Common Components between Dimensions of Growth-oriented Atmosphere and Empowerment

1. Common Components between Dimensions of Growth-oriented Atmosphere and Empowerment http://www.uta.fi/laitokset/aktk/www/papers/rwl2003 Petri Nokelainen Pekka Ruohotie Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere

2. OUTLINE • Introduction • Theoretical Framework • Method • Results • Conclusions Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere

3. INTRODUCTION • In this paper we investigate empirically the relationship between factors of growth-oriented atmosphere (Ruohotie, 2000) and empowerment (Herrenkohl, Judson & Heffner, 1999). • The main goal of this paper is to examine factorial structure of growth-oriented atmosphere to see if it embodies the dimensions of empowerment. • Statistical analysis in this study are based on correlational analysis and Bayesian network modeling (Myllymaki, Silander, Tirri & Uronen, 2002). Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere

4. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK • Empowerment can be understood as a relational concept which refers to individuals power and sense of control in relation to others. • It can mean sharing power with or redistributing power and control to someone else in a subordinate position. • Although we use term "empowerment" in everyday language, it has been three decades ago associated with radical social and political movements (Niemi, 2002). Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere

5. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK • Herrenkohl et al. (1999) developed a measurement instrument to test different dimensions of empowerment as they strove to discriminate empowered and non-empowered employee groups. • They found several characteristics that typify empowered groups: • solving of relevant problems, • search for new ideas and • independent functioning. • They see empowerment as a relationship between employee's actions and organization's support to those actions. Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere

6. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK • Herrenkohl et al. (1999) separate four dimensions of empowerment: • Shared vision. Workers are aware of expectations relating to performance of duties and institutional goals. • Responsibility supporting institutional structure and administration. Central idea is responsibility for decision making, chain of command must be explicit. • Knowledge and learning. Learning is changing, institution may support workers to reach for new, more productive ways of doing their job, and to seek for new information and develop their know-how. • Institutional recognition. Institution recognizes employees achievements. Employees feel that institution cares about them. Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere

7. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK • Ruohotie (2002) states that growth-orientation creates facilities for the continuing development of professional qualifications and innovative activities in a workplace community. • Important concepts of growth orientation are: • support and rewards from the management • the incentive value of the job itself • the operational capacity of the team • work related stress. Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere

8. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK • Recent study (n=318) examined factors of growth-oriented atmosphere with exploratory factor analysis, multidimensional scaling and Bayesian unsupervised model-based visualization (Nokelainen, Ruohotie & Tirri, 2002). • Correlation matrices based on the 92-item responses were subject to exploratory maximum likelihood factor analysis with varimax rotation. • Fourteen factor solution (2[2989]=3845.21, p < .001) accounting for 70.46% of the total variance was found to be interpretable both in terms of correspondence to theoretical model and previous empirical findings. Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere

9. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK • Encouraging leadership (ENC) • Strategic leadership (STR) • Know-how rewarding (KHR) • Know-how developing (KHD) • Incentive value of the job (INV) • Clarity of the job (CLA) • Valuation of the job (VAL) • Community spirit (DEV) • Team spirit (ESP) • Students attitudes towards teacher / manager (STU) • Psychic stress of the job (PSY) • Build-up of work requirements (BUI) • Commitment to work and organization (COM) • Growth motivation (GRM) Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere

10. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere

11. METHOD • The data set consists of 447 employees that worked in a Finnish vocational polytechnic institute during year 2001. • The sample size is 87% of the total population of 512 workers. • Respondents job profile contained five groups (with 6%, N=27 missing data): managers (7%, N=30), teachers (48%, N=215), administrative personnel (9%, N=40), clerks (18%, N=83) and other personnel (12%, N=52). • Respondents nature of contract was categorized into three classes (with 5%, N=23 missing data): Established (64%, N=287), temporary (25%, N=109), and part-time (6%, N=28) employees. Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere

12. METHOD • Theoretical structure of the self-report questionnaire is derived from the works of Argyris (1972), Dubin (1977), Hall (1986), and Kaufman (1974). • The first version was developed during the Growth Needs Project (Ruohotie 1994). • Current version of the instrument is based on the research findings of Ruohotie and Nokelainen (Ruohotie, 2000; Ruohotie & Nokelainen, 2000). • The instrument contains 92 statements, each in a 5-point Likert scale from 1 "Strongly disagree" to 5 "Strongly agree". Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere

13. METHOD • First, we analyzed all the items to see if they were technically applicable for linear statistic computations, such as explorative factor analysis, based on multivariate normality assumption. • Second, we analyzed probabilistic dependencies between variables with Bayesian search algorithm (Myllymäki, Silander, Tirri & Uronen, 2002). • This procedure was conducted in order to find set of models with the highest probability. Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere

14. METHOD • Why use Bayesian modeling? • No limit for minimum sample size. • No measurement level assumption. • No multivariate normality assumption. • Describes linear and non-linear relationships between variables. • Predictive modeling capabilities. • Free modeling tool for academic work: http://b-course.hiit.fi Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere

15. RESULTS • Distribution of respondents ratings on the scale from 1 to 5 was analyzed by plotting the mode values of the over all data to a histogram. • Mode frequencies that sum up to the number of items in the questionnaire show, that the students' have not used all the five options in their answers, but only ratings from 2 to 5. Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere

16. RESULTS • Means range between 2.07 and 4.47 supporting the conclusion that items of the measurement instrument have enough discriminating power for further analysis. • Standard deviations were also satisfactory ranging between 0.71 and 1.31. • To be able to answer the research question, we compare the tentative structure of prerequisites for empowerment, and the correlation matrix of our previous study. Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere

17. 1 Shared vision. 2 Responsibility supporting institutional structure and administration. 3 Knowledge and learning. 4 Institutional recognition. RESULTS Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere

18. RESULTS • The second stage of the analysis was to conduct Bayesian dependence modeling with fourteen dimension solution measuring growth-oriented atmosphere. • "To what extend the factorial structure of growth-oriented atmosphere typify prerequisites for empowerment?" Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere

19. RESULTS Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere

20. CONCLUSIONS • The Bayesian network model supported the conclusion that the first empowerment dimension, shared vision, is not a unidimensional construct. • Respondent's commitment to work and organization depends over three times more on encouraging than strategic leadership. • The second dimension, institutional responsibility supporting structure and administration, was separated into two clusters. • Encouraging leadership was the common factor between the two: when the management defines direction and focus of operations, personnel has clearer picture of goals and responsibilities and thus they are encouraged to participate in collaborative planning and quality development. Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere

21. CONCLUSIONS • Third dimension, knowledge and learning, was found to be unidimensional indicating that work gives intrinsic fulfillment to those members of work community who are interested in self-developing. • Self-developing had more important role in the model than organizational rewarding. • A weak relationship was found between growth motivation and know-how developing. Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere

22. CONCLUSIONS • Fourth empowerment dimension, institutional recognition, was unidimensional. • When the organization management is encouraging, f.e. defines direction and focus of operations, employees' feel that work contribution is respected by worker itself, colleagues and management. Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere

23. FUTURE WORK • New target populations are measured both with growth-oriented atmosphere and empowerment instruments in order to investigate variable level dependencies. Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere

24. REFERENCES Argyris, C. (1972), The Applicability of Organizational Society, London. Congdon, P. (2001), Bayesian Statistical Modeling, London, John Wiley & Sons. Dubin, S. (1977), "The Updating Process", Continuing Education in Science and Engineering, December, pp. 165-186. Herrenkohl, R., Judson, G., & Heffner, J. (1999), "Defining and Measuring Employee Empowerment", Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 379-389. Kaufman, H. (1974), Obsolescence and Professional Career Development, New York, AMACOM. Myllymaki, P., Silander, T., Tirri, H., & Uronen, P. (2002), "B-Course: A Web-Based Tool for Bayesian and Causal Data Analysis", International Journal on Artificial Intelligence Tools, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 369-387. Niemi, H. (2002), "Empowering Learners in the Virtual University", in H. Niemi & P. Ruohotie (Eds.), Theoretical Understandings for Learning in the Virtual University, pp. 1-36, Saarijärvi, Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere. Nokelainen, P., & Ruohotie, P. (2002), Inspecting Dimensions of Growth-oriented Atmosphere with Bayesian and Structural Equation Modeling. (In preparation.) Nokelainen, P., Ruohotie, P., & Tirri, H. (2002, April), Visualization of Growth-oriented Atmosphere, Paper presented at the annual meeting of American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, USA. Ruohotie, P. (1994), "Professional Updating", in P. Ruohotie & P. Grimmett (Eds.), New Themes for Education in a Changing World, pp. 167-205, Tampere, Career Development. Ruohotie, P. (2000), "Some Instructional Issues of Lifelong Learning", in B. Beairsto & P. Ruohotie (Eds.), Empowering Teachers as Life-long Learners, pp. 5-29, Saarijärvi, Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere. Ruohotie, P. (2002), Empowerment - Prerequisite for Change and Growth, Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere. (In preparation.) Ruohotie, P., & Nokelainen, P. (2000), "Beyond the Growth-oriented Atmosphere", in B. Beairsto & P. Ruohotie (Eds.), Empowering Teachers as Lifelong Learners, pp. 147 - 167), Saarijärvi, Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere. Research Centre for Vocational Education, University of Tampere