Refer to Table 1, the CFA results showed that the proposed model of five-factor of the Employee Trust Scale revealed that the majority of comparative fit indexes failed to reach the recommended standards for model fit [14, 15]. Standardized estimates for the measurement model for Employee Trust Scale showed a CFI of .723, a TLI of .867, a GFI of .874, and a RMSEA estimate of .074, and CMIN/DF of 3.804 (refer Table 1). The results suggested that the five-factor model of Employee Trust Scale did not fit the data well. The model exhibited covariance problem among the item (between item B50 and B65, B50 and B48, B60 and B59, B63 and B65) in Competency factor, covariance between (item B81 and B82, item B47 and B51) in Benevolence factor, covariance
…show more content…
The model exhibited covariance among the items in all five factors and some of the items showed insufficient value of regression weight. However, the modified measurement model retained 28 items out of 47 items with recommended quality standards and the model confirmed a better goodness of fit with data (CF= .929, a TLI= .920, GFI =. 844, RMSEA=.071, and CMIN/DF = 3.572). Each factor of the five-factor model has at least four items. It may be concluded that the modified measurement model reflected the local trust culture better and might be related to the Asian culture. It is also worth noted that the samples were drawn from various job sectors (navy, soldiers, bankers, white collar and blue collar workers). The context of trust might be different in each sector. The role of supervisors in each organization is different from other. For example in uniform bodies such as navy and military, the dimensions as well as determinants of trust towards supervisors are different from the one in banks, schools, hospitals and others. As it is suggested by Quinn, Reed, Browne, and Hiers[18] that “When one moves into the managerial structure of the large corporation or firm, one is not just moving into a ‘job’ but into a bureaucratic setting that contains its own social and cultural environment and rules of behavior. Therefore we can assume that sample heterogeneity in the present research might have effect on the results of Confirmatory factor Analysis. As some items in the scale developed by Chua et al. [9] may be relevant to a particular work sector only. Therefore, a larger and adequate proportion of each sector needs to be considered to gain better understanding and reevaluate the fit of the
The model exhibited covariance among the items in all five factors and some of the items showed insufficient value of regression weight. However, the modified measurement model retained 28 items out of 47 items with recommended quality standards and the model confirmed a better goodness of fit with data (CF= .929, a TLI= .920, GFI =. 844, RMSEA=.071, and CMIN/DF = 3.572). Each factor of the five-factor model has at least four items. It may be concluded that the modified measurement model reflected the local trust culture better and might be related to the Asian culture. It is also worth noted that the samples were drawn from various job sectors (navy, soldiers, bankers, white collar and blue collar workers). The context of trust might be different in each sector. The role of supervisors in each organization is different from other. For example in uniform bodies such as navy and military, the dimensions as well as determinants of trust towards supervisors are different from the one in banks, schools, hospitals and others. As it is suggested by Quinn, Reed, Browne, and Hiers[18] that “When one moves into the managerial structure of the large corporation or firm, one is not just moving into a ‘job’ but into a bureaucratic setting that contains its own social and cultural environment and rules of behavior. Therefore we can assume that sample heterogeneity in the present research might have effect on the results of Confirmatory factor Analysis. As some items in the scale developed by Chua et al. [9] may be relevant to a particular work sector only. Therefore, a larger and adequate proportion of each sector needs to be considered to gain better understanding and reevaluate the fit of the