Essay on Operationalizing Variables

By defining a construct conceptually, this means that one is providing the abstract or rather the theoretical meaning of that construct. This is the most common definition which concepts are defined. The conceptual meaning. On the other hand, operationally defining a construct means that one provides the meaning of that construct through outlining the various procedures that will be used to measure that constrict, through the use of various variables (the dependent and the independent variables) (Ary et al. The operationalization definition covers two aspects which include providing not only the conceptual meaning but also labeling or describing a particular instrument and process to measure the variable (Leggett, 2011). A certain level of fulfillment. It can be supported by other words such as pleasure, joy and even merit.

There are various ways to which happiness can be operationalized. Since happiness is a feeling or a particular state that an individual experiences, it can, therefore, be measured through the introduction of a certain number of behavioral aspects against which the level of happiness in an individual can be assessed. To measure happiness (Nani et al. It takes various variables which can be described as happy, sad, or even mixed amidst the two. The judgment of mood varies from one individual to another, which also makes it a hard construct to define (Gupte, 2007) universally. The mood is an emotional state that cannot be numerically quantified. This is to say, when someone asks another person how they are feeling, the answer will not be a specified mention of a number but rather a word description of how they feel.

However, there have been attempts, clinical attempts to develop tools with which mood can be measured on a given scale. Leadership is also a character trait and also a practical skill that cannot be the statistically or numerically quantified. To operationalize leadership, there are various variables against which the assessment is done. According to (Price, 2010), leadership is measured against factors such as self-confidence in achieving tasks, the skill of self-motivation and motivating others as well as other abilities such as communication proficiency and interpersonal skills. While (Graen et al. , 2010) identifies various challenges to operationalizing leadership such as individuals having different ways of applying their leadership abilities and presenting self-confidence, it, therefore, proposes that there is not the most appropriate way of operationalizing leadership to attain a universal scale that can be applied to every leader.

This is where an individual’s level or degree of motivation is assessed based on how he or she responds to the various aspects of work. In the particular tool by (Robben & Poiesz, 1993), there are five-dimensional features that are used to assess motivation. These include what drives an individual to work, where an individual who constantly works is perceived to be highly motivated. The level of motivation was found by summing up the score of the respective dimensions and evaluating them against a scale of 1-5 where 1 meant lowly motivated and 5 meant highly motivated. Motivation is also assessed by the level of effectiveness that an individual seeks while working. Issues in operationalizing and comparing leadership constructs. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(3), 563-575. Price, J.