Content area
Full Text
The level structure of West's (1990) four-factor model of team climate for innovation was assessed by means of multi-level confirmatory factor analysis (MCFA). The sample consisted of 1,487 individuals (195 teams) from a wide range of professions. Results showed that a considerable portion of the variance in the data was explained on the team level with intra-class correlations ranging from .30 to .39. Furthermore, the results demonstrated that the overall measurement model fitted the data well at both the team and individual levels, while the factor loadings were slightly different across the levels with item loadings showing partial invariance. Results from confirmatory factor analyses conducted on separate levels, however, showed that the four-factor model displayed the best fit to the data for both individual and team levels. A second-order one-factor model also fitted the data well on both levels. The results indicate that the team climate for innovation model can be used as a team-level consensus model of team climate for innovation.
One of the most studied models of innovative climates is West's (1990) team climate for innovation model, where four climate factors are proposed as essential for team innovation to occur: (1) clearly defined, shared, valued and attainable visions; (2) an environment perceived as non-threatening, in which it is safe to present new ideas and improved ways of doing things; (3) a shared concern with excellence in quality of task performance characterized by evaluations, modifications, control systems and critical appraisal; and (4) expectation, approval and practical support of attempts to introduce new and improved ways of doing things.
This model has been empirically supported in many studies with different types of groups, such as health care teams (e.g. Anderson & West, 1998; Poulton & West, 1999; Ragazzoni, Baiardi, Zotti, Anderson, & West, 2002), management teams (e. g. West & Anderson, 1996) and industrial companies (e.g. Burningham & West, 1995). Most of the studies have aimed at testing factor structure, internal consistency of factors or criterion validity of the team climate model, demonstrating acceptable results (Agrell & Gustafson, 1994; Anderson & West, 1998; Burningham & West, 1995; Kivimaki et al, 1997; Loo & Loewen, 2002; Mathisen, Einarsen, Jørstad, & Brønnick, 2004; Ragazzoni et al., 2002; West & Anderson, 1996; West, Smith, Feng, & Lawthom,...