طراحی و اعتباریابی سنجه اندازه‌گیری هم آفرینی در دانشگاه

نوع مقاله : پژوهشی (با رویکردهای کیفی)

نویسنده

گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه بیرجند، ایران، خراسان جنوبی

10.29252/jpap.2021.100827

چکیده

هدف: در عصر دانش و با توجه به گستردگی، تنوع و وسعت دانش موجود در زمینه­های مختلف، استفاده از رویکرد هم­آفرینیانه و توسعه فرایندهای هم­آفرینی راهی است در جهت استفاده بهینه و موثر دانش موجود و کاهش ابهام­ها و عدم قطعیت­ها. لیکن فرایندها و مولفه های هم­آفرینی مخصوصا در جامعه علمی دانشگاهی هنوز به خوبی شناخته نشده است. هدف از پژوهش حاضر ساخت پرسشنامه­ هم­آفرینی و بررسی روایی و پایایی آن در جامعه دانشگاهی بود.روش: نخست با بررسی پیشینه هم­آفرینی، مدل 4 بعدی پراهالاد و رامسومی (2004) انتخاب گردید. سپس فهرست اولیه­ای از 40 سوال تهیه شد و در اختیار 13 نفر از متخصصین قرار گرفت. برای بررسی روایی، سازگاری درونی و تکرارپذیری پرسشنامه، به ترتیب از نسبت روایی محتوایی، شاخص روایی محتوایی، ضریب آلفای کرونباخ و تحلیل عاملی تاییدی استفاده شد. تحلیل عاملی تاییدی پرسشنامه با استفاده از نرم افزار Amos انجام شد.یافته ها:  نتایج نشان داد که نسبت روایی محتوایی 9 سوال از 40 سوال مربوط به پرسشنامه هم­آفرینی پایین­تر از 54/0 است و از لیست سوالات حذف شدند. شاخص روایی محتوایی پرسشنامه نهایی مقدار 85/0 محاسبه شد که قابل قبول بود. نتایج تحلیل عاملی تاییدی نشان داد که شاخص  RMSEAنیز کمتر از 08/0 است و نشان دهنده برازش مناسب الگوی تحلیل عاملی بود. همچنین در بررسی برازش مدل، مقدار p-value بیش از 05/0 بود. نتایج نشان داد که پایایی پرسشنامه برابر با 95/0 و تکرارپذیر می­باشد.محدودیتها: از روشهای کیفی در گردآوری داده­ها مانند مصاحبه و مشاهده استفاده نشد. اثرات نمونه­گیری و خطای اندازه­گیری، گستردگی آموزش عالی ایران، پر هزینه بودن جمع آوری داده ها، کمبود مطالعات انجام شده و عدم همکاری خبرگان آموزش عالی از جمله محدودیت­های پژوهش حاضر است.پیامدهای عملی: برای سنجش هم­آفرینی در بین اعضای هیات علمی می بایست از یک ابزار قابل اعتماد استفاده نمود. با توجه به نتایج بدست آمده در این مطالعه، پرسشنامه فراهم آمده برای استفاده در محیط دانشگاهی پایایی مطلوب و روایی مناسبی دارد.ابتکار یا ارزش مقاله: از آنجا که مقاله حاضر به مفهوم هم ­آفرینی و ساخت مقیاس سنجش آن پرداخته است به فهم عمیق­تر این مفهوم کمک می­کند و ایده­هایی را جهت عملیاتی کردن آن در فضای آموزش عالی فراهم می­آورد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Developing and Validation of co-creation Questionnaire

نویسنده [English]

  • fatame taherpour
Department of Educational science, University of Birjand, Iran, South Khorasan
چکیده [English]

