Development and Validation of the Corporate University Inventory for Universities of Medical Sciences

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Department of Educational Management, Isf.C., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran

2 Community-Oriented Nursing Midwifery Research Center, Nursing and Midwifery School, Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences, Shahrekord, Iran

10.30491/hpr.2026.592257.1545
Abstract
Background: Corporate universities serve as strategic frameworks for continuous organizational learning and human capital development, especially within complex healthcare and medical education systems.
Objectives: This study aimed to design and psychometrically evaluate the Corporate University Inventory specifically tailored for Universities of Medical Sciences by assessing content validity, construct validity via confirmatory factor analysis, convergent and divergent validity, and internal consistency reliability.
Methods: Conducted in 2025, this exploratory mixed-methods research targeted educational management authorities and medical education experts in Iran. The qualitative sample comprised 15 purposively selected experts, whereas the quantitative phase involved 265 senior specialists chosen via quota-based stratified sampling. Data were gathered utilizing semi-structured interviews and a researcher-developed questionnaire. Analytical procedures encompassed conventional content analysis, Content Validity Ratio (CVR), Content Validity Index (CVI), and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), utilizing SPSS and AMOS software.
Results: The five core categories (foundational drivers, organizational prerequisites, executive barriers, implementation strategies, and functional achievements) were inductively derived through conventional content analysis until theoretical saturation, refined by expert panel review, and confirmed by CFA. The inventory contains 172 items across 36 components. Content validity was confirmed (CVR ≥ 0.62 for all items per Lawshe's table; I-CVI > 0.80; S-CVI/Ave = 0.91). CFA showed good fit (CFI = 0.94, TLI = 0.93, RMSEA = 0.058, SRMR = 0.047). The five factors explained 71.8% of variance. Convergent validity (AVE = 0.50-0.56) and divergent validity were supported. Composite reliability and Cronbach's alpha both reached 0.92.
Conclusion: The developed inventory is a psychometrically rigorous and highly reliable instrument. It offers healthcare institutions a standardized evaluation framework that may support the implementation of corporate university models, while recognizing that current validation rests on self-reported data and further longitudinal and multi-context studies are needed.

