OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Handbook of Management Scales/Distribution service performance
## Distribution service performance (alpha = 0.86; AVE = 0.55; CR = 0.86)
### Description

Distribution service performance was measured with Ellinger et al.’s (2000) scale. One item (“notifying customers in advance”) was replaced with an item from Stank et al.’s (2001) scale.

### Definition

Distribution service performance refers to “the overall fulfillment of customer expectations in logistics operations”.

### Items

Please rate your logistics organization’s performance in comparison to competitors:
* The ability to meet quoted or anticipated delivery dates and quantities on a consistent basis. (0.75)
* The ability to respond to the needs and wants of key customers. (0.71)
* The ability to accommodate delivery times for specific customers. (0.68)
* The adherence to customer specifications. (0.72)
* The global judgment regarding the extent to which logistics performance matches customer expectations. (0.84)
Items were measured on a scale from “1 = much worse” to “7 = much better than competitors”.

### Source

* Bühler/Wallenburg/Wieland (2016): Accounting for External Turbulence of Logistics Organizations via Performance Measurement Systems. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 21, No. 6
# Handbook of Management Scales/Distrust of others
## Distrust of others (alpha = 0.75)
### Description

A new measure of Machiavellianism, the Machiavellian Personality Scale (MPS), was developed and validated over two studies. Machiavellianism is conceptualized as one's propensity to distrust others, engage in amoral manipulation, seek control over others, and seek status for oneself. Study 1 developed and tested the factor structure of the scale, whereas Study 2 provided evidence for the convergent, divergent, and criterion-related validity of the MPS. The results of these studies supported the a priori factor structure of the MPS and indicated that it is a valid predictor of such outcomes as job satisfaction, task performance, and counterproductive work behaviors.

### Definition

Distrust of others is defined as a cynical outlook on the motivations and intentions of others with a concern for the negative implications that those intentions have for the self.

### Items

* People are only motivated by personal gain.
* I dislike committing to groups because I don’t trust others.
* Team members backstab each other all the time to get ahead.
* If I show any weakness at work, other people will take advantage of it.
* Other people are always planning ways to take advantage of the situation at my expense.

### Source

* Dahling et al. (2009): The Development and Validation of a New Machiavellianism Scale. Journal of Management, Vol. 35, No. 2, pp. 219-257.

### Comments

It is recommended to take the following article into consideration before measuring trust-related constructs: Whipple et al. (2013), Conceptualizations of Trust: Can We Trust Them?, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 34, No. 2.

### Related Scales

* Supervisee trust
* Trust
# Handbook of Management Scales/ERP training
## ERP training
### Description

The paper defines and operationalizes eight Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) competence constructs. A two-stage normative process of scale development is followed. First, a portfolio of eight generic constructs that are hypothesized to be associated with successful ERP adoption is identified. Each construct is then operationalized as a multi-item measurement scale by applying a manual item sorting technique iteratively to independent panels of expert judges until tentative reliability and validity is established. Second, the multi-item scales is further refined and validated using survey data from 79 North American manufacturing users of ERP systems. The following items are taken from the ERP training dimension of the ERP competence construct.

### Definition

ERP training refers to the processes involved in teaching each of the various user groups to use the ERP system efficiently in their day-to-day activities.

### Items

* Specific user training needs were identified early in the implementation.
* A formal training program has been developed to meet the requirements of ERP system users.
* Training materials have been customized for each specific job.
* We seldom update training materials to reflect system changes.
* Training materials target the entire business task, not just the ERP screens and reports.
* Employees are tracked to ensure that they have received the appropriate ERP system training.
* All users have been trained in basic ERP system skills.
* ERP system training review sessions are scheduled.

### Source

* Stratman/Roth (2002): Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Competence Constructs: Two-Stage Multi-Item Scale Development and Validation. Decision Sciences, Vol. 33, No. 4, pp. 601-628.
# Handbook of Management Scales/Ease of use
## Ease of use (alpha = 0.937)
### Description

Nearly all prior studies on the technology acceptance model (TAM) have used Likert scales to measure the model’s constructs. In the research a semantic differential scale was developed for the TAM components usefulness and ease of use. The results confirm that the constructs that are measured by the semantic differential scale are psychometrically equivalent to those that are measured by the Likert scales. The relationship among these constructs was unchanged, providing strong evidence for nomological validity.

### Definition

Perceived ease of use is defined as the degree to which a person believes that using a particular system would be free of effort.

### Items

To aid me in my (accomplishment of tasks), overall, I feel (system) as a (technology type) is:
* Easy to Learn/Difficult to Learn.
* Easy to manipulate/Difficult to manipulate.
* Clear to interact with/Obscure to interact with.
* Flexible to interact with/Rigid to interact with.
* Easy to master/Difficult to master.
* Very Usable/Very cumbersome.

