Team insecurity as a multi-level and multi-dimensional construct: Scale development and validation

Abstract

Although team downsizing or team restructuring initiatives have frequently taken place in contemporary organizations, very little research has been conducted on the issue of team insecurity. Drawing on Kim, Shin, and Rim’s, Korean Journal of Management 25, 257–280 (2017) theoretical framework, which proposes team insecurity as a multi-level and multi-dimensional construct, this study aims to develop a scale assessing team insecurity and test its validity. Team insecurity refers to an employee’s perceptions of and affective reactions to the continuity of his or her team. The employee’s perception of team insecurity can also be shared within a team, which ultimately form an insecurity climate in the team. In Study 1, we developed a multi-dimensional scale of team insecurity, which consisted of four dimensions: (1) perceived team restructuring; (2) perceived team relative status; (3) perceived team composition; and (4) overall affective reaction. We assessed the four-factor structure of team insecurity and its discriminant validity by using a sample of 248 employees. In Study 2, we tested the predictive validity of team insecurity by using survey data from 280 employees in 75 teams. The test of the predictive validity showed that employees’ perceptions of team insecurity significantly predicted their intention to leave and alternative job search, whereas team insecurity climate significantly predicted team creativity and team organizational citizenship behavior. These findings provide initial support for the construct of team insecurity.

Appendices

Appendix 1. The items of team insecurity

• 1. Perceived Team Restructuring (TR)

TR1: I think that the tasks allocated to my team will alter in a way that does not correspond with the team.

TR2: I think that there is a large possibility in the near future that my team’s tasks will be partly outsourced or subcontracted.

TR3: My team will most likely be the first to be disbanded or downsized during reorganization.

TR4: My team will most likely be merged with another team during reorganization.

• 2. Perceived Team Relative Status (TRS)

TRS1: I am discriminated by other departments in the organization because I am a member of my current team.

TRS2: I thing I am underrated in my performance appraisals compared to members in other departments because I am a member of my current team.

TRS3: My team is not beneficial for me to get a promotion or to personally succeed in the organization.

TRS4: I thing transferring to another team will be beneficial for me to get a promotion or to personally succeed in the organization.

TRS5: I feel that my team is disregarded by other teams in the organization.

• 3. Perceived Team Composition (TC)

TC1: My team is highly insecure due to the frequent replacement of team members.

TC2: My team is highly insecure due to the high turnover of team members.

TC3: My team is highly insecure because my team consists of members who have worked for a short period of time.

TC4: My team’s status is low in the organization because my team consists of low-rank employees.

• 4. Overall Affective Reaction (AR)

AR1: I am concerned that my team will be disbanded or downsized

AR2: I am worried that my team will be merged with another team

AR3: I feel strained that my team’s status is unstable within the organization

AR4: I am concerned about my team’s future

AR5: I am pessimistic about my team’s future

Appendix 2. Back-translation procedure

In Studies 1 and 2, we used the back-translation procedure suggested by Brislin’s (1970) and Reynolds et al. (1993). That is, to ensure a match between original survey items and their translation, survey items originally written in Korean was translated into English and then back-translated into Korean by two Korean-English bilingual scholars. Likewise, survey items originally written in English were back-translated through the same procedure.