Yenilikçi İş Davranışı Ölçeği’nin Türkçeye Uyarlanması: Geçerlik-Güvenirlik Çalışması

Abstract

Bu araştırmada Lambriex-Schmitz, Klink, Beausaert, Bijker ve Segers (2020) tarafından geliştirilen Yenilikçi İş Davranışı Ölçeği’ni Türkçe’ye uyarlamak amaçlanmıştır. Bu kapsamda 2019-2020 eğitim-öğretim yılında Hatay il merkezinde resmi ve özel okullarda görev yapan 314 öğretmen çalışma grubunu oluşturmaktadır. Ölçeğin orijinal faktör yapısını incelemek üzere doğrulayıcı faktör analizi ve ölçek uyarlamaya ilişkin diğer işlemler gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çeviri işlemleri, pilot çalışma, dil geçerliği, doğrulayıcı faktör analizi, güvenirlik, madde analizleri ve korelasyon hesaplamaları bu bağlamda yapılan işlemlerdir. Analizler sonunda ölçeğin 44 maddelik yedi faktörlü yapısının doğrulandığı anlaşılmıştır. Doğrulayıcı faktör analizi sonunda uyum değerlerinin kabul edilebilir düzeyde olduğu, maddelerin faktör yüklerinin ise yüksek düzeyde olduğu anlaşılmıştır. Ölçeğin bütününün Cronbach alfa güvenirlik katsayısı 0,98 gibi oldukça yüksek bulunurken, faktörlerin alfa değerleri 0,82-0,96 aralığında değişmektedir. Güvenirlik kapsamında kararlılığa ilişkin güvenirlik değeri 0,79 olarak belirlenmiş, ölçeğin kararlı yapıda olduğu değerlendirilmiştir. Madde analizleri kapsamında madde ayırt edicilik değerlerinin anlamlı olduğu ve ayırt ediciliğin sağlandığı sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Madde toplam korelasyon değerlerinin ise 0,68 ile 0,98 aralığında olduğu, maddelerin ölçeğin bütünü ile olan korelasyonlarının yüksek olduğu anlaşılmıştır. Sonuç olarak orijinali yurt dışında geliştirilen Yenilikçi İş Davranışı Ölçeği’nin Türkçe’ye uyarlandığı bu çalışmada ölçeğin geçerlik ve güvenirliğinin sağlandığı anlaşılmıştır.

Keywords

• Yenilikçi iş davranışı
• Ölçek uyarlama
• Geçerlik – güvenirlik
• Öğretmenler

Adaptation of Innovative Work Behavior Scale to Turkish: A Validity-Reliability Study

Abstract

The aim of the research is to adapt the “Innovative Work Behavior Scale” by Lambriex-Schmitz, Klink, Beausaert, Bijker ve Segers (2020) to Turkish. In this context, participants of the study were 314 teachers working in public and private schools during the 2019-2020 academic year in Hatay province. Other processes related to confirmatory factor analysis and scale adaptation were performed to verify the original factor structure of the scale. Translation processes, pilot work, language validity, confirmatory factor analysis, reliability, item analysis and correlational calculations processes were performed respectively. Related to the analyses, it was presented that the scale has 7-factor structure with 44 items. Regarding to the confirmative factor analysis, it was understood that the compliance values were acceptable or good, while the factor loads of the items were high. The Cronbach alpha coefficient of the entire scale is quite high at .98, while the alfa values of the factors varied between .82 and .96. Within the scope of reliance, the reliance value for decisiveness was found to be .79 and the scale was considered to be stable. In the context of item analyses, it was concluded that the values of item discrimination index was significant. Item – total correlation values are in the range of .68 and .98, the correlations of the items with the whole scale were proved to be high. As a result, it was found out that the Innovative Work Scale, in which, originally developed abroad, was adapted to Turkish contexts was valid and reliable.

