examine and analyze the relationship between knowledge sharing and innovative work behavior, learning orientation and innovative work behavior, and knowledge sharing and learning orientation. Hughes et al. (2018) define innovative work behavior as individual behavior aimed at achieving initiative and introducing ideas (work, group, or organizational roles), new and valuable processes, products, or procedures. At the same time, Scott and Bruce (1994) defined innovative work behavior as one's ability and willingness to produce new ideas and sharpen skills to work using their capability. Later, De Jong & Hartog (2010) introduced innovative behavior as individual activities to introduce new and useful ideas related to processes, products, or procedures. According to , innovation behavior is a simple behavior; it can be interpreted as a breakthrough related to a new workplace to complete a job or a task.

Innovative Work Behavior
In addition to some definitions above, Meza & Joaquin (2015) stated that innovation could also create a competitive advantage and is a means of survival in the face of an uncertain competitive environment. Meanwhile, Ayranci (2011) added that innovative behavior is an individual's ability that can be learned and includes several dimensions such as the ability to think differently from other individuals, sensitive to problems and information gaps, find solutions to problems, formulate new assumptions, and analyze the results of existing assumptions. To sum up, from some of the definitions above, innovative work behavior is a collection of actions performed by a worker in a workplace in which the focus and the purpose are to improve the task completion to achieve the goal as it includes the identification, design, implementation, and evaluation of new ideas and creativity.
This study summarized four dimensions considered ideal for the measurement (De Jong and Hartog, 2010). These dimensions are (1) idea generation which includes the willingness to pay attention to new issues and interest to improve things at work; (2) idea exploration, which involves the ability to find new work methods and techniques, the ability to generate correct ideas for a problem, the ability to find new ways to get work done; (3) idea championing which is elaborated in the ability to encourage other individuals to be enthusiastic in innovating, the ability to convince people to support innovative ideas; and (4) idea implementation as measured by the willingness to introduce innovative ideas systematically in work practices, contributions to the implementation of new ideas and efforts in developing new things.

Knowledge Sharing
Knowledge sharing is simply defined as exchanging information and expertise within an organization (Radaelli et al., 2017). Numerous studies have shown that knowledge sharing has an essential role because it enables organizations to improve innovation performance and reduce excessive learning efforts (Ritala et al., 2014). Knowledge sharing is also considered a key element in organizational competitiveness and growth; therefore, knowledge sharing is one of the keys to organizational survival (Lin, 2007). In addition, knowledge sharing is a crucial method for gaining and creating knowledge in the workplace. This knowledge sharing is a core element of knowledge management, and it is essential to implement knowledge sharing because sharing knowledge has a vital role in achieving successful knowledge management (Wang and Noe, 2010).
According to Lin (2007), knowledge sharing is ideally investigated in research instruments formed in two dimensions of measurement: knowledge donating and knowledge collecting. Knowledge is defined as the process of individuals in communicating their intellectual capital to others. This dimension includes a willingness to share new knowledge with others, an assessment of colleagues' willingness to share new knowledge, and perceptions of a work environment accustomed to the knowledge-sharing culture. Meanwhile, knowledge collecting is defined as the process of consulting with colleagues to encourage them to share intellectual knowledge. This dimension is measured by indicators, namely the willingness to share information when needed, the willingness to share abilities when needed, perceptions of the workplace that can share knowledge and abilities when needed.

