Evaluating Physical Therapists' Perception of Empowerment Using Kanter's Theory of Structural Power in Organizations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Little is known about physical therapists' perceptions of empowerment. In this study, Kanter's theory of structural power in organizations was used to examine physical therapists' perceptions of empowerment in a large Canadian urban teaching hospital. Kanter's theory, which has been studied extensively in the nursing profession, proposes that power in organizations is derived from access to information, support, resources, opportunity, and proportions. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A convenience sample of physical therapists who had been working in the hospital longer than 3 months was used to determine the scores for the physical therapists' ratings of empowerment using the Conditions of Work Effectiveness Questionnaire. RESULTS: Physical therapists' scores were similar to reported staff nurses' scores for access to support, information, resources, and opportunity (mean=2.89, 2.91, 2.62, 3.25, respectively). Physical therapists' scores were higher than the majority of reported staff nurses' and nurse managers' scores for access to sources of informal and formal power structures (mean=2.81 and 3.29, respectively). There was a relationship between the empowerment score and the physical therapists' global rating of empowerment. Unlike studies of nurses, there were no relationships when demographic attributes and empowerment scores were examined. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Evidence for the validity of Kanter's theory of empowerment was found. Kanter's theory can provide physical therapists and their managers with a useful framework for examining critical organizational factors (access to information, support, opportunity, and resources) that contribute to employees' perceptions of empowerment. A baseline measure for comparing future empowerment scores of this sample is available. Further work to examine the application of Kanter's theory to other samples of physical therapists appears to be warranted.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".