Keywords

• Innovative work behavior
• Scale Adaptation
• Validity-reliability
• Teachers

References

1. Afridi, S. A., Afsar, B., Shahjehan, A., Rehman, Z. U., Haider, M. ve Ullah, M. (2020). Perceived corporate social responsibility and innovative work behavior: The role of employee volunteerism and authenticity. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management.
2. Afsar, B. ve Badir, Y. (2017). Workplace spirituality, perceived organizational support and innovative work behavior. Journal of workplace Learning.
3. Albayrak, A. (2006). Uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikleri. Ankara: Asil Yayın Dağıtım.
4. Anderson, N., De Dreu, C. K. W. ve Nijstad, B. A. (2004). The routinization of innovation research: a constructively critical review of the state-of-the-science. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(2), 147-173. doi:10.1002/job.236
5. Anderson, N. R. ve Gasteiger, R. M. (2008). Innovation and creativity in organizations: Individual and work team research findings and implications for government policy. Micro-foundations for innovation policy, 18.
6. Anser, M. K., Yousaf, Z., Khan, A. ve Usman, M. (2020). Towards innovative work behavior through knowledge management infrastructure capabilities. European Journal of Innovation Management, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print). doi:10.1108/ejim-09-2019-0250
7. Asurakkody, T. A. ve Kim, S. H. (2020). Effects of knowledge sharing behavior on innovative work behavior among nursing Students: Mediating role of Self- leadership. International Journal of Africa Nursing Sciences, 12. doi:10.1016/j.ijans.2020.100190
8. Azevedo, A. ve Shane, M. J. (2019). A new training program in developing cultural intelligence can also improve innovative work behavior and resilience: A longitudinal pilot study of graduate students and professional employees. The International Journal of Management Education, 17(3). doi:10.1016/j.ijme.2019.05.004