Learning Orientation
Learning orientation is defined as an organizational value associated with the tendency of organizations to utilize knowledge (Melton & Harline, 2013). Learning orientation focuses on the acquisition of potential knowledge that is beneficial to the organization and provides information and information dissemination systems as a mechanism where learning occurs (Wang, 2008). In addition, learning orientation is a company orientation that shows principles on efforts to identify and exploit learning (Meza & Joaquin, 2014). Companies with a strong learning orientation tend to be more willing to take risks and not just stick to past strategies (Ng et al., 2010). In a dynamic environment these days, learning orientation is clearly and critically necessary for the company's survival. However, instead of analyzing organizations' orientation on their learning behavior, this study examines the learning orientation indicated by the millennial worker in Indonesia in many industries. Therefore, we summarize that individual learning orientation is one's tendency or habit of seeking information to gain knowledge and skills, which is considered beneficial in accomplishing mastery over a task.
Adopting Wang (2008), three dimensions are perceived suitable to measure individual learning orientation, namely commitment to learning, shared vision, and open-mindedness (Wang, 2008). Commitment to learning refers to the extent to which an individual places value on learning. This dimension includes awareness of the importance of learning as one of the keys to excel in competing, an awareness of the importance of learning as a means for self-development, an awareness that learning is an investment, not a burden, awareness that is learning as capital for career continuity. Open-mindedness refers to the extent to which individuals are proactively open to long-term routines, assumptions, beliefs and can learn from experiences of past successes and failures. This construct can be measured through openness to criticism of others, openness to the way to perceive other's personalities. The last dimension described by Wang (2008) is a shared vision that refers to an individual's assessment of the goals held by his place of work. However, in this study, the company's assessment is not conducted since the focus of the research subject is millennials.

Hypothesis Development
This study aims to examine the effect of knowledge sharing and learning orientation on innovative work behavior among millennials workers in Indonesia. Thus, the conceptual framework of this study is described on the following chart:

Knowledge Sharing and Innovative Work Behavior
Notions of the relationship between knowledge sharing and innovative work behavior have been noted in some previous works. Lin (2007) revealed that knowledge sharing activities mentioned in two dimensions of knowledge collecting and donating is a factor that influences the innovation capability of a firm which is collected from the employees. It implies that knowledge sharing is an important strategy that can be an individual factor to support innovation at work. In addition, Hassan et al. (2018) also found in their research that both knowledges donating and knowledge collecting impact improving innovative work behavior for continued improvement in existing procedures and operation of human capital. Thus, the first hypothesis of this study is formulated as the following: H 1 : Knowledge sharing gives a significant contribution to improving innovative work behavior.

Knowledge Sharing and Learning Orientation
Several research works overtimes have also investigated the relationship between knowledge sharing and learning orientation. Two empirical research conducted by Akram et al. (2018) and Chatchawan et al. (2017) revealed that the orientation of learning in the organization could be influenced by knowledge sharing, including knowledge donating as well as knowledge collecting. It is implied that knowledge sharing aims to provide favorable surroundings which encourage employees to share relevant information and knowledge with other colleagues in the workplace. In other words, this situation can stimulate the formation of a stronger learning orientation among the employees. Wu and Lin (2013) also summarized from several previous works that knowledge sharing activity in a firm could gain learning orientation. It is also stated that a strong learning orientation can be formed from constant knowledge sharing in the form of knowledge transfer inside the firm. Therefore, this empirical exploration generates the second hypothesis is the following: H 2 : Knowledge sharing gives a significant contribution to strengthening learning orientation.

Learning Orientation and Innovative Work Behavior
According to research conducted by Chatchawan et al. (2017), learning orientation is one factor that plays a direct role in developing employees' innovative work behavior in local administrative organizations. The organization is committed to encouraging employees to learn and share knowledge with their work teams. Such actions will motivate employees to implement new and innovative ideas in their assigned work. Learning-oriented organizations will increase the innovative behavior of workers. The results of this study are in line with research by Atitumpong and Badir (2018), which states that employee learning orientation has a significant relationship with innovative work behavior. If learning orientation is considered as an input, then an employee's innovative work behavior can be perceived as an output of learning efforts. Thus, the third hypothesis of this study can be stated as follows: H 3 : Learning orientation gives a significant contribution to improving innovative work behavior.

