A Reliability and Validity Study of Agile Leadership Scale: An Application on Educational Organizations

Year 2019, , 312 - 332, 22.10.2019

Nehir Özdemir , Münevver Çetin

https://doi.org/10.33723/rs.619606

Cited By: 5

Abstract

The aim of this study is to develop a scale
that determines the agile leadership properties of school administrators In the
development process of the scale, 96 items were created and presented for the
evaluation of expert views. After the scope validity processes held via Lawshe
analysis, 8 items were taken out of the scale. 1056 teachers work at different
school levels in Istanbul were subjected to the draft scale, which was
comprised of 88 items, in 2018-2019 academic year. In order to detect the
structural validity of the scale, principle components analysis and factor
analysis were conducted and Varimax vertical rotation process was held. As a
result of these analysis, a 5 factored (emotional agility, digital literacy and
technological agility, synergetic agility, shared
responsibility and proactivity agility, openness to innovations and adaptative
agility) scale that explains 82.92% of the total variance and that was
comprised of 56 items was obtained. For reliability, five sub-scales that were
detected as a result of Cronbach’s α (.94) coefficients for the totality of the
scale were calculated and in order to determine the correlation between each
item and the scale, item-total correlation analysis was conducted. Moreover,
factors determined with regards to the analysis held via t test (bottom-top
27%) were determined as distinguishing. The results obtained prove that the
scale is valid and reliable.

Keywords

Agility, Leadership, Educational Organizations, Scale

ÇEVİK LİDERLİK ÖLÇEĞİNİN GELİŞTİRİLMESİNE YÖNELİK GÜVENİLİRLİK VE GEÇERLİLİK ÇALIŞMASI: EĞİTİM ÖRGÜTLERİ ÜZERİNE BİR UYGULAMA

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, öğretmenlerin
algılarına göre,  okul yöneticilerinin
çevik liderlik özelliklerinin belirlenmesine yönelik bir ölçek geliştirmektir.
Ölçeğin geliştirilme aşamasında 96 madde oluşturulmuş ve uzman görüşüne
sunulmuştur. Lawshe analizi ile yapılan kapsam geçerliği işlemlerinin ardından
8 madde ölçekten çıkarılmıştır. Oluşturulan 88 maddelik taslak ölçek 2018-2019
eğitim öğretim yılında İstanbul ilinde çeşitli okul kademelerinde görev
yapmakta olan öğretmenlere uygulanmış 1056 öğretmenden değerlendirmeye uygun
veri toplanmıştır. Ölçeğin yapı geçerliğini saptamak amacıyla temel bileşenler
analizi ile faktör analizi yapılmış ve Varimax dik döndürme işlemi
gerçekleştirilmiştir. Bu analizler sonucunda 5 faktörlü (duygusal çeviklik,
sinerji çevikliği, dijital okuryazarlık ve teknoloji çevikliği, paylaşılan
sorumluluk ve proaktivite çevikliği ve yeniliklere açıklık ve uyum sağlama
çevikliği) 56 maddeli yapının toplam varyansın %82,92’sini açıklayan bir ölçeği
oluşturduğu görülmüştür. Güvenirlik için, belirlenen beş alt boyut ve ölçeğin
tümü için Cronbach α (0.94) katsayıları ve her bir maddenin ölçeğin tamamıyla
olan korelasyon ilişkisini belirlemek için Madde-Toplam korelasyonuna dayalı
madde analizi çalışmaları yapılmıştır. Öte yandan t testi kullanılarak yapılan
(alt-üst %27) analizler sonucu maddelerin ve faktörlerin ayırt edici olduğu
saptanmıştır. Elde edilen sonuçlar ölçeğin geçerli ve güvenilir olduğunu
kanıtlar niteliktedir.

