简要组织弹性量表(BORS):在西班牙和奥地利的发展和有效性

IF 2.2 3区 管理学 Q3 MANAGEMENT
Abolfazl Khanbeiki, Beatriz Sora, Mehran Mohebi, Joan Boada-Grau
{"title":"简要组织弹性量表(BORS):在西班牙和奥地利的发展和有效性","authors":"Abolfazl Khanbeiki,&nbsp;Beatriz Sora,&nbsp;Mehran Mohebi,&nbsp;Joan Boada-Grau","doi":"10.1111/1468-5973.70063","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>There are many inconsistencies in the conceptualisation and measurement of organisational resilience. Existing measures often focus on either the ability or process perspective, limiting their comprehensiveness, and failing to capture the multifaceted nature of resilience. Furthermore, many of these measures and their psychometric properties have not been appropriately validated and they focused on specific organisations and countries, which limits its usability to other work contexts. This study aims to provide a measure that uses the main approaches in the literature and to validate this in a cross-cultural sample of 1435 employees from 138 organisations in two European countries (Spain and Austria). The data were randomly split in two independent subsamples (Sample 1: Explorative; Sample 2: Confirmative). The exploratory factor analysis had a bi-dimensional factorial structure consisting of the dimensions of ability and process. Confirmatory factor analysis replicated this bi-dimensional structure by presenting better goodness of fit indices than the alternative one-factor model. Reliabilities were acceptable for ability and process dimensions in both countries. Convergent validity was also adequate for the two dimensions in both countries with satisfactory AVE and CR. In addition, significant correlations were found in both countries between organisational resilience and organisational commitment and job satisfaction. Finally, discriminant validity was also appropriate. This study is relevant for researchers and practitioners because it provides a useful tool for advancing understanding of organisational resilience and for assessing how resilient organisations are.</p>","PeriodicalId":47674,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management","volume":"33 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1468-5973.70063","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Brief Organisational Resilience Scale (BORS): Development and Validity in Spain and Austria\",\"authors\":\"Abolfazl Khanbeiki,&nbsp;Beatriz Sora,&nbsp;Mehran Mohebi,&nbsp;Joan Boada-Grau\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1468-5973.70063\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>There are many inconsistencies in the conceptualisation and measurement of organisational resilience. Existing measures often focus on either the ability or process perspective, limiting their comprehensiveness, and failing to capture the multifaceted nature of resilience. Furthermore, many of these measures and their psychometric properties have not been appropriately validated and they focused on specific organisations and countries, which limits its usability to other work contexts. This study aims to provide a measure that uses the main approaches in the literature and to validate this in a cross-cultural sample of 1435 employees from 138 organisations in two European countries (Spain and Austria). The data were randomly split in two independent subsamples (Sample 1: Explorative; Sample 2: Confirmative). The exploratory factor analysis had a bi-dimensional factorial structure consisting of the dimensions of ability and process. Confirmatory factor analysis replicated this bi-dimensional structure by presenting better goodness of fit indices than the alternative one-factor model. Reliabilities were acceptable for ability and process dimensions in both countries. Convergent validity was also adequate for the two dimensions in both countries with satisfactory AVE and CR. In addition, significant correlations were found in both countries between organisational resilience and organisational commitment and job satisfaction. Finally, discriminant validity was also appropriate. This study is relevant for researchers and practitioners because it provides a useful tool for advancing understanding of organisational resilience and for assessing how resilient organisations are.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47674,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management\",\"volume\":\"33 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1468-5973.70063\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1468-5973.70063\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1468-5973.70063","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在组织弹性的概念和测量中存在许多不一致之处。现有的度量方法通常侧重于能力或过程的视角,限制了它们的全面性,并且未能捕捉到弹性的多面性。此外,许多这些措施及其心理测量特性尚未得到适当的验证,它们侧重于特定的组织和国家,这限制了其在其他工作环境中的可用性。本研究旨在提供一种使用文献中的主要方法的措施,并在两个欧洲国家(西班牙和奥地利)138个组织的1435名员工的跨文化样本中验证这一点。数据被随机分成两个独立的子样本(样本1:探索性;样本2:确认)。探索性因子分析具有由能力维度和过程维度组成的双向因子结构。验证性因子分析通过提供比备选单因素模型更好的拟合优度指标来复制这种二维结构。两个国家的能力和过程维度的可靠性都是可以接受的。两国的组织弹性和组织承诺、工作满意度在这两个维度上的收敛效度也足够。此外,两国的组织弹性、组织承诺和工作满意度之间存在显著的相关关系。最后,判别效度也是合适的。这项研究对研究人员和实践者来说是相关的,因为它为推进对组织弹性的理解和评估组织弹性提供了一个有用的工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Brief Organisational Resilience Scale (BORS): Development and Validity in Spain and Austria

There are many inconsistencies in the conceptualisation and measurement of organisational resilience. Existing measures often focus on either the ability or process perspective, limiting their comprehensiveness, and failing to capture the multifaceted nature of resilience. Furthermore, many of these measures and their psychometric properties have not been appropriately validated and they focused on specific organisations and countries, which limits its usability to other work contexts. This study aims to provide a measure that uses the main approaches in the literature and to validate this in a cross-cultural sample of 1435 employees from 138 organisations in two European countries (Spain and Austria). The data were randomly split in two independent subsamples (Sample 1: Explorative; Sample 2: Confirmative). The exploratory factor analysis had a bi-dimensional factorial structure consisting of the dimensions of ability and process. Confirmatory factor analysis replicated this bi-dimensional structure by presenting better goodness of fit indices than the alternative one-factor model. Reliabilities were acceptable for ability and process dimensions in both countries. Convergent validity was also adequate for the two dimensions in both countries with satisfactory AVE and CR. In addition, significant correlations were found in both countries between organisational resilience and organisational commitment and job satisfaction. Finally, discriminant validity was also appropriate. This study is relevant for researchers and practitioners because it provides a useful tool for advancing understanding of organisational resilience and for assessing how resilient organisations are.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
12.90%
发文量
51
期刊介绍: The Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management is an invaluable source of information on all aspects of contingency planning, scenario analysis and crisis management in both corporate and public sectors. It focuses on the opportunities and threats facing organizations and presents analysis and case studies of crisis prevention, crisis planning, recovery and turnaround management. With contributions from world-wide sources including corporations, governmental agencies, think tanks and influential academics, this publication provides a vital platform for the exchange of strategic and operational experience, information and knowledge.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信