Search

Role theory has been suggested as the conceptual framework in which to relate or join the properties of the organization and the individual. Two major concepts from role theory are role conflict and ambiguity. Role conflict and ambiguity, measured with scales developed by Rizzo, House, and Lirtzman (1970) have been used in most of the recent studies on role perceptions. Although the scales are frequently related to attitudinal and behavioral variables, they have remained relatively unexamined. This paper is an examination of the psychometric properties of the role conflict and ambiguity scales, including the factor structure, coefficients of congruency, internal reliabilities, test-retest reliabilities, absolute levels of conflict and ambiguity, and correlations with additional attitudinal and behavioral variables. The analysis is conducted across six samples. The results suggest that continued use of role conflict and role ambiguity scales appears to be warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study is to report the development and tests of a model of organizational behavior. The model was developed out of theory, research, and an interpretation of interview findings in the firm studied. A characterization of the firm is made in terms of current theory and research. Questionnaires and measurement scales designed, to test the model are described. Measures of organizational and leadership practices served as predictors. Dependent measures were satisfaction, perceived effectiveness, anxiety, and propensity `to leave. Role conflict and role ambiguity scales were treated as predictor, intervening, and as dependent variables in the model. Selected hypotheses are presented and tested. Predictors tended to relate in expected directions to role measures and dependent variables. Role measure hypotheses were generally supported, and role ambiguity was a better predictor and intervening (partialled) variable than role conflict. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]