All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.

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 19 tables, all factors were internally consistent and well defined by variables. The factor analysis was conducted with Promax rotation because variables were related with each other; Substantial information and Accountability (r = .74, p<.001), Accountability and Secrecy (r = .63, p<.001), and Substantial information and Secrecy (r = .63, p<.001). After oblique rotation performed, loadings under .45 were replaced by zeros. 61% of variance in the data set is accounted for by three factors while Accountability factor account for the most variance (45.7%). The result of the exploratory factor analyses is shown in Table 1 (see Appendix B). The first factor was labeled Substantial Information (Cronbach’s α =.88). Items that loaded on this factor included ―Provides information that is complete,‖ ―Provides information that is reliable,‖ ―Provides information that can be compared to previous performance,‖ ―Provides information that can be compared to industry standards,‖ ―Provides information that is balanced,‖ ―Admit mistakes when it has made mistakes,‖ ―Is forthcoming with information that might be damaging to the organization, and Is open to criticism by people like me.‖ The second factor was named Accountability (Cronbach’s α =81). Items loaded high on this factor were ―Provides information that is easy for people like me to understand,‖ ―Provides information in a timely fashion to people like me,‖ ―Provides information that is relevant to people like me,‖ and ―Provides information to people like me in language that is clear.‖ The third factor was labeled Secrecy (Cronbach’s α =.88). Items that loaded on this factor were ―Provide information that is unclear to people like me,‖ ―Often leave out important details in the information it provides to people like me,‖ ―Only disclose information when it is required,‖ ―Is be slow to provide information to people like me,‖ and ―Blame outside factors that may have contributed to the outcome when reporting bad news.‖ Interestingly, two items originally from Accountability variable (Rawlins, 2009) accounted for Substantial information variable;

Authors: Kim, Bo Kyung. and Hong, Seoyeon.
first   previous   Page 19 of 29   next   last

background image
Running head: How a Public Evaluate an Organization’s Official Statement to pursue 
Organizational Transparency 
tables, all factors were internally consistent and well defined by variables. The factor analysis 
was conducted with Promax rotation because variables were related with each other; Substantial 
information and Accountability (= .74, p<.001), Accountability and Secrecy (= .63, p<.001), 
and Substantial information and Secrecy (= .63, p<.001). After oblique rotation performed, 
loadings under .45 were replaced by zeros. 61% of variance in the data set is accounted for by 
three factors while Accountability factor account for the most variance (45.7%). The result of the 
exploratory factor analyses is shown in Table 1 (see Appendix B).  
The first factor was labeled Substantial Information (Cronbach’s α =.88). Items that 
loaded on this factor included ―Provides information that is complete,‖ ―Provides information 
that is reliable,‖ ―Provides information that can be compared to previous performance,‖ 
―Provides information that can be compared to industry standards,‖ ―Provides information that is 
balanced,‖ ―Admit mistakes when it has made mistakes,‖ ―Is forthcoming with information that 
might be damaging to the organization, and Is open to criticism by people like me.‖  
The second factor was named Accountability (Cronbach’s α =81). Items loaded high on 
this factor were ―Provides information that is easy for people like me to understand,‖ ―Provides 
information in a timely fashion to people like me,‖ ―Provides information that is relevant to 
people like me,‖ and ―Provides information to people like me in language that is clear.‖  
The third factor was labeled Secrecy (Cronbach’s α =.88). Items that loaded on this factor 
were ―Provide information that is unclear to people like me,‖ ―Often leave out important details 
in the information it provides to people like me,‖ ―Only disclose information when it is required,‖ 
―Is be slow to provide information to people like me,‖ and ―Blame outside factors that may have 
contributed to the outcome when reporting bad news.‖ Interestingly, two items originally from 
Accountability variable (Rawlins, 2009) accounted for Substantial information variable; 

All Academic Convention makes running your annual conference simple and cost effective. It is your online solution for abstract management, peer review, and scheduling for your annual meeting or convention.
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 19 of 29   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.