Kenneth S. Law © IACMR 广州 2007 1 Kenneth S. Law ( 罗胜强 ) 香港中文大学管理系 IACMR Workshop, 广州 2007 年 7 月调查研究

Kenneth S. Law © IACMR 广州 20071

Kenneth S. Law (罗胜强 )香港中文大学管理系

IACMR Workshop, 广州2007 年 7 月

调查研究


Different types of studies

2

1. Correlational survey studies2. Experimental laboratory studies3. Quasi experiments4. Qualitative studies5. Qualitative reviews6. Meta analysis (Quantitative reviews)


The Survey Process

Idea generation1. Find some hot topics in the literatureData collection2. Collect as many related variables as possible

around a topic in a surveyData analysis3. See which pairs of correlations are significant4. Try to massage the data so as to get good results5. Use the most up-to-date analytical toolsWrite up the manuscript6. Try to build up a story based on the significant

results7. Find a theory related to your results

3


Issues in survey design4

1. What is the research question?

2. What are the hypotheses?

3. Measure your construct of interesta) What is your level of analysis?b) What is your data source?c) Use validated scales if possibled) The scale development processe) Multidimensional constructs

4. Pilot test

5. Convergent & Discriminant Validity

6. Issues in Questionnaire design

7. How to collect data?

8. Data analysis


1. What is your research question?

What is your contribution to the literature?

Is the research question testable? Are the constructs well defined? Do we have enough validated scales

to measure the constructs? Are the relationships well justified?

5


Contributions

1. Theoretical contributions• New constructs• New phenomena• New findings• New perspectives

2. Methodological contributions• New measures (e.g., new scale

development)• New methods (e.g., cross-level

research)

6


7

What are theoretical contributions?

A complete theory should contain four elements

1. What. Which factors logically should be considered as part of the explanation of the phenomena? (factor comprehensiveness and parsimony)

2. How. How are they related?

3. Why. What are the underlying psychological, economic, or social dynamics that justify the selection of factors and the proposed causal relationships?

4. Who, where, when. These conditions place limitations on the propositions generated from a theoretical model.

Whetten, D.A. (1989) What constitute a theoretical contribution. AMR, 1494), 490-495.


8

Job Design

Job Characteristics Model Hackman & Oldham (1976)

feedbackautonomyceSignificanIdentityVariety

MPS **3

MPS Job Satisfaction

Social Information Processing Model Salancik & Pfeffer (1978)

Job Satisfaction Perceived job characteristics


9

Why employees want fairness?

Group Value Model

Folger & Konovsky (1989)

Instrumental Model

Procedural vs. Distributive justice


10

A research question

Self concept

DownsizingOutsourcingRe-engineering

Productivity


11

Workplace Self Concept

Sociology Identification

Psychology Evaluation

Self Concept

Workplace

WSC


2. Is the research question testable?


Is the research question testable?

Are the constructs well defined? Do we have enough validated scales


12


生涯管理要素图13

生涯情况信息计划资源

探索的动机候迭人的信息

生活的目标

1.个人战略2.时间

1.解决个人问题的技能

2.控制

目标

1.自我评估价值技术兴趣经验

2.组织评估表现潜力分配计划

生涯发展目标生涯计划执行

现有内部劳资市场1.工作调整需要2.生涯之路结构3.内部提升

生涯机会信息1.生涯信息系统2.生涯咨询

1.未来组织经济目标

2.未来所需职工

1.组织人才资源发展战略

2.重要职务分配

1.工作机会2.赞助人3.生涯管理者


3. Are the constructs well defined?


Is the research question testable? Are the constructs well

defined? Do we have enough validated scales


14


15

A research question

1. Workplace Self Concept (WSC)2. General Self Efficacy 3. Organizational-Based Self Esteem4. Core Self Evaluation

DownsizingOutsourcingRe-engineering

Productivity


16

Construct validity

Convergent Validity

Discriminant validity

Workplace Self Concept

Core Self Evaluation

Self Efficacy


17

Content validityWorkplace Self Concept include:

Supervisor Subordinate Colleague Employee Career


4. Measurement Issues


Is the research question testable? Are the constructs well defined? Do we have enough validated

scales to measure the constructs?

Are the relationships well justified?

18


19Use Established Scales

Law, K.S., Wong, C. & Song, L.J. (2004). The construct and criterion validity of emotional intelligence and its potential utility for management studies, JAP, 89(3)483-496.

Wong, C., Law, K.S. (2002). The effects of leader and follower emotional intelligence on performance and attitude: An exploratory study. The Leadership Quarterly, 13, 243-274.

