Validating the Organizational Context Measure for Collective Learning: A Managerial Action Persepctive

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zakariya Belkhamza ◽  
Syed Azizi Wafa
Keyword(s):  
Organizational Context ◽  
Collective Learning ◽  
Managerial Action

Validating the organizational context measure for collective learning: a managerial action perspective

2014 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 222-242 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zakariya Belkhamza ◽  
Syed Azizi Wafa
Keyword(s):  
Organizational Climate ◽  
Organizational Performance ◽  
Organizational Context ◽  
Collective Learning ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Mutual Cooperation ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Managerial Role ◽  
Managerial Action ◽  
The Relationship

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to validate an instrument for the Ghoshal and Bartlett model and operationalize its four attributes into a multidimensionality instrument questionnaire. This study operationalizes the four attributes, namely, discipline, support, trust and stretch, into a multidimensionality instrument questionnaire and tests this instrument's validation using data from 317 Malaysian Multimedia Super Corridor-status companies. Design/methodology/approach – This paper follows the procedures of building a scale measure. This was carried out in three main stages. The first stage is the generation of scale items. The purpose of this stage is to identify and analyze items based on intensive literature review. The second stage is the assessment of face validity to ensure the correspondence between the individual items and the constructs intended to measure. The final stage is the statistical validation, which includes the assessment of validity and reliability of the introduced instrument. Findings – The paper introduces 23 multidimensional questionnaire items, which contribute to organizational context dimensions. The statistical analysis that followed the conceptual development shows that the presented instrument has good psychometric properties. The validity and reliability of the scale were presented and discussed. Research limitations/implications – This paper suggests that these organizational context dimensions can be investigated with a high degree of confidence, especially when applied to organizations with different climate. To improve the robustness of the model, additional testing in different contexts and cultures may be necessary. Future research may also test the validity of the instrument using larger sample data. Practical implications – The measure offers researchers a comprehensive and flexible approach to the assessment of organizational context and collective learning from a managerial action perspective. This measure may be useful for a broad range of research interests, enabling researchers to investigate some theoretical propositions related to managerial action, such as the relationship between organizational climate and organizational performance. The measure also helps to establish the relationship between organizational context and collective learning in the organization. Originality/value – This study helps to fill the gap in the development of the organizational climate through both conceptual and empirical work. There is therefore a need for a measured, testable instrument to facilitate the empirical evaluation by the modern organization. This measure also contributes toward a better understanding of the managerial role. This managerial role has an imperative role in crafting the behavior of the organization’s members, developing collective learning through distributed initiatives and mutual cooperation.

Development and Construct Validation of the German Workplace Trust Survey (G-WTS)

2010 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nale Lehmann-Willenbrock ◽  
Simone Kauffeld
Keyword(s):  
Convergent Validity ◽  
Affective Commitment ◽  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Organizational Context ◽  
Organizational Trust ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Work Related ◽  
Reliable Assessment ◽  
Workplace Trust

In research on trust in the organizational context, there is some agreement evolving that trust should be measured with respect to various foci. The Workplace Trust Survey (WTS) by Ferres (2002) provides reliable assessment of coworker, supervisor, and organizational trust. By means of a functionally equivalent translation, we developed a German version of the questionnaire (G-WTS) comprising 21 items. A total of 427 employees were surveyed with the G-WTS and questionnaires concerning several work-related attitudes and behaviors and 92 of these completed the survey twice. The hypothesized three-dimensional conceptualization of organizational trust was confirmed by confirmatory factor analysis. The G-WTS showed good internal consistency and retest reliability values. Concerning convergent validity, all of the three G-WTS dimensions positively predicted job satisfaction. In terms of discriminant validity, Coworker Trust enhanced group cohesion; Supervisor Trust fostered innovative behavior, while Organizational Trust was associated with affective commitment. Theoretical and practical contributions as well as opportunities for future research with the G-WTS are discussed.

Collective Learning and The Emergence of Producer-Scrounger Dynamics

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noam Miller ◽  
Ariana Strandburg-Peshkin ◽  
Iain Couzin
Keyword(s):  
Collective Learning

PERSONALITY TRAITS IN ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT: OCCUPATIONAL PERSONALITY PROFILE OF THE GAME- TESTER

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-25
Author(s):  
TRANDAFIRESCU ANA-MARIA ◽  
◽  
TUDOSE CORNELIA ELENA ◽  
MIHĂILĂ TEODORA
Keyword(s):  
Personality Traits ◽  
Organizational Context ◽  
Personality Profile

Authentic leadership development: scrutiny of an apparent paradox

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
António Calheiros
Keyword(s):  
Leadership Development ◽  
Authentic Leadership ◽  
Organizational Context ◽  
Social Identification ◽  
Self Awareness ◽  
True Self ◽  
Apparent Paradox ◽  
Positive Behaviors ◽  
Individual Self ◽  
Authentic Leadership Development

Leadership has long been a topic of interest for both academics (Hiller, DeChurch, Murase, & Doty, 2011; Sanders & Davey, 2011) and practitioners (Bennis, 2007; George, 2003). Academics have tried to understand the concept and identify its consequences and determinants. Practitioners have focused their efforts in its training and development hoping to reap its promised benefits. Over the last decade, authentic leadership has emerged as the fashionable leadership theory. More than just promising impacts on performance and subordinates’ work satisfaction, authentic leadership addresses management’s long term demand for and ethic and moral commitment (Ghoshal, 2005; Rosenthal et al., 2007). Authentic leadership is “a process that draws from both positive psychological capacities and a highly developed organizational context, which results in both greater self-awareness and self-regulated positive behaviors on the part of leaders and associates, fostering positive self-development” (Luthans and Avolio, 2003). The components of authentic leadership’s self-regulated authentic positive behaviours are balanced (non-prejudice) processing, relational orientation and internalized moral perspetive. One key point of authentic leadership is the authenticity of leaders, which can be defined as “knowing, accepting, and remaining true to one’s self” (Avolio et al., 2004). Recent research (Ford & Harding, 2011) have argued that this demand for one’s true self privileges a collective (organizational) self over an individual self and thereby hampers subjectivity to both leaders and followers, and could lead to destructive dynamics within organizations. This paper discusses the seeming paradox of developing authenticity in leaders, (namely addressing the issues raised by Ford & Harding) and clarifies the aim of authentic leadership development. It also assesses the suitability of traditional leadership development methodologies in meeting the challenges posed by a process-based approach to leadership with a focus on individual and social identification.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document