Keywords

Çeviklik, Liderlik, Eğitim Örgütleri, Ölçek

References

• Almahamid, S., Awwad, A. & McAdams, A. C. (2010). Effects of Organizational Agility and Knowledge Sharing on Competitive Advantage: An Empirical Study in Jordan. International Journal of Management, 27(3), 387-404.
• Bennett, N., & Lemoine, J. (2014). What VUCA really means for you. Harvard Business Review, Vol. 92, No. 1/2, 2014.
• Boyer, M., & Robert, J. (2006). Organizational inertia and dynamic incentives. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 59(3), 324-348.
• Braunscheidel, M. J., & Suresh, N. C. (2009). The organizational antecedents of a firm’s supply chain agility for risk mitigation and response. Journal of operations Management, 27(2), 119-140.
• Brockbank, W. (1999). If HR were really strategically proactive: Present and future directions in HR's contribution to competitive advantage. Human Resource Management: Published in Cooperation with the School of Business Administration, The University of Michigan and in alliance with the Society of Human Resources Management, 38(4), 337-352.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2011). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı: İstatistik, araştırma deseni SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum. Pegem A Yayıncılık.
• Cegarra-Navarro, J. G., Soto-Acosta, P., & Wensley, A. K. (2016). Structured knowledge processes and firm performance: The role of organizational agility. Journal of Business Research, 69(5), 1544-1549.
• Charbonnier-Voirin, A. (2011). The development and partial testing of the psychometric properties of a measurement scale of organizational agility. M@ n@ gement, 14(2), 120.
• Collins, N. (2018). What Does It Mean To Be An Agile Leader? Having The Flexibility To Take Quick But Sure Actions. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbescoachescouncil/2018/06/29/what-does-it-mean-to-be-an-agile-leader/#770a96a44db4 adresinden 30.01.2019 tarihinde edinilmiştir.
• Conboy, K., & Fitzgerald, B. (2004). Toward a conceptual framework of agile methods: a study of agility in different disciplines. In Proceedings of the 2004 ACM workshop on Interdisciplinary software engineering research (pp. 37-44). ACM.
• Crocitto, M., & Youssef, M. (2003). The human side of organizational agility. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 103(6), 388-397.David, S. (2016). Emotional agility: Get unstuck, embrace change, and thrive in work and life. Penguin.USA.
• Day, D. V., Zaccaro, S. J., & Halpin, S. M. (2004). Leader development for transforming organizations: Growing leaders for tomorrow. Psychology Press.
• Denning, S. (2018). The Age of Agile: How Smart Companies Are Transforming the Way Work Gets Done. New York.
• Doeze Jager-van Vliet, S. (2017). Proactive and Adaptive Agility among Employees: the relationship with personal and situational factors.
• Dubey, R. & Gunasekaran, A. (2014). Agile manufacturing: framework and its empirical validation. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology. 76(9), 2147- 2157.
• Dunlop-Hinkler, D., Parente, R., Marion, T. J., & Friar, J. H. (2011). The role of technology agility on business processes and organizational agilities. In Technology Management Conference (ITMC), 2011 IEEE International (pp. 67-75). IEEE.
• Dyer, L., & Shafer, R. A. (2003). Dynamic organizations: Achieving marketplace and organizational agility with people. CAHRS Working Paper Series, 27.
• Elmore, R. (2000). Building a new structure for school leadership. Washington, DC: The Albert Shanker Institute.
• Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage.
• Ganguly, A., Nilchiani, R. & Farr, J. V. (2009). Evaluating agility in corporate enterprises. International Journal of Production Economics, 118(2), 410-423.
• Gliem, J. A., & Gliem, R. R. (2003). Calculating, interpreting, and reporting Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient for Likert-type scales. Midwest Research-to-Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education.
• Goleman, D., Langer, E., David, S., & Congleton, C. (2017). Mindfulness (HBR Emotional Intelligence Series). Harvard Business Press.
• Graetz, F. (2000). Strategic change leadership. Management decision, 38(8), 550-564.
• Harraf, A., Wanasika, I., Tate, K., & Talbott, K. (2015). Organizational agility. Journal of Applied Business Research, 31(2), 675.