9. Baer, M. (2012). Putting creativity to work: The implementation of creative ideas in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 55(5), 1102-1119.
10. Battistelli, A., Odoardi, C., Vandenberghe, C., Di Napoli, G. ve Piccione, L. (2019). Information sharing and innovative work behavior: The role of work‐based learning, challenging tasks, and organizational commitment. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 30(3), 361-381. doi:10.1002/hrdq.21344
11. Bin Saeed, B., Afsar, B., Shahjeha, A. ve Imad Shah, S. (2019). Does transformational leadership foster innovative work behavior? The roles of psychological empowerment, intrinsic motivation, and creative process engagement. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 32(1), 254-281.
12. Bos-Nehles, A., Renkema, M. ve Janssen, M. (2017). HRM and innovative work behaviour: A systematic literature review. Personnel Review.
13. Brown, T. ve Moore, M. (2012). Handbook of Structural Equation Modeling (Ed: Rick H. Hoyle), Chapter: Confirmatory factor analysis (pp.361-379). The Guilford Press.
14. Budhiraja, S. (2019). Organizational readiness for change: an inherent concern for Indian small and medium enterprises (SMEs). Development and Learning in Organizations: An International Journal.
15. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2008). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitbı. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
16. Can, A. (2019). SPSS ile nicel veri analizi. Ankara: Pegem Yayınları.
17. Cangialosi, N., Odoardi, C. ve Battistelli, A. (2020). Learning climate and innovative work behavior, the mediating role of the learning potential of the workplace. Vocations and Learning, 1-18.
18. Darroch, J. (2005). Knowledge management, innovation and firm performance. Journal of Knowledge Management.
19. De Jong, J. ve Den Hartog, D. (2010). Measuring innovative work behaviour. Creativity and innovation management, 19(1), 23-36.
20. De Jong, J. P. J. ve Den Hartog, D. N. (2007). How leaders influence employees' innovative behaviour. European Journal of Innovation Management.
21. Demirer, M. C. (2020). Yapısal ve Psikolojik Güçlendirmenin Kariyer Tatmini ve Yenilikçi İş Davranışı Üzerine Etkisi. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 15(1), 165-184.
22. DeVellis, R. (2017). Ölçek geliştirme kuram ve uygulamalar, Çeviri: Tarık Totan. Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
23. Doğan, M. (2013). Doğrulayıcı faktör analizinde örneklem hacmi, tahmin yöntemleri ve normalliğin uyum ölçütlerine etkisi (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Osmangazi Üniversitesi, Eskişehir.
24. Edú-Valsania, S., Moriano, J. A. ve Molero, F. (2016). Authentic leadership and employee knowledge sharing behavior. Leadership ve Organization Development Journal.
25. Ergin, D. (1995). Ölçeklerde geçerlik ve güvenirlik. M.Ü.Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 7(1) , 125-148.
26. Erkuş, A. (2016). Psikolojide ölçme ve ölçek geliştirme - 1. Ankara: Pegem Yayınları.
27. Erkuş, A., Sünbül, Ö., Sümbül, S., Yormaz, S. ve Aşiret, S. (2017). Psikolojide ölçme ve ölçek geliştirme - 2. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
28. Hammond, M. M., Neff, N. L., Farr, J. L., Schwall, A. R. ve Zhao, X. (2011). Predictors of individual-level innovation at work: A meta-analysis. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5(1), 90.
29. Hirst, G., Van Knippenberg, D. ve Zhou, J. (2009). A cross-level perspective on employee creativity: Goal orientation, team learning behavior, and individual creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 52(2), 280-293.
30. Hooper, D., Coughlan, J. ve Mullen, M. (2008). Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53-60.
31. Hu, L. ve Bentler, P. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55.
32. Ibus, S., Wahab, E. ve Ismail, F. (2020). How to Promote Innovative Work Behavior among Academics. International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation, 24(02), 3697-3710. doi:10.37200/ijpr/v24i2/pr200693
33. İşcan, Ö. F. ve Karabey, C. N. (2007). Örgüt iklimi ile yeniliğe destek algısı arasındaki ilişki. Gaziantep Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 6(2), 180-193.
34. Jada, U. R., Mukhopadhyay, S. ve Titiyal, R. (2019). Empowering leadership and innovative work behavior: a moderated mediation examination. Journal of Knowledge Management.
35. Janssen, O. (2000). Job demands, perceptions of effort‐reward fairness and innovative work behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73(3), 287-302.
36. Javed, B., Khan, A. K., Arjoon, S., Mashkoor, M. ve Haque, A. u. (2020). Openness to Experience, Ethical Leadership, and Innovative Work Behavior. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 54(1), 211-223. doi:10.1002/jocb.360
