Generative Leadership Scale Development Study

Abstract

The aim of this research is to develop a valid and reliable scale that includes school principals' generative leadership behaviors and the expressions defining these behaviors. As a result of the literature review, the item pool was formed and the scope validity ratios were calculated according to the expert opinion. The draft item form was carried out as a pilot scheme to a group of 50 teachers. Final general practice was applied to 442 teachers. For the validation studies of the scale, the factor loadings of the items of the scale were determined by applying the Exploratory Factor Analysis. First, a four-factor structure emerged, followed by varimax rotation to obtain a twofactor structure. In this process, a total of 35 items were excluded from the scale and a scale with two factors named "Revealing Creative Dynamics" and "Innovation Generating Capacity" and consisting of 27 items. Subsequently, Confirmatory Factor Analysis was performed and then the study proceeded to reliability analyses and Cronbach's Alpha and Composite Reliability values were calculated. After that, the distinctiveness of the scale was examined. Again, using Pearson analysis, the item-total and item-remainder correlations and the correlations between subscales and total scores of the scale items were calculated. All values obtained prove that the scale is valid and reliable.

Bridging Generative Leadership and Green Creativity: Unpacking the Role of Psychological Green Climate and Green Commitment in the Hospitality Industry

“…This study employs a twenty-seven items generative leadership scale developed by Çetin and Demirbilek (2019) and used by Demirbilek (2022). Through this scale, the respondents assessed the ability of their organizational leader to express a higher level of resilience in the face of unexpected future events.…”

“…Unlike, transformational leader who can motivate followers with green goals, while prone to prioritize organizational goals over followers (Eva et al, 2019) and servant leaders who take a bottom-up approach, putting the needs of workers first foremost (Eva et al, 2019;Rabiul et al, 2022), the GL focuses on both; individuals and the environment and can make a culture that perpetuates the employee's development and innovation (Surie & Hazy, 2006). Besides, one of the main attributes of GL is concern for the future generation (Bushe, 2019) and they believe that one thing that the current generation will leave to the future generation is the state of the environment (C xetin & Demirbilek, 2019). Thus, such a concern makes GL different from other leadership style particularly in the domain of greener environment.…”

Do Generative Leadership and Digital Literacy of Executive Management Help Flourishing Micro and Small Business Digital Maturity?

“…This type of leader seizes and senses opportunities and assures an environment that fosters new ways of cooperation, encourages innovation, and endorses and nurtures new ideas. Managers of this type of leadership transcend beyond the norms set for them and introduce new processes and innovative ideas within the organization (Çetin & Demirbilek, 2020).…”

“…In order to operationalize the proposed research model, different scales developed in previous studies are used. Generative leadership is measured through 27 item-scale developed by Çetin and Demirbilek (2020), and digital literacy is measured by ten item-scale (Lau & Yuen, 2014).…”

“…Generative leadership is considered one of the influential and innovative leadership types because this type of leader seizes and senses opportunities and brings to their work a powerful blend of knowledge, high energy, creative thinking, and willingness to take action (Klimek et al, 2008). Considering the traditional, pragmatic, explorative, and generative leadership types of Klimek et al (2008), the generative leadership type draws attention as it emphasizes innovative vision (Çetin & Demirbilek, 2020) and is also associated with risk propensity (Tuschner et al, 2022), collaborative approach (Gerth & Peppard, 2016;Gilli et al, 2022), cooperative learning (Taylor, 2016), and finding new ways for cooperation.…”