Thevalidation and correlations with empowering leadership and self-efficacy scales

Empowering employees becomes a current issue as leadership approach as well as a managerial means of contemporary approaches. Empowering employees is predicted to impact on selfefficacy positively. In the first phase of the study, the investigation of validity and reliability of empowering leadership and self-efficacy scale were conducted among healthcare employees in Turkey. In the second phase, the relationships between empowering leadership and the subdimension of empowering leadership and self-efficacy were searched. The related scales were performed among 550 healthcare employees, who were selected randomly from 7 different hospitals of states that in different regions of Turkey. Empowering leadership scale of Amundsen and Martinsen (2014), and General Self-efficacy scale of Chen, Gully and Eden (2001) were used to measure designed model within the study. As the results of the study, a new version of empowering leadership scale, which is consisted of 2 dimensions and 5 questions in each dimensions and has reliability and validity in Turkish, was reached. Moreover, a new selfefficacy scale that is insisted of one dimension and 4 questions and has reliability and validity in Turkish was obtained within the analyses. Empowering leadership as total score, sub-dimension of empowering leadership as autonomy and development supportaffects on self-efficacy positively.


1.Introduction
Leadership role becomes increasingly crucial within contemporary institutions, it does not matter what the sector is. Leadership reveals itself in each process due to its effects on employee behaviors. In the light of this viewpoint, leadership abilities state an improved and increased knowledge position. Leaders can enhance and foster organizational performance by giving self-control and providing participation of employees in decision making process so that they can put organizational resources to good use (Dierendonck & Dijkstra, 2012, p. 2).
In contemporary management literature, work structure is designed with the current concepts such as autonomy, selfleadership, delegation of responsibility and decision-making authority (Amundsen & Martinsen, 2015, p. 1). Empowering leadership is a crucial instrument for organizational processes such as problem-solving, enhancing autonomous and selfmanaging teams and individuals (Arnold, Arad, Rhoades, & Drasgow, 2000, p. 249; Tong, Rasiah, Tong, & Lai, 2015, p. 191). Empowering leadership is a facilitator to share power, authority and responsibility between leaders and employees (Kou and Lee, 2015, p. 118).Empowering behaviors support sharing power and authority by improving new ideas and conceptualizing changing process (Jönsson, Muhonen, Denti, & Chen, 2015, p. 3).
As one of the leadership approaches, empowering leadership has a crucial place in modern management approach with the view of positive impact on employees. Empowering employees, imparting participation, authority, right to freedom of expression may reduce many negations. Self-efficacy as another supporting concept this view, may be treated as closely associated with empowering leadership and it can be assumed that self-efficacy is effective about self-development and self-determination. Self-efficacy allows healthcare employees to perceive their colleagues" competencies and confidence in their skills ( This paper is presented as follows. In the next section, a general view of literature review related with empowered leadership, self-efficacy and also hypothesis are stated. In the third and fourth sections, research method and results are mentioned. As a last section, discussion and implications for the future studies are addressed and proposed.

Empowering leadership
Many organizations have transformed their hierarchical management structure into empowering employees in order to improve organizational general flexibility and efficiency (Arnold et al., 2000, p. 249).In the light of this view, empowering expresses a high authority, individual orientation and control over the environment (Arnold et al., 2000, p. 250). Empowering behaviors of leaders present autonomy and decision making opportunities and participation in decision making process (Auh, Menguc, & Jung, 2014, p. 562). Empowering behaviors enable to transform a crowd in the organization into a community by supporting to work together regarding with their values, believes, ideas etc. (Lee, 2008, p. 104).
Empowering leadership, which involves such different capabilities than the other types of leadership as self-control, selfregulation, self-management and self-leadership of the followers (Tekleab, Sims, Yun, Tesluk, & Cox, 2008, p. 187), constructs a framework with supervisor, employee and client, so that this type of leadership supports motivation, efficacy and positive reflections of these factors to the clients or users (Auh et al., 2014, p. 562). This type of leadershipaims to foster self-leadership capability and efficiency of followers rather than highlighting general leadership characteristics (Tekleab et al., 2008, p. 197) and is important in as individual based as group-level activities and additionally, connecting a tie between empowering leadership and performance outcomes between groups and within the groups ( . "Showing concern" elucidates that leaders concern about employees" feelings, ideas, view about organization and tasks and this dimension is associated with the understanding of achieving goals and fostering a collective consensus within the organization (Men, 2010, p. 37). "Participative decision making" illustrates the characteristic of empowering leadership that is defined as leading employees organizational goals and decisions and also encouraging them to take action independently within decision making process ( (Hon & Chan, 2013, p. 200). Additionally, the results of Liu, Fu and Zhang"s (2008) study exhibit the effects of factors of empowering leadership behaviors on many organizational variables. As one of the factors of empowering leadership behaviors, "leading by example" has positive impact on perceived meaning of the job and also the other factor, "participative decision making" enhances to express employees" opinions, moreover, "facilitating", "coaching" and "informing" enable to gain control to fulfill employees" goals (Liu, Fu, & Zhang, 2008, pp. 942-943).
According to literature review, empowering leadership has two dimensions, classified as autonomy support and development support.