Knowledge Sharing, Learning Orientation, and Innovative Work Behavior
In addition to analyzing the direct influence between two constructs, this study also analyzes the indirect effect of knowledge sharing on innovative work behavior among millennial workers in Indonesia. Following the construct relationships above, namely the relationship between knowledge sharing and learning orientation (Lin, 2007;Hassan et al., 2018), and the relationship between learning orientation and innovative work behavior (Chatcawan et al., 2017;Atitumping & Badir, 2018), this study forms the investigation the intervention of learning orientation on the impact of knowledge sharing on innovative work behavior. Therefore, the fourth hypothesis of this research is summarized as the following: H 4 : Learning orientation can play an intervening role between knowledge sharing and innovative work behavior.

Methods
In this study, the identified population is the millennial generation, commonly referred to as Generation Y, born in 1980-1995(Ng et al., 2010. This study was conducted under the quantitative approach using a five-score Likert scale questionnaire. This questionnaire was distributed using Google Form. Two hundred ninety-seven answers were received from research respondents from April 25 to April 30, 2020. The data collected included the year of birth, gender, education, domicile, and occupation. Due to some eliminations, finally, the number of qualified respondents reached 246. These 246 observations were distributed in western Indonesia (175) and eastern Indonesia (71), with millennials born in 1991-1995 as a dominating sample (154 observations) while those who born in 1986-1990 took part in 68 observations, and senior millennials (born in 1980-1985) contributed in 24 observations. This study also required employed millennials to fill the questionnaire, and the occupations identified from these millennials are entrepreneur (86), private company worker (81), professionals (40), civil servant (13), and others (26). Finally, we can conclude that the various jobs of millennial respondents are from various professions and can represent some different industries.
Then, the answer collected was included in the data pre-processing step. In addition to setting all the variables as latent variables, we placed learning orientation as the intervening variable while knowledge sharing as the independent variable and innovative work behavior as the dependent variable. Furthermore, partial least squares (PLS) were chosen to test the hypotheses. Although the portion is not evenly distributed, we still decide to analyze in Multi-Group Analysis (MGA) later. The MGA run under the extension process of partial least square aims to see the difference of behavior representing the direct effect of two constructs between the two main groups (West and East Indonesia). Although it is not stated in the research question, the MGA is still selected since the approach compares different groups of millennials based on the geographical as mentioned above, that leads to further analysis.
Assessment of the research instruments in terms of validity and reliability was conducted for both the constructs and indicators. The indicator validity test was performed by assessing if the factor loading of each indicator is more significant than 0.5 as the acceptable minimum value (Hair et al., 2014). Meanwhile, the construct reliability test assesses if the reliability value greater than 0.7 is the acceptable minimum value (Saunders et al., 2009). Finally, the construct validity is indicated enough if the cut-off value of the average variance extracted (AVE) reaches 0.5 or above (Hair et al., 2014). Using SmartPLS 3.0, we ran the convergent validity test for the first stage, and then the result showed that the AVE of the IWB construct was less than 0.5. Thus, we decided to drop the indicator with the smallest outer loading. IWB01 is related to one's willingness to pay attention to new issues that were found weak on its outer loading (< 0.5). Therefore, IWB01 was excluded from the model and not involved in the subsequent analysis.
After IWB01-exclusion, the second attempt of the PLS algorithm was once run. The result can be seen in Table 1 or Figure 2 that indicates that the AVE value of the three variables has met the minimum requirements of 0.5 with each AVE value 0.521, 0.578, and 0.600 for IWB, KS, and LO. To identify convergent validity, the outer loading value of each indicator on each variable has reached the cut-off value, which is 0.5. Thus, all indicators shown above are considered valid. Valid indicators are those that are ideally perceived to measure the latent variable. In addition to the validity test, Table 1 also shows measurements in Cronbach's Alpha score. In general, reliability of less than 0.60 is considered acceptable, while in the range of 0.70 is acceptable, and those above 0.80 are good (Sekarang & Bougie, 2016). Since the Cronbach's Alpha which is owned by each variable, are more than 0.80, all the variables in this study can be considered reliable.

