MEASUREMENT OF INDIVIDUAL INNOVATION COMPETENCIES: SCALE ADAPTATION STUDY - BİREYSEL İNOVASYON YETKİNLİKLERİ ÖLÇÜMLENMESİ: ÖLÇEK UYARLAMA ÇALIŞMASI

Year 2020, Volume: 7 Issue: 1, 143 - 171, 23.03.2020

Ceyda Ovacı , Ezgi Yıldırım Saatçi

https://doi.org/10.30798/makuiibf.602669

Cited By: 2

Abstract

For the last two decades, innovation concept has earned well-earned appreciation for its impact on the strategic sustainability of organizations of all kind and size. In this paper, individual innovation competencies scale as a product of European Union Erasmus Project FINCODA applied in Turkish context to promote the individual level competency of innovation with five dimensions measurement consistency and validity. The study was conducted in the light of the data obtained from two different sample groups (n =145, n = 346).The results of confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the original five factor structure of FINCODA. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient was ,93 for the first sample and ,92 for the second sample. Added to this, the structures of the factors have been found valid. 

Keywords

Innovation, Individual Innovation Competencies, Creativity, Critical Thinking, FINCODA

BİREYSEL İNOVASYON YETKİNLİKLERİ ÖLÇÜMLENMESİ: ÖLÇEK UYARLAMA ÇALIŞMASI - MEASUREMENT OF INDIVIDUAL INNOVATION COMPETENCIES: SCALE ADAPTATION STUDY

Abstract

Son 20 yıl içerisinde inovasyon kavramı, her tür ve büyüklükteki örgütün sürdürülebilir stratejisindeki etkisi nedeniyle hakkettiği takdiri kazanmaktadır. Bu çalışmada Avrupa Birliği Erasmus Projesi olarak gerçekleşen FINCODA ‘nın (Framework for Innovation Competencies Development and Assesment) bireylerin inovasyon yetkinlikleri üzerine geliştirdikleri beş boyutlu ölçeğinin Türkiye ölçeğindeki uyarlaması, geçerlilik ve güvenirlilik çalışmasının sonuçları tartışılmaktadır. Çalışma iki farklı örneklem grubundan (n=145, n=346) elde veriler ışığında gerçekleştirilmiştir. Analiz sonuçlarına FINCODA ölçeğine ait orijinal beş faktör yapısı doğrulanmıştır. Cronbach Alfa katsayısı ilk örneklem için ,92 ikinci örneklem için ,93 olarak tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca faktörlere ilişkin yapı geçerliği test edilmiş ve kabul edilebilir olduğu tespit edilmiştir

Keywords

İnovasyon, Bireysel İnovasyon Yetkinliği, yaratıcılık, eleştirel düşünme

References

• AGARWAL, U. (2014), Examining The Impact of Social Exchange Relationships on Innovative Work Behaviour. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, Vol. 20, No.3/4, 102-120.
• ALBERT, R., RUNCO, M. (1999), A History of Research on Creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 16-31). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• AMABILE, T., SCHATZEL, E., MONETA, G., KRAMER, S. (2004), Leader Behaviors and The Work Environment for Creativity: Perceived Leader Support, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 15, No.1, 5-32.
• AMO, B. (2006), What Motivates Knowledge Workers to Involve Themselves in Employee Innovation Behaviour? , International Journal of Knowledge Management Studies, Vol. 1, No. 1/2, 160-177.
• ANSOFF, I. (1965), Corporate Strategy, NewYork: McGraw-Hill.
• ARMSTRONG, M. (2014), Armstrong’s Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice, 13. Baskı, London: Kogan Page.
• BRISLIK, E., LONNERWALTER, J., THORNDIKE, R.M. (1973), Cross- Cultural Research Methods, New York: John Wiley-SonsPub.
• BUTTER, R.,VAN BEEST, W. (2017), Psychometric Validation of a Tool for Innovation Competencies Development and Assesment, https://static1.squarespace.com/static/583dddb7cd0f686c5defc5bb/t/58da1ce5e3df28fabb796bff/1490689255628/EURAM_Validation_WP7_Rev1.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 11.04. 2019).
• BÜYÜKÖZTÜRK, Ş. (2007), Sosyal Bilimler için Veri Analizi El Kitabı, Ankara: Pegem Yayıncılık.
• CARLSSON, B. (2006), Internationalization of Innovation Systems: A Survey of The Literature, Research Policy, Vol. 35, No. 1: 56-67.
• CARMELI, A., MEITAR, R., WEISBERG, J. (2006), Self‐leadership Skills and Innovative Behaviour at Work, International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 27, No. 1, 75-90.
• CHRISTIANSEN, J. (2000), Building the Innovative Organization: Management Systems that Encourage Innovation, London: Macmillan Business.
• COHEN, S., BAILEY, D. (1997), What Makes Teams Work: Group Effectiveness Research From The Shop Floor to the Executive Suite, Journal of Management, Vol. 23,No.4, 238-90.
• COOPER, R. (2008), Perspective: The Stage-Gate® Idea-to-Launch Process - Update, What's New, and NexGen Systems, The Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 25, No. 3,213-232.
• ÇOKLUK, Ö., ŞEKERCİOĞLU, G., BÜYÜKÖZTÜRK, Ş., (2012), Sosyal Bilimler İçin Çok Değişkenli İstatistik SPSS ve Lisrel Uygulamaları, 2. Baskı, Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
• DE JONG, J., DEN HARTOG, D. (2007), How Leaders Influence Employees’ Innovative Behaviour, European Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 10, No.1 , 41-64.
• DE SPIEGELAERE, S.,VAN, G.G., VAN HOOTEGEM, G., (2016), Not All Autonomy is the Same. Different Dimensions of Job Autonomy and Their Relation to Work Engagement & Innovative Work Behavior, Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing, Vol. 26, No.4, 515-527.
• ENNIS, R., (1989), Critical Thinking and Subject Specificity: Clarification and Needed Research, Educational Researcher, Vol. 18, No.3, 4–10.
• FRESEr, M., FAY, D., (2001), Personal Initiative (PI): An Active Performance Concept for Work in the 21st Century. In B.M. Staw & R.M. Sutton (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior (Vol. 23, pp. 133-187). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
• GÜRBÜZ, S., ŞAHİN, F., (2018), Sosyal Bilimlerde Araştırma Yöntemleri Felsefe- Yönetim- Analiz, 5. Baskı, Ankara:Seçkin Yayıncılık.
• HAKIMIAN, F., FARID, H.,ISMAI, M., NAIR, P., (2016), Importance of Commitment in Encouraging Employees’ Innovative Behaviour, Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration, Vol. 8, No.1, 70-83.
• HAMBLETON, R., KANJEE, A. (1993), Enhancing The Validity of Cross-Cultural Studies: Improvements in Instrument Translation Methods, Annual Meetings of the American Educational Research Association, Atlanta, April 12-16.
• HAMMOND, M., NEFF, N., FARR, J., SCHWALL, A., ZHAO, X. (2011), Predictors of Individual-Level Innovation at Work: A Meta-Analysis, Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, Vol. 5, No.1, 90-105.
• HECKLAU, F., GALEITZKE, M., FLACHS, S., KOHL, H., (2016), Holistic Approach for Human Resource Management in Industry 4.0, Procedia CIRP, Vol. 54, 1-6.
• JANSSEN, O., (2000), Job Demands, Perceptions of effort‐reward Fairness and Innovative Work Behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 73, 287-302.
• JOSE PEREZ-PENALVER, M.,LOURDE,A.M.,BEGONA, M.F. (2018), Identification and Classification of Behavioural Indicators to Assess Innovation Competence, Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management ,Vol. 11, No.1, 87-115.
• KAIRISTO-MERTANEN, L., RASANEN, M., LEHTONEN, J., LAPPALAINEN, H., (2012), Innovation Pedagogy - Learningthrough Active Multidisciplinary Methods, Revista de Docencia Universitaria,Vol.10, No.1,67-86.
• KALAYCI, Ş., (2010), SPSS Uygulamalı Çok Değişkenli İstatistik Teknikleri, 5. Baskı, Ankara: Asil Yayın.
• KARAATA, S. (2012), Yenilik – Yenileşim -İnovasyon Dünyasına Bir Yolculuk, www.egiad.org.tr/wp-content/uploads/arastirma-raporlari/inovasyon-raporu.pdf, (Erişim Tarihi:01.04.2019).
