Adaptation and validation of the Polish version of the team boosting behaviors scale

• Authors: Joanna Haffer

Abstracts

EN

Purpose – The article aims to present the results of adapting the team boosting behaviors (TBB) scale to Polish cultural conditions and validating it. Design/methodology/approach – The research methodology consisted of three steps. In the first step, I translated the TBB scale into Polish using a rigorous back-translation method. Next, to assess content validity, nine domain experts reviewed the initial version of the instrument for clarity and relevance. Finally, I applied the scale to a sample of 532 team members and underwent thorough psychometric testing to assess construct validity. I employed structural equation modeling (SEM) with the partial least squares (PLS) factor-based algorithm technique for confirmatory factor analysis to assess the scale’s reliability and validity. Findings – After development, the Polish version of the TBB scale kept its three sub-scale structures. However, the validation process led to a slight reduction in the number of test items compared to the original scale. Research limitations/implications – The findings imply that the Polish version of the scale is a valid and reliable tool for assessing TBB. However, I recommend additional studies to confirm this instrument’s structure. Originality/value – The results confirmed the reliability and relevance of the tool for measuring TBBs in Polish cultural conditions. The tool provides the basis for implementing further research with the TBB construct in Poland and internationally.

Keywords

EN

Content validity; Construct validity; Scale adaptation; Team boosting behaviors; Psychometric properties

• Publisher: Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego
• Journal: Central European Management Journal
• Year: 2024
• Volume: 32
• Issue: 3
• Pages: 392-407