### Source

* Chin et al. (2008): A Fast Form Approach to Measuring Technology Acceptance and Other Constructs. MIS Quarterly, Vol. 32, No. 4, pp. 687-703.

### Related Scales

* Consensus on appropriation
* Faithfulness of appropriation
* Usefulness
# Handbook of Management Scales/Employee-oriented CSR
## Employee-oriented corporate social responsibility (CSR) (alpha = 0.82)
### Description

A multidimensional measure of corporate stakeholder responsibility (CStR) was developed and validated. Hereby, the authors conducted a series of analyses, including exploratory factor analyses, confirmatory factor analyses, and structural equation modeling to assess different types of validity of the proposed scale. The scale consists of six dimensions: community-oriented, natural environment-oriented, employee-oriented, supplier-oriented, customer-oriented, and shareholder-oriented CSR.

### Definition

Corporate stakeholder responsibility (CStR) is defined as “an organization’s context-specific actions and policies designed to enhance the welfare of various stakeholder groups by accounting for the triple bottom line of economic, social, and environmental performance”.

### Items

* Our company implements policies that improve the well-being of its employees at work. (0.82)
* Our company promotes the safety and health of its employees. (0.69)
* Our company avoids all forms of discrimination (age, sex, handicap, ethnic or religious origin) in its recruitment and promotion policies. (0.68)
* Our company supports equal opportunities at work (e.g., gender equality policies). (0.59)
* Our company encourages employees’ diversity in the workplace. (0.57)
* Our company helps its employees in case of hardship (e.g., medical care, social assistance). (0.55)
* Our company supports its employees’ work and life balance (e.g., flextime, part-time work, flexible working arrangements). (0.55)

### Source

* El Akremi (201_): How Do Employees Perceive Corporate Responsibility? Development and Validation of a Multidimensional Corporate Stakeholder Responsibility Scale. Journal of Management, Vol. _, No. _, pp. _–_
# Handbook of Management Scales/Desire for status
## Desire for status (alpha = 0.72)
### Description

A new measure of Machiavellianism, the Machiavellian Personality Scale (MPS), was developed and validated over two studies. Machiavellianism is conceptualized as one's propensity to distrust others, engage in amoral manipulation, seek control over others, and seek status for oneself. Study 1 developed and tested the factor structure of the scale, whereas Study 2 provided evidence for the convergent, divergent, and criterion-related validity of the MPS. The results of these studies supported the a priori factor structure of the MPS and indicated that it is a valid predictor of such outcomes as job satisfaction, task performance, and counterproductive work behaviors.

### Definition

Desire for status is defined as a desire to accumulate external indicators of success.

### Items

* Status is a good sign of success in life.
* Accumulating wealth is an important goal for me.
* I want to be rich and powerful someday.

### Source

* Dahling et al. (2009): The Development and Validation of a New Machiavellianism Scale. Journal of Management, Vol. 35, No. 2, pp. 219-257.
# Handbook of Management Scales/Effect uncertainty
## Effect uncertainty (alpha = 0.89)
### Description

An important contribution to the literature on perceived environmental uncertainty (PEU) is Milliken's (1987) distinction between state uncertainty, effect uncertainty, and response uncertainty. Using a two-phase empirical study, this research seeks to develop and test scales to measure the three constructs in terms of dimensionality, reliability, and validity (including nomological validity).

### Definition

Effect uncertainty refers to the inability to predict the nature of the effect of a future state of the environment on the organization (i.e. an understanding of cause–effect relationships).

### Items

* How often do you feel that you are able to predict the impact of this factor on your marketing management decision making? [A low level of predictability means that you are very unsure about how this factor affects your marketing decision making. A high level of predictability means that you are very sure about how this factor affects your marketing decision making.] (never/always)
* Please indicate your “sureness” (level of certainty) as to how each factor affects your marketing management decision making? (not at all sure about how it will affect my decision making/completely sure about how it will affect my decision making)
* How often do you feel you fully understand the effect of this factor on your marketing management decision making? (never/always)

### Source

* Ashill/Jobber (2010): Measuring State, Effect, and Response Uncertainty: Theoretical Construct Development and Empirical Validation. Journal of Management, Vol. 36, No. 5, pp. 1278-1308.

### Related Scales

* Response uncertainty
* State uncertainty
# Handbook of Management Scales/Emotional support
## Emotional support (alpha = 0.90)
### Description

Drawing on social support theory and using data from two samples of lower wage workers, the authors develop and validate a measure of family supportive supervisor behaviors (FSSB). FSSB is conceptualized as a multidimensional superordinate construct with four subordinate dimensions: emotional support, instrumental support, role modeling behaviors, and creative work-family management. Results from multilevel confirmatory factor analyses and multilevel regression analyses provide evidence of construct, criterion-related, and incremental validity.

