TABLE 6-5: DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS, CRONBACH ALPHA COEFFICIENTS AND INTERCORRELATIONS
The correlation matrix shows significant positive correlations between Business development and
Client centricity (ȡ=.51, p<.01) and between Business development and Organizational creativity
(ȡ=.43, p<.01) (Aun et al., 2011). Client centricity was also positively correlated with Organizational
creativity (albeit to a lesser extent than the former mentioned correlations, ȡ=.37, p<.01). From the
Cronbach Alpha reliability analysis, one may deduce that the scales for Business development
(Į=.88), Operational efficiency (Į=.89), Client centricity (Į=.82) and Organizational creativity
(Į=.79) were internally reliable (all above the Į= .70 threshold).
6.4 DISCUSSION
This chapter described the initial phase of scale development based on an exploratory factor analysis
in order to establish the structure of the strategic leadership instrument. Four valid and internally
reliable factors were identified. The correlations among the dimensions fitted relatively well with the
expected relationships. What was striking was that Client centricity was positively related to
Organizational creativity. That implies that managers can and do combine these roles. This may be
due to the increased importance of consumer collaboration for the purposes of innovation (Malerba,
2006). The most frequently cited term to define this process has been co-creation between a firm and
its consumers. As described by Prahalad and Ramaswamy (2004) it involves four factors: (1) a deep
dialogue with customers that involves interactivity, engagement, and a propensity to act on both sides,
(2) access to tools and information to create, (3) risk assessment that leads to informed choice,
especially by consumers, and (4) transparency of information on both sides. The authors argue that
combining these four factors in creative ways can lead to new forms of value. So, one may argue that
Organizational creativity and Client centricity are not mutually exclusive, but if not considered
WRJHWKHUPD\OHDGWRH[WUHPHVOHDGLQJWRFODLPVVXFKDV³LJQRUH\RXUFXVWRPHU ́(Martin, 1995) and
³,W¶VWKHFXVWRPHUVWXSLG ́(Aun et al., 2011). Given that these findings are based on a first-time
measurement, the validity of the instrument needs to be increased, in particular construct and
concurrent validity.