Search results

New measures in marketing are invariably created by using a psychometric approach based on Churchill's “scale development” procedure. This paper aims to compare and contrast Churchill's procedure with Rossiter's content‐validity approach to measurement, called C‐OAR‐SE.

The comparison of the two procedures is by rational argument and forms the theoretical first half of the paper. In the applied second half of the paper, three recent articles from the Journal of Marketing (JM) that introduce new constructs and measures are criticized and corrected from the C‐OAR‐SE perspective.

The C‐OAR‐SE method differs from Churchill's method by arguing for: total emphasis on achieving high content validity of the item(s) and answer scale – without which nothing else matters; use of single‐item measures for “basic” constructs and for the first‐order components of “abstract” constructs; abandonment of the “reflective” measurement model, along with its associated statistical techniques of factor analysis and coefficient alpha, arguing that all abstract constructs must be measured as “formative”; and abandonment of external validation methods, notably multitrait‐multimethod analysis (MTMM) and structural equation modeling (SEM), to be replaced by internal content‐validation of the measure itself. The C‐OAR‐SE method can be applied – as demonstrated in the last part of the article – by any verbally intelligent researcher. However, less confident researchers may need to seek the assistance of one or two colleagues who fully understand the new method.

If a measure is not highly content‐valid to begin with – and none of the new measures in the JM articles criticized is highly content‐valid – then no subsequent psychometric properties can save it. Highly content‐valid measures are absolutely necessary for proper tests of theories and hypotheses, and for obtaining trustworthy findings in marketing.

C‐OAR‐SE is completely original and Rossiter's updated version should be followed. C‐OAR‐SE is leading the necessary marketing measurement revolution.

This paper aims to extend Rossiter’s C-OAR-SE method of measure design (IJRM, 2002, p. 19, p. 4, pp. 305-335; EJM, 2011, p. 45, p. 11, p. 12, pp. 1561-1588) by proposing five distinct construct models for designing optimally content-valid multiple-item and single-item measures.

The paper begins by dismissing convergent validation, the core procedure in Nunnally’s (1978) and Churchill’s (1979) psychometric method of measure design which allows alternative measures of the same construct. The method of dismissal is the mathematical demonstration that an alternative measure, no matter how highly its scores converge with those from the original measure, will inevitably produce different findings. The only solution to this knowledge-threatening problem is to agree on an optimal measure of each of our major constructs and to use only that measure in all future research, as is standard practice in the physical sciences. The paper concludes by proposing an extension of Rossiter’s C-OAR-SE method to design optimal standard measures of judgment constructs, the most prevalent type of construct in marketing.

The findings are, first, the mathematical dismissal of the accepted practice of convergent validation of alternative measures of the same construct, which paves the way for, second, the proposal of five new C-OAR-SE-based construct models for designing optimal standard measures of judgment constructs, three of which require a multiple-item measure and two of which a single-item measure.

The common practice of accepting alternative measures of the same construct causes major problems for the social sciences: when different measures are used, it becomes impossible, except by remote chance, to replicate findings; meta-analyses become meaningless because the findings are averaged over different measures; and empirical generalizations cannot be trusted when measures are changed. These problems mean that we cannot continue to accept alternative measures of the constructs and that, for each construct, an optimal standard measure must be found.

The ideas in this paper, which have untold value for the future of marketing as a legitimate science, are unique to Rossiter’s C-OAR-SE method of measure design.

This paper aims to critically comment Rossiter’s “How to use C-OAR-SE to design optimal standard measures” in the current issue of EJM and provides a broader perspective on Rossiter’s C-OAR-SE framework and measurement practice in marketing in general.

The paper is conceptual, based on interpretation of measurement theory.

The paper shows that, at best, Rossiter’s mathematical dismissal of convergent validity applies to the completely hypothetical (and highly unlikely) situation where a perfect measure without any error would be available. Further considerations cast serious doubt on the appropriateness of Rossiter’s concrete object, dual subattribute-based single item measures. Being immunized against any piece of empirical evidence, C-OAR-SE cannot be considered a scientific theory and is bound to perpetuate, if not aggravate, the fundamental flaws in current measurement practice. While C-OAR-SE indeed helps generate more content valid instruments, the procedure offers no insights as to whether these instruments work properly to be used in research and practice.

This paper concludes that great caution needs to be exercised before adapting measurement instruments based on the C-OAR-SE procedure, and statistical evidence remains essential for validity assessment.

This paper identifies several serious conceptual and operational problems in Rossiter’s C-OAR-SE procedure and discusses how to align measurement in the social sciences to be compatible with the definition of measurement in the physical sciences.

