All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

How a Public Evaluate an Organization’s Official Statement to pursue Organizational Transparency: An Impact of Organizational Claims to Truth on the Public’s Perception of Credibility toward the Content
Unformatted Document Text:  Running head: How a Public Evaluate an Organization’s Official Statement to pursue Organizational Transparency 12 appeared on the two types of a claim, therefore, ―participation in identifying the information they need to make accurate decisions‖ is hardly manageable through the mere exposure to an organization’s official statement. Thus, this study includes the three constructs of transparency efforts (substantial information, accountability, and secrecy) in order to examine whether the lay public’s evaluation of organizational transparency shares similar constructs with the transparency measurement instrument perceived by employees. While Rawlins (2009) constructed the initial measure of organizational transparency based on survey with the healthcare organization’s professionals, this study examines the transparency measurement in eyes of the lay public, neither employees nor professionals. Concerning the lay public’s true estimation of organizational transparency efforts, the second research question is proposed: RQ2: Are the three constructs of transparency efforts (e.g., Substantial information, accountability, and secrecy) mutually exclusive variables or are they combining with larger constructs that measure transparency? Method Design This study used a 2 (statement claiming truth of an official statement: presence vs. absence) x 2 (claims to disclose more detailed information: presence vs. absence) mixed-subjects experimental design with multiple messages (e.g., the online site) in which each participant read two versions of an organization’s official statement that appeared on a corporate website and a corporate Facebook. Claims to disclosure of more information of an official statement and its truth claims were between-subject variables –participants were assigned to one of the four conditions: either a condition of presenting disclosure claims in responding to stakeholders’

Authors: Kim, Bo Kyung. and Hong, Seoyeon.
first   previous   Page 12 of 29   next   last



background image
Running head: How a Public Evaluate an Organization’s Official Statement to pursue 
Organizational Transparency 
 
12 
 
appeared on the two types of a claim, therefore, ―participation in identifying the information they 
need to make accurate decisions‖
 is hardly manageable through the mere exposure to an 
organization’s official statement.  
Thus, this study includes the three constructs of transparency efforts (substantial 
information, accountability, and secrecy) in order to examine whether the lay public’s evaluation 
of organizational transparency shares similar constructs with the transparency measurement 
instrument perceived by employees. While Rawlins (2009) constructed the initial measure of 
organizational transparency based on survey with the healthcare organization’s professionals, 
this study examines the transparency measurement in eyes of the lay public, neither employees 
nor professionals. Concerning the lay public’s true estimation of organizational transparency 
efforts, the second research question is proposed:  
RQ2: Are the three constructs of transparency efforts (e.g., Substantial information, 
accountability, and secrecy) mutually exclusive variables or are they combining with larger 
constructs that measure transparency?  
Method 
Design  
This study used a 2 (statement claiming truth of an official statement: presence vs. 
absence) x 2 (claims to disclose more detailed information: presence vs. absence) mixed-subjects 
experimental design with multiple messages (e.g., the online site) in which each participant read 
two versions of an organization’s official statement that appeared on a corporate website and a 
corporate Facebook. Claims to disclosure of more information of an official statement and its 
truth claims were between-subject variables –participants were assigned to one of the four 
conditions: either a condition of presenting disclosure claims in responding to stakeholders’ 


Convention
Convention is an application service for managing large or small academic conferences, annual meetings, and other types of events!
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 12 of 29   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.