Content validity and expert judgement: innovation model for new ways of working

The objective is to validate the content of the information collection instrument, through expert judgement and pilot testing. Methodology: Non-experimental, correlational research with a cross-sectional design. The first sample of the expert judgment was composed of 8 experts, the second of 27 employees was used for the pilot test. Unit of measurement: Employees from four Technological Universities of Puebla, studying empowerment, leadership, work routine, collaborative work and innovation. The methodology of the analysis included the Kendall Concordance Coefficient (W), to decide the level of correlation between the experts and we used Cronbach’s Alpha for the statistical analysis of the pilot test to measure the reliability of the measurement scale. The results of the expert judgement showed changes that would improve the clarity of the instrument. The wording would be expressed in third person, the use of technical language would be avoided, with the aim of generalizing understanding in the wording. The identification data would be defined according to the organizational structure of the media unit. Kendall's coefficient and Cronbach's Alpha showed acceptable agreement. Discussion. It is important to control the application of these tests with strict adherence to the methodology, minimizing human bias. It is concluded that the content validity represents an elemental tool to evidence the dominance and representativeness of the constructs. If the results are not reached, it is possible to repeat the process until acceptable values are reached. It is proposed to improve the instrument as a result of the experts' judgment and check the concordance between experts.