Dialectical Leadership Behavior Scale

Abstract

The Dialectical Leadership Behavior Scale (DLBS), developed by Wang et al. (2023), is a specialized psychometric instrument designed to quantify leadership behaviors rooted in a leader’s dialectical thinking. This foundational cognitive approach emphasizes the simultaneous consideration of three basic principles: contradiction, connection, and change (Meng, 1988).

The scale’s development followed rigorous procedures suggested by Hinkin (1995). The resulting 22-item instrument was cross-validated using diverse samples, including EMBA students and middle- to top-level managers recruited online from both Chinese and American professional populations. Comprehensive psychometric results, including detailed factor analysis, reliability, and validity findings, support the DLBS as a robust measure of complex leadership styles in global contexts.

Keywords

Dialectical Leadership Behavior, Timely Adjusting, Weighing Contradiction, Balancing between Kindness and Strictness, Holistically Managing, Promoting Coordination, Individualized Mentoring, Strategic Leadership, Psychometrics.

Authors

Wang, Hui, Wang, Ying, Ji, Xiaode, Ji, Ming.

Purpose

The purpose of the DLBS is to provide a standardized tool for measuring a strategic leadership construct defined by adaptability and paradox management. Specifically, it assesses a leader’s behavior regarding the adjustment of organizational strategy and management style in response to dynamic environmental changes.

The scale focuses on the leader’s ability to effectively accept and balance inherent organizational contradictions and coordinate disparate organizations or departments holistically and synergistically (Huang & Wang, 2017). This measurement is crucial for understanding effective leadership in complex, non-linear organizational environments.

Construct

The core construct measured is Dialectical Leadership Behavior, which views leadership not as a single style, but as a dynamic process of reconciling opposing forces and maintaining holistic awareness. This behavior is fundamentally based on dialectical thinking.

The 22 items of the scale are organized into six distinct dimensions, reflecting the multifaceted nature of this leadership construct:

• Timely Adjusting
• Balancing between Kindness and Strictness
• Weighing Contradiction
• Individualized Mentoring
• Promoting Coordination
• Holistically Managing

Validity

The DLBS demonstrates strong psychometric evidence supporting its validity, particularly concerning its internal structure and distinctness from other constructs.

Construct Validity: The hypothesized six-factor structure was rigorously tested using structural equation modeling. The structure successfully met standard model fit requirements (Lance et al., 2006), confirming that the instrument accurately captures the multi-dimensional nature of dialectical leadership behavior.

Discriminant Validity: To ensure the six dimensions were empirically distinct, the authors compared the fit of the 6-factor baseline model against more constrained models (a 3-factor model and a single-factor model). The fit indices of the more restrictive models were significantly poorer, indicating that the six dimensions possess robust discriminant validity and are not redundant measures of a single underlying factor (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988).

Reliability

The reliability of the DLBS was established through internal consistency analysis across different cultural samples, providing confidence in the scale’s stability.

Internal Consistency: The internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach’s α. The resulting coefficients were highly acceptable and consistent across cultures, measuring 0.88 for the American sample and 0.93 for the Chinese sample. These high values indicate strong internal coherence among the items within the scale.

Factor Analysis

The structure of the DLBS was confirmed using a two-stage factor analysis process: Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) followed by Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA).

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA): The authors utilized the principal axis factor analysis method with an oblique rotation. This process clearly identified six underlying dimensions. After refinement and item deletion (14 items were removed), the final 22-item scale emerged, with the six factors explaining 71.91% of the total variance. Item loadings were substantial, ranging from 0.70 to 0.95, confirming a clear and distinct factor structure with minimal cross-loading.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and Measurement Invariance: The CFA confirmed the 6-factor structure, reporting factor loadings between 0.54 and 0.85. The model fit indices demonstrated excellent fit: (Chi-squared = 262.09, df=194, RMSEA = 0.04, CFI = 0.97, TLI = 0.96, SRMR = 0.05). Furthermore, testing for Measurement Invariance showed that the configuration invariant model and the metric invariant model exhibited no significant difference in fit between the Chinese and United States samples, supporting the scale’s applicability across these two cultures.

Instrument

Test Type: Original Inventory/Questionnaire

Format: Participants rate the consistency of the item description with their direct leaders’ behavior using a 7-point Likert scale. The anchors range from “1-Strongly disagree” to “7-Strongly agree”.

Language Available: Chinese; English

Population Group: Human; Male; Female

Age Group: Adulthood (18 yrs & older)

Population Details: Respondents include EMBA Students and Middle- and Top-Level Managers from China and the United States.

Test Methodology: Test Validity; Construct Validity; Discriminant Validity; Test Reliability; Internal Consistency; Factor Analysis; Confirmatory Factor Analysis; Exploratory Factor Analysis; Measurement Invariance.

Keywords

Leadership Qualities, Leadership Style, Management Methods, Management Personnel, Organizational Behavior, Organizational and Occupational Measures, Cross-cultural Validation, Paradox Management.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: No data is Available

Affiliation Email addresses:

• Wang, Hui: Peking University, Guanghua School of Management
• Wang, Ying: University of International Business and Economics, Business School
• Ji, Xiaode: Peking University, Guanghua School of Management
• Ji, Ming: Peking University, Guanghua School of Management

Correspondence Address: Ji, Xiaode: Peking University, Guanghua School of Management, Beijing, China, 100871, [email protected]

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Permissions: Contact Corresponding Author

Commercial: No

Fee: No

Test Year: 2023

Reference’s

Wang, H., Wang, Y., Ji, X., & Ji, M. (2023). Dialectical leadership behavior and its impact on firm innovation and performance: An exploration based on the Chinese culture. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 55(3), 374–389. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2023.00374

Items of the Dialectical Leadership Behavior Scale

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

Number of items: This is a 22-item scale.

Subscales: Timely Adjusting; Balancing between Kindness and Strictness; Weighing Contradiction; Individualized Mentoring; Promoting Coordination; Holistically Managing.

Test Items Available: No