Psychological Empowerment: Definition, Measurement, and Validation
Psychological empowerment: definition, measurement, and validation
Abstract
Psychological empowerment was defined from the perspective of the individual employee, and a measure was developed using three different samples. The psychologically empowered state was considered to be a cognitive state characterized by a sense of perceived control, perceptions of competence, and internalization of the goals and objectives of the organization. Using an initial sample of 311 employed individuals (41% women, 45% Francophone), a 9-item, 3-factor scale of psychological empowerment was developed with subscale reliabilities as follows: perceived control (.83), perceived competence (.80), and goal internalization (.88). In the validation sample of 66 employees from a single organization, empowerment as measured by the scale was negatively related to organizational centralization while being positively related to delegation.
Although there is plenty of anecdotal evidence regarding the success or failure of empowerment attempts, it is only recently that researchers have begun to study the empowerment phenomenon in a systematic manner. Examples of recent empirical studies include the work of Spreitzer (1996) and Thorlakson and Murray (1996). It is quite possible that this relative paucity of empirical work reflects the dearth of widely available measures of empowerment. At the time of this study, the only measure in circulation was that recently used by Spreitzer (1996). The objectives of the article are: (a) to present an integrative definition to psychological empowerment from the perspective of the employee, and (b) to report results from a two-part study undertaken to develop a psychometrically sound measure of psychological empowerment based on this integrative definition.
Theoretical approaches to empowerment have dealt with three major psychological facets of power. Perceived control over one 's environment and others is considered one of the primary psychological
Abstract
Psychological empowerment was defined from the perspective of the individual employee, and a measure was developed using three different samples. The psychologically empowered state was considered to be a cognitive state characterized by a sense of perceived control, perceptions of competence, and internalization of the goals and objectives of the organization. Using an initial sample of 311 employed individuals (41% women, 45% Francophone), a 9-item, 3-factor scale of psychological empowerment was developed with subscale reliabilities as follows: perceived control (.83), perceived competence (.80), and goal internalization (.88). In the validation sample of 66 employees from a single organization, empowerment as measured by the scale was negatively related to organizational centralization while being positively related to delegation.
Although there is plenty of anecdotal evidence regarding the success or failure of empowerment attempts, it is only recently that researchers have begun to study the empowerment phenomenon in a systematic manner. Examples of recent empirical studies include the work of Spreitzer (1996) and Thorlakson and Murray (1996). It is quite possible that this relative paucity of empirical work reflects the dearth of widely available measures of empowerment. At the time of this study, the only measure in circulation was that recently used by Spreitzer (1996). The objectives of the article are: (a) to present an integrative definition to psychological empowerment from the perspective of the employee, and (b) to report results from a two-part study undertaken to develop a psychometrically sound measure of psychological empowerment based on this integrative definition.
Theoretical approaches to empowerment have dealt with three major psychological facets of power. Perceived control over one 's environment and others is considered one of the primary psychological
References: Allen, N.J., & Meyer, J.P. (1990). The measurement of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of occupational psychology, 63, 1-18. Conger, J.A., & Kanungo, R.N. (1988). The empowerment process: Integrating theory and practice. Academy of Management Review, 13, 471- 482. DeVellis, R.F. (1991). Scale Development: Theory and Applications. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Dewar, R.D., Whetten, D.A., & Boje, D. (1980). An examination of the reliability and validity of the Aiken and Hage scales of centralization, formalization and task routineness. Administrative Sciences Quarterly, 25, 120-128. Kanungo, R.N. (1982). Work Alienation. New York: Praeger. Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Smith, C.A., Organ, D.W., & Near, J.P. (1983). Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Its nature and its antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 653-663. Spreitzer, G.M. (1996). Social structural characteristics of psychological empowerment. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 483- 504. Thomas, K.W., & Velthouse, B.A. (1990). Cognitive elements of empowerment: An "interpretive" model of intrinsic task motivation. Academy of Management Review, 15, 666-681. Thorlakson, A.J.H., & Murray, R.P. (1996). An empirical study of empowerment in the workplace. Group and Organization Management, 21(1), 67-83. Yukl, G.A. (1988). Development and validation of the Managerial Practices Questionnaire. Technical report, State University of New York, Albany. Received December 2, 1997 Revised August 21, 1998 Accepted November 20, 1998 Empowerment scale items Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3