Results
The next step of the analysis is to interpret the coefficient of determination indicated in the R2 score shown in Figure 2. According to the calculation results, the R 2 value of the innovative work behavior and learning orientation are 0.374 and 0.391, respectively. This result means that the value of the innovative work behavior variable affected by knowledge sharing is 37.4%, while other variables outside the proposed model explain the remaining 62.6%. In addition, this also means that the value of learning orientation that is influenced by knowledge sharing is 39.1%. Other variables outside this research model can explain the remaining 60.9%. Both R 2 values are considered in the low category because they are in the range of 0.25-0.50.  According to Table 2, with a path coefficient of 0.532, the knowledge sharing variable has a positive and significant effect on innovative work behavior because the p-value is 0.000 and the T-statistic value is 7.746, which means the p-value <0.05 and T-statistic> 1.96. This finding means H 1 is accepted. Meanwhile, with a path coefficient of 0.626, the knowledge sharing variable has a positive and significant effect on learning orientation following the p-value of 0.000 and the T-statistic value of 13.434. This result shows that H 2 is accepted.
On the contrary, learning orientation has no significant effect on innovative work behavior since the p-value is 0.101 and the T-statistic value is 1.645 (p-value > 0.05; the T-statistic <1.96, and this means that H 3 is rejected. In addition, the indirect effect calculation shows that knowledge sharing has no significant effect on innovative work behavior through learning orientation. This result is supported by the pvalue of 0.165 (> 0.05) and the T-statistic value of 1.392 (<1.96). The path coefficient value (0.075) is considered small compared to the direct effect. This summarizes that this indirect effect is still positive but has no significant effect or strength of influence in it. Considering this result, we can finally state that H 4 is not supported.
Finally, a multi-group analysis (MGA) test was conducted to explain the group of millennial workers based on geographical areas, including western Indonesia and eastern Indonesia. Table 3 implies that the distribution of respondents in this study were 175 millennial workers distributed in western Indonesia, which included Sumatra, Java, Bali, and Kalimantan, and 71 millennial workers in eastern Indonesia, including Sulawesi, Nusa Tenggara, Maluku, and Papua. Table 3 also describes the t-value and p-value of the relationships between variables in both groups of millennial workers. The significance requirements for MGA still use the same cut-off value for evaluating the inner model. The significant result of this MGA, both in the West and East Indonesia groups, has the same finding as the inner model evaluation derived from the hypothesis test. It states that KS has a significant positive effect on IWB; KS has a positive effect significant to LO while LO has no significant positive effect on IWB. Table 3 illustrates that the effect of learning orientation on innovative work behavior does not strongly impact innovation owned by millennials in both western and eastern Indonesia. Another revealed is that knowledge sharing can directly influence innovative work behavior in millennial generation workplaces in western and eastern Indonesia. However, the finding of this study also implies that the influence of knowledge sharing on innovative work behavior is more robust among millennials in Western Indonesia than in Eastern Indonesia. This result is supported by the calculation finding of the T-statistic value of the KS-IWB relation (6,522 for Western Indonesia and 3,256 for Eastern Indonesia).

Discussion
This study found that knowledge sharing has a positive and significant effect on innovative work behavior. In other words, knowledge sharing among millennial workers can contribute to the improvement of innovative work behavior. For instance, sharing experience and transferring knowledge among the workers with the same division or those who work in the same business process can positively stimulate a habit of innovation that leads to the organization's development to achieve its vision and mission. This result also illustrates that every individual needs various knowledge from many sources to innovate when accomplishing duties and responsibilities. The results obtained from this study are in line with the findings of previous research conducted by Lin (2007) and Suprapto et al. (2017), which explains that knowledge sharing is considered a key element in competitiveness and organizational growth. Therefore, knowledge sharing will be advantageous for the survival of the organization. This study also found that sharing knowledge among millennial workers can strongly influence one's willingness to create collective innovation at the organizational level. Supported by the second hypotheses test result, it was discovered that knowledge sharing has a positive and significant effect on learning orientation. By practicing knowledge sharing such as knowledge transfer and experience sharing, millennial workers can gain competence improvement from the interactions with other fellow workers, which can lead to a learning habit among workers through knowledge sharing activity. In other words, learning orientation in organizations involving millennials as productive workers can be mainly formed by knowledge-sharing behavior both in a small set of people and a larger group. Another result in this study indicates that learning orientation has no significant influence on innovative work behavior. It implies that in this study the effect of learning orientation on innovative work behavior still cannot be employed as a guide in innovating organization or firm among millennials.
The rejected prediction points out that organizations can rely on knowledge sharing to improve millennials' innovation behavior at the workplace instead of focusing on strengthening their learning orientation. This suggestion is rationally based on the phenomenon related to information sources digitally provided by the rapid advancement of technology. Regardless of their orientation type in the learning process, productive generations such as millennials and gen-z members tend to count on valuable and relevant information shared on the internet or other technology-based media to innovate themselves and the organization.

