Document Type : Original Article


1 Ph.D Candidate in Nursing, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Trauma Nursing Research Center, Kashan University of Medical Sciences

2 PhD in Nursing Education, Trauma Nursing Research Center, Kashan University of Medical Science,

3 PhD in Nursing Education, Trauma Nursing Research Center, Kashan University of Medical Science, Department of Operating Room, Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran


BACKGROUND: Structural empowerment (SE) is an effective method of advancing work
environments and has previously been widely discussed in Western countries. Due to the lack of
culturally and academically accepted scales in Iran for measuring SE, localization of a foreign scale
in this field is necessary.
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed at investigating the validity and reliability of the Persian Version of
the Conditions of Work Effectiveness Questionnaire‑II (CWEQ‑II‑PV) among Iranian nurses.
METHODS: The present cross‑sectional methodological research was conducted during 2017–2018.
Participants were 230 nurses working in four teaching hospitals affiliated to Kashan University of
Medical Sciences in Kashan, Iran, who were selected using quota sampling. A standard forward–
backward translation procedure according to Wild et al. (2005) was used to translate the English
Version of the CWEQ‑II to Persian. The psychometric evaluation processes were achieved by face,
content, and construct validity (confirmatory factor analysis [CFA]). Reliability was examined using
test–retest and Cronbach’s alpha for internal consistency reliability.
RESULTS: The CWEQ‑II‑PV showed good content validity (the mean content validity scores for
relevancy, clarity, and simplicity were 94%, 96%, and 94%, respectively). In the CFA, the original
six‑factor version with 19 items was confirmed. The original model was presented and incorporated in
the CFA, indicating an acceptable fit for the model (root mean square error of approximation = 0.06,
comparative fit index = 0.92, goodness of fit index (GFI) = 0.94, and adjusted GFI = 0.91). Cronbach’s
alpha coefficient for the total scale was 0.84 and for each component ranged from 0.71 to 0.87,
indicating good internal consistency, and the test–retest Spearman and intraclass correlation
coefficients were 0.93 and 0.87, respectively, showing good test–retest reliability.
CONCLUSIONS: Evidence was found to support the reliability and validity of the CWEQ‑II‑PV scale
that measures the quality of the work environment for nurses from a SE perspective.


