Search results

Smart card-based E-payment systems are receiving increasing attention as the number of implementations is witnessed on the rise globally. Understanding of user adoption behavior of E-payment systems that employ smart card technology becomes a research area that is of particular value and interest to both IS researchers and professionals. However, research interest focuses mostly on why a smart card-based E-payment system results in a failure or how the system could have grown into a success. This signals the fact that researchers have not had much opportunity to critically review a smart card-based E-payment system that has gained wide support and overcome the hurdle of critical mass adoption. The Octopus in Hong Kong has provided a rare opportunity for investigating smart card-based E-payment system because of its unprecedented success. This research seeks to thoroughly analyze the Octopus from technology adoption behavior perspectives.

Cultural impacts on adoption behavior are one of the key areas that this research posits to investigate. Since the present research is conducted in Hong Kong where a majority of population is Chinese ethnicity and yet is westernized in a number of aspects, assuming that users in Hong Kong are characterized by eastern or western culture is less useful. Explicit cultural characteristics at individual level are tapped into here instead of applying generalization of cultural beliefs to users to more accurately reflect cultural bias. In this vein, the technology acceptance model (TAM) is adapted, extended, and tested for its applicability cross-culturally in Hong Kong on the Octopus. Four cultural dimensions developed by Hofstede are included in this study, namely uncertainty avoidance, masculinity, individualism, and Confucian Dynamism (long-term orientation), to explore their influence on usage behavior through the mediation of perceived usefulness.

TAM is also integrated with the innovation diffusion theory (IDT) to borrow two constructs in relation to innovative characteristics, namely relative advantage and compatibility, in order to enhance the explanatory power of the proposed research model. Besides, the normative accountability of the research model is strengthened by embracing two social influences, namely subjective norm and image. As the last antecedent to perceived usefulness, prior experience serves to bring in the time variation factor to allow level of prior experience to exert both direct and moderating effects on perceived usefulness.

The resulting research model is analyzed by partial least squares (PLS)-based Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) approach. The research findings reveal that all cultural dimensions demonstrate direct effect on perceived usefulness though the influence of uncertainty avoidance is found marginally significant. Other constructs on innovative characteristics and social influences are validated to be significant as hypothesized. Prior experience does indeed significantly moderate the two influences that perceived usefulness receives from relative advantage and compatibility, respectively. The research model has demonstrated convincing explanatory power and so may be employed for further studies in other contexts. In particular, cultural effects play a key role in contributing to the uniqueness of the model, enabling it to be an effective tool to help critically understand increasingly internationalized IS system development and implementation efforts. This research also suggests several practical implications in view of the findings that could better inform managerial decisions for designing, implementing, or promoting smart card-based E-payment system.

Addresses the standardization of the measurements and the labels for concepts commonly used in the study of work organizations. As a reference handbook and research tool, seeks to improve measurement in the study of work organizations and to facilitate the teaching of introductory courses in this subject. Focuses solely on work organizations, that is, social systems in which members work for money. Defines measurement and distinguishes four levels: nominal, ordinal, interval and ratio. Selects specific measures on the basis of quality, diversity, simplicity and availability and evaluates each measure for its validity and reliability. Employs a set of 38 concepts ‐ ranging from “absenteeism” to “turnover” as the handbook’s frame of reference. Concludes by reviewing organizational measurement over the past 30 years and recommending future measurement reseach.

The purpose of this paper is to focus on the suitability of the multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) matrix approach for examining construct validity in human resource management (HRM) research. The authors also provide a number of suggestions on how to use MTMM more effectively in HRM research.

The authors start by presenting a basic introduction to MTMM approach. Next the authors briefly review the limitations of MTMM approach and suggested improvements. The authors elaborate on these limitations by providing HRM examples. To further illustrate these issues, the authors review employment interview research.

The construct validity analysis in HRM research suffers from three problematic assumptions of the classical MTMM approach: uncorrelated trait-method units, uncorrelated methods, and uncorrelated traits. The review of interview research shows that classical MTMM approach is by far the most popular approach given its relative simplicity and modest sample size requirements. This popularity stresses the significance of the review in highlighting these issues.

Several improvements to quantify the interpretations of MTMM analysis are available to researchers. This review closely examines how these limitations and proposed improvements influence HRM research, thereby making the methodological advances concerning the MTMM approach more accessible to HRM researchers and practitioners.

The purpose of this paper is to validate empirically a measurement scale of the effectiveness of R & D activities, starting from previous work in which the content was validated.

Following psychometric standards the authors have addressed the analysis phases of construct dimensionality, reliability and validity (convergent, discriminant and nomologic), and the scale criteria are shown to be valid in their three temporal manifestations (retrospective, concurrent and predictive). The empirical evidence was drawn from a sample of 85 companies belonging to the Spanish pharmaceutical sector.

