Handbook of Management Scales/Technical proficiency
Technical proficiency (alpha = 0.83)[edit | edit source]
Description[edit | edit source]
Although certain items of some scales were developed specifically for the Japanese context, many were derived from existing validated scales. Respondents answered all questions using a Likert-type scale ranging from 0 to 10; field research suggested that an 11-point scale was appropriate for studying Japanese management practices because a 100 percent grading system is used in most Japanese schools.
Definition[edit | edit source]
Technical proficiency encompasses such activities as conducting engineering and manufacturing evaluations, product testing, determining product specifications, prototyping, and building the final product.
Items[edit | edit source]
Please circle the answer that best represents your judgment about each aspect on "how things actually were during the development of this project" rather than on "how things ought to be". Please indicate how well or adequately your firm undertook each activity in this product development process—relative to "how you think it should have been done". (0 = done very poorly or mistakenly omitted altogether, 10 = done excellently)
- Conducting preliminary engineering, technical and manufacturing assessments. (0.78)
- Building the product to designated or revised specifications. (0.86)
- Evaluating laboratory tests to determine basic performance against specifications. (1.00)
- Executing prototype or "in house" sample product testing. (0.60)
- Determining the final product design and specifications. (0.96)
- Working continuously for cost reduction and quality control. (0.76)
Source[edit | edit source]
- Song/Montoya-Weiss (2001): The Effect of Perceived Technological Uncertainty on Japanese New Product Development. Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 44, No. 1, pp. 61-80.
Comments[edit | edit source]
The items were evaluated on a scale ranging from 0 to 10. However, the observed mean value is 6.66 rather than 5. It might therefore be recommendable to change the wording, e.g. "ALWAYS conducting preliminary …".