Conclusions
To sum up, we formalized four conclusions of this study. Firstly, knowledge-sharing activities carried out by millennial workers can increase the capacity of innovative work behavior in their respective professions. In other words, the higher the knowledge sharing an individual has, the higher the work behavior of the individual. This result is due to the first hypothesis, which reads "knowledge sharing has a significant effect on innovative work behavior," is supported. Secondly, knowledge-sharing activities performed by millennial workers can stimulate the capacity of learning orientation in their profession at the workplace. This result also means that the higher the knowledge sharing owned by an individual, the higher the learning orientation of the individual. This finding is because the second hypothesis is accepted. Third, learning orientation among millennial workers in Indonesia has not increased the capacity of innovative work behavior to support their work. This finding indicates that learning orientation is not a factor that can influence innovative work behavior among millennial workers in Indonesia. Finally, the indirect effect from knowledge sharing to innovative work behavior shows that learning orientation cannot play the mediating or intervening role to boost the influence.
This research recommends that firms in various industrial sectors employ millennials to emphasize knowledge sharing in the organization, leading to increased innovation. Knowledge-sharing activities involving millennials in the workplace, such as knowledge transfer from seniors to newcomers, are considered essential. This is not limited to knowledge alone; however, it can also involve skill transfer and experience brainstorming to equip millennials employees with their passion for learning and social interaction value in the workplace and their strong technology capacity (Ng, et al., 2010). According to the MGA finding, it is known that knowledge sharing has a significant influence on innovative work behavior. However, the influence power shows that the relationship power between knowledge sharing and innovative work behavior among millennials in West Indonesia is about twice stronger than millennials in East Indonesia. Know sharing initiatives in west Indonesia could be supported by technological facilities distributed more evenly than in the east. Wu and Lin (2013) summarized that information technology plays an important role in knowledge effectiveness in a firm. The management people can consider this issue in the firms to facilitate employees with technologybased knowledge sharing activity that promotes innovation on a firm-wide scale.
In addition, this study found that strong learning orientation does not play a vital role in improving innovation in individual scope in a firm. However, it is affected significantly by knowledge sharing; nonetheless, this finding is only applied to millennial workers since the characteristic generation could's characteristic different in performing innovative work behavior that is formed from learning orientation. For that reason, we recommend that learning orientation be assessed in a more specific view. Digital learning orientation, for instance, can be a considerable concept to examine since Wu and Li (2013) revealed that information technology is one of the important factors forming knowledge effectiveness in a firm.
Due to the uneven distribution of geographical representation on millennials taking part in the survey, the finding of this study must be put into moderate consideration when it comes to generalizing to the entire country. This limitation is reflected from the small participation of millennials in Sumatra Island, which is the second populous island in Indonesia, and other places in Indonesia that are considered required to be represented. After all, each province and region's professional and social culture can significantly differ in knowledge sharing and learning orientation in the workplace. Further, research also implies that millennials have the characteristic to be encouraged to collaborate and offer capacity-building programs through knowledge sharing. Finally, this study suggests future research regarding creating adequate knowledge sharing between millennials and how to leverage the learning capacity and innovation. Moreover, the link between knowledge sharing and the successful creation and breadth of learning needs to be delved, such as what other factors affect those results.