1.1.1.Autonomy Support
Autonomy is identified as the need for choosing behaviors and views independently and as to self-will, as mentioned in the framework with self-determination theory (Shih, 2012, p. 3). Empowering behavior taxonomy insists many variables such as support, facilitation and encouraging behaviors etc., as one of the concepts, autonomy is consisted of providing taking responsibility in problem solving process, encouraging taking risks, developing opportunities and opinions (Reitzug, 1994, p. 291). Moreover, self-determination theory defines concept of autonomy as a preferred environment that enhancing motivation, internalized learning outcomes and allowing individuals to making preferences and choices freely (Shih, 2008, p. 315).
Autonomy supportive role of empowering leadership is a key point in order to comprehend and make a sense about selfconfidence of employees and providing control over the goals and decisions, also it can be roadmap for employees and leaders to develop extra positive abilities and behaviors (Sharma & Kirkman, 2015, pp. 5-27). Besides, these behaviors refer motivation implies that present alternatives for individuals for making independent choices and preferences and also affecting on individual"s perception (Raub & Robert, 2010, p. 1747). As this view, motivation tools will contribute to employees" satisfaction, autonomy and more adaptive behaviors (Lim & Wang, 2009, pp. 52-55). Autonomy functions with facilitator and protective role as a negative predictor of burnout, emotional exhaustion, as well as positively associated with personal success (

1.1.1.Development Support
Development is identified as enhancing knowledge, skills and competencies of employees in order to gain individual and professional advancement (Gilley, Shelton, & Gilley, 2011, p. 387), as well as leadership focuses on personal goals achievement and development as to its structure that has skills, strategies and competencies (Johnson, 1999, p. 4

Self-efficacy
Self-efficacy beliefs, which iscrucial for social cognitive theory (Ekholm, Zumbrunn, & Conklin, 2015, p. 198), is occurred by appraisal processes of knowledge and using it as a guide (Alessandri, Vecchione, & Caprara, 2015, p. 25).Self-efficacy provides to assess individual competence and beliefs for achieving goals and fulfilling job demands ( In many studies, authors treat the concept of self-efficacy as employee motivation (Mulvaney, 2014, p. 460). Basically, this perspective can be considerable, however it should be explained within broader management approach as that this term is associated with many factors, especially in decision making process and affects on many organizational outcomes. Selfefficacy refers a merit in terms of achievement according to social cognitive theory ( As is seen, self-efficacy has correlations with many organizational variables. This study insists on the effect of empowering leadership on self-efficacy. Empowering behaviors motivate employees to perform tasks effectively and encourage them to fulfill their goals and roles (Raub and Robert, 2010, p. 1747). Empowering behaviors enhance the understanding of tasks and responsibilities for employees, since these behaviors present leaders" beliefs and views about employees" competence and abilities, so they can improve positive psychological commitment to the organization (Lorinkova & Perry, 2014, p. 6). Furthermore, empowering leadership states to constitute a contextual framework of responsibilities, roles, tasks and organizational goals so that employees can motivate to adopt problems or organizational situations, and also this term is beneficial for encouraging employees to accept responsibilities and express their voice as coaching (Gao, Janssen, & Shi, 2011, p. 790). It is assumed that empowering leadership that motivates employees and supports their achievement of roles effectively has an increasing impact on self-efficacy and the following second hypothesis is designed: In the light of that giving opportunity for employees to gain autonomy will support self-efficacy as mentioned in the following designed hypothesis: Hypothesis 2. Autonomy Support is positively related to self-efficacy.
Self-efficacy beliefs, which are related with role responsibilities, can be enhanced by leaders as increasing confidence in employees" skills and willingness to take responsibility and risk (Ladegard & Gjerde, 2014, p. 636). Self-efficacy, which refers individuals" beliefs about their skills, contributes to response more effectively to negative stereotype, enhances wellbeing and performance (Hoyt & Blascovich, 2010, pp. 90-99). Development support contributes to individuals how they can adapt to complex situations and find solving ways for their experiences (McCauley et al., 2006, p. 634). The study of Zhang and Chen (2013) addressed that developmental behaviors positively associated with self-determination feelings, that is to say perceived self-efficacy (Zhang & Chen, 2013, p. 536).The review leads us to assume the following hypothesis: Hypothesis 3. Development Support is positively related to self-efficacy.

