Search results

The purpose of this paper, a critical reflection, is twofold. First, by comprehensively reviewing scale development procedures in hospitality research, a concerning lack of nomological validity testing is demonstrated. Second, the need for nomological validity testing is discussed and both conceptually and empirically reasoned.

This research systematically reviews scale development studies in three leading hospitality journals, including Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management and International Journal of Hospitality Management over ten years (2012–2021) to analyze the completeness of scale development procedures. Specifically, the authors evaluate whether the reviewed studies engage in testing the nomological and predictive validity of the newly developed measures.

The results indicate a concerning gap in the current practices in hospitality research. Specifically, only 33.3% of the examined studies assess nomological validity. These findings collectively underscore the need for improving the comprehensiveness of scale development processes in hospitality research.

The study offers important implications for hospitality researchers. The paper provides an extensive discussion on the importance and benefits of testing for nomological validity in scale development studies, contributing to the completeness and consistency of scale development procedures in the hospitality discipline.

This research critically assesses prevalent, and widely accepted, scale development procedures in hospitality research. This research empirically demonstrates the neglect of nomological validity issues in scale development practices in hospitality research. Scale development is an essential scientific practice used to create a research instrument in a field of study, improving our understanding of a specific phenomenon and contributing to knowledge creation. Considering the significance of scale development in advancing the field of hospitality research, the validation procedures involved in the scale development processes are of utmost importance and should be thoroughly applied.

This study aims to develop a measurement instrument, which involves four usability dimensions of efficiency, effectiveness, satisfaction, and learnability, as a way of assessing the usability of academic digital libraries.

To generate measurement items, previous research related to usability frameworks, usability guidelines, and empirical usability tests was reviewed. The measurement instrument was then verified in terms of reliability and validity, empirically using data from 230 actual users of an academic digital library. To ensure the reliability of the instrument, internal consistency of measurements, measurement item reliability, and construct reliability were examined. Construct validity, which consists of convergent validity and discriminant validity, was also examined on the basis of confirmatory factor analysis using structural equation modeling.

The usability evaluation instrument suggested in this study comprises four dimensions: efficiency, effectiveness, satisfaction, and learnability, and three to four items were identified to measure each dimension.

To date, while many of the usability studies have relied on either experimental methods or inspection methods, few studies have been conducted to identify evaluation measures that can assess the usability of a digital library from a survey method. This study is one of a few studies to develop a measurement instrument tailored to academic digital library environments.

Overall quantitative research aims to observe certain fundamental principles of logic and scientific frame of reasoning. There continues to be challenges on how quantitative research is conducted in the field of information systems.

Structured equation modelling (SEM) research identifies concerns about the standard of scientific enquiry method, the issue of the misconception of sustaining the consequent and the issue of collective validity. Therefore, rigor and robustness in instrument validity, constructs validity and path analysis validity maybe better achieved by attending to these three concerns. Measuring a multiple mediator construct in a hypothetical model continues to be a challenge for researchers in information systems research and related fields.

This paper aims to provide a thoughtful assessment of the contemporary issues of structural equation modelling methodology (SEMM), by providing rigid and robust SEMM that has several stages in specifying valid multiple mediators construct and the process to measuring in a path analysis model. This paper attempts to develop each stage of the methodology using relevant research to construct a methodology specified to test effects in multiple mediators in SEM using AMOS software. The methodology developed contains the two main phases; first is prior to data collection phase and the second phase is after the data collection, the use of this methodology design, for implementation, intended to support high methodological standards and subsequent quality in MIS research findings.

The research paper provides SEMM that has several stages in specifying valid multiple mediators construct and the process to measuring in a path analysis model.

Numerous scales have been developed and utilized in the tourism and hospitality field, yet, their psychometric properties have not been systematically reviewed and evaluated. This gap compromises researchers' ability to develop better measures and improve measurement decisions. In this current study, 56 scales were identified and evaluated in terms of their psychometric properties. It was found that most scales were imperfect in measuring tourism and hospitality domains, and most scales did not provide explicit information about the scale development procedures that were adopted. The scale development procedure and psychometric properties of the reviewed scales are summarized, evaluated, and recommendations are made for future tourism and hospitality scale development.

This paper aims to develop and validate scale for ethical decision-making model in marketing that confirms religious–humanistic approach with special reference to ethical philosophy in Islam. Synthesized model of Ferrell and Gresham contingency framework for ethical decision-making in marketing and Al-Ghazali’s ethical philosophy are considered as theoretical background of this study.

