As societies become increasingly differentiate, special interests and demands of groups or people grow. In fact, organizations, companies and local authorities are subject to a rising tide of contradictory needs and demands. Due to increasing amount of demands and needs, conditions of organizations have been exposed to transformation. Specifically, organizations become to compel their environment to yield the sources they want in order to meet the demands of the society. Actually, organizations have to supply products fulfilling the needs or interests and reflecting the norms and values of the environment (Brunsson, 1989).

When organizations face with inconsistent demands of their environment, they build inconsistencies into the organization as well as into the organizational output. Indeed, they allow structures, processes, and ideologies reflect the inconsistencies in the environment. Hence, they have difficulties in generating organized action; talk, decisions and products tend to be inconsistent in the end that corresponds to organizational hypocrisy. In fact, ideas and actions in an organization start not to compensate for one another; systematically contradict one another or do not directly support each other. In fact, organizational hypocrisy starts when good decisions are easily stated and not so easily achieved in an organization (Fernandez-Revuella Perez & Robson, 1999). When there is an inconsistency between espoused fundamental values, beliefs and the actions follows by the principals. Actually, conflict and false expectations obtained from this contradictory behaviors cause one to decrease in capacity for continuing in a job (Kouzes & Pozner, 1993).

If educational organizations are considered, the same situation can be experienced. When school management faces with increasing amount of demands of environment and the students, the management may disregard for fulfilling the expectations with a failure and may exhibit an inconsistency between their words and actions due to lots of things to do for each demand. Hereby, organizational hypocrisy behavior of the management may lead to some negative organizational behaviors among the personnel and the teachers in a school environment.

When the related literature about organizational hypocrisy is reviewed, there are scale development studies about organizational hypocrisy for different organization types, but there is limited study emphasizing this organizational behavior in educational organizations (Phillippe & Koehler, 2005). Therefore, the purpose of this study is to develop a scale measuring organizational hypocrisy expressing inconsistencies between talk, goals, aims, values and practices in educational organizations with an aim to reveal hypocrisy behavior in educational organizations that is not being realized. Beside to capturing the phenomenon of organizational hypocrisy in schools empirically, the developed instrument is also aimed to be tested for its psychometric properties and its utility comparing with one of the organizational behaviors organizational trust with predicting its effect on organizational cynicism variable.

Bagozzi, R. P. (1994). Measurement in marketing research: Basic principles of questionnaire design. In R. P. Bagozzi (Ed.), Principles of marketing research (pp. 1-49). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Brandes, P., Dharwadkar, R., & Dean, J.W., (1999). Does organizational cynicism matter? Employee and supervisor perspectives on work outcomes. Eastern Academy of Management Proceedings, 150-153. Bromiley, P., & Cummings, L. L. (1996). The organizational trust inventory (OTI). In R.M. Kramer & T.R (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp.302-319). London: Sage Publications. Brunsson, N. (1989). Organization of hypocrisy: Talk, decisions and actions in organizations. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS, Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming (S. 79-88). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Fernandez-Revuella Perez, L., & Robson, K. (1999). Ritual legitimation, de-coupling and the budgetary process: Managing organizational hypocrisies in a multinational company. Management Accounting Research, 10, 383-407. Hinkin, T. R. (1995). A review of scale development practices in the study of organizations. Journal of Management, 21(5), 967-988. Hinkin, T. R. (1998). A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational Research Methods, 1, 104-121. Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1993). Credibility. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Phillippe, T. W., & Koehler, J. M (2005). A factor analytical study of perceived organizational hypocrisy. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 70, 13-20. Schriesheim, C. A., Powers, K. J., Scandura, T. A., Gardiner, C. C., & Lankau, M. J. (1993). Improving construct measurement in management research: Comments and a quantitative approach for assessing the theoretical content adequacy of paper-and pencil survey-type instruments. Journal of Management, 19(2), 385-417. Venkatraman, N., & Grant, J. H. (1986). Construct measurement in organizational strategy research: A critique and proposal. Academy of Management Review, 11(1), 71-87.