37. Kanter, R. M. (1988). When a thousand flowers bloom: Structural, collective, and social conditions for innovation in organizations. Knowledge Management and Organisational Design, 10, 93-131.
38. King, N. ve Anderson, N. (2002). Managing innovation and change: A critical guide for organizations: Cengage Learning EMEA.
39. Kör, B., Wakkee, I. ve van der Sijde, P. (2020). How to promote managers’ innovative behavior at work: Individual factors and perceptions. Technovation. doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2020.102127
40. Lambriex-Schmitz, P., Van der Klink, M. R., Beausaert, S., Bijker, M. ve Segers, M. (2020). Towards successful innovations in education: Development and validation of a multi-dimensional Innovative Work Behaviour Instrument. Vocations and Learning, 13(2), 313-340. doi:10.1007/s12186-020-09242-4
41. Li, C., Makhdoom, H. U. R. ve Asim, S. (2020). Impact of Entrepreneurial Leadership on Innovative Work Behavior: Examining Mediation and Moderation Mechanisms. Psychol Res Behav Manag, 13, 105-118. doi:10.2147/PRBM.S236876
42. Madrid, H. P., Patterson, M. G., Birdi, K. S., Leiva, P. I. ve Kausel, E. E. (2014). The role of weekly high-activated positive mood, context, and personality in innovative work behavior: A multilevel and interactional model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(2), 234-256. doi:10.1002/job.1867
43. Maqbool, S., Černe, M. ve Bortoluzzi, G. (2019). Micro-foundations of innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management, 22(1), 125-145. doi:10.1108/ejim-01-2018-0013
44. Messmann, G. ve Mulder, R. H. (2020). A short measure of innovative work behaviour as a dynamic, context-bound construct. International Journal of Manpower, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print). doi:10.1108/ijm-01-2019-0029
45. Miao, R., Lu, L., Cao, Y. ve Du, Q. (2020). The High-Performance Work System, Employee Voice, and Innovative Behavior: The Moderating Role of Psychological Safety. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 17(4). doi:10.3390/ijerph17041150
46. Nazir, S., Shafi, A., Atif, M. M., Qun, W. ve Abdullah, S. M. (2019). How organization justice and perceived organizational support facilitate employees’ innovative behavior at work. Employee Relations: The International Journal, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print). doi:10.1108/er-01-2017-0007
47. Nöhammer, E. ve Stichlberger, S. (2019). Digitalization, innovative work behavior and extended availability. Journal of Business Economics, 89(8-9), 1191-1214. doi:10.1007/s11573-019-00953-2
48. OECD. (2018). The future ofeducation and skills: Education 2030. Erişim adresi: http://www.oecd.org/education/2030/E2030%20Position%20Paper%20(05.04.2018).pdf
49. Önhon, Ö. (2019). The relationship between organizational climate for innovation and employees’ innovative work behavior: ICT sector in Turkey. Vezetéstudomány / Budapest Management Review, 50(11), 53-64. doi:10.14267/veztud.2019.11.04
50. Pallant, J. (2016). SPSS kullanma kılavuzu-SPSS ile adım adım veri analizi. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
51. Phung, V. D., Hawryszkiewycz, I. ve Chandran, D. (2019). How knowledge sharing leads to innovative work behaviour. Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 21(3), 277-303. doi:10.1108/jsit-11-2018-0148
52. Pradhan, S. ve Jena, L. K. (2019). Does Meaningful Work Explains the Relationship Between Transformational Leadership and Innovative Work Behaviour? Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision Makers, 44(1), 30-40. doi:10.1177/0256090919832434
53. Rao Jada, U., Mukhopadhyay, S. ve Titiyal, R. (2019). Empowering leadership and innovative work behavior: a moderated mediation examination. Journal of Knowledge Management, 23(5), 915-930. doi:10.1108/jkm-08-2018-0533
54. Remcdbcrb.org. (2020). 15.09.2020 tarihinde https://remcdbcrb.org/guvenirlik/ adresinden alındı
55. Saeed, B. B., Afsar, B., Cheema, S. ve Javed, F. (2019). Leader-member exchange and innovative work behavior. European Journal of Innovation Management, 22(1), 105-124. doi:10.1108/ejim-11-2017-0158
56. Salas-Vallina, A., Pozo, M. ve Fernandez-Guerrero, R. (2020). New times for HRM? Well-being oriented management (WOM), harmonious work passion and innovative work behavior. Employee Relations: The International Journal, 42(3), 561-581. doi:10.1108/er-04-2019-0185
57. Santoso, H., Abdinagoro, S. B. ve Arief, M. (2019). The Role of Digital Literacy in Supporting Performance Through Innovative Work Behavior: The Case of Indonesia’s Telecommunications Industry. International Journal of Technology, 10(8). doi:10.14716/ijtech.v10i8.3432