• Henson, C. (2015). Agile Leadership for a Changing Workplace. Learning Quest. https://www.learningquest.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Agile-Leadership_-Learning-Quest-.pdfa adresinden 18.06.2018 tarihinde edinilmiştir.
• Hayward, S. (2018). The agile leadership. How to create an agile business in the digital age. Kogan Page Limited.
• Hillis K. (2014). How to Be a Proactive Entrepreneur. CareerAddict. https://www.careeraddict.com/be-a-proactive-entrepreneur adresinden 5.2.2019 tarihinde erşilmiştir.
• Joiner, W. B., & Josephs, S. A. (2006). Leadership agility: Five levels of mastery for anticipating and initiating change (Vol. 307). John Wiley & Sons.
• Kanbur, E., ve Özyer, K. (2016). Çalışanların Bireysel Yaratıcılık Düzeylerinin İç Girişimcilik performanslarına etkisi. Yönetim ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 14(2), 264-275.
• Kassim, N. M. & Zain, M. (2004). Assessing the measurement of organizational agility. Journal of American Academy of Business, Cambridge, 4(1/2), 174-177.
• Kelly, K. (2012). Leadership Agility: Using Improv to Build Critical Skills. UNC Kenan-Flagler Business School.
• Kettunen, P., & Laanti, M. (2008). Combining agile software projects and large‐scale organizational agility. Software Process: Improvement and Practice, 13(2), 183-193.
• Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research methodology: Methods and techniques. New Age International.
• Lawrence K. (2013). Developing Leaders in a VUCA Environment. UNC Kenan-Flagler Business School.Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel psychology, 28(4), 563-575.
• Lee, O. K., Sambamurthy, V., Lim, K. H., & Wei, K. K. (2015). How does IT ambidexterity impact organizational agility?. Information Systems Research, 26(2), 398-417.
• Lu, Y., & K. Ramamurthy. (2011). Understanding the link between information technology capability and organizational agility: An empirical examination. Mis Quarterly, 931-954.
• Lunenburg Fred, C., & Ornstein, A. C. (2013). Educational administration (Educational Management Translation Editor: G. Arastaman). Ankara: Nobel.
• Maghsoudi, S., Keshavarzi, T., & Behrooz, A. (2013). A Conceptual Model for Agility Strategy and Work Organization by Structural Equation Modeling: A Case Study in the Iranian Textile Industry. Business and Economic Research, 3(1), 369-387.
• Mathiassen, L., & Pries-Heje, J. (2006). Business agility and diffusion of information technology.
• Medinilla, Á. (2012). Agile management: Leadership in an agile environment. Springer Science & Business Media.
• Mulhbauer, J.A. (2018). What Does It Mean To Be An Agile Leader? Being Resilient And Creative. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbescoachescouncil/2018/06/29/what-does-it-mean-to-be-an-agile-leader/#770a96a44db4 adresinden 30.01.2019 tarihinde edinilmiştir.
• Nagel, R. N., & Dove, R. (1991). 21st century manufacturing enterprise strategy: An industry-led view. Diane Publishing.
• Nijssen, M., & Paauwe, J. (2012). HRM in turbulent times: how to achieve organizational agility? The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23(16), 3315-3335.
• Parker, D. W., Holesgrove, M., & Pathak, R. (2015). Improving productivity with self-organised teams and agile leadership. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 64(1), 112-128.
• Ramanujam, R., & Lee, I. (2011). Collaborative and competitive strategies for agile scrum development. In Networked Computing and Advanced Information Management (NCM), 2011 7th International Conference on (pp. 123-127). IEEE.
• Sambamurthy, V., Bharadwaj, A., & Grover, V. (2003). Shaping agility through digital options: Reconceptualizing the role of information technology in contemporary firms. MIS quarterly, 237-263.
• Sambamurthy, V., Wei, K. K., Lim, K., & Lee, D. (2007). IT-enabled organizational agility and firms' sustainable competitive advantage. ICIS 2007 proceedings, 91.
• Tabachnick, B. G., ve Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Allyn & Bacon/Pearson Education.
• Tallon, P. P., & Pinsonneault, A. (2011). Competing perspectives on the link between strategic information technology alignment and organizational agility: insights from a mediation model. Mis Quarterly, 463-486.Veneziano L. & Hooper J. (1997). A method for quantifying content validity of health-related questionnaires. American Journal of Health Behavior, 21 (1), s. 67-70
• Zain, M., Rose, R. C., Abdullah, I., & Masrom, M. (2005). The relationship between information technology acceptance and organizational agility in Malaysia. Information & Management, 42(6), 829-839.