Evaluating the Content Validity of a Supply Chain Innovation Factors Measurement Instrument in the Dairy Industry
Abstract
Developing technological capabilities is a necessary condition for increasing competitiveness. To this end, improvement and innovation projects are implemented in supply chains, which are strategic in today's highly competitive markets. Therefore, it is essential that these projects succeed. However, the literature and industrial practice offer a wide variety of alternative projects, making it difficult to determine the most suitable one. The objective of this work is to design and evaluate the content validity of an instrument to measure the contribution of project factors and thus identify the critical factors. The factors identified through a literature review are the dynamism of the environment, knowledge orientation, quality orientation, process management, and collaboration. These factors are used to construct the measurement instrument, whose content validity is evaluated by the judgment of ten experts. These judgments are analyzed using Lynn's Content Validity Index (I-ICV, S-CVI/ave). The results show that the measurement instrument has content validity with a significance level of 5%. The measurement instrument is a useful tool for obtaining the information needed to build models that explain the relationship between the success factors of technological innovation projects in supply chains.
Downloads
References
Almanasreh, E., Moles, R. and Chen, T. F. (2019). Evaluation of methods used for estimating content validity. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 15(2), 214–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2018.03.066.
Aravindh, K. L., & Ganesan, R. (2011). Influence of e-business in SME’s supply chain management: a status review. European Journal of Social Sciences, 23(3), 493-501.
Baryannis, G., Validi, S., Dani, S., & Antoniou, G. (2019). Supply Chain Risk Management and Artificial Intelligence: State of the Art and Future Research Directions. International Journal of Production Research, 57(7), 2179-2202. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1530476
Belhadi, A., Kamble, S., Jabbour, C., Gunasekaran, A., Ndubisi, N., & Venkatesh, M. (2021). Manufacturing and service supply chain resilience to the COVID-19 outbreak: lessons learned from the automobile and airline industries. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 163(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120447.
Bughin, J., Chui, M., & Manyika, J. (2010). Clouds, big data, and smart assets: Ten tech-enabled business trends to watch. McKinsey quarterly, 56(1), 75-86.
Cámara Nacional de Industriales de la Leche (Canilec). (2022). Estadísticas del Sector Lácteo 2011-2021. Canilec. https://www.canilec.org.mx/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Compendio_Sector_Lacteo_-2011-2022-act202205.pdf
Cooper, M., Lambert, D., & Pagh, J. (1997). Supply Chain Management: more than a New Name for Logistics. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 8(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/https://doi-org.pbidi.unam.mx:2443/10.1108/09574099710805556.
Drucker, P. (2004). La disciplina de la innovación. Harvard business review, 82(8), 3-7.
E Porter, M. (1998). Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors.
Escobar-Pérez, J., & Cuervo-Martínez, Á. (2008). VALIDEZ DE CONTENIDO Y JUICIO DE EXPERTOS: UNA APROXIMACIÓN A SU UTILIZACIÓN. Avances en Medición, 6, 27-36.
Esser, Klaus & Hillebrand, Wolfgang & Messner, Dirk & Meyer-Stamer, Jörg, 1996. "Competitividad sistémica: nuevo desafío para las empresas y la política," Revista CEPAL, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), August.
Fatorachian, H., & Kazemi, H. (2021). Impact of Industry 4.0 on supply chain performance. Production Planning & Control, 32 (1), 63–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2020.1712487
Flynn, B. B., Huo, B., & Zhao, X. (2010). The impact of supply chain integration on performance: A contingency and configuration approach. Journal of operations management, 28(1), 58-71.
Guillot-Valdés, M., Guillén-Riquelme, A., & Buela-Casal, G. (2022). Content validity through expert judgment for the Depression Clinical Evaluation Test. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 22(2), 100292.
Hamsioglu, A. (2011). Market orientation, quality orientation and business performance relationship: A study in pharmaceutical industry. Ege Academic Review, 11(1), 91-101.
