Specialty Training’s Organizational Readiness for curriculum Change (STORC): validation of a questionnaire

Figures & data

Table 1 STORC: final questionnaire

STORCa
Pressure to change
Current pressures to implement this innovation in residency training comes from
1. Trainees in the program
2. Clinical teaching staff
3. Program directors
Appropriateness
This innovation in residency training is appropriate for the situation being addressed.
4. This change will improve the knowledge and skills of our trainees
5. This change is tailored to the needs for change within our residency training
6. This change will be an improvement over our current practices
Necessity to change
There is a need for change
7. There is a significant difference between the current state and the desired state of residency training
8. We need to improve our residency training curriculum
9. A change is needed to improve our residency training curriculum
Management support and leadership
The educational board (hospital level)
10. Is committed to this change
11. Provides the time and resources required to implement this change
Staff culture
Clinical staff members
12. Feel a sense of personal responsibility to improve training
13. Cooperate to maintain and improve effectiveness of training
14. Are willing to innovate and/or experiment to improve training
15. Are receptive to changes in training methods
16. Share responsibility for the success of this project
17. Work together as a team
18. Discuss this change with trainees in both formal and informal situations
The formal leader of this innovation in residency training (eg, the program director)
19. Accepts responsibility for the success of this project
20. Has the authority to carry out the implementation of this change
21. Cooperates well with the clinical staff members
Involvement in this innovation in residency training
22. Formal educational leaders communicated well with us about the policy toward this change
23. Information provided about this change is clear
24. We are sufficiently consulted about the change
25. We are informed about the reasons for change
26. Trainees are willing to innovate and/or experiment to improve training
27. We have the skills that are needed to implement this change
Project resources
The following are available to successfully implement this innovation in residency training:
28. Financial resources
29. Training
30. Facilities
31. Staffing
32. Equipment and materials
33. Trainee awareness of this change
34. Incorporation of trainee needs
35. Evaluation protocol
Clarity of mission and goals of this innovation in residency training
36. We understand how this change fits in with the desired competences of trainees
37. This curriculum change has clear goals and objectives
38. Our duties are clearly related to the goals of this change
The implementation plan for this innovation in residency training
39. Identifies specific roles and responsibilities
40. Clearly describes tasks and timelines
41. Includes appropriate training
42. Acknowledges our input and opinions
43. Includes a plan for improvement based on evaluations

Notes: Bold text: subscales of the questionnaire.

a Item numbers were adapted after the removal of 1 item in subscale 1.

Abbreviation: STORC, Specialty Training’s Organizational Readiness for curriculum Change.

Table 2 Confirmatory factor analysis and reliability analysis

Factor (F)a	Mean (SD)	Loading	α	R-SEMb
F1: pressure to change			0.609	7
Item 1	3.40 (0.94)	0.552^*1
Item 2	3.04 (0.89)	0.758
Item 3	4.04 (0.79)	0.552^*1
F2: appropriateness			0.836	7
Item 5	3.64 (0.80)	0.850^*2
Item 6	3.43 (0.82)	0.850^*2
Item 7	3.64 (0.82)	0.850^*2
F3: necessity to change			0.834	8
Item 8	3.19 (0.93)	0.725
Item 9	3.59 (0.79)	0.927^*3
Item 10	3.44 (0.86)	0.927^*3
F4: management support and leadership			0.544	7
Item 11	3.69 (0.71)	0.673^*4
Item 12	2.97 (0.93)	0.673^*4
F5: staff culture			0.877	5
Item 13	3.59 (0.81)	0.773
Item 14	3.73 (0.70)	0.847^*5
Item 15	3.62 (0.78)	0.847^*5
Item 16	3.53 (0.74)	0.847^*5
Item 17	3.46 (0.79)	0.727^*6
Item 18	3.64 (0.85)	0.727^*6
Item 19	3.63 (0.80)	0.727^*6
F6: formal leader			0.830	6
Item 20	3.96 (0.72)	0.851^*7
Item 21	3.91 (0.72)	0.851^*7
Item 22	3.79 (0.74)	0.851^*7
F7: involvement			0.797	5
Item 23	3.41 (0.80)	0.789^*8
Item 24	3.36 (0.79)	0.789^*8
Item 25	3.17 (0.88)	0.789^*8
Item 26	3.35 (0.87)	0.789^*8
Item 27	3.74 (0.67)	0.570^*9
Item 28	3.67 (0.67)	0.570^*9
F8: project resources			0.842	5
Item 29	2.85 (0.91)	0.525
Item 30	3.51 (0.76)	0.732^*10
Item 31	3.45 (0.81)	0.732^*10
Item 32	3.27 (0.88)	0.732^*10
Item 33	3.44 (0.77)	0.732^*10
Item 34	3.63 (0.72)	0.732^*10
Item 35	3.39 (0.77)	0.732^*10
Item 36	3.11 (0.85)	0.732^*10
F9: clarity of mission and goals			0.836	7
Item 37	3.51 (0.79)	0.853^*11
Item 38	3.43 (0.77)	0.853^*11
Item 39	3.29 (0.79)	0.853^*11
F10: implementation plan			0.853	6
Item 40	3.44 (0.75)	0.803^*12
Item 41	3.21 (0.81)	0.803^*12
Item 42	3.29 (0.79)	0.803^*12
Item 43	3.22 (0.85)	0.803^*12
Item 44	3.19 (0.84)	0.803^*12