Keywords


1.    Ukwandu E, Omisade O, Jones K, Thorne S, Castle M. The future of teaching and learning in the context of emerging artificial intelligence technologies. Futures. 2025;171:103616. doi:10.1016/j.futures.2025.103616
2.    Noe RA, Clarke AD, Klein HJ. Learning in the twenty-first-century workplace. Annu Rev Organ Psychol Organ Behav. 2014;1(1):245-75. doi:10.1146/annurev -orgpsych-031413-091321
3.    Han Y, Zhou Y, Carr S, Jiang J. Lifelong learning in the workplace: the knowledge management role of corporate universities in China. Humanit Soc Sci Commun. 2024;11(1):189. doi:10.1057/s41599-024-02693-3
4.    Gudissa ZA, Pittino D, Bayiley YT, Eslami M. Strategy-making at higher education institutions: faculty member’s academic engagement with industry and strategy participation. Cogent Educ. 2025;12(1): 2588541. doi:10.1080/2331186X.2025.2588541
5.    Shakina E, Barajas Á, Sánchez-Fernández P. Revisiting corporate universities: Strategic choices shaping performance in telecom. Heliyon. 2024;10(14): e34314. doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e34314
6.    Ferede WL, Getahun DA. Strategic leadership and change management: a systematic and meta-analysis. J Innov Entrepreneurship. 2026;15(1):32. doi:10.1 186/s13731-026-00623-y 
7.    Chen Y, Xu Y, Zhai Q. The knowledge management functions of corporate university and their evolution: case studies of two Chinese corporate universities. J Knowl Manag. 2019;23(10):2086–112. doi:10.1108/ JKM-04-2018-0228
8.    Frenk J, Chen L, Bhutta ZA, Cohen J, Crisp N, Evans T, et al. Health professionals for a new century: transforming education to strengthen health systems in an interdependent world. Lancet. 2010;376(9756): 1923–58. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(10)61854-5
9.    Dzau VJ, Cho A, Ellaissi W, Yoediono Z, Sangvai D, Shah B, et al. Transforming academic health centers for an uncertain future. N Engl J Med. 2013; 369(11):991–3. doi:10.1056/NEJMp1302374
10.    Botchwey CO, Kondo OA, Asimeng M, Opoku-Mensah FA. Operational or Paper Work? Management and Control of Inventory in Two Public Hospitals in Ghana: Health Leaders’ Viewpoint. Hosp Pract Res. 2025;10(2):659-66. doi:10.30491/hpr.2025.50782 3.1475
11.    Ahmady S, Kalantarion M, Shahbazi S, Bagheri S, Sohrabi S, Babaei S, et al. Integration of medical education into the Iranian health system from the perspective of experts: A qualitative analysis. J Educ Health Promot. 2025;14:274. doi:10.4103/jehp. jehp_219_24 
12.    Jamshidi Z, Aieen M, Jafari-Oori M. University innovation and start-ups: Barriers and facilitators experienced by nursing faculties - A content analysis study. Nurs Open. 2024;11(5):e2190. doi:10.1002/ nop2.2190
13.    O’Dwyer M, Filieri R, O’Malley L. Establishing successful university–industry collaborations: barriers and enablers deconstructed. J Technol Transfer. 2023;48(3):900-31. doi:10.1007/s10961-022-09932-2
14.    Reineke R-D, Gottschall O. Sustainable Learning Architectures for Corporate Universities as Platforms for Intrapreneurship and Change in an International Context. In: Verkuil AH, Milow U, Hinz A, Al-Kilani M, editors. Innovating Business and Education for Sustainable Development. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland; 2025. pp. 443–73.
15.    Heshmati H, Shakibazadeh E, Foroushani AR, Sadeghi R. A comprehensive model of health education barriers of health-care system in Iran. J Educ Health Promot. 2020;9:106. doi:10.4103/jehp.jehp_23_20
16.    de Kok K, van der Scheer W, Ketelaars C, Leistikow I. Organizational attributes that contribute to the learning & improvement capabilities of healthcare organizations: a scoping review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2023;23(1):585. doi:10.1186/s12913-023-09562-w
17.    Van Schalkwyk SC, Couper ID, Blitz J, De Villiers MR. A framework for distributed health professions training: using participatory action research to build consensus. BMC Med Educ. 2020;20(1):154. doi:10.1186/s12909-020-02046-z
18.    Dogan YO, Arditi D, Irlayıcı Cakmak P. Corporate Universities in Building Construction Companies: Evidence from the U.S. Int J Constr Educ Res. 2026; 22(1):96–118. doi:10.1080/15578771.2025.2468433
19.    Forsetlund L, O'Brien MA, Forsén L, Reinar LM, Okwen MP, Horsley T, et al. Continuing education meetings and workshops: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021;9(9):Cd003030. doi:10.100 2/14651858.CD003030.pub3
20.    Al Salmi Q, Al Fannah J, de Roodenbeke E. The imperative of professionalising healthcare management: A global perspective. Future Healthc J. 2024;11(3): 100170. doi:10.1016/j.fhj.2024.100170
21.    Vahdat S, Tanhaei N, Najafi S, Salemi MH, Karbasian F. Investigating the barriers to clinical education among medical students in Iran: A narrative review study. J Family Med Prim Care. 2022;11(12):7537–42. doi:10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_994_21
22.    Edmondson A. Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Adm Sci Q. 1999;44(2):350–83. doi:10.2307/2666999
23.    Rotea CC, Ploscaru AN, Bocean CG, Vărzaru AA, Mangra MG, Mangra GI. The Link between HRM Practices and Performance in Healthcare: The Mediating Role of the Organizational Change Process. Healthcare. 2023;11(9). doi:10.3390/healthcare11 091236
24.    Godfrey CM, Kircher C, Ashoor HM, Ross-White A, Glandon L, Wilson R, et al. Absorptive capacity in the adoption of innovations in health: a scoping review. JBI Evid Synth. 2023;21(1):6–32. doi:10.11124/jbies-21-00436

Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript
Available Online from 30 September 2026