Development and Validation of a Japanese Version of the Humble Leadership Scale for Healthcare Professionals.

BACKGROUND

"Humble leadership", characterized by accurate self-awareness, appreciation of others' strengths, and openness to learning, is associated with psychological safety and work engagement within healthcare teams. However, a validated instrument tailored to the Japanese clinical context has been lacking, and existing scales developed in Western organizational settings may not capture culturally salient dimensions of humility.

METHODS

We translated Chintakananda's nine-item Humble Leadership Scale into Japanese and evaluated its reliability and validity among Japanese healthcare professionals (physicians, nurses, and pharmacists aged 30-59 years; n = 494), assessing confirmatory factor analysis, internal consistency (Cronbach's α and McDonald's ω), and construct-related validity against the Owens Expressed Humility Scale, Psychological Safety Scale, and Utrecht Work Engagement Scale.

RESULTS

The initial nine-item single-factor model revealed a very low factor loading for one reverse-scored item (0.09); given this, together with a low item-total correlation for this item in the main sample, we excluded it and adopted the remaining eight items as the primary scale, with the original nine-item version reported as a sensitivity analysis. The modified eight-item model demonstrated provisional fit (CFI = 0.977, RMSEA = 0.086, above the conventional 0.08 threshold, SRMR = 0.028) with excellent internal consistency (α = 0.930, ω = 0.931) and strong construct-related validity against the Owens scale (r = 0.773, p <0.001), and moderate associations with theoretically related constructs, psychological safety (r = 0.575, p <0.001), and work engagement (r = 0.467, p <0.001).

CONCLUSION

The Japanese Humble Leadership Scale (eight-item version) demonstrates acceptable psychometric properties, supporting its use as a research tool in healthcare professional education. Because model modification was conducted within the same sample, and RMSEA for the modified model exceeded conventional benchmarks, these findings should be regarded as provisional; independent-sample validation is needed before broader application.