Formative vs. Reflective Measurement: Comment on Marakas, Johnson, and Clay (2007)

Hardin, Andrew; Chang, Jerry Cha-Jan; Fuller, Mark A.

doi:10.17705/1jais.00170

Cited by 62 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Diamantopoulos and Siguaw (2006) are of the view that empirical studies should clarify the hypothesized relationship, particularly clarifying whether the measures are studied formatively or reflectively. Hardin et al (2008) explained that if the measures are conceptualized reflectively, variation in a construct leads to variation in its measures. On the hand, formative measures indicate that the variation in the measures have a causal effect on the construct.…”

Section: Figure 1: Research Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is innovation a second order construct: clarifying the formative and reflective measures of innovation

Arshi¹

2017

ABR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The primary purpose of this study is to bring clarity to the measurement of innovation construct, particularly within corporate firms. Measures of innovation continue to be debated in academic literature and absence of universally accepted and valid quantitate scale of innovation can be attributed to lack of clarity of innovation measures. Academic research needs to increase the understanding of diverse conceptualization and operationalization of the innovation construct and its implications in research and practice. Drawing from corporate entrepreneurship and innovation literature, this study argues that innovation is a second order construct consisting of radical and incremental innovation degree and frequency, which are its reflective measures. It further argues that readiness for innovation is a formative measure and an antecedent to innovation. The study uses a dominantly quantitative approach and utilizes structural equation modelling to test the measures of innovation through first and second order measurement and structural models. The results of the study on a sample of Omani corporate firms indicate that measurement of innovation can better understood through both reflective and formative measures.

show abstract

Section: Figure 1: Research Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is innovation a second order construct: clarifying the formative and reflective measures of innovation

Arshi¹

2017

ABR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to [17], formative measurement is assessed by collinearity issues, and the significance and relevance of the formative indicators. Also, the formative measurement has to be investigated in terms of nomological validity to determine the quality of the measurement model [18]. Our results suggest that the formative measurement model is satisfactory.…”

Section: B Formative Measurement Modelmentioning

confidence: 91%

The Impact of Triadic Strategic Alignment on Organisational Performance

2016

International Conference on Engineering Technologies and Big Data Analytics (ETBDA’2016) Jan. 21-22, 2016 Bangkok (Thailand)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Strategic alignment is deemed crucial in understanding how organisational performance can be improved through supporting business strategy with other organisational strategies. Whilst previous alignment literature has provided foundations for identifying the dimensions and performance impacts of the strategic alignment, it is mainly based on dyadic relationships between, for example, business and information technology (IT), business and marketing, or IT and marketing, which could not include other vital variable to develop a more comprehensive understanding of strategic alignment and its impact on organisational performance. Based on a systematic literature review of prior research on strategic alignment, this research develops a research model of triadic strategic alignment of business, IT, and marketing strategies and its impact on organisational performance. It posits that the alignment will result in better organisational performance. Relevant hypotheses have been proposed, which should provide future research directions. Using data collected from 242 managers, and analysed with PLS-SEM.

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, there was still a considerable barrier to accepting the arguments of Hardin et al (2008b) and considering CSE as a reflective construct. For a reflective scale to be meaningful and usable for analysis, the respondents' answers to all the items are expected to covary.…”

Section: Formative Vs Reflective Self-efficacy Constructmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…GSE vs. AS-SE) in the context of IT artifacts (Compeau & Higgins, 1995b;Hardin, Chang, & Fuller, 2008a, 2008bMarakas, Johnson, & Clay, 2007, 2008. It is well discussed in prior studies that using application-specific items to capture one's self-efficacy has considerable advantages over using a general instrument for this construct (Compeau & Higgins, 1995b;Marakas et al, 2007), yet little research has specifically looked at replicating this idea across many different AS-SE measures in different IS contexts.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Training, Self-Efficacy, and Performance; a Replication Study

Davazdahemami¹,

Luse²,

Scheibe³

et al. 2018

AIS TRR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:A conceptual replication of multiple prior IS studies was conducted with the aim of providing stronger empirical support for those results. Conducting six separate longitudinal studies, the effect of professional training on improving one's application-specific computer self-efficacy (AS-CSE) was shown. Also in line with some prior IS studies it was shown that an application-specific measure of self-efficacy is better able to predict one's performance in accomplishing tasks in the corresponding domain than a general computer self-efficacy (GCSE) measure. Moreover, it is shown that, regardless of the type and characteristics of the training method, individuals' perceptions of quality of training significantly affects their AS-CSE after the training course.

show abstract

Formative vs. Reflective Measurement: Comment on Marakas, Johnson, and Clay (2007)

Cited by 62 publications

References 22 publications

Is innovation a second order construct: clarifying the formative and reflective measures of innovation

Is innovation a second order construct: clarifying the formative and reflective measures of innovation

The Impact of Triadic Strategic Alignment on Organisational Performance

Training, Self-Efficacy, and Performance; a Replication Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About