Development of ``HealthServe'': A measure of customer service orientation in healthcare

An assessment tool designed to measure a customer service orientation among RN's and LPN's was developed using a content-oriented approach. Critical incidents were first developed by asking two samples of healthcare managers (n = 52 and 25) to identify various customer-contact situations. The critical incidents were then used to formulate a 121-item instrument. Patient-contact workers from 3 hospitals (n = 102) completed the instrument along with the NEO-FFI, a measure of the Big Five personality factors. Concurrently, managers completed a performance evaluation scale on the employees participating in the study in order to determine the predictive validity of the instrument.^ Through a criterion-keying approach, the instrument was scaled down to 38 items. The correlation between HealthServe and the supervisory ratings of performance evaluation data supported the instrument's criterion-related validity (r =.66, p $<$.0001). Incremental validity of HealthServe over the Big Five was found with HealthServe accounting for 46% of the variance.^ The NEO-FFI was used to assess the correlation between personality traits and HealthServe. A factor analysis of HealthServe suggested 4 factors which were correlated with the NEO-FFI scores. Results indicated that HealthServe was related to Extraversion, Openness to Experience, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness and negatively related to Neuroticism.^ The benefits of the test construction procedure used here over the use of broad-based measures of personality were discussed as well as the limitations of using a concurrent validation strategy. Recommendations for future studies were provided. ^

Employee Orientation: An Organizational and Experiential Learning Approach

Employee orientation problems for a resort chain were studied and addressed through action research. The implemented solution leveraged experiential learning to foster employee initiative and problem solving to instill a culture of learning, improve customer satisfaction and increase employee retention. Business results were achieved but learner/ management reaction was mixed.

Social-cognitive antecedents of ambidextrous orientation in family-owned startups: The role of family ties, achievement motivation, and internal locus of control

Regulatory Focus Theory predicts that the motivation to self-regulate goal-directed thought and behavior depends on two distinct regulation strategies: a promotion focus based on attaining gains and a prevention focus based on avoiding losses. This study took a social-cognitive approach predicting that regulatory focus has an impact on how family startups (several family related founders) explore "new ideas", exploit "old certainties" and achieve the balance of both (ambidexterity), compared to lone founder startups (only one founder present). It was proposed that the social context of family ties among founders leads them to a prevention focus concerned with avoiding the loss of the socio-emotional benefits of those ties. In order to avoid such a loss, family founders were expected to increase their risk perceptions and thus, explore less than lone founders, who lack such socio-emotional ties. It was also proposed that two commonly used psychological traits in entrepreneurship research —achievement motivation and internal locus of control, predispose entrepreneurs to a promotion focus. Founders with a promotion focus, in turn, were hypothesized to lead startups to more risk-seeking behaviors and to more explorative orientation. The previous argument was used as a springboard to derive hypotheses about ambidexterity (the ability to exploit and explore simultaneously) and survival hazards. Using Regulatory Focus Theory, exploitative orientation, conceptualized as the motivational strength to continue on previous paths of action, was hypothesized to be not significantly different from that of lone founder startups. Taking previous arguments together, lone founder startups were hypothesized to be more ambidextrous than family startups. Finally, ambidexterity and internal locus of control were hypothesized to reduce survival hazards in family startups. The findings suggested that family startups explore less than lone founder startups even after controlling for group effects. Interesting but contradictory findings revealed that internal locus of control have both a positive direct effect and a positive interaction that increases the explorative and ambidextrous orientation gap of family startups over lone founder startups. As expected, ambidexterity and internal locus of control reduced survival hazards on family startups. Implications for practitioners were derived based on a sample of 470 nascent entrepreneurs.

Social-cognitive Antecedents of Ambidextrous Orientation in Family-owned Startups: The Role of Family Ties, Achievement Motivation, and Internal Locus of Control

Regulatory Focus Theory predicts that the motivation to self-regulate goal-directed thought and behavior depends on two distinct regulation strategies: a promotion focus based on attaining gains and a prevention focus based on avoiding losses. This study took a social-cognitive approach predicting that regulatory focus has an impact on how family startups (several family related founders) explore “new ideas”, exploit “old certainties” and achieve the balance of both (ambidexterity), compared to lone founder startups (only one founder present). It was proposed that the social context of family ties among founders leads them to a prevention focus concerned with avoiding the loss of the socio-emotional benefits of those ties. In order to avoid such a loss, family founders were expected to increase their risk perceptions and thus, explore less than lone founders, who lack such socio-emotional ties. It was also proposed that two commonly used psychological traits in entrepreneurship research --achievement motivation and internal locus of control, predispose entrepreneurs to a promotion focus. Founders with a promotion focus, in turn, were hypothesized to lead startups to more risk-seeking behaviors and to more explorative orientation. The previous argument was used as a springboard to derive hypotheses about ambidexterity (the ability to exploit and explore simultaneously) and survival hazards. Using Regulatory Focus Theory, exploitative orientation, conceptualized as the motivational strength to continue on previous paths of action, was hypothesized to be not significantly different from that of lone founder startups. Taking previous arguments together, lone founder startups were hypothesized to be more ambidextrous than family startups. Finally, ambidexterity and internal locus of control were hypothesized to reduce survival hazards in family startups. The findings suggested that family startups explore less than lone founder startups even after controlling for group effects. Interesting but contradictory findings revealed that internal locus of control have both a positive direct effect and a positive interaction that increases the explorative and ambidextrous orientation gap of family startups over lone founder startups. As expected, ambidexterity and internal locus of control reduced survival hazards on family startups. Implications for practitioners were derived based on a sample of 470 nascent entrepreneurs.