This paper aims to respond to claims by Collier and Bienstock and Rossiter that reflective measurement is wrong for internet retailing service quality (IRSQ). The research empirically assesses Rossiter's proposal that the C‐OAR‐SE procedure for index development will generate a more valid way to measure IRSQ than is otherwise available.

C‐OAR‐SE is used to develop a formative IRSQ index. The index is administered to internet shoppers in an online survey. The index is compared with an existing IRSQ scale in terms of content, parsimony, measurement scores and criterion validity.

The scale and index display parity in content, parsimony and measurement scores, while the scale shows higher criterion validity. The results contradict Rossiter's claims and foster doubt regarding the usefulness of C‐OAR‐SE's formative measurement procedures.

IRSQ can be conceptualised as reflective or formative, but C‐OAR‐SE does not necessarily generate a better way to measure the construct. Furthermore, implementing C‐OAR‐SE unearths problems with the procedure.

Multiple variations of IRSQ exist, as well as multiple views on how to measure the variations and differing degrees to which the variations are actually measured. Crucially, the situation is not as bleak as Collier and Bienstock or Rossiter suggest: the literature does offer sound, valid IRSQ measurement scales.

The paper resolves unwarranted criticisms of IRSQ scales, highlights the limitations with some scales, offers the first complete example of using C‐OAR‐SE to develop a new index and lends applied support to theoretical criticisms of C‐OAR‐SE.

This paper aims to respond to John Rossiter's call for a “Marketing measurement revolution” in the current issue of EJM, as well as providing broader comment on Rossiter's C‐OAR‐SE framework, and measurement practice in marketing in general.

The paper is purely theoretical, based on interpretation of measurement theory.

The authors find that much of Rossiter's diagnosis of the problems facing measurement practice in marketing and social science is highly relevant. However, the authors find themselves opposed to the revolution advocated by Rossiter.

The paper presents a comment based on interpretation of measurement theory and observation of practices in marketing and social science. As such, the interpretation is itself open to disagreement.

There are implications for those outside academia who wish to use measures derived from academic work as well as to derive their own measures of key marketing and other social variables.

This paper is one of the few to explicitly respond to the C‐OAR‐SE framework proposed by Rossiter, and presents a number of points critical to good measurement theory and practice, which appear to remain underdeveloped in marketing and social science.

This paper provides a balanced commentary on Rossiter’s paper “How to use C-OAR-SE to design optimal standard measures” in this issue of the “European Journal of Marketing”. It also relates the comments in general to Rossiter’s other C-OAR-SE work and throws light on a number of key measurement issues that seem under-appreciated at present in marketing and business research.

The authors use conceptual argument based on measurement theory and philosophy of science.

The authors find that Rossiter’s work makes a number of important points that are necessary in the current stage of development of marketing and social science. However, the authors also find that many of these points are also well made by fundamental measurement theories. When measurement theory is correctly interpreted, the idea of multiple measures of the same thing is not problematic. However, they show that existing social science measurement practice rarely takes account of the important issues at play here.

The authors show that marketing, management and social science researchers need to get better in terms of their appreciation of measurement theory and in their practices of measurement.

The authors identify a number of areas where marketing and social science measurement can be improved, taking account of the important aspects of C-OAR-SE and incorporating them in good practice, without needlessly avoiding existing good practices.

Latent constructs represent the building blocks of marketing theory. The purpose of this paper is to provide marketing researchers with a practical procedure for writing construct definitions.

The paper reviews important contributions to construct definition in the literature from marketing, management, psychology and the philosophy of science. The authors expound construct definition in both practical and theoretical spheres to motivate the proposed procedure.

A six‐step procedure for construct definition and redefinition in marketing is developed. The proposed procedure addresses important aspects of definitions including the level of abstraction, scope, nomological relationships, explanatory and predictive power, ambiguity, vagueness, and preventing construct proliferation.

While techniques for developing measures have received a great deal of attention, those for the earlier step of construct definition have not. Researchers will benefit from more precise definitions through improved model specification, better measures, and more reliable determination of the direction of causality. The role of the individual researcher's linguistic skill in construct definition must still be determined.

Marketing practitioners can also use the procedure to define latent constructs for which they must develop measures.

The literature on construct definition is fragmentary, scattered across disciplines and occasionally even arcane. It is further often descriptive of what a good definition looks like rather than prescriptive of how a good definition can be developed. The six steps are simple, broadly applicable, based on both theory and practical experience, consist of relatively few discrete steps, and feed directly into the modern measure development paradigm in marketing.

The purpose of this paper is to provide research insights into stakeholder specifications of the domain of the corporate reputation (CR) construct thereby obtaining greater content validity of scale items.

A simple research technique is identified (the nominal group techniques (NGT) which, when used in the context of a formal procedure, addresses content validity issues.

The study confirms the value of NGT in providing content validity through stakeholder (rater) involvement in construct definition and domain specification.

The stakeholder makes a vital contribution to construct definition and to scale item development.

The development of a method based on what is in the minds of stakeholders and which has relevance at the level of meaning as well as explanation. Stakeholders have not so far been involved directly in CR scale item development.

In management accounting research, the capabilities of Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) have only partially been utilized. These yet unexploited capabilities of PLS-SEM are a useful tool in the often explorative state of research in management accounting. After reviewing eleven top-ranked management accounting journals through the end of 2013, 37 articles in which PLS-SEM is used are identified. These articles are analysed based on multiple relevant criteria to determine the progress in this research area, including the reasons for using PLS-SEM, the characteristics of the data and the models, and model evaluation and reporting. A special focus is placed on the degree of importance of these analysed criteria for the future development of management accounting research. To ensure continued theoretical development in management accounting, this article also offers recommendations to avoid common pitfalls and provides guidance for the advanced use of PLS-SEM in management accounting research.

Information and communications technology (ICT) offers enormous opportunities for individuals, businesses and society. The application of ICT is equally important to economic and non-economic activities. Researchers have increasingly focused on the adoption and use of ICT by small and medium enterprises (SMEs) as the economic development of a country is largely dependent on them. Following the success of ICT utilisation in SMEs in developed countries, many developing countries are looking to utilise the potential of the technology to develop SMEs. Past studies have shown that the contribution of ICT to the performance of SMEs is not clear and certain. Thus, it is crucial to determine the effectiveness of ICT in generating firm performance since this has implications for SMEs’ expenditure on the technology. This research examines the diffusion of ICT among SMEs with respect to the typical stages from innovation adoption to post-adoption, by analysing the actual usage of ICT and value creation. The mediating effects of integration and utilisation on SME performance are also studied. Grounded in the innovation diffusion literature, institutional theory and resource-based theory, this study has developed a comprehensive integrated research model focused on the research objectives. Following a positivist research paradigm, this study employs a mixed-method research approach. A preliminary conceptual framework is developed through an extensive literature review and is refined by results from an in-depth field study. During the field study, a total of 11 SME owners or decision-makers were interviewed. The recorded interviews were transcribed and analysed using NVivo 10 to refine the model to develop the research hypotheses. The final research model is composed of 30 first-order and five higher-order constructs which involve both reflective and formative measures. Partial least squares-based structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) is employed to test the theoretical model with a cross-sectional data set of 282 SMEs in Bangladesh. Survey data were collected using a structured questionnaire issued to SMEs selected by applying a stratified random sampling technique. The structural equation modelling utilises a two-step procedure of data analysis. Prior to estimating the structural model, the measurement model is examined for construct validity of the study variables (i.e. convergent and discriminant validity).

The estimates show cognitive evaluation as an important antecedent for expectation which is shaped primarily by the entrepreneurs’ beliefs (perception) and also influenced by the owners’ innovativeness and culture. Culture further influences expectation. The study finds that facilitating condition, environmental pressure and country readiness are important antecedents of expectation and ICT use. The results also reveal that integration and the degree of ICT utilisation significantly affect SMEs’ performance. Surprisingly, the findings do not reveal any significant impact of ICT usage on performance which apparently suggests the possibility of the ICT productivity paradox. However, the analysis finally proves the non-existence of the paradox by demonstrating the mediating role of ICT integration and degree of utilisation explain the influence of information technology (IT) usage on firm performance which is consistent with the resource-based theory. The results suggest that the use of ICT can enhance SMEs’ performance if the technology is integrated and properly utilised. SME owners or managers, interested stakeholders and policy makers may follow the study’s outcomes and focus on ICT integration and degree of utilisation with a view to attaining superior organisational performance.

This study urges concerned business enterprises and government to look at the environmental and cultural factors with a view to achieving ICT usage success in terms of enhanced firm performance. In particular, improving organisational practices and procedures by eliminating the traditional power distance inside organisations and implementing necessary rules and regulations are important actions for managing environmental and cultural uncertainties. The application of a Bengali user interface may help to ensure the productivity of ICT use by SMEs in Bangladesh. Establishing a favourable national technology infrastructure and legal environment may contribute positively to improving the overall situation. This study also suggests some changes and modifications in the country’s existing policies and strategies. The government and policy makers should undertake mass promotional programs to disseminate information about the various uses of computers and their contribution in developing better organisational performance. Organising specialised training programs for SME capacity building may succeed in attaining the motivation for SMEs to use ICT. Ensuring easy access to the technology by providing loans, grants and subsidies is important. Various stakeholders, partners and related organisations should come forward to support government policies and priorities in order to ensure the productive use of ICT among SMEs which finally will help to foster Bangladesh’s economic development.