Dates

published

2024

Contributors

author

Joanna Haffer

• WSB Merito University in Torun

References

• Aycan, Z., & Gelfand, M. J. (2012). Cross-cultural organizational psychology. In S. W. J. Kozlowski (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Psychology. Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199928286.013.0033.
• Beaton, D. E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., & Ferraz, M. B. (2000). Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measure. Spine, 25(24), 3186–3191. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014.
• Becker, J. M., Klein, K., & Wetzels, M. (2012). Hierarchical latent variable models in PLS-SEM: Guidelines for using reflective-formative type models. Long Range Planning, 45(5-6), 359–394. doi: 10.1016/j.lrp.2012.10.001.
• Bera, A. K., & Jarque, C. M. (1981). Efficient tests for normality, homoscedasticity and serial independence of regression residuals: Monte Carlo evidence. Economics Letters, 7(4), 313–318. doi: 10.1016/0165-1765(81)90035-5.
• Bliese, P. D. (2000). Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In K. J. Klein, & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel Theory, Research, and Methods in Organizations. Foundations, Extensions, and New Directions (pp. 249–381). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Cameron, K. S., & Caza, A. (2004). Contributions to the discipline of positive organizational scholarship. American Behavioral Scientist, 47(6), 731–739. doi: 10.1177/0002764203260207.
• Cameron, K. S., Dutton, J. E., & Quinn, R. E. (2003). Positive organizational scholarship: Foundations of a new discipline. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
• Chan, D. (2005). Multilevel research. In F. T. L. Leong, & J. T. Austin (Eds.), The Psychology Research Handbook (2nd ed, pp. 401–18). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern methods for business research (pp. 295–336). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Cicchetti, D. V., & Sparrow, S. A. (1981). Developing criteria for establishing interrater reliability of specific items: Applications to assessment of adaptive behavior. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 86(2), 127–37.
• Collins, A. L., Lawrence, S. A., Troth, A. C., & Jordan, P. J. (2013). Group affective tone: A review and future research directions. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(1), 43–62, doi: 10.1002/job.1887.
• Country Comparison Tool (2023), Available from: https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison-tool
• Czakon, W. (2019). Walidacja narzędzia pomiarowego w naukach o zarządzaniu. Przegląd Organizacji, 4(951), 3–10. doi: 10.33141/po.2019.04.01.
• Davis, L. L. (1992). Instrument review: Getting the most from your panel of experts. Applied Nursing Research, 5(4), 194–197. doi: 10.1016/S0897-1897(05)80008-4.
• DeVellis, R. F. (2016). Scale development: Theory and applications (Fourth Edition). Los Angeles, CA: Sage publications.
• Felps, W., Mitchell, T. R., & Byington, E. (2006). How, when, and why bad apples spoil the barrel: Negative group members and dysfunctional groups. Research in Organizational Behavior, 27, 175–222. doi: 10.1016/S0191-3085(06)27005-9.
• Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. doi: 10.2307/3151312.
• Fortuin, D. J., van Mierlo, H., Bakker, A. B., Petrou, P., & Demerouti, E. (2021). Team boosting behaviors: Development and validation of a new concept and scale. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 30(4), 600–618. doi: 10.1080/1359432X.2020.1854226.
• Gibson, C. B. (1999). Do they do what they think they can? Group-Efficacy and group effectiveness across tasks and cultures. Academy of Management Journal, 42(2), 138–152. doi: 10.2307/257089.
• Glińska-Neweś, A. (2017). Pozytywne relacje interpersonalne w zarządzaniu. Toruń: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu Mikołaja Kopernika w Toruniu.
• Gudmundsson, E. (2009). Guidelines for translating and adapting psychological instruments. Nordic Psychology, 61(2), 29–145. doi: 10.1027/1901-2276.61.2.29.
• Haffer, R., & Glińska-Neweś, A. (2013). Pozytywny Potencjał Organizacji jako determinanta sukcesu przedsiębiorstwa. Przypadek Polski i Francji. Zarządzanie i Finanse, 11(4), 91–1100.
• Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–152. doi: 10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202.
• Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.
• Hakanen, M., Häkkinen, M., & Soudunsaari, A. (2015). Trust in building high-performing teams: Conceptual approach. Electronic Journal of Business Ethics and Organization Studies, 20(2), 43–53.
• Hambleton, R. K. (2005). Issues, designs, and technical guidelines for adapting tests into multiple languages and cultures. In R. K. Hambleton, P. F. Merenda, & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Adapting educational and psychological tests for cross-cultural assessment (pp. 3–38). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Haynes, S. N., Richard, D. C. S., & Kubany, E. S. (1995). Content validity in psychological assessment: A functional approach to concepts and methods. Psychological Assessment, 7(3), 238–247. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.238.
• Heggestad, E. D., Scheaf, D. J., Banks, G. C., Hausfeld, M. M., Tonidandel, S., & Williams, E. B. (2019). Scale adaptation in organizational science research: A review and best-practice recommendation. Journal of Management, 45(6), 2596–2627. doi: 10.1177/0149206319850280.
• Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. doi: 10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8.
• Hofstede, G. (1980). Motivation, leadership and organization: Do American theories apply abroad?. Organizational Dynamics, 9(1), 42–63. doi: 10.1016/0090-2616(80)90013-3.
• Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (1991). Software of the mind: Cultures and organizations. London: McGraw-Hill.