Proposed model
In the first phase of the study, the investigation of validity and reliability of empowering leadership and self-efficacy scale were conducted among healthcare employees in Turkey. In the second phase, the relationships between empowering leadership and the sub-dimension of empowering leadership and self-efficacy were searched. Our proposed model is shown in Fig. 1. A conceptual overview along with the rationale for each of the hypothesized relationships is provided below.

Data collection
Seven states were determined from seven different regions in Turkey and the study was performed among 550 healthcare employees by designating hospitals randomly. Participants were selected via stratified sampling method as 100 employees from 3 hospitals and 50 employees from 5 hospitals. A great majority of participants are married (n=304, 55

Measures
Empowering leadership and self-efficacy scale were performed within the study.

Empowering leadership
The scale was obtained from the study of Amundsen and Martinsen (2014) and insisted of two dimensions and 18 items as autonomy support (12 items) and development support (6 items). Cronbach Alpha Coefficient was found as .93 for both dimensions. It was rated with 7 likert point in the original source, however 5 likert point was used within this study (1=never, 5=always).

General self-efficacy
It was consisted of 8 items and obtained from the study of Chen, Gully and Eden (2001) and also rated with 5 likert-point (1=strongly disagree, 5=strongly agree). Chen, Gully and Eden (2001)   The validity and reliability of scales were analyzed within the study. Item reliability and construct reliability are proposed for reliability. Item reliability is calculated via the squares of factor loads for each question and the results are expected to be higher than .50, also the questions that have a over score than .70 are accepted as excellent (Gulliksen, 1945 Ultimately, mean and standard deviation values of the scale items were calculated. Item-total correlation was examined for the relation between each items and general scale score. High correlation value with total scale score is an indicator of measuring degree of desired item for desired variable and it also demonstrates item reliability. Accordingly, correlation coefficients should not be negative and be higher than 0.25 (Şahin and Gülleroğlu, 2013).Lastly, t value in confirmatory factor analysis should be significant (Nejati, 2013  The coefficients ranged from .73 to .82 and were significant at the .00 level. Finally, t value in confirmatory factor analysis was found as significant. Item reliability was found between the range as .53-.67 and over .50. Item-total correlation coefficients of the scale were found as between .53-67, so as over . 25. A new version of empowering leadership scale, which is consisted of two dimensions and 5 questions in each dimension and has reliability and validity in Turkish, was reached as a result of the analysis. Note.CFI = comparative fit index; GFI = goodness of fit index; AGFI= adjusted goodness of fit index; normed fit index (NFI); non-normed fit index (NNFI); RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation. * model with acceptable fit.

Analysis and results
The most valid model is model 3 as seen in  Initially, explanatory factor analysis was performed for the scale KMO: 917, Barlett"s test is 2.553E3, (p<.01). Total variance explained is for both factorsare 62.368% and initial eigenvalues is 4.989. As it is seen, it is determined that the scale has one factor with 8 questions as it is in the original source.
In the second phase, confirmatory factor analysis was performed for the scale. In initial version of the scale, questions that defined with one dimension were identified similarly, however goodness-of-fit values could not be reached (Goodness-of- The coefficients ranged from .73 to .83 and were significant at the .00 level.Finally, t value in confirmatory factor analysis was found as significant. Item reliability was found between the range as .53-.69 and over .50. Item-total correlation coefficients of the scale were found as between .82-86. A new version of self-efficacy scale, which is consisted of one dimension and 4 questions and has reliability and validity in Turkish, was reached as a result of the analysis.  As seen in Table 7, the results of performed correlation analysis, a positive low correlation was discovered between the empowering leadership total score and self efficacy (r=.14). A correlation between age and empowering leadership was found as negatively and significantly (r=-.12) (p>.01). However, it could not be found that self-efficacy is correlated with age as statistically significant (p<.05). In Table 8, standardized value andtvaluesare exhibited. Accordingly, t values were found as statistically significant.

Fig.2. The Result Model
At the result of the path analysis done it has been determined the path coefficient between autonomy support and empowering leadership as .51 (p<.01). The path coefficient between development support and empowering leadership as .53 (p<.01). The path coefficient between autonomy support and development support as .69 (p<.01). In addition to that, in tested model, the path coefficient between empowering leadership and self-efficacy as .28 (p<.01). The path coefficient between development support and self-efficacy as .21 (p<.01). The path coefficient between autonomy support and selfefficacy as . 28 Fig.2).At the result of analysis, Hypothesis 1,Hypothesis 2, and Hypothesis 3have been accepted.