• KHALAF ALHARTHEY, B., RASLI, A., YOSOFF, R., AL-GHAZALI, B. (2013), Impact of Innovation Culture on Human Resources Management Practices, International Journal of Academic Research, Part B, Social Sciences and Humanities, Vol. 5, No. 3, 60-63.
• KLEYSEN, R., STREET, C., (2001), Toward a Multi-dimensional Measure of Individual Innovative Behaviour, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 2, No. 3, 284-296.
• LI, M., HSU, C., (2016), A review of Employee Innovative Behavior in Services. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 28, No.12, 2820-2841.
• LIPMAN, M. (1988). Critical Thinking—What Can It Be?, Educational Leadership, Vol. 46, No.1, 38–43.
• LUKES, M., STEPHAN, U.(2017), Measuring Employee Innovation: A Review of Existing Scales and The Development of The Innovative Behaviour and Innovation Support Inventories Across Cultures , International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, Vol. 23, No. 1, 136-158.
• MANION, Jo., LORIMER, W., LEANDER, W., (1996), Team Based Health Care Organizations: Blueprint for Success, Gaithersburg: Aspen.
• MCEWAN, D., RUISSEN, G., EYS, M.,ZUMBO, B., BEAUCHAMP, M., (2017), The Effectiveness of Teamwork Training on Teamwork Behaviors and Team Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Controlled Interventions, PLoS ONE,Vol.12, No.1.
• OLDHAM, G., CUMMINGS, A., (1996), Employee creativity: Personal and contextual factors at work, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 39,No.3, 607-634.
• PATTERSON, F., KERRIN, M., GATTO- ROISSARD, G., COAN, P., (2009), Everyday Innovation: How to Enhance Innovative Working in Employees and Organisations, (1-54). Available in NESTA. City University London
• PAUL, R., (1992), Critical Thinking: What, why, and how?, New Directions for Community Colleges, Vol. 1997, NO.77, 3–24.
• PREISS, K. SPOONER, K., (2003), Innovation Creation and Diffusion in the Australian Economy , International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, Vol. 3, No. 3, 197–210.
• PUTKONEN, A. (2013), Learning Skills for Distributed Engineering Design, Proceedings of the ICEE/ ICIT 2013 Conference, iNeerCape Peninsula University of Technology, Cape Town, South Africa, 8-12 December, 50-58.
• RASANEN, M., KAIRISTO-MERTANEN, L., PENTTILA, T. (2013), The Role of Social Learning Environment in the Context of Innovation Pedagogy in Higher Education, Proceedings of the Participatory Innovation Conference PIN-C 2013, 18th-20th June Lahti, Finland. Lappeenranta University of Technology LUT, Scientific and Expertise Publications – Research Reports No. 6.
• RHODES, M. (1987), An analysis of creativity. In S. G. Isaksen (Ed.), Frontiers of creativity research: Beyond the basics. Buffalo, NY: Bearly.
• SAVAŞIR, I. (1994), Ölçek Uyarlamasındaki Bazı Sorunlar ve Çözüm Yolları, Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, Vol. 33, No.9, 27-32.
• SCOTT, S., BRUCE, R.,(1994), Determinants of innovative behaviour: A path model of individual innovation in the workplace, Academy of Management Journal Vol. 37, No.3, 580-607.
• STENBERG, R., (1986), Critical Thinking: Its Nature, Measurement, and Improvement, National Institute of Education. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED272882.pdf. (Erişim Tarihi: 02.03. 2019).
• STENBERG, R., LUBART, T., (1999), The Concept of Creativity: Prospects and Paradigms. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• SUMER, N. (2000), Yapısal Eşitlik Modelleri: Temel Kavramlar ve Örnek Uygulamalar, Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, Vol. 3, No.6,49-74.
• ŞİMŞEK, Ö.F. (2007), Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesine Giriş Temel İlkeler ve LISREL Uygulamaları, Ankara: Ekinoks Yayıncılık.
• TUCKER, A., EDMONDSON, A, SPEAR, S., (2002), When Problem Solving Prevents Organizational Learning, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 15, No. 2,122-137.
• TURRINI, A., CRISTOFOLI, D., FROSINI, F., NASI, G. (2010), Networking Literature about Determinants of Network Effectiveness, Public Administration, Vol. 88, No. 2. 528– 550.
• UZKURT, C., (2017), Yenilik (İnovasyon) Yönetimi ve Yenilikçi Örgüt Kültürü (Kültürel, Yönetimsel ve Makro Yaklaşım), 2. Baskı, İstanbul: Beta Yayınları.
• ÜLGEN, H., MIRZE, K., (2004), İşletmelerde Stratejik Yönetim, 2.Baskı, İstanbul: Literatür Yayıncılık.
• VAN DE VEN, A., POOLE, M., (1989), Methods for Studying Innovation Processes. Research on the Management of Innovation, Harper & Row, New York, 31-54.
• VAN KLEEF, J. A. G., ROOME, N. (2007), Developing Capabilities and Competence for Sustainable Business Management as İnnovation: A Research Agenda, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 15, No.1,38-51.
• WARD, T., PATTERSON, M., SIFONIS, C., DODDS, R., SAUNDERS, K., (2002), The Role of Graded Category Structure in Imaginative Thought, Memory & Cognition ,Vol. 30, No. 2, 199–216.
• YANKIN, F.B (2019), Dijital Dönüşüm Sürecinde Çalışma Yaşamı, Trakya Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi E-Dergi, Vol. 7, No.2, 1-38.
• YUAN, F., WOODMAN, R. (2010), Innovative Behaviour in The Workplace: The Role of Performance and Image Outcome Expectations. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 53,No.2, 323-342.
• ZHAO, F. (2006), Technological and Organizational Innovations: Case Study of Siemens (Australia), International Journal of Innovation and Learning, Vol. 3, No. 1,95–109.