Rejoinder to article by Harold M Shroder: The fallacy of using in-basket based measures for the validation of leadership dimensions

Abstract

A response is given to the critical questions and concerns raised by Schroder (2004) on the validation study by Spangenberg and Theron (2003). The importance of open debate as an expression of scientific rationally in service of the epistemic ideal of science is acknowledged. Schroder’s (2004) concern essentially centers on the use of the inbasket as a stand-alone measure and the appropriateness of the design of the Spangenberg and Theron (2003) study for the investigation of the validity of the HPLC’s. The objectives of the Spangenberg and Theron (2003) study are re-examined. The prudence of using and validating the in-basket as a stand-alone measure is discussed. Opsomming Repliek word gelewer op die kritise vrae en besorgdhede wat deur Schroder (2004) geopper word oor die validasiestudie van Spangenberg en Theron (2003). Die belang van ’n oop gesprek as manifestasie van die rasionaliteit van wetenskap in diens van die epistemiese ideal word erken. Schroder (2004) se kommer sentreer wesenlik rondom die gebruik van die posmandjie as ‘n meetinstrument in eie reg en die toepaslikheid van die ontwerp van die Spangenberg en Theron (2003) studie vir die validasie van die HPLC’s. Die doelstellings van die Spangenberg en Theron (2003) studie word weer in oënskou geneem. Die wysheid om die posmandjie as ’n meetinstrument in eie reg te gebruik en te valideer word bespreek.

Keywords

• Validation of leadership dimensions
• Harold M Shroder
• In-basket based measures