  1. Adib Hajbaghery M, Salsali M. A model for empowerment of
    nursing in Iran. BMC Health Serv Res 2005;5:24.
    2. Sun N, Li QJ, Lv DM, Lu GZ, Lin P, An XM, et al. The psychometric
    properties of the Chinese version of the conditions of work
    effectiveness questionnaire‑II. J Nurs Manag 2014;22:848‑54.
    3. Valizadeh L, Zamanzadeh V, Habibzadeh H, Alilu L, Gillespie M,
    Shakibi A, et al. Experiences of Iranian nurses that intent to leave
    the clinical nursing: A content analysis. J Caring Sci 2016;5:169‑78.
    4. McCallin AM, Frankson C. The role of the charge nurse manager:
    A descriptive exploratory study. J Nurs Manag 2010;18:319‑25.
    5. Laschinger HK, Finegan J, Shamian J. Promoting nurses’ health:
    Effect of empowerment on job strain and work satisfaction. Nurs
    Econ 2001;19:42.
    6. Hagbaghery MA, Salsali M, Ahmadi F. The factors facilitating
    and inhibiting effective clinical decision‑making in nursing:
    A qualitative study. BMC Nurs 2004;3:2.
    7. Ahmad I, Manzoor SR. Effect of teamwork, employee
    empowerment and training on employee performance. Int J Acad
    Res Bus Soc Sci 2017;7:380‑94.
    8. Bradbury‑Jones C, Sambrook S, Irvine F. Power and empowerment
    in nursing: A fourth theoretical approach. J Adv Nurs
    9. Brancato V. Enhancing psychological empowerment for nurses.
    Pa Nurse 2006;61:31.
    10. Kennedy S, Hardiker N, Staniland K. Empowerment an essential
    ingredient in the clinical environment: A review of the literature.
    Nurse Educ Today 2015;35:487‑92.
    11. Watson LM. Leadership’s influence on job satisfaction. Radiol
    Technol 2009;80:297‑308.
    12. Miyashita M, Nakai Y, Sasahara T, Koyama Y, Shimizu Y,
    Tsukamoto N, et al. Nursing autonomy plays an important role
    in nurses’ attitudes toward caring for dying patients. Am J Hosp
    Palliat Care 2007;24:202‑10.
    13. Spence Laschinger HK, Wilk P, Cho J, Greco P. Empowerment,
    engagement and perceived effectiveness in nursing work
    environments: Does experience matter? J Nurs Manag
    14. Enns V, Currie S, Wang J. Professional autonomy and work setting
    as contributing factors to depression and absenteeism in Canadian
    nurses. Nurs Outlook 2015;63:269‑77.
    15. Lucas V, Laschinger HK, Wong CA. The impact of emotional
    intelligent leadership on staff nurse empowerment: The
    moderating effect of span of control. J Nurs Manag 2008;16:964‑73.
    16. Tao J, Jiping L. The relationship between empowerment and job
    strain in clinical nurses. Chin J Pract Nurs 2006;22:7‑9.
    17. Orgambídez‑Ramos A, Gonçalves G, Santos J, Borrego‑Alés Y,
    Mendoza‑Sierra MI. Empowering employees: A portuguese
    adaptation of the conditions of work effectiveness
    questionnaire (CWEQ‑II). Psicol Rev Assoc Port Psicol
    18. Laschinger HK, Finegan J, Shamian J, Wilk P. Impact of structural
    and psychological empowerment on job strain in nursing work
    settings: Expanding Kanter’s model. J Nurs Adm 2001;31:260‑72.
    19. Sarmiento TP, Laschinger HK, Iwasiw C. Nurse educators’
    workplace empowerment, burnout, and job satisfaction: Testing
    Kanter’s theory. J Adv Nurs 2004;46:134‑43.
    20. LoBiondo-Wood G, Haber J. Nursing Research-E-Book: Methods
    and Critical Appraisal for Evidence-Based Practice. 8th ed. China:
    Elsevier Health Sciences; 2014.
    21. Rode N. Translation of measurement instruments and their
    reliability: An example of job‑related affective well‑being scale.
    Metodoloski Zvezki 2005;2:15.
    22. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for
    the process of cross‑cultural adaptation of self‑report measures.
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000;25:3186‑91.
    23. Sperber AD. Translation and validation of study instruments for
    cross‑cultural research. Gastroenterology 2004;126:S124‑8.
    24. Severinsson E. Evaluation of the manchester clinical supervision
    scale: Norwegian and Swedish versions. J Nurs Manag
    25. Wild D, Grove A, Martin M, Eremenco S, McElroy S,
    Verjee‑Lorenz A, et al. Principles of good practice for the
    translation and cultural adaptation process for patient‑reported
    outcomes (PRO) measures: Report of the ISPOR task force for
    translation and cultural adaptation. Value Health 2005;8:94‑104.
    26. Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Streiner DL, King DR. Clinical impact
    versus factor analysis for quality of life questionnaire construction.
    J Clin Epidemiol 1997;50:233‑8.
    27. Lacasse Y, Godbout C, Sériès F. Health‑related quality of life in
    obstructive sleep apnoea. Eur Respir J 2002;19:499‑503.
    28. Waltz CF, Strickland OL, Lenz ER. Measurement in nursing
    and health research. 5th ed. United States: Springer publishing
    company; 2010.
    29. Mueller RO. Basic principles of structural equation modeling:
    An introduction to LISREL and EQS. 1st ed. New York: SpringerVerlag New York; 1999.
  2. 30. Seo DC, Torabi MR, Blair EH, Ellis NT. A cross‑validation of safety
    climate scale using confirmatory factor analytic approach. J Safety
    Res 2004;35:427‑45.
    31. Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling.
    4th ed. New York: Guilford publications; 2015.
    32. Gil‑Monte PR, Olivares Faúndez VE. Psychometric properties of
    the “Spanish burnout inventory” in chilean professionals working
    to physical disabled people. Span J Psychol 2011;14:441‑51.
    33. Loehlin JC. Latent variable models: An introduction to factor,
    path, and structural analysis. 5th ed. London: Routledge; 2017.
    34. Fornell C, Larcker DF. Evaluating structural equation models with
    unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res 1981;
    35. Kolagari S, Zagheri Tafreshi M, Rassouli M, Kavousi A.
    Psychometric evaluation of the role strain scale: The Persian
    version. Iran Red Crescent Med J 2014;16:e15469.
    36. Hawthorne D, Youngblut JM, Brooten D. Psychometric evaluation
    of the Spanish and english versions of the spiritual coping
    strategies scale. J Nurs Meas 2011;19:46‑54.
    37. Helsen K, Van den Bussche E, Vlaeyen JW, Goubert L.
    Confirmatory factor analysis of the dutch intolerance of
    uncertainty scale: Comparison of the full and short version.
    J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry 2013;44:21‑9.
    38. Polit DF, Beck CT. Nursing research: Generating and assessing
    evidence for nursing practice. United States: Lippincott Williams
    & Wilkins; 2008.
    39. Polit DF, Beck CT. Essentials of nursing research: Appraising
    evidence for nursing practice. 4th ed. London: Lippincott Williams
    & Wilkins; 2014.
    40. LautiziM, LaschingerHK, RavazzoloS. Workplace empowerment,
    job satisfaction and job stress among Italian mental health nurses:
    An exploratory study. J Nurs Manag 2009;17:446‑52.
    41. Wong CA, Laschinger HK. Authentic leadership, performance,
    and job satisfaction: The mediating role of empowerment. J Adv
    Nurs 2013;69:947‑59.
    42. Jáimez Román MJ, Bretones FD. Spanish adaptation of the
    structural empowerment scale. Span J Psychol 2013;16:E15.
    43. Streiner DL, Norman GR, Cairney J. Health Measurement Scales:
    A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. USA: Oxford
    University Press; 2015.
    44. Houser J. Nursing research: Reading, using and creating evidence.
    3rd ed. United States: Jones & Bartlett Publishers; 2013.