MULTIFACTOR LEADERSHIP QUESTIONNAIRE PDF

adminComment(0)
    Contents:

Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) Form 6S. INSTRUCTIONS: This questionnaire provides a description of your leadership style. Twenty‐one. The Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ-5X) is the standard . see Mind Gardens' website: tranarkiptinan.ga 3. Items 1 - 21 of 21 Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire + Authentic Leadership . The downloadable PDF file includes one copy of the MLQ (all forms), scoring.


Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire Pdf

Author:BOOKER SORELL
Language:English, Dutch, Hindi
Country:Ethiopia
Genre:Religion
Pages:468
Published (Last):08.11.2015
ISBN:866-4-43123-341-2
ePub File Size:27.67 MB
PDF File Size:17.46 MB
Distribution:Free* [*Sign up for free]
Downloads:31033
Uploaded by: ERIK

Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire 5X. tranarkiptinan.ga documents/slides6/Northouse6e%20Ch9%20Transformational%tranarkiptinan.ga The staff evaluated their closest supervisor's leadership style on the. Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ 5X-Short; Avolio & Bass, ). The 36 items. The Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) evaluates three different provides review copies of instruments and scoring in the product manual so that you.

MLQ x5 is one of the most frequently used versions broadly used in many subject areas. It measures transactional, transformational and avoidant leadership styles.

Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire™

MLQ x5 comprises 45 items where the first 36 items measure the type of leadership style and the next 9 items examine the effectiveness of the manager. MLQ-6S is another version of the questionnaire comprising 21 items. It measures 7 factors pertaining to transformational, transactional and laissez-faire leadership 8.

Following consultation with experts on the importance of leadership style in education and the necessity to adopt an appropriate instrument for measuring the construct, the present researcher studied 36 leadership questionnaires and adopted MLQ due to its affinity with educational institutions. Accordingly, we examined the reliability and validity of MLQ-S6.

Methods Test Development The study adopted a descriptive method and a cross-sectional approach. Following extensive consultation with experts and comprehensive review of the related literature, the original version of the questionnaire was selected to be used in the study. A query was sent to the developers of the questionnaire on the use of the email version of the scale.

The developers agreed with the application of the email version.

Product successfully added to your shopping cart

The research instrument was MLQ-S6 comprising 21 items on a 5-point Likert-type scale including not at all, once in a while, sometimes, fairly often, and frequently if not always. The score for every item ranged from 1 not at all to 5 frequently if not always. The questionnaire was translated and culturally adapted into Farsi according to the method proposed by Wild and colleagues in the following steps In the first stage of forward translation, the scale was translated by two expert translators who were faculty members.

They both were experienced in translating specialized texts and were familiar with the concepts addressed in the scale. In the second stage, the two translations were integrated into a single translation for the reconciliation of forward translation. In the third stage, the final translated version was back-translated into English by two faculty members who were fluent in both Farsi and English. One of the translators had studied management, and another one, the English.

In the fourth stage, the back translated versions were reviewed. In the fifth stage, the questionnaire was administered to a few participants in a pilot study in order to examine its wording, scoring, and rating of statements and its components were amended.

In the sixth stage of finalization and proofreading, modifications were made in the scales, and their final version was prepared for psychometrics. In the seventh stage, the psychometric properties of the scale were determined including content, face and construct validity.

Content Validity Ratio CVR was used to ensure that the scale contains the most important and most accurate content. Content validity index CVI was used to ensure that the questionnaire items are best developed to measure the content.

The opinions of 10 faculty members of Tehran University of Medical Sciences were sought to examine the face and content validity of the scale using CVR and CVI methods both qualitatively and quantitatively. Of the faculty members, 5 people had studied management or passed management courses and 5 had studied educational sciences or other disciplines.

They were considered as the panel of experts who were specialized in developing and administering research instruments related to the topic of the study. The content validity of all items was obtained by averaging the CVR values. The content validity index was measured in terms of four criteria: relevance, clarity, importance, and simplicity. The relevance criterion was examined at four levels: 1 irrelevant with a score of 1 , relevant but requiring serious adjustments with a score of 2 , relevant but requiring partial adjustments with a score of 3 , and completely relevant with a score of 4.

Difficulty, irrelevancy and ambiguity were studied in the questionnaire to examine and correct its face validity. The faculty expressed their opinions about editing and adjusting the items consistent with Iranian culture.

In the next stage, item impact method was used to eliminate inappropriate items and determine item importance. Since factor analysis depends on the sample size that is subjects per variable, 10 respondents were selected per variable to measure the construct validity With regard to the minimum sample size in factor analysis, different sources suggest a minimum of 1 to 5 ratio for the proportion of variable to subject. Thus, the present sample size is more than enough considering the number of items used in exploratory factor analysis.

In order to avoid sample attrition, 40 individuals were added to the sample size. Therefore, a number of questionnaires were administered to the faculty.

The number of respondents was computed using stratified-random sampling consistent with the number of faculty members in each college. In this regard, Tehran University of Medical Sciences was divided into 12 strata including all colleges and research centers.

Of every stratum, a number of five groups were selected randomly. Subsequently, all groups were divided into two strata of male and female. All colleges were listed separately. Eventually, the sample size was computed to be consistent with the number of professors at college strata and gender. Every college was selected as a cluster using the random number table. Of the administered questionnaires, the faculty members of Tehran University of Medical Sciences returned ones.

For ethical purposes, the respondents were informed of the research objectives and confidentiality of the data before the sampling stage. Subsequently, the completed questionnaires were collected, and the data were entered into the software. Data analysis Principal component analysis PCA and orthogonal rotation method Varimax were run to conduct exploratory analysis of the model. Factor loading was considered to be above 0.

Confirmatory factor analysis was run to examine construct validity. Factor analysis is done to reduce large number of variables into a limited number of factors with minimum data attrition.

Confirmatory factor analysis was used through maximum likelihood estimation to examine the structural validity of the scale. In other words, confirmatory factor analysis revealed whether or not the questionnaire items were assigned to and fit the relevant factors as theoretically expected.

Results As discussed above, MLQ-S6 consists of 21 items that measure 7 factors pertaining to leadership. Step 1: MLQ was presented to the panel of experts to measure its content validity, and the scores were collected.

Overall, one item was added and one was eliminated from the questionnaire. Items with a CVI above 0. Based on quantitative results of CVR, items with a content validity of 0.

Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire.doc

Following reevaluation and consultation with the experts, some recommendations were approved of, and the item questionnaire was adjusted to be consistent with Iranian culture. I provide others with new ways of looking at puzzling things. I let others know how I think they are doing. As long as things are working, I do not try to change anything. Whatever others want to do is OK with me Others are proud to be associated with me.

I help others find meaning in their work. I get others to rethink ideas that they had never questioned before I give personal attention to others who seem rejected I call attention to what others can get for what they accomplish I tell others the standards they have to know to carry out their work..

I ask no more of others than what is absolutely essential Your score for each factor is determined by summing three specified items on the questionnaire.Joey is a leadership development consultant specializing in executive coaching, leadership and organization development.

Second Edition. Reexamining the components of transformational and transactional leadership using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Assesses the effectiveness of an entire organization's leadership. I call attention to what others can get for what they accomplish