Notes: Means and SD per item along with item-factor loadings and fit statistics resulting from confirmatory factor analysis, Cronbach’s alpha values (α) per factor, and raters required for a sufficient SEM for the STORC final questionnaire. CFI =0.942, TLI =0.938, RMSEA =0.052. Superscripts ^*1–^*12 denote equality constraints (ie, loadings fixed to be equal).

a Item numbers based on original questionnaire.

b R-SEM = number of raters required for SEM <0.26.

Abbreviations: SEM, standard error of measurement; STORC, Specialty Training’s Organizational Readiness for curriculum Change; SD, standard deviation; CFI, comparative fit index; TLI, Tucker–Lewis index; RMSEA, root mean square error of approximation.

Table 3 Factor–factor correlations of STORC resulting from the confirmatory factor analysis reported in Table 2

Factor (F)	Correlations
	F1	F2	F3	F4	F5	F6	F7	F8	F9	F10
F1: pressure to change	–
F2: appropriateness	0.368	–
F3: necessity to change	0	0.160	–
F4: management support and leadership	0.109	0.134	−0.285	–
F5: staff culture	0.370	0.129	−0.333	0.296	–
F6: formal leader	0.225	0.143	−0.218	0.267	0.380	–
F7: involvement	0.176	0.349	−0.194	0.302	0.227	0.410	–
F8: project resources	0.219	0.233	0	0.498	0.304	0.283	0.441	–
F9: clarity of mission and goals	0.219	0.461	0	0.282	0.275	0.287	0.600	0.453	–
F10: implementation plan	0.227	0.218	0	0.276	0.292	0.298	0.501	0.508	0.591	–

Note: Correlations of “0” have been fixed to zero.

Abbreviation: STORC, Specialty Training’s Organizational Readiness for curriculum Change.

Table 4 Correlations between the factors (ie, subscales) of STORC and the behavioral support-for-change scores

Factor (F)	Behavioral support-for-change score
	Own score	Team score
F1: pressure to change	0.360	0.457
F2: appropriateness	0.496	0.258
F3: necessity to change	0.112	−0.178
F4: management support and leadership	0.260	0.398
F5: staff culture	0.273	0.538
F6: formal leader	0.311	0.396
F7: involvement	0.386	0.366
F8: project resources	0.303	0.378
F9: clarity of mission and goals	0.446	0.385
F10: implementation plan	0.321	0.363

Note: The correlation between resistance scores is 0.457.

Abbreviation: STORC, Specialty Training’s Organizational Readiness for curriculum Change.

Table 5 Final subscales, number of items per subscale, and original subscales from which STORC was adapted

Subscale	No of items	Original subscale
Pressure to change	3	Pressure for change^Citation23
Appropriateness	3	Organizational valence,^Citation24 commitment to change^Citation17
Necessity to change	3	Discrepancy^Citation24
Management support and leadership	2	Senior leadership support^Citation24
Staff culture	7	Staff culture,^Citation22 staff cohesiveness,^Citation23 implementation team roles^Citation22
The formal leader	3	Clinical champion^Citation22
Involvement	6	Involvement,^Citation25 commitment^Citation26
Project recourses	8	Project resources and context,^Citation22 general resources^Citation22
Clarity of mission and goals	3	Clarity of mission and goals^Citation23
The implementation plan	5 43	Implementation plan^Citation22

Abbreviation: STORC, Specialty Training’s Organizational Readiness for curriculum Change.

HelfrichCDLiYFSharpNDSalesAEOrganizational readiness to change assessment (ORCA): development of an instrument based on the Promoting Action on Research in Health Services (PARIHS) frameworkImplement Sci200943819594942

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

LehmanWEGreenerJMSimpsonDDAssessing organizational readiness for changeJ Subst Abuse Treat200222419720912072164

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

HerscovitchLMeyerJPCommitment to organizational change: extension of a three-component modelJ Appl Psychol200287347448712090605

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

FrankJRCanMEDS 2005 Physician Competency Framework: Better Standards, Better Physicians, Better CareOttawa, ONRoyal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada2005

 Google Scholar

HoltDArmenakisAFeildHHarrisSReadiness for organizational change: the systematic development of scaleJ Appl Behav Sci2007432232255

 Google Scholar

BouckenoogheDDevosGvan den BroeckHOrganizational change questionnaire – climate of change, processes, and readiness: development of a new instrumentJ Psychol2009143655959919957876

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar