Organizational healing: Development and validation of a multidimensional scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Organizational Healing (OH) refers to the process through which workplaces restore positive relationships and social interactions after traumatic events or crises. This study develops and validates a reliable and psychometrically sound scale to measure the key enablers of OH in organizations. The scale items were drawn from broad dimensions of the existing literature, such as Trust in Leadership, Empathetic Leadership, Empathetic Teams, Visionary Leadership, Unambiguous Communication, Change Management, Employee Empowerment, and Positivity. Scale items were generated and refined through expert consultation to ensure clarity and face validity. The scale was then empirically tested using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis to establish reliability, as well as convergent and discriminant validity. The validated scale contributes to both scholarship and practice by providing a systematic framework for assessing an organization's capacity for healing after disruption or change. In practice, the instrument helps leaders to diagnose cultural strengths and vulnerabilities, guide interventions that foster trust and empathy, and design effective change management strategies.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".