SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi / 2012 / Cilt: 13 - Sayı: 1

Örtük liderlik üzerine ölçek geliştirme ve geçerlilik analizi: MBA öğrencileri ile yapılan bir çalışma

Perceivers as cognitive misers: Scale development for implicit leadership theories in the context of MBA degrees from Turkey

Yasin ROFCANIN
Aykut BERBER
Pages
15–44
Publication Date
2022-10-11
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)

Further discussions and further suggestions are provided in the study.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study is an attempt to develop and test a scale in Implicit Leadership Theories (ILTs) in the context of MBA students.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The first steps involves two seperate focus groups where statements related to ILTs are developed.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Further discussions and further suggestions are provided in the study.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This study is an attempt to develop and test a scale in Implicit Leadership Theories (ILTs) in the context of MBA students. The study is composed of two steps. The first steps involves two seperate focus groups where statements related to ILTs are developed. In the second step, these statements are tested with surveys to two different sample sets who are full time working MBA students. Results confirm the existence of three factors in ILTs. Further discussions and further suggestions are provided in the study.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı, MBA öğrencileri bağlamında örtük liderlik teorisi ile ilgili bir ölçek geliştirmektir. Çalışma iki kısımdan oluşmaktadır. Birinci kısımda, odak grubu çalışmaları ve mülakatlar sonucunda örtük liderlik teorileri ile ilgili ifadeler elde edilmiştir. İkinci kısım, bu ifadeleri içeren anketin, tam zamanlı çalışan MBA öğrencilerinden oluşan iki ayrı örneklem grubuna uygulanmasına yöneliktir. Çalışmanın sonuçları , üç ayrı faktör grubunun varlığına işaret etmektedir. Tartışma ve sonuç kısımlarında ilgili faktörler ve uygulamaları ele alınmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

ROFCANIN, Y., BERBER, A. (2022). Örtük liderlik üzerine ölçek geliştirme ve geçerlilik analizi: MBA öğrencileri ile yapılan bir çalışma. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 13 - Sayı: 1, 15–44. https://ajindex.com/articles/490700

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Bentler, P.M. & Bonett, D.G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588-606.
  2. Boyacigiller, N.A. & Adler, N.J. (1991). The parochial dinosaur: Organizational science in a global context. Academy of Management Journal, 16, 262-290.
  3. Brodbeck, F.C., Frese, M., Akerblom, S., Audia, G., Bakacsi, G., Bendova, H., et al. (2000). Cultural variation of leadership prototypes across 22 European countries. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 73(1), 1-29.
  4. Brown, D.J., Scott, K.A. & Lewis, H. (2004). Information processing and leadership. In: J. Antonakis, A.T. Cianciolo & R.J. Sternberg (Eds.), The nature of leadership (pp. 125-147). London: Sage Publications. Byrne, B.M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Cabrera-Nguyen, P. (2010). Author Guidelines for Reporting Scale Development and Validation Results in the Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research. Journal for Social Work and Research, 1(2), 99-103.
  5. Canino, G. & Bravo, M. (1994). The adaptation and testing of diagnostic and outcome measures forcross-cultural research. International Review of Psychiatry, 6(4), 281-286.
  6. Cronbach, L.J. (1958). Proposals leading to analytic treatment of social perception scores. In: R. Tagiuri & L. Petrullo (Eds.), Person perception and interpersonal behavior (pp. 353-379).
  7. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
  8. Den Hartog, D.N., House, R.J., Hanges, P.J., Ruiz-Quintanilla, A. & Dorfman, P.W. (1999). Culture specific and cross-cultural generalizable implicit leadership theories: Are attributes of charismatic/transformational leadership universally endorsed? Leadership Quarterly, 10, 219-256.
  9. Eden, D. & Leviatan, U. (1975). Implicit leadership theory as a determinant of the factor structure underlying supervisory behavior scales. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 736-741.
  10. Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14, 532-550.
  11. Eisenhardt, K.M. & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 23-32.
  12. Ensaria, N. & Murphy, S.E. (2003). Cross-cultural variations in leadership perceptions and attribution of charisma to the leader. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 92, 52-66.
  13. Engle, E.M. & Lord, R.G. (1997). Implicit theories, self-schemas