“Content validity test” and “factor analysis” are used to refine measurement items and define as well as validate the scale, respectively. A total of 362 samples were collected from Islamic banking practitioners in the United Arab Emirates.

Item scale of the constructs comprised in the conceptual model defined and validated by using content validity test (CVT). Underlying theoretical dimensions of the constructs were extracted through exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and evidence of validation of scale/construct reported through CFA.

The scope of this paper is limited to development and validation of scale. Future studies are suggested to use the newly validated scale/construct in descriptive model, and examine the hypotheses prescribed in the model. Further, explanations on theoretical background of this paper is limited as the main objective of this paper is to statistically validate the conceptual model adopted.

Proper application of validated scale of ethical decision-making model in marketing should enable concerned authorities of marketing department to gauge and understand the ethical aspects of individuals in the organizations. Apparently, apprehension of ethical perception of workforces in organizations should benefit in enhancing competence and minimize the costs from unethical behaviour, and, thus, better governance in whole level of management.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is an initial attempt to develop and validate the scale of ethical decision-making model in marketing that accommodates both religious and humanistic aspects into a single model to examine the decision-making behaviour related to ethical issues of individuals in organizations.

The objective of this study is to investigate how country risk, different political actions from the government and bureaucratic behavior influence the activities in industry supply chains (SCs) in emerging markets. The main objective of this study is to investigate the influence of these external stakeholders’ elements to the demand-side and supply-side drivers and barriers for improving competitiveness of Ready-Made Garment (RMG) industry in the way of analyzing supply chain. Considering the phenomenon of recent change in the RMG business environment and the competitiveness issues this study uses the principles of stakeholder and resource dependence theory and aims to find out some factors which influence to make an efficient supply chain for improving competitiveness. The RMG industry of Bangladesh is the case application of this study. Following a positivist paradigm, this study adopts a two phase sequential mixed-method research design consisting of qualitative and quantitative approaches. A tentative research model is developed first based on extensive literature review. Qualitative field study is then carried out to fine tune the initial research model. Findings from the qualitative method are also used to develop measures and instruments for the next phase of quantitative method. A survey is carried out with sample of top and middle level executives of different garment companies of Dhaka city in Bangladesh and the collected quantitative data are analyzed by partial least square-based structural equation modeling. The findings support eight hypotheses. From the analysis the external stakeholders’ elements like bureaucratic behavior and country risk have significant influence to the barriers. From the internal stakeholders’ point of view the manufacturers’ and buyers’ drivers have significant influence on the competitiveness. Therefore, stakeholders need to take proper action to reduce the barriers and increase the drivers, as the drivers have positive influence to improve competitiveness.

This study has both theoretical and practical contributions. This study represents an important contribution to the theory by integrating two theoretical perceptions to identify factors of the RMG industry’s SC that affect the competitiveness of the RMG industry. This research study contributes to the understanding of both external and internal stakeholders of national and international perspectives in the RMG (textile and clothing) business. It combines the insights of stakeholder and resource dependence theories along with the concept of the SC in improving effectiveness. In a practical sense, this study certainly contributes to the Bangladeshi RMG industry. In accordance with the desire of the RMG manufacturers, the research has shown that some influential constructs of the RMG industry’s SC affect the competitiveness of the RMG industry. The outcome of the study is useful for various stakeholders of the Bangladeshi RMG industry sector ranging from the government to various private organizations. The applications of this study are extendable through further adaptation in other industries and various geographic contexts.

The purpose of this study is to develop a valid and reliable instrument to measure the corporate reputation of large service organizations. The validity of a discipline’s constructs is a prerequisite for effective theory development and testing. Construct validity thus lies at the very heart of both decision-making and scientific progress in marketing. The use of marketing instruments that do not demonstrate sufficient evidence of construct validity can lead to invalid results, erroneous conclusions and poor decision-making. Despite several attempts to develop an instrument to measure the corporate reputation of service organizations effectively, lingering doubts remain about the construct validity of several published instruments.

Empirical data were collected from the clients of service organization using an online survey during three waves of data collection and scale purification. Invariance testing in two different service industries confirmed that the final instrument is completely invariant, suggesting that the measurement parameters of the measurement model are the same in both samples.

Rigorous scale development led to the development of a 19-item instrument that effectively measures a large service organization’s corporate reputation along five dimensions, namely, emotional appeal, corporate performance, social engagement, good employer and service points.

