SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Research Journal of Business and Management / 2020 / Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 3

DEVELOPMENT OF THE HIGH-PERFORMANCE WORK SYSTEMS SCALE FOR HOSPITALS: VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY STUDY

Aysun DANAYİYEN
S. Burak BEKAROGLU
Pages
128–138
Publication Date
2020-09-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Findings- Overall, a 29 items scale were obtained, encompassing 6 factors that explained 78% of the total variance.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:ABSTRACT Purpose- This study aims to develop a scale that evaluates the level of HPWS practices in hospitals based on employee perceptions and to make its validity and reliability.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The sample consisted of 309 clinical and administrative employees.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Findings- Overall, a 29 items scale were obtained, encompassing 6 factors that explained 78% of the total variance.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:High-performance work systems · human resources management · healthcare

Abstract

ABSTRACT Purpose- This study aims to develop a scale that evaluates the level of HPWS practices in hospitals based on employee perceptions and to make its validity and reliability. Methodology- The study was conducted via an online survey in three public education and research hospitals. The sample consisted of 309 clinical and administrative employees. After performed face and content validity, a pilot study conducted. The item-total score correlations and Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were calculated. Construct validity was tested. Correlation analysis was performed to test scale-related validity. Findings- Overall, a 29 items scale were obtained, encompassing 6 factors that explained 78% of the total variance. Reliability coefficients varied between .96 and .87. Confirmatory factor analyses were found to show good fit. Evidence for criterion-related validity was obtained after correlation analysis. Conclusion- The scale that proven content, construct, and predictive validity, can be used to evaluate the level of high-performance work systems in hospitals.

🔖

Cite This Article

DANAYİYEN, A., BEKAROGLU, S. B. (2020). DEVELOPMENT OF THE HIGH-PERFORMANCE WORK SYSTEMS SCALE FOR HOSPITALS: VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY STUDY. Research Journal of Business and Management, Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 3, 128–138. https://ajindex.com/articles/238745

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Ang, S. H., Bartram, T., McNeil, N., Leggat, S. G., & Stanton, P. (2013). The effects of high-performance work systems on hospital employees’ work attitudes and intention to leave: a multi-level and occupational group analysis. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(16), 3086-3114. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2013.775029
  2. Arthur, J. B. (1994). Effects of human resource systems on manufacturing performance and turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 670-687. https://doi.org/10.5465/256705
  3. Becker, B. E., & Huselid, M. A. (1998). High performance work systems and firm performance: a synthesis of research and managerial implications. Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management, 53-102. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp001392z
  4. Becker, B., & Gerhart, B. (1996). The impact of human resource management on organizational performance: progress and prospects. Academy of Management Journal, 39(4), 779-801. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/256712
  5. Brislin, R. W. (1986). The wording and translation of research instruments. In: Lonner, W. J., & Berry, J. W. (Ed.), Field methods in cross-cultural research (ss. 137-164).
  6. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd edition). New York.: Routledge. Cohen, R. J., & Swerdlik, M. E. (2018). Psychological testing and assessment: an introduction to tests and measurement (9th edition). The McGraw−Hill Companies. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-0222-1_8
  7. Cole, D. A. (1987). Utility of confirmatory factor analysis in test validation research. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55(4), 584-594. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.55.4.584
  8. Comrey, A. L. (2013). A first course in factor analysis (2nd edition). New York: Psychology Press.
  9. Cook, D. A., & Beckman, T. J. (2006). Current concepts in validity and reliability for psychometric instruments: theory and application. American Journal of Medicine, 119(2), 166.e7-166.e16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2005.10.036
  10. Danayiyen, A., & Bekaroglu, S. B. (2019). Hastanelerde yüksek performansli iş sistemleri ölçeğinin geçerlilik ve güvenirlik (pilot) çalışması. In 3. International 21. National Public Health Congress. Davis, L. L. (1992). Instrument review: getting the most from a panel of experts. Applied Nursing Research, 5(4), 194-197. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0897-1897(05)80008-4
  11. Delery, J. E., & Doty, D. (1996). Modes of theorizing in strategic