Hidalgo Nuchera, A.; Serrano León, G.; Pavón Morote, J.(2002) LA GESTIÓN DE LA INNOVACIÓN Y LA TECNOLOGÍA EN LAS ORGANIZACIONES. Pirámide, Madrid. Revista madri+ d. Monografía: revista de investigación en gestión de la innovación y tecnología, (5), 161-162. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/libro?codigo=100690
Kafetzopoulos, D., Vouzas, F., & Skalkos, D. (2020). Developing and validating an innovation drivers' measurement instrument in the agri-food sector. British Food Journal, 122(4), 1199-1214. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-09-2019-0721.
Lawshe, C. H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563–575. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x.
Lugones, E., Gutti., P., & Le Clech, N. (2007). Indicadores de capacidades tecnológicas en América Latina. CEPAL, 89. https://www.cepal.org/es/publicaciones/5014-indicadores-capacidades-tecnologicas-america-latina
Lynn, M. R. (1986). Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research, 35(6), 82–385. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-198611000-00017.
Malaver Rodríguez, F., & Vargas Pérez, M. (2013). Formas de innovar y sus implicaciones de política: lecciones de una experiencia. Cuadernos de Economía, 32(60), 499-532.
Materia, V., Pascucci, S., & Dries, L. (2017). Are in-house and outsourcing innovation strategies correlated? Evidence from the European agrifood
sector. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 68(1), 249-258. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.1111/1477-9552.12206.
Mentzer, J. T., DeWitt, W., Keebler, J. S., Min, S., Nix, N. W., Smith, C. D., & Zacharia, Z. G. (2001). Defining supply chain management. Journal of Business logistics, 22(2), 1-25.
Navas, J. E., & Nieto, M. (2003). Estrategias de innovación y creación del conocimiento tecnológico en las empresas industriales españolas. In. Madrid: Civitas.
Polit, D., Beck, C., & Owen, S. (2007). Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Research in nursing & health, 30(4), 459-467. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20199.
Priore Moreno, P., Ponte Blanco, B., & Rosillo Camblor, R. (2018). Applying machine learning to the dynamic selection of replenishment policies in fast-changing supply chain environments. International Journal of Production Research, 57.
Romero, M., Díaz Costa, E., & Faouzi Nadim, T. (2023). A Review of Lawshe's Method for Calculating Content Validity in the Social Sciences. Frontiers in Education, 8, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1271335.
Shamout, M. D. (2019). Does supply chain analytics enhance supply chain innovation and robustness capability? Organizacija, 52 (2), 95-106. https://doi.org/10.2478/orga-2019-0007
Shi, J., Mo, X., & Sun, Z. (2012). Content validity index in scale development. Zhong nan da xue bao. Yi xue ban= Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences, 37(2), 152-155. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7347.2012.02.007
Stylos, N., Beltagui, A., & Sesis, A. (2020). Makerspaces as a route to democratising Innovation: The case of 3D Printing. All rights reserved. No full or partial reproduction, copy or transmission of this publication may be made without prior written permission of the authors and/or, 31.
Wilson, F. R., Wei, P., & Donald, A. S. (2012). Recalculation of the Critical Values for Lawshe’s Content Validity Ratio. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 45(12), https://doi.org/10.1177/0748175612440286.
Yao, J., Shi, H., & Liu, C. (2020). Optimising the configuration of green supply chains under mass personalisation. International Journal of Production Research, 58(24), 7420-7438.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
In order to promote the development and dissemination of research in education in Latin America, the Ibero-American Journal for Educational Research and Development (RIDE) adhered to the Budapest Open Access Initiative, which is why it is identified as a Open access publication. This means that any user can read the complete text of the articles, print them, download them, copy them, link them, distribute them and use the contents for other purposes. Creative Cummons licenses allow users to specify the rights to use an open access journal available on the Internet in such a way that users know the rules of publication. Authors who publish in this journal accept the following conditions: Authors they keep the author's rights and give the magazine the right of the first publication, with the work registered with the attribution license of Creative Commons, which allows third parties to use the published material whenever they mention the authorship of the work and the first publication in this The authors can make other independent and additional contractual agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the version of the article published in this journal (eg, include it in an institutional repository or publish it in a book) as long as they clearly indicate that The work was published for the first time in this magazine. Authors are allowed and recommended to publish their work. low on the Internet (for example on institutional or personal pages) before and during the review and publication process, as it can lead to productive exchanges and to a greater and faster dissemination of the published work
