Development and psychometric testing of the Clinical Learning Organisational Culture Survey (CLOCS)

File Size Format
65409_1.pdf 163Kb Adobe PDF View
Title Development and psychometric testing of the Clinical Learning Organisational Culture Survey (CLOCS)
Author Henderson, Amanda Jane; Creedy, Debra; Boorman, Rhonda Joy; Cooke, Marie Louise; Walker, Rachel Michell
Journal Name Nurse Education Today
Year Published 2010
Place of publication United Kingdom
Publisher Elsevier
Abstract Aim: This paper describes the development and psychometric testing of the Clinical Learning Organisational Culture Survey (CLOCS) that measures prevailing beliefs and assumptions important for learning to occur in the workplace. Method: Items from a tool that measured motivation in workplace learning were adapted to the nursing practice context. The tool was tested in the clinical setting, and then further modified to enhance face and content validity. Participants: Registered nurses (329) across three major Australian health facilities were surveyed between June 2007 and September 2007. Data analysis: An exploratory factor analysis identified five concepts – recognition, dissatisfaction, affiliation, accomplishment, and influence. Validity and reliability: Internal consistency measures of reliability revealed that four concepts had good internal consistency: recognition (α = .914), dissatisfaction (α = .771), affiliation (α = .801), accomplishment ( α = .664), but less so for influence ( α = .529). Results: This tool effectively measures recognition, affiliation and accomplishment – three concepts important for learning in practice situations, as well as dissatisfied staff across all these domains. Testing of additional influence items identify that this concept is difficult to delineate. Conclusion: The CLOCS can effectively inform leaders about concepts inherent in the culture important for maximising learning by staff.
Peer Reviewed Yes
Published Yes
Alternative URI http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2009.12.006
Copyright Statement Copyright 2010 Elsevier. This is the author-manuscript version of this paper. Reproduced in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. Please refer to the journal's website for access to the definitive, published version.
Volume 30
Issue Number 7
Page from 598
Page to 602
ISSN 0260-6917
Date Accessioned 2010-11-05
Date Available 2010-12-10T06:52:33Z
Language en_AU
Research Centre Centre for Health Practice Innovation; Griffith Health Institute
Faculty Griffith Health Faculty
Subject Nursing
URI http://hdl.handle.net/10072/35302
Publication Type Journal Articles (Refereed Article)
Publication Type Code c1

Brief Record

Griffith University copyright notice