The study was limited to the measurement of the corporate reputation of large service organizations.

Given the fact that corporate reputation has been described as “the ultimate determinant of competitiveness” by some executives, the outcome of this study is a proposal that large service organizations measure this intangible asset along five dimensions, namely, emotional appeal, corporate performance, social engagement, good employer and service points.

Despite several attempts to do so, a valid and reliable instrument to effectively measure the corporate reputation of service firms (particularly large ones) has remained elusive. After more than two decades after the first attempts at measurement, there are many who now call for improved methodologies and more valid instruments to measure corporate reputation, based on more rigorous theoretical and conceptual development. This study addresses a matter of concern for many managers and academics.

The importance of co-innovation platforms has been well established, but a valid and reliable instrument to measure the affordances of these platforms for co-innovation behavior has not yet been reported in the literature. A robust, validated instrument to measure co-innovation platform affordances (PAs) will facilitate the conduct of studies across different platforms and contribute to enhanced understanding of co-innovation behaviors, outcomes, and platform design. The purpose of this paper is to conceptualize co-innovation PAs, develop a reliable measurement instrument capturing critical facets of co-innovation, namely ideation, collaboration, and communication, and validate the instrument.

The construct of PAs was conceptualized based on the findings from two case studies of co-innovation networks and the key characteristics of social mediating technology affordances. The measurement items newly developed via a case study underwent a two-round exploratory analysis to ensure face validity and content validity. The resulting instrument was subjected to a pilot study and a field study to establish the necessary reliability and validity.

The findings of the study reveal that co-innovation PAs have three distinctive components, namely ideation, collaboration, and communication. Furthermore, the results of the study suggest that PAs are most appropriately operationalized as a second-order construct comprising all three components. The empirical results from the field study show a high degree of confidence in both translation validity and criterion-related validity.

Drawing from co-innovation and affordances literature, this study develops and validates a general instrument to measure co-innovation PAs. The result is a reliable and parsimonious instrument with 12 items. The authors believe that the instrument can contribute significantly to future empirical investigations of co-innovation behavior on virtual platforms.

The purpose of this paper is to draw on resource orchestration theory (ROT) and resource advantage theory (RAT) to develop a measurement scale for supply chain competitive advantage (SCCA) as a second-order construct with the dimensions of agility, adaptability and alignment (triple-A).

A survey research design is adopted to collect primary and secondary data from 182 international firms. The paper utilizes a scale development procedure to develop a measurement instrument and assess its psychometric properties. The scale’s predictive validity is tested using both subjective and objective data. Additionally, the simultaneous effect of triple-A is tested using latent congruent modeling.

Drawing upon ROT and RAT, this study introduces SCCA as a second-order construct composed of SC agility, adaptability and alignment. In addition, the findings show that an SCCA has a direct and positive impact on firms’ financial and market performance.

Existing literature indicates that competition has shifted from inter-firm to inter-SC. To account for this change in competition level, past studies have suggested various capabilities that SCs must possess to offer a competitive advantage, such as triple-As. However, drawing upon RAT and ROT, the authors argue that the SCCA construct accounts for sources of advantage in both the resource side and the demand side. The authors further assert that possessing supply chain resources (i.e. agility, adaptability, alignment as disparate resources) is not sufficient to create advantage but the resources must be orchestrated to create SCCA (i.e. the combination of agility, adaptability and alignment).

This study aims to reexamine the discriminant validity of the customer-based corporate reputation (CBR) scale in both its original and short forms.

The authors used data from end-use customers in two countries and two service industries. Results obtained in partial least squares structural equation modeling for the heterotrait–monotrait (HTMT)-based inference test and the Fornell and Larcker criterion were compared to make judgements about the empirical distinctiveness of the CBR scale’s five dimensions.

This study’s findings demonstrate that the CBR scale in both its original and short forms lacks discriminant validity when using the HTMT-based inference test. Conversely, the discriminant validity of the five corporate reputation dimensions is generally supported when using the more liberal Fornell and Larcker criterion.

Future studies using the CBR scale in either the original or its short form should rely on the more stringent HTMT criterion to ensure the discriminant validity of the scale’s five dimensions.

By addressing recent findings regarding the HTMT criterion’s superiority in uncovering discriminant validity issues compared to that of the Fornell and Larcker criterion, this study is the first, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, to reexamine the discriminant validity of the well-known CBR scale.