Background and aim: The present study was designed to develop a measurement tool for the estimation of co-creation in universities. In the first stage, after review the related literature, based on Prahalad and Ramaswamy (2004), a 40 items questionnaire was developed and delivered to 13 experts in this context.Method: For the evaluation of validity, internal consistency and repeatability of the co-creation questionnaire the content validity ratio (CVR), content validity index and Cronbach α coefficient methods were Used.  The results showed that the content validity ratio of 9 questions was less than 0.54 and were removed from the list of questions. The content validity index of the final questionnaire was calculated to be 0.85, which was acceptable.Results: The results of confirmatory factor analysis showed that the RMSEA index is less than 0.08 and showed a good fit of the model. Also, in the model fit study, the p-value was more than 0.05. Through Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, reliability coefficients were obtained equal to 0.95.Limitations: Qualitative methods were not used in data collection such as interview and observation. The effects of sampling and measurement error, the extent of higher education in Iran, the high cost of data collection, the lack of studies and the lack of cooperation of higher education experts were the limitations of the present study.Practical implications: For measurement of co-creation in educational workplaces, a valid and reliable instrument is required. Based on the obtained results, it can be concluded that the developed questionnaire is a valid and reliable tool for the estimation of co-creation in university.Initiative or value of the article: Since the present article deals with the concept of co-creation and the construction of its measurement scale, it contributes to a deeper understanding of this concept and provides ideas for its implementation in the higher education environment