• Jarque, C. M., & Bera, A. K. (1980). Efficient tests for normality, homoscedasticity and serial independence of regression residuals. Economics Letters, 6(3), 255–259. doi: 10.1016/0165-1765(80)90024-5.
• Katz, N. (2001). Sports teams as a model for workplace teams: Lessons and liabilities. Academy of Management Perspectives, 15(3), 56–67. doi: 10.5465/ame.2001.5229533.
• Katz, N., & Koenig, G. (2001). Sports teams as a model for workplace teams: Lessons and liabilities [and executive commentary]. The Academy of Management Executive, 15(3), 1993–2005, 56–69.
• Kirkman, B. L., Gibson, C. B., & Shapiro, D. L. (2001). ‘Exporting’ teams: Enhancing the implementation and effectiveness of work teams in global affiliates. Organizational Dynamics, 30(1), 12–29. doi: 10.1016/s0090-2616(01)00038-9.
• Kock, N. (2015). A note on how to conduct a factor-based PLS-SEM analysis. International Journal of e-Collaboration, 11(3), 1–9. doi: 10.4018/ijec.2015070101.
• Kock, N. (2021). WarpPLS user manual: Version 7.0. Laredo, TX: ScriptWarp Systems.
• Lonner, W., & Malpass, R. S. (1994). When psychology and culture meet: An introduction to cross-cultural psychology. In W. J. Lonner, & R. S. Malpass (Eds.), Psychology and culture (pp. 1–12). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
• Lowry, P. B., & Gaskin, J. (2014). Partial least squares (PLS) structural equation modeling (SEM) for building and testing behavioral causal theory: When to choose it and how to use it. Ieee Transactions on Professional Communication, 57(2), 123–146. doi: 10.1109/TPC.2014.2312452.
• Luthans, F. (2002). The need for and meaning of positive organizational behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(6), 695–706. doi: 10.1002/job.165.
• Lynn, M. R. (1986). Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research, 35(6), 382–385. doi: 10.1097/00006199-198611000-00017.
• Mach, M., Dolan, S., & Tzafrir, S. (2010). The differential effect of team members’ trust on team performance: The mediation role of team cohesion. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83(3), 771–794. doi: 10.1348/096317909X473903.
• Mathieu, J., Maynard, M. T., Rapp, T., & Gilson, L. (2008). Team effectiveness 1997–2007: A review of recent advancements and a glimpse into the future. Journal of Management, 34(3), 410–476. doi: 10.1177/0149206308316061.
• Mathieu, J. E., Tannenbaum, S. I., Donsbach, J. S., & Alliger, G. M. (2014). A review and integration of team composition models: Moving toward a dynamic and temporal framework. Journal of Management, 40(1), 130–160. doi: 10.1177/0149206313503014.
• Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2006). The content validity index: Are you sure you know what’s being reported? Critique and recommendations. Research in Nursing Health, 29(5), 489–497. doi: 10.1002/nur.20147.
• Polit, D. F., Beck, C. T., & Owen, S. V. (2007). Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Research in Nursing Health, 30(4), 459–467. doi: 10.1002/nur.20199.
• Rubio, D., Berg-Weger, M., Tebb, S. S., Lee, S. E., & Rauch, S. (2003). Objectifying content validity: Conducting a content validity study in social work research. Social Work Research, 27(3), 94–104. doi: 10.1093/swr/27.2.94.
• Salas, E., Shuffler, M. L., Thayer, A. L., Bedwell, W. L., & Lazzara, E. H. (2015). Understanding and improving teamwork in organizations: A scientifically based practical guide. Human Resource Management, 54(4), 599–622. doi: 10.1002/hrm.21628.
• Schneider, S. C., & Barsoux, J. L. (2003). Managing across cultures. New York: Pearson Education.
• Shrotryia, V. K., & Dhanda, U. (2019). Content validity of assessment instrument for employee engagement (pp. 1–7). Los Angeles: SAGE Open. doi: 10.1177/2158244018821751.
• Sousa, V. D., & Rojjanasrirat, W. (2011). Translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for use in cross-cultural health care research: A clear and user-friendly guideline. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 17(2), 268–274. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01434.x.
• Urbach, N., & Ahlemann, F. (2010). Structural equation modeling in information systems research using partial least squares. Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application, 11(2), 5–40.
• Walter, F., & Bruch, H. (2008). The positive group affect spiral: A dynamic model of the emergence of positive affective similarity in work groups. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29(2), 239–261. doi: 10.1002/job.505.
• Waltz, C. F., Strickland, O. L., & Lenz, E. R. (2005). Measurement in nursing and health research. New York: Springer Publishing Company.
• Wetzels, M., Odekerken-Schröder, G., & van Oppen, C. (2009). Using PLS path modeling for assessing hierarchical construct models: Guidelines and empirical illustration. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 33(1), 177–195. doi: 10.2307/20650284.
• Wolfe, R. A., Weick, K. E., Usher, J. M., Terborg, J. R., Poppo, L., Murrell, A. J., . . . Jourdan, J. S. (2005). Sport and organizational studies: Exploring synergy. Journal of Management Inquiry, 14(2), 182–210. doi: 10.1177/1056492605275245.
• Wright, T. A. (2003). Positive organizational behavior: An idea whose time has truly come. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(4), 437–442. doi: 10.1002/job.197.
• Wright, P. M., Smart, D. L., & McMahan, G. C. (1995). Matches between human resources and strategy among NCAA basketball teams. Academy of Management Journal, 38(4), 1052–1074. doi: 10.2307/256620.
• Wynd, C. A., Schmidt, B., & Schaefer, M. A. (2003). Two quantitative approaches for estimating content validity. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 25(5), 508–518. doi: 10.1177/0193945903252998.
• Zamanzadeh, V., Rassouli, M., Abbaszadeh, A., Majd, H. A., Nikanfar, A., & Ghahramanian, A. (2014). Details of content validity and objectifying it in instrument development. Nursing Practice Today, 1(3), 163–171. doi: 10.18502/npt.v7i1.2295.

Identifiers

DOI

10.1108/CEMJ-11-2022-0194

Biblioteka Nauki

55992946