### Definition

Family supportive supervisor behaviors are defined as behaviors exhibited by supervisors that are supportive of families.
Emotional support is focused on perceptions that one is being cared for, that one’s feelings are being considered, and that individuals feel comfortable communicating with the source of support when needed.

### Items

* My supervisor is willing to listen to my problems in juggling work and nonwork life.
* My supervisor takes the time to learn about my personal needs.
* My supervisor makes me feel comfortable talking to him or her about my conflicts between work and nonwork.
* My supervisor and I can talk effectively to solve conflicts between work and nonwork issues.

### Source

* Hammer et al. (2009): Development and Validation of a Multidimensional Measure of Family Supportive Supervisor Behaviors (FSSB). Journal of Management, Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 837-856.
# Handbook of Management Scales/Disruption impact
## Disruption impact (alpha = 0.75)
### Description

A scale to measure disruption impact was adapted from Bode et al. (2011).

### Definition

Disruption impact refers to both high impact and low impact disruptions.

### Items

In the following section, please indicate how did the reported disruption negatively affect (directly or indirectly) your business unit on the following dimensions in the short-run? (1 = not at all, 5 = a great deal)
* Overall efficiency of operations. (0.54)
* Lead time for delivery (delivery reliability). (0.80)
* Purchasing costs for supplies. (0.79)

### Source

* Ambulkar/Blackhurst/Grawe (2015): Firm’s resilience to supply chain disruptions: Scale development and empirical examination. Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 33–34, pp. 111–122

### Comments

The three items might measure the construct in a formative rather than reflective way. This might also be the reason for the very low standardized factor loading of the first item.
# Handbook of Management Scales/Distributive justice
## Distributive justice (alpha = 0.97/0.98)
### Description

Four dimensions of organizational justice were measured with a scale developed and validated by Colquitt (2001): procedual, distributive, interpersonal, and informational justice. The scale ranged from 1 (to a very small extent) to 5 (to a very large extent).

### Definition

Organizational justice refers to perceptions of fairness in decision-making and resource allocation environments.
Distributive justice refers to the fairness of decision outcomes, and individuals judge it by determining whether the perceived ratio of outcomes to inputs matches those of a comparison other, or whether resource allocations match appropriate norms.

### Items

* Do those outcomes reflect the effort you have put into your work?
* Are those outcomes appropriate for the work you have completed?
* Do those outcomes reflect what you have contributed to your work?
* Are those outcomes justified, given your performance?

### Source

* Colquitt/Rodell (2011): Justice, trust, and trustworthiness: A longitudinal analysis integrating three theoretical perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 54, No. 6, pp. 1183–1206

### Related Scales

* Informational justice
* Interpersonal justice
* Procedural justice
# Handbook of Management Scales/Supplier feedback
## Supplier feedback (alpha > 0.7; composite reliability = 0.77; average variance extracted = 0.53)
### Description

The research takes a step toward clarifying the concept of lean production and develops and validates a multi-dimensional measure of lean production. The 10 distinct dimensions of a lean system are continuous flow, customer involvement, employee involvement, JIT delivery by suppliers, pull, set up time reduction, statistical process control, supplier development, supplier feedback, and total productive/preventive maintenance.

### Definition

Lean production is an integrated socio-technical system whose main objective is to eliminate waste by concurrently reducing or minimizing supplier, customer, and internal variability. This dimension of lean production is about providing regular feedback to suppliers about their performance.

### Items

Please indicate the extent of implementation of each of the following practices in your plant. (1) no implementation; (2) little implementation; (3) some implementation; (4) extensive implementation; (5) complete implementation.
* We frequently are in close contact with our suppliers.
* We give our suppliers feedback on quality and delivery performance.
* We strive to establish long-term relationship with our suppliers.

### Source

* Shah/Ward (2007): Deﬁning and developing measures of lean production. Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 25, No. 4, pp. 785-805.

### Comments

Only the second item is about feedback rather than relationship. It is therefore questionable if this scale really measures what it is intended to measure.
# Handbook of Management Scales/Supplier performance
## Supplier performance (alpha = 0.79)
### Description

Through a detailed analysis of the literature, twelve constructs of integrated quality management strategies were identified: top management commitment, customer focus, supplier quality management, design quality management, benchmarking, SPC usage, internal quality information usage, employee empowerment, employee involvement, employee training, product quality, and supplier performance. Using a survey of 371 manufacturing firms, the constructs were then empirically tested and validated. For this purpose a confirmatory factor analysis approach was used.

