Correction to: ‘Does TQM improve employees’ quality of work life? Empirical evidence from Malaysia's manufacturing firms’

Figures & data

Table 5. Assessment of discriminant validity.

	LD	CF	IA	PM	HRM	SP
LD	0.796
CF	0.570	0.836
IA	0.647	0.713	0.766
PM	0.633	0.698	0.718	0.791
HRM	0.571	0.630	0.753	0.699	0.744
SP	0.753	0.684	0.777	0.760	0.653	0.729
Notes: N = 202. LD = Leadership; SP = strategic planning; CF = customer focus; HRM = human resource management; PM = process management; IA = information and analysis. Diagonal elements (bold) are the square root of the AVE for each construct. Off-diagonal factors demonstrate the shared variance.

Table 5. Assessment of discriminant validity.

	LD	CF	IA	PM	HRM	SP
LD	0.796
CF	0.570	0.766
IA	0.647	0.713	0.729
PM	0.633	0.698	0.718	0.744
HRM	0.571	0.630	0.753	0.699	0.791
SP	0.753	0.684	0.777	0.760	0.653	0.836
Notes: N = 202. LD = leadership; SP = strategic planning; CF = customer focus; HRM = human resource management; PM = process management; IA = information and analysis. Diagonal elements (bold) are the square root of the AVE for each construct. The authors would like to apologise for these oversights.