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • validity
  • questionnaire
  • co-creation
  • university
  1. Ballantyne, David and Richard J. Varey. (2006b). “Creating Value-in-Use through Marketing Interaction: The Exchange Logic of Relating, Communicating and Knowing.” Marketing Theory, 6 (3): 335-48.
  2. Borys, B. & Jemison, D.B., (1989). Hybrid Arrangements as Strategic Alliances: Theoretical Issues in Organizational Combinations, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp 234-249.
  3. Bovill, C. (2020) Co-creation in learning and teaching: the case for a whole-class approach in higher education. High Educ 79, 1023–1037 . https://rdcu.be/b9BWt
  4. Bushman, R., Piotroski, J., & Smith, A. (2004). What Determines Corporate Transparency? Journal of Accounting Research, 2: 207-252.
  5. Chiva & Alegra and Lapiedra (2007). Measuring organizational learning capability among the workforce. International journal of manpower. Vol, 28. No3/4. Pp 224-242.
  6. Díaz-Méndez, M. & Gummesson, E. (2012). Value co-creation and university teaching quality: Consequences for the European Higher Education Area (EHEA). Journal of Service Management, 23(4), 571–592.
  7. Ennew, C. T., & Binks, M. R. (1999). Impact of participative service relationships on quality, satisfaction and retention: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Research, 46, 121–132
  8. Forsström, B. (2005). Value Co-Creation in Industrial Buyer- Seller Partnerships – Creating and Exploiting Interdependencies. An Empirical Case Study. http://www.impgroup.org/ uploads/ dissertations/ dissertion_19.
  9. Forsström, B., (2004). Value Co-Creation through Interdependence - findings from an empirical case of a buyer-seller dyad, Paper presented at the 20th IMP Conference, Kopenhagen, September 2004.
  10. Gabriel, E. (2009). An assessment of value co-creation and delivery systems in the higher education sector of Tanzania: The African Journal of Finance and Management Vol. 11, Number 2 (p 59 –64)..
  11. Granados, N., Gupta, A., & Kauffman, R. (2006). The impact of IT on market information and transparency: a unified theoretical framework. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 7(3): 148-178.
  12. Groth, M., Mertens, D. P., & Murphy, R. O. (2004). Customers as good solidiers: Extending organizational citizenship behavior research to the customer domain. In D. L.
  13. Haataja & Hautamäki & Holm & Pulkkinen and Suni (2018) CO-CREATION A GUIDE TO ENHANCING THE COLLABORATION BETWEEN UNIVERSITIES AND COMPANIES. University of Helsinki and the authors Printed by Erweko Oy, Oulu ISBN 978-951-51-4096-8
  14. Kellogg, D. L., Youngdahl, W. E., & Bowen, D. E. (1997). On the relationship between customer participation and satisfaction: Two frameworks. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 8, 206–219.
  15. Kristensson, P., Matthing, J. & Johansson, N. (2008) Key strategies for the successful involvement of customers in the co-creation of new technology-based services. International journal of service industry management, 19(4), pp 474-491.
  16. Lambert, Douglas M. (2008), Supply Chain Management: Processes, Partnerships, Performance, 3rd Ed. Sarasota, FL: Supply Chain Management Institute.
  17. Lambert, Douglas M. and Sebastián García-Dastugue (2006), “Cross-functional Business Process for the Implementation of Service-Dominant Logic,” In R. F. Lusch and S. L.
  18. Lambert, Douglas M., A. Michael Knemeyer, and John T. Gardner (2010), Building High Performance Business Relationships, Sarasota, FL: Supply Chain Management Institute, Forthcoming.
  19. Lawshe CH. A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 1975, 28, 563-575.
  20. Lengnick-Hall, C. A., Claycomb, V., & Inks, L. W. (2000). From recipient to contributor: Examining customer roles and experienced outcomes. European Journal of Marketing, 34, 359–383.
  21. Lusch, R. F., Vargo, S. L., & Tanniru, M. (2010). Service, value networks and learning. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 38(1), 19–31.
  22. Madhavan, A., Porter, D., & Weaver, D. (2005). Should securities markets be transparent? Journal of Financial Markets, 3: 265-287.
  23. Mitchell, R.B. (1998). Sources of transparency information systems in international regimes. International studies quarterly. 42, 109-130.
  24. Oswick, C., Anthony, P., Keenoy, T., Mangham, I., & Grant, D. (2000) A dialogic analysis of organizational learning. Journal of management studies, Vol, 37. No, 6. Pp 887-901.
  25. Pucciarelli, F., & Kaplan, A. (2016). Competition and strategy in higher education: Managing complexity and uncertainty. Business Horizons, 59(3), 311–320.
  26. Payne, A.F., Storbacka, K., Frow, P., (2008). Managing the co-creation of value. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 36 (1), 83–96.
  27. Payne, Adrian F., Storbacka, and Pennie Frow (2008), "Managing the Co-Creation of Value," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 83-96.
  28. Prahalad, C.K. and Ramaswamy, Venkat (2004), The future of Competition: co-creating unique value with customers, Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston.
  29. Prahalad, C.K. and Ramaswamy, Venkat (2004),”co-creating unique value with customers”, Strategy and Leadership, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 4-9
  30. Rosenbaum, M. S., & Massiah, C. A. (2007). When customers receive support from other customers: Exploring the influence of intercustomer social support on customer voluntary performance, 9, 257–270.
  31. Seifunraqi,Maryam and Nader,Ezatullah (2011).Research methods in the humanities (whit an emphasis on educational science). Tehran: Arsbaran. (In Persion)
  32. Tanev, S. & Bailetti, T. & Allen, S. & Milyakov, H. & Durchev, P. and Ruskov, P. (2011). How do value co-creation activities relate to the perception of firms' innovativeness? Journal of Innovation Economics, No 7, p. 131-159. DOI : 10.3917/jie.007.0131.
  33. Yi, Y., & Gong, T. (2008). If employees “go the extra mile”, do customers reciprocate with similar behavior? Psychology and Marketing, 25, 961–986.
  34. Yi, Y., & Gong, T.,(2012) Customer value co-creation behavior: Scale development and validation, Journal of Business Research, doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.
  35. Yi, Y., Nataraajan, R., & Gong, T. (2011). Customer participation and citizenship behavioral influences on employee performance, satisfaction, commitment, and turnover intention. Journal of Business Research, 64, 87–95.
  36. Tanev, S. & Bailetti, T. & Allen, S. & Milyakov, H. & Durchev, P. and Ruskov, P. (2011). How do value co-creation activities relate to the perception of firms' innovativeness? Journal of Innovation Economics, No 7, p. 131-159. DOI : 10.3917/jie.007.0131.
  37. Wan Ahmad, Z., & Yahya, Y. and Mukhtar, M. (2011). Performance Measurement System Based On Value Co-Creation Model. International Conference on Electrical Engineering and Informatics 17-19 July 2011, Bandung, Indonesia.