World Journal of Management Vol. 3. No. 2. September 2011 Pp. 131-152 The Construct Validity of Organizational Structure Scale: Evidence from Malaysia Johanim Johari, Khulida Kirana Yahya and Abdullah Omar This study attempts to examine the psychometric properties of the organizational structure construct, which integrates four subscales- centralized decision making, centralized hierarchy of authority, formalized job codification, and formalized rule observation using a Malay language version of the instrument developed by Hage and Aiken (1967). A priori proposition was made that organizational structure could be explained by the four aforementioned factors. SPSS version 14 and AMOS 16 were used to analyze the data. The results found support for the fact that organizational structure can be measured by the four theorized factors. The findings also showed acceptable internal consistency reliability for the overall and the four specific subscales of organizational structure factor. Based on the results, it can be concluded that the Malay-translated version of the Hage and Aiken’s (1967) measure can be a useful and appropriate tool in assessing the organizational structure construct. Field of Research: Human Resource Management, Organizational Behavior 1. Introduction The conception of the organizational structure construct has come a long way since it was first established by Porter and Lawler (1965). The term has been defined as “positions and parts of organizations and their systematically and relatively enduring relationships to each other” (Porter & Lawler 1965, p.24). They also categorized seven interrelated factors under organizational structure. Based on Porter and Lawler‟s (1965) proposition, Hage and Aiken (1967) had later simplified the conceptualization of the organizational structure construct. According to Hage and Aiken (1967), organizational structure has been defined as practices being undertaken in an organization with regard to policies, procedures, and rules. Two important features of organizational structure are formalization and centralization, which can further be subdivided into four sub-dimensions: decision- making, hierarchy of authority, job codification, and rule observation (Hage & Aiken 1967; Hall 1991; Matherly 1985). Under the formalization construct, job codification has been defined as the level to which an organization precisely spells out rules and procedures related to jobs in different situations while rule observation refers to the extent to which an organization rigidly adheres to the rules and procedures. In other words, this construct measures how far employees are supervised to ensure that they are not committing any offense against the company‟s rules and regulations (Hage & Aiken, 1967). Additionally, centralization deals with the amount of power distributed among employees of various positions. This variable is measured in terms of hierarchy of authority and centralized decision-making. According to Hage and Aiken (1967), the former examines the level subordinates are reliant upon their supervisors in decision-making while the latter identifies the level of employees‟ involvement in decisions on resource allocation and policy formation.