Globally the authors provide evidence of reliability, validity of construct and validity of criterion in their diverse manifestations, for the scale designed and validated, on effectiveness in R & D. The authors divide the results into two groups: one for content of the scale and the other for relationships of the scale with other variables. With respect to the first, it is notable that, although in general the variables analyzed coincide with the previous broad and multidisciplinary theory on the success factors of R & D activities, what the authors provide is empirical evidence of the most important factors and variables for effectiveness in R & D; the authors emphasize that the results of the sample analyzed indicate that the most important factor is the close integration of the R & D activities with the corporate strategy, followed by the proper planning of these activities, and the achievement of financial results for the company. With respect to the relationship of the scale with other variables, the authors have found positive and significant relationships between the effectiveness in R & D and the following financial variables: net turnover and earnings after taxes. The authors have also found positive and significant relationships between different characteristics of the company and the achievement of success in R & D activities. Thus, being a company of larger size, the existence of an R & D department, the existence of specific incentive systems for the R & D personnel, the adoption of new management techniques in the R & D department, and the patents policy of the company are all factors that have a positive influence.

There are three main limitations of the study: the size of the sample; the decision to use a very particular highly innovatory sector, the pharmaceutical industry; and conducting the study in only one specific country, Spain. The results should be interpreted taking into account these limitations. Another limitation is the absence of previously validated scales. This meant that the authors were unable to do any comparative analyses.

The authors have contributed by summarizing and testing the existing theories on the factors of success in R & D. This should give R & D managers a more comprehensive and useful picture of the variables that have been considered more important, and should enable them to choose from among the range of variables proposed those that may be considered most relevant for inclusion in their own balanced scorecard. More generally, the results should help them in the management of their activity. For researchers the authors make available an already validated scale with which to work in various different samples and settings.

The originality of the work resides in two aspects. First, a very wide set of variables proposed in the literature is analyzed, with the object of establishing the relationships and the ranking of these variables, which would not be clear if the variables were analyzed in isolation. Second, there is originality in the methodology employed for measuring the result of activities with a high level of uncertainty and risk, specifically R & D activities in the highly innovative companies of the pharmaceutical industry. It is original because, to date, the scale has only been validated theoretically – there is no work in the literature validating it empirically.

Purpose – This chapter (a) summarizes leader–member exchange (LMX) measurement practices since the influential reviews by Schriesheim, Castro, and Cogliser (1999) and Gerstner and Day (1997), (b) clarifies the status of LMX as a broad construct from a hierarchical factor model, (c) conducts multitrait-multimethod (MTMM) analyses on leader and follower reports of multidimensional LMX, and (d) investigates discriminant validity between Member LMX and satisfaction with supervisor.

Methodology/Approach – We used (a) a literature search of LMX measurement practices, (b) a combination of meta-analysis and factor analysis to specify the broad LMX construct underlying Liden and Maslyn's (1998) (LMX-MDM) multidimensional instrument, (c) MTMM analyses of leader and member ratings of the LMX-MDM, and (d) a combination of meta-analysis and multiple regression to assess incremental validity of Member LMX beyond satisfaction with supervisor.

Findings – Since 1999, 85% of LMX studies now use one of two dominant LMX scales (LMX-7, Scandura, & Graen, 1984; LMX-MDM, Liden & Maslyn, 1998). These two measures are correlated (rcorrected=.9), suggesting the LMX-7 and the LMX-MDM are alternate forms of the same instrument. 94% of studies that used these two measures treat LMX as a single, broad construct rather than as a multidimensional set of constructs. MTMM analyses suggest Leader LMX and Member LMX are two, separate-but-related constructs (i.e., confirming two source factors and no lower-order trait factors). Last, Member LMX meta-analytically correlates with satisfaction with supervisor at rcorrected=.8. There is some incremental validity of LMX, but the pattern is inconsistent across samples.

Social Implications – We point out that LMX researchers have now moved toward standard measurement of LMX – as a broad, higher-order factor that varies between leader and follower. By doing so, we reveal that the stage is set for cumulative and replicable research on leadership as a dyadic, follower-specific phenomenon.

Originality/Value of Paper – Our chapter is the first to reveal consensus in LMX measurement across studies; to summarize the standard treatment of LMX as a single, broad factor; and to apply MTMM analyses to demonstrate separate Leader LMX and Member LMX source factors.

Sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) ensures integration of socially, environmentally and economically feasible practices in entire supply chain. SSCM principles can be implemented to improve efficiency and productivity of a system by different attributes of the system. The purpose of this article is to identify the most appropriate existing (SSCM) framework that can be implemented suitably in Indian smart manufacturing industries.

Validity and reliability analysis on the existing SSCM frameworks was carried out with the help of empirical data collected using questionnaire survey methodology from various Indian smart manufacturing organizations. The empirical data were gathered from various experts from top- and middle-level management in different smart manufacturing organizations across the country. Further, factor analysis was carried on the collected data to estimate the unidimensionality of each SSCM frameworks. Cronbach's alpha value was used to assess reliability of each framework. Subsequently, the frequency distribution analysis was done to obtain familiar elements in the segregated frameworks based on validity and reliability analysis.

The work observed that only five SSCM frameworks have shown unidimensionality in terms of the elements or constructs. The work further found that these segregated frameworks have not shown sufficiently high level of reliability. Additionally, this work attempted frequency distribution analysis and observed that there were very few elements which were being repeatedly used in numerous frameworks proposed by researchers. Based on the findings of this work, the work concluded that there is acute need of a new SSCM framework for Indian smart manufacturing industries.

This study gathered empirical data from 388 Indian smart manufacturing organizations. Thus, before generalizing the findings of the study across the sectors, there is a possibility of some more explication.

The main purpose of this article is to explore the feasibility of the existing SSCM frameworks in Indian smart manufacturing sector. The study also assumes that the manufacturing managers and executives may have the complete understanding on the existing sustainable manufacturing frameworks and a chance to executing proper suitable framework in the respective manufacturing organization.

The purpose of the article is to identify suitable existing lean product development (LPD) framework that is useful to implement in Indian manufacturing industry. The number of successful products is one of the most deciding factors in any organization revenue. Lean principles can be applied across product development processes to eliminate waste activities. Thus, to fulfill the objective, the present study has performed validity and reliability analysis on the existing LPD frameworks with the help of empirical data collected from Indian manufacturing sector through a survey questionnaire methodology.

The empirical data was collected from 180 manufacturing organizations from Indian manufacturing sector. The study has gathered the empirical data from respondents from top and middle level personnel. Factor analysis was conducted on the collected empirical data to find the unidimensionality of the each framework. Reliability of each individual framework was determined through Cronbach’s alpha value. Finally, the frequency distribution analysis was performed to find familiar constructs in the selected frameworks sorted on the basis of validity and reliability analysis.

The present study found that only eight LPD frameworks have displayed unidimensionality with respect to the construct, i.e. the LPD it measures. The study also found that those eight frameworks have displayed a high level of reliability. Further, the study tried to find the most familiar constructs from the selected eight frameworks by applying frequency distribution analysis. The frequency distribution analysis has identified that most of the constructs have showed a high value in terms of mode and mean. The study also concluded that there is a need to develop a new LPD framework, which is suitable to fulfill the requirements of Indian manufacturing industry, as well as global manufacturing industry.

The study collected empirical data from 180 organizations and all of the respondents were restricted from Indian manufacturing industry. Hence, the study believes that there is a chance some more amplification before being generalizes over across the sectors and countries.

The main objective of the present article is to find out the suitability of the existing LPD frameworks to Indian manufacturing sector. The study also anticipates that the products development managers and executives may collect complete information on the existing LPD frameworks and also a chance to executing proper suitable framework in the respective manufacturing organization.

The argumentativeness measure has been used in more than a 100 studies since 1982. The measure was developed and validated within a US university/college student sample. Despite its intended use, the measure is regularly used outside of the US and outside of the university/college setting without tests of validity. There is also intense debate as to the dimensionality of the measure, with one camp defending the bi-dimensionality of the measure and another proposing uni-dimensionality. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to assess the utility of the measure outside of its intended population.

A total of seven samples were collected (n = 1860) from the UK, Germany, France, Turkey, the Philippines, Nicaragua and the US. In this study, Infante and Rancer’s (1982) original 20-item argumentativeness measure was used to assess argumentativeness. Confirmatory factor analyses was used to test content validity.

Fit statistics were consistently poor for the unidimensional factor structure. As there is debate as to whether the measure is uni or bi-dimensional, a bi-dimensional fit was also analysed. The measure performed slightly better in each sample using a bi-dimensional factor structure. However, fit statistics were still poor for each sample.

Specifically, the seven samples are convenience samples. While such a sampling technique does limit the generalizability of a study’s findings, convenience samples are common when using the argumentativeness measure. These results present avenues for exploring the dimensionality of the argumentativeness measure and for revisiting cross-cultural examinations of argumentativeness.

Factor structure is a critical issue in validity. Whether authors specify their prediction or not, factor structure is always hypothesized as part of a study when measurements are used, and therefore, should be examined in every study as part of the scientific process. Making claims about human behaviour based upon measures with mis-specified factor structures or other validity issues can lead to the perpetuation of misinformation within the literature.

This is one of the few studies to empirically explore the psychometric properties of one of the most used measures in argument/conflict research. In doing so, this study enhances the understanding of decades of argumentativeness research.