Self Emotion Appraisal通常我能知道自己為什麼會有某些感受。我很瞭解自己的情緒。我真的能明白自己的感受。我常常知道自己為什麼覺得開心或不高興。Regulation of Emotion遇到困難時，我能控制自己的脾氣。我很能控制自己的情緒。當我憤怒時，我通常能在很短的時間內冷靜下來。我對自己的情緒有很強的控制能力。Use of Emotion我通常能為自己制訂目標並儘量完成這些目標。我經常告訴自己是一個有能力的人。我是一個能鼓勵自己的人。我經常鼓勵自己要做到最好。Other's Emotion Appraisal我通常能從朋友的行為中猜到他們的情緒。我觀察別人情緒的能力很強。我能很敏銳地洞悉別人的感受和情緒。我很瞭解身邊的人的情緒。


5. Hypotheses


Is the research question testable? Are the constructs well defined? Do we have enough validated scales

to measure the constructs? Are the relationships well

justified?

20


21

A research question

Are there existing empirical evidence to support the hypothesis?

Are there un-obvious logical arguments to justify your hypothesis?

Is there a theoretical perspective to justify your hypothesis?


22

Three possible arguments1. Bass and Bentler (2001) found that followers who followed

transformational leaders have a stronger vision of where the firm is heading to. As a result, we hypothesize that ……

2. A transformational leader leads by creating visions for his/her followers. They share their visions with their followers and communicate with their followers continuous on these visions. Since mission and vision is a core component of organizational commitment, we hypothesize that……

3. According to the social exchange theory, leader-follower relationship that engages in social exchange would expect long term reciprocity instead of immediate reward, we therefore hypothesized that ……


23

Issues in survey design



3. Measure your construct of interesta) What is your level of analysis? b) What is your data source?c) Use validated scales if possibled) The scale development processe) Formative vs. Reflective indicators f) Multidimensional constructs g) Pilot test



6. Data analysis


24

3. Measure your construct of interest

a) What is your level of analysis? b) What is your data source?c) Use validated scales if possibled) The scale development processe) Formative vs. Reflective

indicatorsf) Multidimensional constructs


3a. Level of Analysis Individual level/group level/firm

level/industry level/cross levelExample: 1. The effects of LMX on employee

performance.2. On the antecedents and outcomes of

group-level OCB.3. The effect of HRM practices on firm

performance4. The effect of HRM practices on the job

satisfaction of employees.

25


3a. Level of Analysis

26

Perceived Organizational

Support

Organizational Citizenship Behaviors

Firm Performance

Employees Employees General Manager

No. of firms = 98

No. of employees per firm ≈ 15


27





28

3b Data source and CMV

Try to solicit data (esp. predictor vs. criterion variables) from different sources.

The problem of common method variance (CMV)


29

A Method Factor

Organizational commitment (affective) 不同意同意

1.我很樂意在此家公司中渡過我餘下的生涯。 1 2 3 4 5

2.這家公司所面臨的問題就是我自己的問題。 1 2 3 4 5

3.我有很強地屬於「這家公司的人」的感覺。 1 2 3 4 5

Turnover Intention7. 我很少想到辭職。 1 2 3 4

58. 我不可能在明年另尋新的工作。 1 2 3 4

59. 如果能自由選擇，我仍然喜歡留在這機構工作。 1 2 3 4 5


30

FactorsVar A B CX1 .29 .60 -.06X2 .32 .81 .12X3 .35 .77 .03X4 .27 .01 .65X5 .41 .03 .80X6 .40 .12 .67

Organizational commitment

Turnover intention

Rotated Factor Matrix in EFARotated Factor Matrix in EFA


One Factor Test31

X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X6

X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X6

**


32

An example

HRM practices of

the firm

Degree of social exchange in the

organization

Individual performance of employees

Source of information:

HR manager Middle managers Top level managers


33

Different methods/sources

Organizational commitment

Organizational culture

• Not reported by employee• rites and ceremonials

• Self reported by employee

reported by employee reported by supervisor/peer


34


a) What is your level of analysis? b) What is your data source?c) Use validated scales if possible.d) The scale development processe) Formative vs. Reflective



35

3c Using existing scales1. Adapting measures

Ratee perceptions was measured by a four-item scale adapted from Atwater et al. (2000)

What has changed? Why?

2. Adopting measures Moorman (1991) has seven items measuring procedural justice Procedural justice was measured by three items from Moorman

(1991)

3. Combining measures Perception of rater credibility was measured by a six-item scale

adapted from Kerst (1997) and Facteau et al. (1998). Perceived demographic similarity was measured using four single-

item measures based on work by Kirchmeyer (1995), Louis (1978), and Riordan (1997, 2000).


36

What measure to be used?

Use full scale of existing validated scales

Select items only when you have perfect justifications

Use scales that have been validated (esp. cross culturally)

Develop you own measure when you have a strong reason that existing measures do not fit; or there is no good measure of the construct.


37

3c Using existing scalesMeasureWe developed five items to measure emotional intelligence in this study. One sample item is “I am able to control my temper most of the time.” Coefficient of the five items was .89.

Problems1. We do not know how the items are developed.2. There is no evidence of validity of the items.3. We do not know whether you have done any item

trimming or not.4. If yes, we do not know the criteria of item selection.


38

3c Using existing scales

• Follow the proper procedure of scale translation.

• The minimum requirement is a forward-backward translation.

• It is best to pre-test your (translated) scale before use.


39





3d. Developing new scales

Inductive vs. deductive approach for scale development

40

Inductive• Usually behavioral measures of constructs• E.g., Managers write statements to describe

behaviors of a transformational leader• Researcher group all items and sort them into

various dimensions using systematic classification techniques

• Select items to represent each dimension• Pretesting of the scale


Developing new scales41

Deductive• Start with theory to determine the dimensionality

of the construct• For each and every dimension, draft items to

represent the dimension• Pretesting of the scale• Item trimming• Final validation


3e. Formative vs. Reflective indicators

42

Socio-economic

status

Income

Parent’s income

Size of apartment

Formative or causal indicators

Please give one example of each type of construct

Life satisfaction

Positive

Happy

Relax

Reflective or effect indicators


3f. Multidimensional constructs

43

Job Performance

Quality

Quantity

On-time

Mental Ability

Math

Verbal

Memory

Latent Model

Aggregate Model


44

Issues in survey design1. What is the research question?


3. Measure your construct of interesta) What is your level of analysis? b) What is your data source?c) Use validated scales if possibled) The scale development processe) Formative vs. Reflective indicators f) Multidimensional constructs

4. Pilot test



7. Data analysis?a) Convergent & Discriminant Validity b) Confirmatory Factor Analysis c) Mediators and moderators d) Cross level analysis


45

4. Pilot Test Item trimming (EFA) Factor loading >.4 Low cross loading Item difficulty/Item reliability Never trim items based on EFA and

then retest with a CFA using the same sample

Cross validation


46





4. Pilot test



7. Data analysis


47

5. Questionnaire Design1. Question sequencing

• Dependent variables first• Randomization?

2. Grouping of constructs3. Length of questionnaire (# of pages)4. What constructs to include (two papers

but not too long)第三部分下面這些陳述是有關您自己對工作及醫院的一些想法。對於每一题目 ,請在後面最能代表您的意見的選項上畫圈。

1.在生活中看重的事和我單位看重的事很相似。 1 2 3 4 5

2.我個人的價值觀和我單位的價值觀及文化相符。 1 2 3 4 5

3.我單位的價值觀及文化和我在生活中看重的相符。 1 2 3 4 5


48





4. Pilot test



7. Data analysis


49

6. Data collection

1. Minimum N is 1:5 (one respondent for each item within a construct)

2. Minimum N: >100 for group level; >200 for individual level

3. You should be there during data collection.

4. Questionnaire distribution – the higher the level the better


50




3. Measure your construct of interesta) What is your level of analysis?b) What is your data source?c) Use validated scales if possibled) The scale development processe) Formative vs. Reflective indicatorsf) Multidimensional constructs

4. Pilot test



7. Data analysis


7.Data analysis1. Clean your data

2. Examine descriptive statistics

3. Look at your correlation table

4. start with simple analyses

5. Test your hypotheses with the appropriate analytical tools (i.e., H0) (e.g., mediation)

6. Analyze your data at the appropriate level of analysisa) Individual level vs. group level vs. firm levelb) Dimensional level or construct level

7. Do not separate your sample using sub-group analysis unless you have no choice (testing moderators)

51


7.Data analysis8. Confirmatory factor analysis of all items from the same

source (no separate CFA)

9. When to use CFA vs. EFA?

10. Never trim items based on EFA and then retest with a CFA using the same sample

11. Separate measurement model from structural model

12. Using parcels when number of items are large?

52


Forming parcels in CFA

3/)( 3211 xxxg

3/)( 6542 xxxg

2/)( 873 xxg

53

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8


54

Data Dependency

1. Supervisor 1 Subordinate 1



……





55

Sample size in HLM

0111

0212

03

13

ijijjjij rXY 10

jjj

jjj

uW

uW

111101

001000


56

Thank you!

Documents

Kenneth S. Law © IACMR 广州 2007 1 Kenneth S. Law ( 罗胜强 ) 香港中文大学 管理系 IACMR Workshop, 广州 2007 年 7 月 调查研究

Kenneth S. Law © IACMR 广州 2007 1 Kenneth S. Law ( 罗胜强 ) 香港中文大学管理系 IACMR Workshop, 广州 2007 年 7 月调查研究