### Items

Answer with respect to suppliers of the critical component of the primary product.
* Suppliers send us shipments of this component that conform to specifications.
* Most quality problems in the past have easily been resolved with our suppliers.
* Our suppliers are always eager to resolve quality problems.
* The critical component is durable.
* The critical component’s performance is excellent.
* The critical component is reliable.

### Source

* Ahire et al. (1996): Development and Validation of TQM Implementation Constructs. Decision Sciences, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 23-56.
# Handbook of Management Scales/Supplier commitment
## Supplier commitment (alpha = 0.854)
### Items

* This supplier has a strong sense of loyalty to us.
* This supplier is willing to make a long-term investment in helping us.
* This supplier sees our relationship as a long-term alliance.
* This supplier is willing to dedicate whatever people and resources it takes to make us a satisfied customer.

### Source

* Krause (1999): The antecedents of buying firms' efforts to improve suppliers. Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp 205–224.

### Related Scales

* Interorganizational loyalty
* Relational commitment
# Handbook of Management Scales/Supplier operational performance
## Supplier operational performance (alpha = 0.76)
### Description

The authors identify key constructs related to supply chain management. Based on a systematic instrument develop process, they develop a set of reliable, valid, and unidimensional measurement scales.

### Items

* Volume flexibility (0.66)
* Scheduling flexibility (0.77)
* On-time delivery (0.79)
* Delivery reliability/consistency (0.78)
* Quality (0.49)
* Cost (0.78)

### Source

* Chen/Paulraj (2004): Towards a theory of supply chain management: the constructs and measurements. Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 119–150

### Comments

These items seem to be formative rather than reflective.
# Handbook of Management Scales/Supplier's technical influence
## Supplier’s technical influence (alpha = 0.74)
### Items

* Product design specifications.
* Manufacturing process specifications.
* Procurement of materials and components.
* Product quality control.
(anchors: 1 — ‘Our Firm Has No Influence’ and 5 — ‘Our Firm Has Complete Influence’)

### Source

* Kotabe et al. (2002): Gaining from Vertical Partnerships: Knowledge Transfer, Relationship Duration, and Supplier Performance Improvement in the U.S. and Japanese Automotive Industries. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 24, No. 4, pp. 293–316

### Comments

These items do not necessarily correlate and might, then, be interpreted as formative.
# Handbook of Management Scales/Supplier development
## Supplier development (alpha > 0.7; composite reliability = 0.74; average variance extracted = 0.33)
### Description

The research takes a step toward clarifying the concept of lean production and develops and validates a multi-dimensional measure of lean production. The 10 distinct dimensions of a lean system are continuous flow, customer involvement, employee involvement, JIT delivery by suppliers, pull, set up time reduction, statistical process control, supplier development, supplier feedback, and total productive/preventive maintenance.

### Definition

Lean production is an integrated socio-technical system whose main objective is to eliminate waste by concurrently reducing or minimizing supplier, customer, and internal variability. This dimension of lean production is about developing suppliers so they can be more involved in the production process of the focal firm.

### Items

Please indicate the extent of implementation of each of the following practices in your plant. (1) no implementation; (2) little implementation; (3) some implementation; (4) extensive implementation; (5) complete implementation.
* Our suppliers are contractually committed to annual cost reductions.
* Our key suppliers are located in close proximity to our plants.
* We have corporate level communication on important issues with key suppliers.
* We take active steps to reduce the number of suppliers in each category.
* Our key suppliers manage our inventory.
* We evaluate suppliers on the basis of total cost and not per unit price.

### Source

* Shah/Ward (2007): Deﬁning and developing measures of lean production. Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 25, No. 4, pp. 785-805.

### Comments

Average variance extracted is too low. The items are quite heterogenous and sometimes they appear to be too far from measuring supplier development.

### Related Scales

* Supplier evaluation systems
* Supplier quality management
# Handbook of Management Scales/Supplier evaluation systems
## Supplier evaluation systems (alpha = 0.8266)
### Items

* We have a formal supplier certification program.
* Our company has a formal system to track the performance of the suppliers we deal with.
* Our firm has a formal program for evaluating and recognizing suppliers.

### Source

* Carr/Pearson (1999): Strategically managed buyer–supplier relationships and performance outcomes. Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 17, No. 5, pp. 497-519.

### Related Scales

* Supplier development
* Supplier quality management
# Handbook of Management Scales/Supplication
## Supplication (alpha = 0.86)
### Items

* Act like you know less than you do so people will help you out.
* Try to gain assistance or sympathy from people by appearing needy in some area.
* Pretend not to understand something to gain someone's help.
* Act like you need assistance so people will help you out.
* Pretend to know less than you do so you can avoid an unpleasant assignment.

### Source

* Bolino/Turnley (1999): Measuring Impression Management in Organizations: A Scale Development Based on the Jones and Pittman Taxonomy. Organizational Research Methods, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 187-206.