Discussion
As the results of the study, a new version of empowering leadership scale, which is consisted of 2 dimensions and 5 questions in each dimensions and has reliability and validity in Turkish, was reached. Moreover, a new self-efficacy scale that is insisted of one dimension and 4 questions and has reliability and validity in Turkish was obtained within the analyses. Another result of the study shows that empowering leadership as totally, the sub-dimension of empowering leadership, named as autonomy support and development support have a positive impact on self-efficacy.
Power, authority (Dierendonck & Dijkstra, 2012, p. 4), responsibility and control redound on employees as contribute to facts and tasks with their own ideas, decisions and feelings rather than the directions from their boss (Kuo and Lee, 2011, p. 116). On the other side, as the other main concept of the study, self-efficacy has associated with many health and social outcomes. The psychological, emotional and physical dimensions of self-efficacy can be predicted by health behaviors, life experiences, suicide attempts and addictive behaviors (Majer et al., 2015, p. 44) as supported by the study of Czyz et al. (2014, p. 699) and also physical activity goals as cited from the study of David et al. (2014, p. 573). Furthermore, selfefficacy is expressed as an important predictor of psychological and physical health, intention to quit and also associated with higher job satisfaction and lower burnout ( Autonomy, which is accepted as an indicator of preventing negative impacts of workload in terms of learning opportunities within the organization (Roca & Gagne, 2008, p. 1585; Ruysseveldt & Dijke, 2011, p. 478), and self-efficacy are associated closely that mentioned in many studies as also an effecting factor on performance (Neve, Devos, & Tuytens, 2015, p. 37). Self-efficacy leads the understanding process of pessimism and confusion (Garcia, Restubog, Bordia, Bordia, & Roxas, 2015, p. 11).Self-efficacy is associated with social support (Garcia et al., 2015, p. 15 efficacy enhances optimism, because it is beneficial for providing confidence in order to achieving goals, tasks and making decisions (Garcia et al., 2015, p. 16). As an example of health sector, nurses had a sense to enhance their activities, responsibilities, self-image and job satisfaction, as mentioned in the study of Yakubovich, Carmel, Zwanger and Zaltcman (1989) (Yakubovich, Carmel, Zwanger, & Zaltcman, 1989, p. 1315). Self-determination is assumed as an effecting factor on job demands, job control and personal accomplishment (Fernet, Guay, & Senecal, 2004, p. 52). Parker, Jimmieson and Amiot (2010) highlighted similar results in their study that was conducted employees of a health insurance organization, self-determination supports job control, greater engagement and lower health complaints (Parker, Jimmieson, & Amiot, 2010, p. 52). Conversely, the main reason of empowering barriers among healthcare employees can be classified as lack of resources and the structure of practical and clinical implementations (Scambler, Newton, Sinclair, & Asimakopoulou, 2012, p. e18), as considering the structure of health sector.
Followers can perceive empowering leadership as laissez-faire leadership because this type of leadership draws employees an uncertain and flexible picture within the organization, so employees can perceive this work environment as less effective (Humborstad & Giessner, 2015, p. 2). It would be better to explain the difference of empowering leaders as that they guide for employees by alternative ways such as face-to-face communication, participation of employees in decision making process, valuing and increasing willingness to express their opinions and views and providing reciprocal trusty behaviors within their relationship (Gao et

Future research
There are many studies showing that supporting right of choice and participation in decision process of employees are central point for gaining better organizational outcomes in the literature. Sustainable development, empowering leadership behaviors to employees, supporting participative climate would enhance job productivity of healthcare employees (Chang & Liu, 2008, p. 1446. Besides, the studies related with empowering and especially developmental support tools and the degree of use these implementations can be contribute to leadership review. Additionally, the studies should be conducted as designing a model with psychological and emotional variables in terms of supporting autonomy of employees and selfefficacy. It is also suggested that researchers should focus on the effects and relationship between communication between patients and healthcare employees and self-efficacy and empowering leadership behaviors.
Moreover, these concepts can result more clearly and presented job requirements with research models separately that insisted of not only hospitals but also employees and executives, who work in clinical departments such as intensive care units, operation rooms etc. by considering different management structure and legal implementation of health sector.
Higher autonomy support, broader opportunities for development and efforts for self-efficacy of healthcare employees can be a key role to prevent malpractice, which is one of the main problems of healthcare service quality and patient safety, therefore these concepts might be investigated with this perspective, as an outcome of health employees and institutions.