58. Sanz-Valle, R. ve Jiménez-Jiménez, D. (2018). HRM and product innovation: does innovative work behaviour mediate that relationship? Management Decision, 56(6), 1417-1429. doi:10.1108/md-04-2017-0404
59. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H. ve Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23-74.
60. Schuh, S. C., Zhang, X.-a., Morgeson, F. P., Tian, P. ve van Dick, R. (2018). Are you really doing good things in your boss's eyes? Interactive effects of employee innovative work behavior and leader-member exchange on supervisory performance ratings. Human Resource Management, 57(1), 397-409. doi:10.1002/hrm.21851
61. Seçer, İ. (2015). Psikolojik test geliştirme ve uyarlama süreci. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
62. Shah, S. I., Shahjehan, A., Afsar, B., Afridi, S. A. ve Saeed, B. B. (2020). The dynamics of leader technical competence, subordinate learning, and innovative work behaviors in high-tech, knowledge-based industry. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 33(1), 623-638. doi:10.1080/1331677x.2019.1699140
63. Stoffers, J., Hendrikx, K., Habets, O. ve van der Heijden, B. (2019). Employability and innovative work behaviours in SMEs in a Euroregion. Personnel Review, 49(1), 167-187. doi:10.1108/pr-10-2018-0387
64. Stoffers, J. M. M., Van der Heijden, B. I. J. M. ve Jacobs, E. A. G. M. (2018). Employability and innovative work behaviour in small and medium-sized enterprises. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 31(11), 1439-1466. doi:10.1080/09585192.2017.1407953
65. Suseno, Y., Standing, C., Gengatharen, D. ve Nguyen, D. (2019). Innovative work behaviour in the public sector: The roles of task characteristics, social support, and proactivity. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 79(1), 41-59. doi:10.1111/1467-8500.12378
66. Susomrith, P. ve Amankwaa, A. (2019). Relationship between job embeddedness and innovative work behaviour. Management Decision, 58(5), 864-878. doi:10.1108/md-11-2018-1232
67. Suwanti, S., Udin, U. ve Widodo, W. (2018). Person-organization fit, person-job fit, and innovative work behavior: The role of organizational citizenship behavior. European Research Studies, 21, 389-402.
68. Şeker, H. ve Gençdoğan, B. (2014). Teknolojide ve eğitimde ölçme aracı geliştirme. Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
69. Tsai, S.-p. (2018). Innovative behaviour of knowledge workers and social exchange attributes of financial incentive: implications for knowledge management. Journal of Knowledge Management.
70. Ulusal, E. ve Yüreğir, O. (2020). Yenilikçi iş davranışını belirleyen faktörlerin ağırlıklandırılması. Endüstri Mühendisliği, 31, 17-31.
71. Van Zyl, L. E., van Oort, A., Rispens, S. ve Olckers, C. (2019). Work engagement and task performance within a global Dutch ICT-consulting firm: The mediating role of innovative work behaviors. Current Psychology. doi:10.1007/s12144-019-00339-1
72. Waheed, A., Xiao-Ming, M., Ahmad, N. ve Waheed, S. (2017). Impact of Work Engagement and Innovative Work Behavior on Organizational Performance; Moderating Role of Perceived Distributive Fairness.
73. Wang, Z., Gao, M. ve Panaccio, A. (2020). A Self-Determination Approach to Understanding Individual Values as an Interaction Condition on Employees' Innovative Work Behavior in the High-Tech Industry. The Journal of Creative Behavior. doi:10.1002/jocb.444
74. West, M. A. ve Farr, J. L. (1990). Innovation and Creativity at Work: Psycological and Organizational Strategies: John Wiley.
75. Wheaton, B., Muthen, B., Alwin, D. ve Summers, G. (1975). Assessing reliability and stability in panel models. University of Wisconsin-Madison.
76. Wheaton, B., Muthén, B., Alwin, D. ve Summers, G. (1997). Assessing reliability and stability in panel models. Sociological Methodology, 8, 84-136.
77. Widmann, A. ve Mulder, R. H. (2018). Team learning behaviours and innovative work behaviour in work teams. European Journal of Innovation Management, 21(3), 501-520. doi:10.1108/ejim-12-2017-0194
78. Yasir, M. ve Majid, A. (2020). High-involvement HRM practices and innovative work behavior among production-line workers: mediating role of employee's functional flexibility. Employee Relations: The International Journal, 42(4), 883-902. doi:10.1108/er-02-2018-0061
79. Yaşlıoğlu, M. (2017). Sosyal bilimlerde faktör analizi ve geçerlilik: Keşfedici ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizlerinin kullanılması. İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, 46(Özel Sayı), 74-85.
80. Yoon, Y. ve Kim, S. (2000). An assessment and construct validity of destination image: A use of second-order factor analysis. Working Paper, Virginia, USA.