ISSN: 2222-6990
Open access
This study assesses the content validity of a questionnaire intended to capture information-management capabilities and inventory replenishment decision processes among small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Guided by organisational information-processing theory and established scale-development principles, the instrument initially comprised 27 items representing seven constructs: information governance, data integration capability, information quality, analytical capability, decision information use, replenishment decision uncertainty, and replenishment decision effectiveness. The item-level evaluation records ratings by six assessors using a four-point relevance scale. Item-level content validity (I-CVI), average scale-level content validity (S-CVI/Ave), and universal-agreement content validity (S-CVI/UA) were calculated. Eighteen items received unanimous relevance endorsement, six were endorsed by five assessors, and three by four assessors. Twenty-four of 27 items met the I-CVI screening criterion of 0.78, yielding S-CVI/Ave = 0.926 and S-CVI/UA = 0.667. The three flagged items—DIU4, RDU4, and RDE3—require closer attention to conceptual boundaries between information use, uncertainty and outcomes. The study contributes an item-level content-validation account and an explicit revision trail for an SME inventory questionnaire. Content relevance is a necessary, but not sufficient, basis for later evidence of dimensionality, reliability, response processes or criterion validity.
Abraham, R., Schneider, J., & vom Brocke, J. (2019). Data governance: A conceptual framework, structured review, and research agenda. International Journal of Information Management, 49, 424–438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.07.008
Boateng, G. O., Neilands, T. B., Frongillo, E. A., Melgar-Quiñonez, H. R., & Young, S. L. (2018). Best practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: A primer. Frontiers in Public Health, 6, Article 149. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00149
Galbraith, J. R. (1974). Organization design: An information processing view. Interfaces, 4(3), 28–36. https://doi.org/10.1287/inte.4.3.28
Goel, K., Martin, N., & ter Hofstede, A. H. M. (2024). Demystifying data governance for process mining: Insights from a Delphi study. Information & Management, 61(5), Article 103973. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2024.103973
Haynes, S. N., Richard, D. C. S., & Kubany, E. S. (1995). Content validity in psychological assessment: A functional approach to concepts and methods. Psychological Assessment, 7(3), 238–247. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.238
Hinkin, T. R. (1998). A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods, 1(1), 104–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442819800100106
Koller, I., Levenson, M. R., & Glück, J. (2017). What do you think you are measuring? A mixed-methods procedure for assessing the content validity of test items and theory-based scaling. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 126. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00126
Lem, K. W. (2024). Data analytics strategy and internal information quality. Contemporary Accounting Research, 41(2), 1376–1410. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12942
Polit, D. F., Beck, C. T., & Owen, S. V. (2007). Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 30(4), 459–467. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20199
Teerasoponpong, S., & Sopadang, A. (2022). Decision support system for adaptive sourcing and inventory management in small- and medium-sized enterprises. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 73, Article 102226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcim.2021.102226
Wang, R. Y., & Strong, D. M. (1996). Beyond accuracy: What data quality means to data consumers. Journal of Management Information Systems, 12(4), 5–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.1996.11518099
Yusoff, M. S. B. (2019). ABC of content validation and content validity index calculation. Education in Medicine Journal, 11(2), 49–54. https://doi.org/10.21315/eimj2019.11.2.6
Zaid, A. A. M., & Hussin, A. R. C. (2024). From ink to insight: A methodology review of questionnaire design and validation for crowdfunding in social media. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 14(1), 1156–1171. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v14-i1/20530
Zamanzadeh, V., Ghahramanian, A., Rassouli, M., Abbaszadeh, A., Alavi-Majd, H., & Nikanfar, A.-R. (2015). Design and implementation content validity study: Development of an instrument for measuring patient-centered communication. Journal of Caring Sciences, 4(2), 165–178. https://doi.org/10.15171/jcs.2015.017
Ismail, N. A., & Zaid, A. A. M. (2026). Measuring What Matters: Content-Validity Assessment of an Information Management and Inventory Replenishment Decision Instrument for SMEs. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 16(10), 1342–1352.
Copyright: © 2026 The Author(s)
Published by HRMARS (www.hrmars.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode