UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

An evaluation of a human relations training program for engineers Wilson, Blair 1975

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1975_A8 W54.pdf [ 4.66MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0055959.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0055959-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0055959-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0055959-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0055959-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0055959-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0055959-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0055959-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0055959.ris

Full Text

AN EVALUATION OF A HUMAN RELATIONS TRAINING PROGRAM FOR ENGINEERS by B l a i r Wilson . Ed. (Secondary), U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, 196 A t h e s i s submitted i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l l m e n t o f the requirements f o r the Degree of Master of A r t s In the F a c u l t y o f Ed u c a t i o n (Adult Education) We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the r e q u i r e d standards. The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia September, 1975 In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f the r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I agree t h a t the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and s t u d y . I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y p u rposes may be g r a n t e d by the Head o f my Department o r by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . Department o f - | " P K . U L T V ( S~V t o o c A T l i x J The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS An E v a l u a t i o n o f a Human R e l a t i o n s T r a i n i n g Program f o r E n g i n e e r s by B l a i r W i l s o n U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a September, 1975 E n g i n e e r s have been p r e s e n t e d , a l m o s t t r a d i t i o n a l l y , as h i g h l y s k i l l e d s p e c i a l i s t s who t e n d t o l a c k s k i l l s i n t h e human r e l a t i o n s a r e a . T h i s s t u d y e v a l u a t e d a human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g program f o r e n g i n e e r s w h i c h had been d e v e l o p e d t o f i l l t h e gap i n t h e i r e a r l i e r t r a i n i n g . The program i s p a r t o f t h e Diploma i n Admin-i s t r a t i o n f o r E n g i n e e r s o f f e r e d by t h e B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a C o u n c i l on C o n t i n u i n g E d u c a t i o n f o r E n g i n e e r s i n con-j u n c t i o n w i t h t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . Three i n s t r u m e n t s were used i n t h e s t u d y , namely t h e . L e a d e r s h i p O p i n i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e (LOQ), t h e L e a d e r s h i p : Employee O r i e n t a t i o n and D i f f e r e n t i a t i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e (LEAD) and t h e P r o f i l e o f O r g a n i z a t i o n a l C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s (Form-S). The LOQ i s a w e l l - e s t a b l i s h e d i n s t r u m e n t w h i c h measures two v a r i a b l e s i d e n t i f i e d as i i C o n s i d e r a t i o n (C) and S t r u c t u r e (S). The LEAD i n s t r u -ment i s r e l a t i v e l y new and measures two v a r i a b l e s , i d e n t i f i e d as Employee O r i e n t a t i o n (E) and D i f f e r e n t i a t i o n (D), which are p u r p o r t e d to be s i m i l a r t o the LOQ v a r i a b l e s . The Form-S instrument was developed t o e s t a b l i s h p r o -f i l e s o f the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f an o r g a n i z a t i o n . On t h i s study, i t measured the s u b j e c t s ' p e r c e p t i o n of t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n a t the time o f the course (N = Now) and as they wanted i t t o be (L = L i k e ) . Matched c o n t r o l and e x p e r i m e n t a l groups o f e n g i n e e r s and t e c h n i c a l l y - o r i e n t e d p e r s o n n e l , each w i t h f i f t e e n s u b j e c t s , were s e l e c t e d a t a l o c a t i o n i n Northern B r i t i s h Columbia. The e x p e r i m e n t a l group was exposed to approximately twenty-four hours of t o t a l course time, i n two weekends spaced one month a p a r t , o f a s t r u c t u r e d human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g c o u r s e . The c o n t r o l group was not exposed to any t r a i n i n g . Seven hypotheses were t e s t e d to determine the e f f e c t s of the t r a i n i n g course on the s i x v a r i a b l e s o f the LOQ, LEAD and Form-S i n s t r u m e n t s . S p e c i f i c a l l y , a p o s i t i v e i n c r e a s e f o r the C and E means o f the e x p e r i -mental group was expected t o g e t h e r w i t h a p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n between these two v a r i a b l e s . In a d d i t i o n , S and D f o r both the e x p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l groups i i i were e x p e c t e d t o remain unchanged and the two v a r i a b l e s were e x p e c t e d t o show p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n . F i n a l l y , N and L were e x p e c t e d t o remain unchanged f o r the e x p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l g roups. The s t a t i s t i c a l p r o c e d u r e s employed i n c l u d e d the 2 H o t e l l i n g s T t e s t f o r s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s , the Hoyt E s t i m a t e o f R e l i a b i l i t y f o r t h e LOQ and LEAD v a r i a b l e s and F i s h e r ' s Z - T r a n s f d r m a t i o n o f C o r r e l a t i o n C o e f f i c i e n t s . A n a l y s i s o f the r e s u l t s showed no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the C o n s i d e r a t i o n means. However, a d e f i n i t e t r e n d was e v i d e n t i n the h y p o t h e s i z e d d i r e c t i o n , i n f a v o u r o f the e x p e r i m e n t a l group. No change o c c u r r e d on the E, D, N and L v a r i a b l e s f o r b o t h groups. A l -though a s l i g h t d e c r e a s e o c c u r r e d i n the S t r u c t u r e means f o r b o t h groups, t h e d i f f e r e n c e s , i n b o t h c a s e s , were n o t s i g n i f i c a n t . F i n a l l y , no c o r r e l a t i o n s between e i t h e r t h e C and E v a r i a b l e s o r the S and D v a r i a b l e s were shown. i v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page D e d i c a t i o n -xi L i s t o f T a b l e s v i i Acknowledgements .1. ix A b s t r a c t i i Chapter I I n t r o d u c t i o n 1 I I Review o f the L i t e r a t u r e 8 - Hypotheses 2 3 - Research Questions 24 I I I Research Design 26 - S u b j e c t s 26 - Program I n t e r v e n t i o n s 27 - Instruments 28 - LOQ 29 ] - LEAD Q u e s t i o n n a i r e 34 - P r o f i l e o f O r g a n i z a t i o n a l C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s (Form-S) 36 - Procedures 39 - Procedures on Matching Groups 39 - A d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f I n s t r u -ments 42 - A d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f the Course 42 - P r o c e s s i n g o f Data .43 - S t a t i s t i c a l Procedures 4 3 - H o t e l l i n g s T2 43 - Hoyt E s t i m a t e o f R e l i a b i l i t y 44 - F i s h e r ' s Z-Transformation o f C o r r e l a t i o n C o e f f i c i e n t s 44 - A n a l y s i s o f Data 44 IV R e s u l t s 46 - Matching o f E x p e r i m e n t a l and C o n t r o l Groups 46 - Hypotheses 50 IV R e s u l t s (cont'd) - R e s e a r c h Q u e s t i o n s - R e l i a b i l i t y V D i s c u s s i o n - I m p l i c a t i o n s - C o n c l u s i o n s B i b l i o g r a p h y A p p e n d i c e s 1 T o t a l Data on M a t c h i n g V a r i a b l e s 2 P r e and P o s t - C o u r s e S c o r e s f o r E x p e r i m e n t a l and C o n t r o l Groups on LOQ, LEAD and Form-S S c a l e s 3 N and L P r e - C o u r s e Means 4 C o r r e l a t i o n C o e f f i c i e n t s M a t r i c e s v i -LIST OF TABLES Table P a ? e Means and Medians o f Matching V a r i a b l e s f o r E x p e r i m e n t a l and C o n t r o l Groups 48 2 Means o f LOQ, LEAD and Form-S 49 Pre-Course Scores f o r E x p e r i m e n t a l and ..Control Groups 3 Pre and Post-Course C o n s i d e r a t i o n (C) 50 Means f o r E x p e r i m e n t a l and C o n t r o l Groups 4 Pre and Post-Course Employee 51 O r i e n t a t i o n (E) Means f o r E x p e r i -mental and C o n t r o l Groups 5 C o r r e l a t i o n C o e f f i c i e n t s f o r 52 C o n s i d e r a t i o n (C) and Employee O r i e n t a t i o n (E) V a r i a b l e s f o r T o t a l Group 6 Pre and Post-Course S t r u c t u r e (S) 53 Means f o r E x p e r i m e n t a l and C o n t r o l Groups 7 Pre and Post-Course D i f f e r e n t i a t i o n (D) 54 Means f o r E x p e r i m e n t a l and C o n t r o l Groups 8 C o r r e l a t i o n C o e f f i c i e n t s f o r S t r u c t u r e 55 (S) and D i f f e r e n t i a t i o n (D) V a r i a b l e s f o r T o t a l Group 9 Pre and Post-Course Now (N) and L i k e (L) 56 Means f o r E x p e r i m e n t a l and C o n t r o l Groups 10 C o r r e l a t i o n C o e f f i c i e n t s f o r S t r u c t u r e 5 7 (S) and C o n s i d e r a t i o n V a r i a b l e s f o r T o t a l Group 11 C o r r e l a t i o n C o e f f i c i e n t s f o r Employee 58 O r i e n t a t i o n (E) and D i f f e r e n t i a t i o n (D) V a r i a b l e s f o r T o t a l Group 12 Hoyt E s t i m a t e s o f R e l i a b i l i t i e s f o r 59 LOQ and LEAD Instruments yii Matching Variables Data for Experimental Group Matching Variables Data for Control Group Individual Consideration and Structure Pre and Post-Course Scores for Experimental Group Individual Consideration and Structure Pre and Post-Course Scores for Control Group Individual Consideration and Structure Pre and Follow-Up Scores for Experimental Group Individual Consideration and Structure Pre and Post-Course Scores for Control Group Individual E and D Pre and Post-Course Scores for Experimental Group Individual E and D Pre and Post-Course Scores for Control Group Individual N and L Pre and Post-Course Scores f o r Experimental Group Individual N and L Pre and Post-Course Scores f o r Control Group Experimental and Control Group Pre-Course .Now (N) Means for Individual Form-S Questions Experimental and Control Group Pre-Course Like (L) Means for Individual Form-S Questions v i i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Without the h e l p , c o u n s e l and a s s i s t a n c e o f many people, t h i s study would not have been completed. The author r e a l i z e s t h a t he i s deeply i n d e b t e d t o these people f o r t h e i r v a r i o u s c o n t r i b u t i o n s . Dr. John Niemi and Dr. John F r i e s e n p r o v i d e d guidance and a s s i s t a n c e throughout the course o f the study w h i l e Dr. Yeong K. Lee p r o v i d e d p a r t i c u l a r s t a t i s t i c a l a d v i c e . T h e i r support, p a t i e n c e and con-t i n u a l w i l l i n g n e s s to h e l p are very much a p p r e c i a t e d . Thanks a l s o a re due t o Dr. S. F o s t e r and Mr. S. Varga f o r t h e i r h e l p . Without the a s s i s t a n c e o f Miss M. Lawless the study would not have met i t s p a r t i c u l a r d e a d l i n e . A p a r t i c u l a r note o f thanks i s due t o the many students o f Human Behaviour i n O r g a n i z a t i o n s courses who cooperated w i t h my e f f o r t s t o e v a l u a t e the r e s u l t s o f the d i f f e r e n t c o u r s e s . S p e c i a l a p p r e c i a t i o n i s due t o the study s u b j e c t s f o r p a t i e n t l y p r o v i d i n g me w i t h the completed forms, and o t h e r data, needed f o r the study. A s p e c i a l note o f thanks i s due to the l a t e Dr. Geoff Matthews, who asked me to develop the Human Behaviour i n O r g a n i z a t i o n s course and then encouraged me ix to e v a l u a t e i t s e f f e c t i v e n e s s . I t h i n k t h a t he would have been p l e a s e d w i t h the r e s u l t s o f t h i s study. F i n a l l y , I would l i k e t o o f f e r my s p e c i a l a p p r e c i a -t i o n t o my f a m i l y — p a r t i c u l a r l y my w i f e — f o r a l l the encouragement and p a t i e n c e t h a t was g i v e n . DEDICATION T h i s t h e s i s i s d e d i c a t e d t o my w i f e , d a u g h t e r and son - B o n n i e , Lynn and Gord. CHAPTER I : INTRODUCTION: A l m o s t t r a d i t i o n a l l y , p r o f e s s i o n a l e n g i n e e r s have been p r e s e n t e d as h i g h l y - s k i l l e d s p e c i a l i s t s who t e n d t o be more c o n c e r n e d about t h i n g s and t a s k s t h a n about p e o p l e . I n t h i s c o n n e c t i o n , N i e m i (1969, p. 2), i n h i s r e s e a r c h , n o t e d t h a t an e n g i n e e r ' s r e p u t a t i o n i s b u i l t on h i s t e c h n i c a l s k i l l s , w i t h an emphasis on p r o d u c t s . S i m i l a r l y , M o s v i c k (19 71) r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e p r e v i o u s t r a i n i n g o f e n g i n e e r s t e n d e d t o produce i n -dependent and q u e s t i o n i n g i n d i v i d u a l s who had " s t r o n g b u t narrow commitments" i n a p r o f e s s i o n where p r e s t i g e and r e c o g n i t i o n t e n d s t o be based on one's t e c h n i c a l 2 a b i l i t i e s . These and o t h e r f a c t o r s , he b e l i e v e d , sub-s t a n t i a t e d an obvious need " f o r human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g f o r the t e c h n i c a l l y - o r i e n t e d p r o f e s s i o n a l s . " (p. 277) In a s i m i l a r v e i n , De Simone (1968) r e p o r t e d t h a t the e n g i n e e r i n g e d u c a t i o n system " s t r e s s e s the a c q u i s i t i o n o f knowledge and s k i l l s o f a n a l y s i s t o the v i r t u a l ex-c l u s i o n o f a l l e l s e . " (p. 2) In a d d i t i o n , Megginson (1967, p. 34 3) notes t h a t f o r en g i n e e r s t o take p a r t i n d e v e l o p i n g as managers, they need t o be r e - o r i e n t e d from t h i n k i n g i n terms o f t h i n g s t o t h i n k i n g i n terms o f people. F u r t h e r , he s t a t e s t h a t t h i s r e - o r i e n t a t i o n i n v o l v e s t h r e e e s s e n t i a l s : F i r s t , i t i s n e c e s s a r y t o arouse the man's i n t e r e s t i n people-type programs. Second, c e r t a i n r o a d b l o c k s r e s u l t i n g from h i s p r i o r t r a i n i n g , which l i m i t the e x t e n t o f h i s empathy w i t h people, must be removed. F i n a l l y , t h e r e i s a need to t r a i n him i n the area he has n e g l e c t e d i n the p a s t which i s u s u a l l y human r e l a t i o n s , (p. 277) Layton (1971) has observed t h a t i n the t r a i n i n g . of p r o f e s s i o n a l engineers heavy emphasis has been p l a c e d , i n r e c e n t y e a r s , on s c i e n c e . A c c o r d i n g t o B e t t s , ( L a v o i e , 1972) " i t i s a r a r e graduate ( i n E n g i n e e r i n g ) who under-stands i n t e r p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s o r ac c e p t s t h e i r importance to the e f f e c t i v e f u n c t i o n i n g o f an o r g a n i z a t i o n . " (p. 100) F i n a l l y , Given (1955) has noted t h a t : The e n g i n e e r ' s background o f s c i e n t i f i c method and emphasis on exactness and a d e t a i l e d q u a n t i t a t i v e d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s may h i n d e r 3 him i n d e a l i n g w i t h the s u b j e c t i v e a s p e c t s o f many d e c i s i o n s and i n working w i t h people, (p. 43} A t t h i s p o i n t , i t i s worth r e c a l l i n g Kornhaeuser*s study (1962, p. 99) which p o i n t e d out t h a t a c h a r a c t e r -i s t i c c a r e e r a s p i r a t i o n o f e n g i n e e r s was t h a t of a c h i e v i n g a h i g h e x e c u t i v e p o s i t i o n . While v a r i o u s r e p o r t s have confirmed t h a t e n g i n e e r s have, indeed, succeeded i n o b t a i n i n g management p o s i t i o n s a t a l l l e v e l s , o t h e r s have noted t h a t t h i s success has not been a c h i e v e d w i t h o u t problems. As a r e c e n t U n i t e d S t a t e s Government r e p o r t (Crocket, 1968) noted: Both e x p e r i e n c e and i n t u i t i o n i n d i c a t e t h a t the i n d i v i d u a l w i t h an e n g i n e e r i n g e d u c a t i o n and background may have some d e f i c i e n c i e s i n terms o f the s k i l l s and knowledge needed to be an e f f e c t i v e manager. The t r a n s i t i o n from e n g i n e e r i n g t o management i n v o l v e s a change from problems t h a t can u s u a l l y be s o l v e d by q u a n t i t a t i v e measures t o problems t h a t almost i n v a r i a b l y c o n t a i n some q u a l i t a t i v e f a c t o r s and they change from p r i m a r i l y i n d i v i d u a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r o t h e r s ' e f f o r t s and a g r e a t e r need f o r i n t e r a c t i n g w i t h o t h e r s , (p. 1) In the face of a l l t h i s c r i t i c i s m (much of which has been generated by the e n g i n e e r s t h e m s e l v e s ) , a con-s i d e r a b l e amount o f evidence has accumulated to suggest t h a t steps c o u l d be taken to improve the s i t u a t i o n . For example, the 1968 Woods Hole Conference sponsored i n p a r t by the N a t i o n a l Academy o f E n g i n e e r i n g was concerned w i t h the problems of keeping e n g i n e e r i n g e d u c a t i o n a l i v e and r e l e v a n t . In the proceedings of 4 t h a t c o n f erence, Teare (1968, p. 120) l i s t e d "a cognizance o f human f a c t o r s i n e n g i n e e r i n g " among the c r i t i c a l o b j e c t i v e s o f a program. Teare e l a b o r a t e d on h i s statement as f o l l o w s : Graduates must be aware o f human problems and have a s t a r t toward a competency i n d e a l i n g w i t h them. Understanding and working w i t h people i s one o f the most important f a c e t s o f the en g i n e e r ' s j o b . An e n g i n e e r i n g t a s k sooner o r l a t e r i n v o l v e s o t h e r people u s u a l l y both w i t h i n and o u t s i d e o f the o r g a n i z a t i o n i n which the engineer works. Often the human element i s a key f a c t o r and he must be aware t h a t t h i s i s so. Graduates must develop the a b i l i t y to communicate, t o s e l l i d e a s , and to understand and a p p r e c i a t e what i t i s t h a t motivates o t h e r s , (p. 121) In a s i m i l a r v e i n , Schrader (19 72) has p o i n t e d out t h a t " i t i s simply not enough to have o n l y the body of knowledge t h a t a p p l i e s d i r e c t l y to a pro-f e s s i o n . Knowledge of s o c i e t y , human v a l u e s and human nature i s e q u a l l y e s s e n t i a l . " (p. 10) F u r t h e r , r e s e a r c h f i n d i n g s have tended t o support the a s s e r t i o n s t h a t e n g i n e e r s need t r a i n i n g i n human r e l a t i o n s , p a r t i c u l a r l y as they move from e n g i n e e r i n g t o management p o s i t i o n s . Dubin and Marlow (1965) used a q u e s t i o n n a i r e approach w i t h a l a r g e sample o f en g i n e e r s and r e p o r t e d t h a t human r e l a t i o n s and communication s k i l l s were p e r c e i v e d as the most important areas f o r f u t u r e e d u c a t i o n . In a j o i n t E n g i n e e r i n g ' C o l l e g e Admin-i s t r a t i o n C o u n c i l and R e l a t i o n s With I n d u s t r y study, once again using a large sample of engineers, "manage-ment practices" was the most popular subject f o r further study i n that i t was selected by 65 percent of the respondents. S p e c i f i c topics within t h i s needs area included "working with i n d i v i d u a l s , working with groups, and t a l k i n g with people." (ASEE, 1965, p. 256) F i n a l l y , a recent National Aeronautic and Space Administration study (Bayton and Chapman, 19 72) noted that, i n the transforming of s c i e n t i s t s and engineers to managers, the lack of good personal s k i l l s was c i t e d as a major source of c o n f l i c t , (p. 103-104) An increasing number of educational centres have recognized the need for a professional approach that takes i n t o account the broad spectrum of society's problems, not j u s t t e c h n i c a l problems at hand, and have begun to devise a wider s l a t e of educational programs for undergraduate engineers. I t i s only recently, however, that broadened programs, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the area of human r e l a t i o n s , have been provided for graduate engineers through sources such as continuing education programs. . Although an extensive number and v a r i e t y of human re l a t i o n s programs are conducted each year i n the management t r a i n i n g and development area, there i s 6 l i t t l e e vidence o f e v a l u a t i o n o f the r e l a t i v e m e r i t s o f such programs. In t h i s r e g a r d , McGehee and Thayer (1961) concluded t h a t although t h e r e were many r e f e r e n c e s t o the need f o r the e v a l u a t i o n o f t r a i n i n g , t h e r e was " l i t t l e e vidence o f any s e r i o u s e f f o r t s i n t h i s d i r e c t i o n . " (p. 256) F u r t h e r , S t r a u s s and S a y l e s (1964) observed t h a t "the f i e l d o f management t r a i n i n g i s s t i l l i n i t s i n f a n c y ... the t r u t h i s t h a t we have no r e a l p r o o f t h a t t r a i n i n g o f any s o r t i s e f f e c t i v e . " (p. 574-575) S i m i l a r l y , B e l a s c o and T r i c e (1969) noted t h a t w h i l e i t i s o n l y through e v a l u a t i o n t h a t one can ever know how e f f e c t i v e a t r a i n i n g program has been, " l e s s than one p e r c e n t o f the ongoing t r a i n i n g programs are s y s t e m a t i c a l l y e v a l u a t e d . " (p. 12) Furthermore, they noted t h a t even those cases where e v a l u a t i o n was attempted, i t was o f t e n undertaken w i t h inadequate designs and methodology. In a s i m i l a r v e i n , Burke (1969) noted t h a t " f o r the most p a r t , the b e n e f i t s o f i n d u s t r i a l t r a i n i n g have been taken on f a i t h . Few demands have been made to e v a l u a t e i t i s a r i g o r o u s manner." (p. 24) While C a t a l a n e l l o and K i r k p a t r i c k (1968) noted simply t h a t "the e v a l u a t i o n s t a t e of the a r t i s s t i l l i n i t s i n f a n c y . " (p. 9 ), L i p p i t t ' s (1969) comments are more p o i n t e d and c r u s h i n g when he noted t h a t : Our l a c k o f a t t e n t i o n t o f a c t - f i n d i n g and e v a l u a t i o n d e r i v e s , i n p a r t a t l e a s t , from our low l e v e l o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f how t o 7 go about such e v a l u a t i v e e f f o r t . We may even need i n s h o r t , r e s e a r c h on how b e s t to conduct r e s e a r c h l e a d i n g t o e v a l u a t i o n o f t r a i n i n g , (p. 195) F i n a l l y , from a source o u t s i d e the d i r e c t l i t e r a t u r e , i t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o note the Dun's Review Report (Perham, 1968): Management remains the American .corpora-t i o n ' s most complete a c t of f a i t h . Gut f e e l o r i t s e q u i v a l e n t i s the o n l y r a t i o n a l e t h a t a dozen c o r p o r a t i o n s i n t e r v i e w e d - most of whom a d m i n i s t e r l e v i a t h a n doses o f manage-ment t r a i n i n g - can muster i n j u s t i f y i n g t h e i r management t r a i n i n g programs, (p. 46) Many would agree w i t h Mahler (1953) t h a t t r a i n e r s and o t h e r s i n v o l v e d i n management development programs do r e c o g n i z e the importance o f e v a l u a t i o n but t h a t they are "dismayed by the d i f f i c u l t i e s i n v o l v e d " , (p. 116) However, these same people would a l s o support the i d e a t h a t , i f we are n o t t o remain i n a s t a t e o f p e r p e t u a l " i n f a n c y " we must attempt t o do the n e c e s s a r y work. T h i s e f f o r t , however, i s f u r t h e r com-p l i c a t e d by the wide v a r i e t y o f d i f f e r i n g e v a l u a t i o n models suggested by the v a r i o u s a u t h o r s . I t would appear t h a t , w h i l e a p p a r e n t l y l i t t l e time i s spent a c t u a l l y e v a l u a t i n g t r a i n i n g , a g r e a t d e a l o f time i s spent d e v e l o p i n g new models o r d e s i g n s . In any event, a l t h o u g h many o f these models have much i n t h e i r f a v o u r , the d e s i g n suggested by R i z z o (1967, p. 94) appears to o f f e r the most promise f o r o b t a i n i n g s a t i s f a c t o r y r e s u l t s . 8 In t h i s regard, the v a l i d e v a l u a t i o n model would appear to be one wherein pre and post-course measure-ments are taken f o r matched experimental and c o n t r o l groups. The main par t of ^this study, then, w i l l examine a human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g program f o r engineers , and w i l l attempt to evaluate the program's e f f e c t i v e n e s s i n terms of changed a t t i t u d e s on the par t of the p a r t i c i p a n t s . The t r a i n i n g program under study, i n t u r n , was designed to meet the needs of engineers i n the human r e l a t i o n s area, p a r t i c u l a r l y as they move, or consider moving, from engineering to management p o s i t i o n s . 9 CHAPTER I I ; REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE: The f i r s t p r o b l e m e n c o u n t e r e d i n u n d e r t a k i n g a r e v i e w o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e i s t h a t t h e t e r m i n o l o g y i s n o t c o n s i s t e n t . T h i s p r o b l e m appears t o be p a r t i c u l a r l y s e v e r e w i t h r e s p e c t t o m a t e r i a l s on human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g . I n f a c t , t h e r e seems t o be a c o n s i d e r a b l e amount o f c o n f u s i o n s u r r o u n d i n g t h i s t e r m and i t must be c l a r i f i e d . Rush (1969) d i s c u s s e s t h e human r e l a t i o n s movement as "the one most o f t e n c o n f u s e d w i t h the c u r r e n t 10 b e h a v i o u r a l s c i e n c e movement." (p. 5) He views human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g as t e a c h i n g managers " t o be f r i e n d l y toward t h e i r s u b o r d i n a t e s , to keep people c o n t e n t as p a r t o f one b i g happy f a m i l y . " (p. 5) Stephenson (1966) l o o k s a t the problem i n terms o f a t t i t u d i n a l change on the p a r t o f management. I t would i n v o l v e "any program desig n e d t o focus on such q u a l i t i e s o f s u p e r v i s i o n as employee centredness, c o n s i d e r a t e n e s s b e h a v i o u r o r s u p p o r t i v e l e a d e r s h i p . " (p. 34) B r a d f o r d (1960), one o f the e a r l i e r l e a d e r s i n the f i e l d , r e p o r t e d t h a t human r e l a t i o n s and l e a d e r s h i p t r a i n i n g had gone beyond simple i n s p i r a t i o n a l courses on i n f l u e n c i n g people to att e m p t i n g to " b r i d ge between the emerging s o c i a l behaviour and the growing complexity o f human and s o c i a l problems." (p. 492) He moved very q u i c k l y from the above comments, however, t o t a l k about a l a b o r a t o r y approach which has as i t s h e a r t "the d i a g n o s t i c group." While D r o t n i n g (1968) uses s e n s i t i v i t y t r a i n i n g , T-groups and l a b o r a t o r y t r a i n i n g i n t e r c h a n g e a b l y , he i s concerned about the t h e r a p e u t i c nature o f c u r r e n t developments. He b e l i e v e s t h a t emphasis s h o u l d be p l a c e d on go a l s s i m i l a r t o those o f the founders o f s e n s i t i v i t y t r a i n i n g which he sees as b e i n g " f o c u s e d on human r e l a t i o n s s k i l l s development and the t r a n s i t i o n o f l a b o r a t o r y l e a r n i n g to the home environment." (p. 20) 11 In d e a l i n g w i t h the "therapy" a s p e c t , S canlan (1971) appears to f u r t h e r confuse the i s s u e by app e a r i n g to agree t h a t t h e r e i s some s i m i l a r i t y between extreme s e n s i t i v i t y t r a i n i n g and group therapy b u t going, sub-s e q u e n t l y , t o some l e n g t h t o e x p l a i n the d i f f e r e n c e between the two. He co n c l u d e s , however, by n o t i n g t h a t therapy groups tend t o be formed o f people " s e e k i n g r e l i e f from d i s t r e s s " which s e n s i t i v i t y groups are "composed o f i n d i v i d u a l s t r y i n g t o l e a r n new s k i l l s . " (p. 548) These comments sho u l d be c o n s i d e r e d i n the co n t e x t o f Bare and M i t c h e l l ' s (1972) e v a l u a t i v e statements on a " s e n s i t i v i t y t r a i n i n g " program where they note t h a t t h e i r study s h o u l d d i s p e l the many doubts t h a t have been r a i s e d about the u t i l i t y o f " t h e r a p e u t i c i n t e r v e n t i o n . " (p. 274) F i n a l l y , Scanlan notes t h a t "while s e n s i t i v i t y t r a i n i n g does not c l a i m t o be a panacea t o remedy a l l o r g a n i z a t i o n a l problems, i t does h o l d the p o t e n t i a l t o h e l p some o r g a n i z a t i o n s b e g i n t o overcome some o f t h e i r problems." (p. 552) Despi t e t h i s , S t o g d i l l (19 74) m a i n t a i n e d t h a t i t was a c o n t r a d i c t i o n to c a l l s e n s i t i v i t y t r a i n i n g a method o f b u i l d i n g l e a d e r s h i p . I n s t e a d , he b e l i e v e d t h a t s e n s i t i v i t y t r a i n i n g p r e p a r e d the l e a d e r f o r "s u r r e n d e r o f l e a d e r s h i p t o the f o l l o w e r group." (p. 242) P u b l i s h e d reviews o f the l i t e r a t u r e f u r t h e r confuse the i s s u e , on human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g , w i t h a p p a r e n t l y 12 c a s u a l terminology r e f e r e n c e s . In t h i s c o n t e x t , Kohn (1969) r e f e r s t o a study and s t a t e s t h a t the author had conducted an e x p e r i m e n t a l f i e l d study t o determine the e f f e c t s o f "T-group t r a i n i n g " , (p. 6) R e f e r r i n g t o the same study, Mosvick (1971) c a l l e d i t a "standard" t r a i n i n g program i n human r e l a t i o n s as compared t o a "T-group" program, (p. 279) An examination o f the study i t s e l f r e v e a l s t h a t Mosvick's d e s c r i p t i o n o f the study i s c o r r e c t — a t l e a s t so f a r as the author o f the study, Carron (1964), intended. Not a l l o f the debate has been covered i n the f o r e g o i n g account o f the d i f f e r e n c e s p e r t a i n i n g t o the s u b j e c t o f human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g . Rather, i t has simply attempted to i n d i c a t e the f a c t t h a t these i s s u e s e x i s t and t h a t there does not appear to be a ready s o l u t i o n o r s e t o f s o l u t i o n s . In any event, i t would appear to be r a t h e r obvious t h a t t h i s s i t u a t i o n must c o n t r i b u t e t o the d i f f i c u l t y o f e v a l u a t i n g a human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g program. Consequently, i n any study, a d e f i n i t e p o s i t i o n must be s e l e c t e d . In t h i s c o n t e x t , then, the work o f Middleman and Goldberg (1972) appears t o p r e s e n t an a p p r o p r i a t e c l a r i f i c a t i o n o f the key d i f f e r e n c e between s t r u c t u r e d and n o n - s t r u c t u r e d l e a r n i n g s i t u a t i o n s i n human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g . While they have noted t h a t e x p e r i e n t i a l l e a r n i n g i s an important p a r t 13 o f human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g , and perhaps even i t s most " d i s t i n g u i s h i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c " they have a l s o noted t h a t not a l l e x p e r i e n t i a l l e a r n i n g makes use o f s t r u c t u r e . For example, they observe, the "very l a c k o f s t r u c t u r e " p r o v i d e s the b a s i s f o r what they r e f e r to as the b e s t known form of human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g , namely the T-group. A l t e r n a t i v e l y , they note t h a t a s t r u c t u r e d e x p e r i e n t i a l l e a r n i n g s i t u a t i o n (as i n human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g ) i s "a c l o s e d system d e l i b e r a t e l y c o n s t r u c t e d . I t has a boundary which s e p a r a t e s i t from the t a l k about the s i t u a t i o n as w e l l . The task c o n s t i t u t e s the moving dynamic of the l e a r n i n g s i t u a t i o n . " (p. 20 3-20 7) F i n a l l y , they conclude t h a t a s t r u c t u r e d e x p e r i e n t i a l l e a r n i n g s i t u a t i o n suggests e d u c a t i o n r a t h e r than the therapy suggested by the u n s t r u c t u r e d s i t u a t i o n . H a r r i s o n (19 71) c o n s i d e r s the s u b j e c t o f human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g from the broad p o i n t o f the d e s i r e d outcomes which he says "are b r o a d l y d e f i n e d as changes i n i n t e r p e r s o n a l b ehaviour: a complex o f knowledge, v a l u e s , p e r c e p t i o n s and b e h a v i o u r a l s k i l l s . " (p. 71) As p r e v i o u s l y noted, one must take a d e f i n i t e p o s i t i o n w i t h s e l e c t e d r e f e r e n c e s t o support the p o s i t i o n . T h i s s h o u l d not be taken t o imply t h a t t h i s i s the o n l y p o s s i b l e s o l u t i o n , but, r a t h e r , one t h a t i s s u b s c r i b e d 14 to as s e t t i n g a p p r o p r i a t e terms o f r e f e r e n c e around some a d m i t t e d l y i n e x a c t s u b j e c t matter, namely human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g . In t h i s c o n t e x t , then, t h i s study w i l l c o n s i d e r a " s t r u c t u r e d " human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g program designed w i t h d e s i r e d outcomes i n mind such as those noted by H a r r i s o n . S i n c e t h i s study w i l l s p e c i f i c a l l y examine l e a d e r -s h i p as i t r e l a t e s to human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g , i t appears to be worthwhile to b r i e f l y examine the l i t e r a t u r e p a r t i c u l a r l y as i t i d e n t i f i e s any problems p e r t a i n i n g t o the term. L e a d e r s h i p , or l e a d e r s h i p b e h a v i o u r , has been the s u b j e c t o f e x t e n s i v e i n v e s t i g a t i o n and r e s e a r c h f o r many y e a r s . Much o f t h i s a c t i v i t y has been caused, i n p a r t a t l e a s t , by the apparent importance of e f f e c t i v e l e a d e r -s h i p to the a c h i e v i n g o f an o r g a n i z a t i o n ' s g o a l s . The i n v e s t i g a t i o n s have i n c l u d e d examinations o f the " g r e a t man" t h e o r i e s on "born l e a d e r s " and have i n c l u d e d attempts to i d e n t i f y a unique s e t of t r a i t s o f l e a d e r s . In t h i s r e g a r d , as McGregor (1971) noted: P r i o r t o the 1930's, i t was w i d e l y b e l i e v e d t h a t l e a d e r s h i p was the p r o p e r t y o f the i n -d i v i d u a l , t h a t a l i m i t e d number o f people were u n i q u e l y endowed w i t h a b i l i t i e s and t r a i t s which made i t p o s s i b l e f o r them to become l e a d e r s . Moreover, these a b i l i t i e s and t r a i t s were b e l i e v e d to be i n h e r i t e d r a t h e r than a c q u i r e d , (p. 18) 15 Subsequent r e s e a r c h has l a r g e l y d i s p o s e d o f these approaches and has p r e s e n t e d a l t e r n a t e e x p l a n a t i o n s f o r t h i s c r i t i c a l f a c t o r c a l l e d " l e a d e r s h i p " . In these terms, McGregor has noted t h a t " l e a d e r s h i p i s not a p r o p e r t y o f the i n d i v i d u a l b u t a complex r e l a t i o n s h i p o f these v a r i a b l e s : (1) the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f a l e a d e r ; (2) the a t t i t u d e s , needs and o t h e r p e r s o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the f o l l o w e r s ; (3) the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the o r g a n i z a t i o n , such as i t s purpose, i t s s t r u c t u r e , and the nature o f the task t o be performed; (4) the s o c i a l , economic and p o l i t i c a l m i l i e u . " (p. 20) In a s i m i l a r v e i n , Lassey (1971), a d a p t i n g a d e f i n i t i o n from another source, i d e n t i f i e d l e a d e r s h i p as " i n t e r p e r s o n a l i n f l u e n c e e x e r c i s e d through the proc e s s o f communication toward the at t a i n m e n t o f a s p e c i f i e d g o a l o r g o a l s . " (p. 4) S i m i l a r l y , a t a much e a r l i e r date, Fleishman and P e t e r s (1962) s t a t e d : An e s s e n t i a l element o f any modern d e f i n i t i o n o f l e a d e r s h i p i s the n o t i o n o f i n t e r p e r s o n a l i n f l u e n c e . L e a d e r s h i p a c t s occur when one i n d i v i d u a l , whether o r not he i s i n a f o r m a l l y d e s i g n a t e d l e a d e r s h i p p o s i t i o n , attempts to i n f l u e n c e the behaviour o f o t h e r s toward some g o a l .... Since the essence of l e a d e r s h i p i s i n t e r p e r s o n a l i n f l u e n c e , i t would seem t h a t the k i n d s o f l e a d e r s h i p a c t s attempted would be a f u n c t i o n o f the i n t e r p e r s o n a l v a l u e s o f the l e a d e r . By i n t e r p e r s o n a l v a l u e s , we mean the k i n d s o f human r e l a t i o n s h i p s t h a t a re con-s i d e r e d important by the i n d i v i d u a l , (p. 127) 16 Fleishman, as i s w e l l known, pursued h i s i n t e r e s t i n l e a d e r s h i p and, u s i n g the Ohio S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y L e a d e r s h i p S t u d i e s as a base, developed instruments designed to measure t h i s f a c t o r through two c r i t i c a l v a r i a b l e s which he c a l l e d " C o n s i d e r a t i o n " and " S t r u c t u r e " . While these v a r i a b l e s w i l l be examined i n g r e a t e r depth l a t e r i n the study, i t i s important to note a t t h i s p o i n t t h a t they are c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the modern r e s e a r c h i n the a r e a , namely t h a t both c o n s i d e r a t i o n f o r people and concerns f o r g o a l s or s t r u c t u r e are important l e a d e r s h i p elements i n any o r g a n i z a t i o n ' s development o f i t s people. Consequently, one of the instruments developed by Fleishman, the L e a d e r s h i p Opinion Q u e s t i o n n a i r e (LOQ), w i l l be u t i l i z e d i n the e v a l u a t i o n of the human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g course t h a t forms the base f o r t h i s study. In a d d i t i o n , the study w i l l u t i l i z e the d e f i n i t i o n i n h e r e n t f o r the two v a r i a b l e s i n the LOQ as i t s terms o f r e f e r e n c e . As was noted e a r l i e r , t h e r e has been an e x t e n s i v e debate i n the l i t e r a t u r e p e r t a i n i n g t o v a r i o u s a s p e c t s of human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g . I t i s not the i n t e n t i o n here to examine t h i s l a r g e amount o f data i n any d e t a i l . However, i t seems a p p r o p r i a t e to examine a few s p e c i f i c 17 s t u d i e s t h a t c l o s e l y p e r t a i n t o the study t h a t forms the base f o r t h i s r e p o r t . In t h i s r e g a r d , Mosvick (1971) c o n s i d e r e d t h r e e types o f t r a i n i n g q u e s t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g t e c h n i c a l p r o -f e s s i o n a l s and one o f these i s p a r t i c u l a r l y a p p r o p r i a t e here namely: "Which type o f human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g , standard o r T-group, seems b e t t e r adapted to the con-d i t i o n s o f t e c h n i c a l l y - o r i e n t e d p r o f e s s i o n a l s ? " (p. 277) He examined e i g h t y - s i x human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g s t u d i e s and i d e n t i f i e d ten as ha v i n g been conducted f o r t e c h n i c a l l y - o r i e n t e d p o p u l a t i o n s . He then e l i m i n a t e d two of the ten as not meeting h i s c r i t e r i a and, o f the remaining e i g h t , noted t h a t f o u r c o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d as e v a l u a t i o n s o f "standard"•human r e l a t i o n s courses and f o u r o f "T-group" s t u d i e s . Mosvick examined these e i g h t s t u d i e s i n some depth and determined t h a t "a d e c i d e d margin e x i s t e d which favoured s t a n d a r d as opposed t o T-group human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g as b e i n g b e t t e r adapted t o the needs of t e c h n i c a l l y - o r i e n t e d p r o f e s s i o n a l s . " (p. 289) He a l s o added the c a u t i o n , however, t h a t h i s must be c o n s i d e r e d a g e n e r a l c o n c l u s i o n and t h a t much work remained to be done t o make i t f u l l y c o n c l u s i v e . N e v e r t h e l e s s , i t would appear t o be r a t h e r obvious t h a t a c a r e f u l l y designed and conducted- "standard" human r e l a t i o n s program would d e f i n i t e l y be of b e n e f i t t o an 18 e n g i n e e r . On the o t h e r hand, t h e r e c o n t i n u e s t o be some q u e s t i o n as t o whether a "T-group" human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g program can be o f e x t e n s i v e use to any but very p a r t i c u l a r p o p u l a t i o n s . In any event, Mosvick's examination o f the e i g h t s t u d i e s i n c l u d e d one p a r t i c u l a r study which, on c l o s e examination, appears t o c l o s e l y p a r a l l e l t h i s study. In t h i s r e g a r d , the s p e c i f i c study by Carron (1964) s e l e c t e d twenty-three male s u p e r v i s o r s from the Research Development and E n g i n e e r i n g u n i t s o f a chemical company to undertake a "standard" human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g program c o v e r i n g a p e r i o d o f about s i x months. During the course, case d i s c u s s i o n s , con-c e p t s , r o l e p l a y i n g and o t h e r approaches were u t i l i z e d d u r i n g s e s s i o n s which t y p i c a l l y l a s t e d a p p r o x i m a t e l y two hours and were g i v e n a t r e g u l a r p e r i o d s d u r i n g the six-month time frame. At the same time, the s m a l l e r sample o f twelve s u p e r v i s o r s was used as a c o n t r o l group and t h i s group was not exposed to the t r a i n i n g . The two groups were w e l l matched through f o u r matching v a r i a b l e s namely age, job l e v e l , s e r v i c e i n y e a r s and c o l l e g e e d u c a t i o n i n y e a r s . Carron a l s o used a r e s e a r c h d e s i g n such as t h a t advocated i n the f i r s t c hapter o f t h i s study i n t h a t 1 9 he took pre and p o s t - c o u r s e measures of both c o n t r o l and e x p e r i m e n t a l groups. In h i s study, he used the Lead e r s h i p O p i n i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e (LOQ) and the F - S c a l e to o b t a i n a p p r o p r i a t e measures. Carron h y p o t h e s i z e d t h a t , as a r e s u l t o f t r a i n i n g , one would expect a movement away from a u t h o r i t a r i a n a t t i t u d e s toward more democratic, group-centred a t t i t u d e s . S p e c i f i c a l l y , he expected a decrease i n S t r u c t u r e s c o r e s , an i n c r e a s e i n C o n s i d e r a t i o n s c o r e s on the Fleishman LOQ and a decrease i n the a u t h o r i t a r i a n i s m s c o r e on the Adorno's s c a l e as a r e s u l t o f the t r a i n i n g , (p. 408) An examinationof h i s r e s u l t s shows t h a t , w h i l e t h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the b e f o r e s c o r e s f o r the two groups, the S t r u c t u r e s c o r e s f o r the ex p e r i m e n t a l group decreased s i g n i f i c a n t l y (at the 0.025 l e v e l ) as compared t o the c o n t r o l group w h i l e d i f f e r e n c e s on the C o n s i d e r a t i o n s c o r e were not s i g -n i f i c a n t . However, the l a t t e r s c o r e tended i n the hy p o t h e s i z e d d i r e c t i o n f o r the e x p e r i m e n t a l group w h i l e the c o n t r o l group remained f a i r l y steady. The f o l l o w - u p r e t e s t a t seventeen months a f t e r the completion of the t r a i n i n g d i d not y i e l d any s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n the S t r u c t u r e and C o n s i d e r a t i o n s c o r e s . 20 In a n o v e l a p p l i c a t i o n , Carron used v e c t o r geometry to a nalyze the S t r u c t u r e and C o n s i d e r a t i o n dimensions o f the LOQ. The r e s u l t s showed "a s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i -c a n t change from a u t h o r i t a r i a n to democratic a t t i t u d e s i n the e x p e r i m e n t a l group. T h i s change p e r s i s t e d o v e r a seventeen month f o l l o w - u p p e r i o d . " (p. 419) One f a c t o r t h a t Carron d i d not examine but which i s of c r i t i c a l importance p e r t a i n s to the " c l i m a t e " o f the o r g a n i z a t i o n . The s u b j e c t o f o r g a n i z a t i o n a l c l i m a t e has been e x t e n s i v e l y d e a l t w i t h i n the l i t e r a t u r e and w i l l o n l y be examined b r i e f l y here. T h i s examination i s n e cessary, however, because o f the s i g n i f i c a n c e t h a t c l i m a t e can have on t r a i n i n g outcomes. In t h i s c o n n e c t i o n , Hand and Slocum (1972) have noted: A fundamental tenant i n t r a i n i n g i s to develop a c l i m a t e f o r the people to u t i l i z e t h e i r t a l e n t s and to be rewarded a p p r o p r i a t e l y by the o r g a n i z a t i o n f o r t h e i r e f f o r t s . Behaviour taught i n t r a i n i n g i s made i n s t r u m e n t a l to the t r a i n e e by making rewards and punishments from the o r g a n i z a t i o n c o n t i n g e n t on the t r a n s f e r of t r a i n i n g to the job. There must be an o r g a n i z a t i o n a l c l i m a t e t h a t i s a d a p t i v e to t h i s p r o c e s s , (p. 416) Sherwood (1971), McGregor (1960) and House (1967), among o t h e r s , f u l l y s upport t h i s view and, i n f a c t , the l a t t e r has noted t h a t " i t i s unreasonable to expect e f f e c t i v e managerial p r a c t i c e s or change w i t h o u t o r g a n i z a t i o n a l c o n d i t i o n s which are conducive to them" 21 (p. 102) F i n a l l y , L i t w i n and S t r i n g e r (1968) have i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e i r r e s e a r c h supports the p o s i t i o n t h a t c l i m a t e i s a c r i t i c a l l y important v a r i a b l e i n the study o f human o r g a n i z a t i o n s and t h a t "dynamics o f o r g a n i z a -t i o n a l c l i m a t e must be s t u d i e d f o r c l i m a t e r e p r e s e n t s the d i r e c t determinant o f m o t i v a t i o n . " (p. 44) F u r t h e r , these two authors have p r e s e n t e d an e x c e l l e n t examina-t i o n o f the s u b j e c t , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n terms of c l i m a t e ' s e f f e c t on the m o t i v a t i o n a l dimension. ( L i t w i n and S t r i n g e r , 1968, Chapter IV) The q u e s t i o n remains, however,: What c o n s t i t u t e s a s u p p o r t i v e c l i m a t e ? House (1967) appears to have s u c c i n c t l y answered the q u e s t i o n , p a r t i c u l a r l y as i t r e l a t e s to t r a i n i n g , when he d e f i n e s such c l i m a t e as "one i n which the manager has the o p p o r t u n i t y to u t i l i z e i n p r a c t i c e those i d e a s p r e s e n t e d i n t r a i n i n g . " (p. 102) L i k e r t (1967), as i s w e l l known, has ex-t e n s i v e l y examined the "human" o r g a n i z a t i o n and has i d e n t i f i e d t h r e e s e t s o f v a r i a b l e s as b e i n g c r i t i c a l i n terms o f understanding the o r g a n i z a t i o n . In terms o f t h i s study, two of h i s s e t s — namely the Causal and I n t e r v e n i n g ones — seem p a r t i c u l a r l y important. L i k e r t has i d e n t i f i e d these two s e t s as f o l l o w s : The Causal v a r i a b l e s are independent - v a r i a b l e s which can be d i r e c t l y o r p u r p o s e l y a l t e r e d o r changed by o r g a n i z a t i o n and i t s management 4 4 and w h i c h , i n t u r n , d e t e r m i n e the c o u r s e o f developments w i t h i n an o r g a n i z a t i o n and t h e r e s u l t s a c h i e v e d by t h a t o r g a n i z a t i o n . G e n e r a l b u s i n e s s c o n d i t i o n s , f o r example, a l t h o u g h com-p r i s i n g i n d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e s a r e n o t v i e w e d as C a u s a l s i n c e the management o f a p a r t i c u l a r . e n t e r p r i s e o r d i n a r i l y can do l i t t l e a b out them.. C a u s a l v a r i a b l e s i n c l u d e t h e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n and management's p o l i c i e s , d e c i s i o n s , b u s i n e s s and l e a d e r s h i p s t r a t e g i e s , s k i l l s and b e h a v i o u r . The I n t e r v e n i n g v a r i a b l e s r e f l e c t t h e i n t e r n a l s t a t e , h e a l t h and p erformance c a p a b i l i t i e s o f t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n , e.g., t h e l o y a l t i e s , a t t i t u d e s , m o t i v a t i o n s , p e r formance g o a l s and p e r c e p t i o n s o f a l l members and t h e i r c o l l e c t i v e c a p a c i t y f o r e f f e c t i v e a c t i o n , i n t e r a c t i o n , communication and d e c i s i o n making, (p. 29) L i k e r t has f u r t h e r shown t h a t i t i s p o s s i b l e t o c o l l e c t d a t a w h i c h w i l l p r e s e n t t h e p r o f i l e o f an o r g a n i z a t i o n i n terms o f a System I t o System IV con-tinuum. F u r t h e r , he has i d e n t i f i e d t h a t o r g a n i z a t i o n s t h a t t e n d toward System I and System I I — E x p l o i t a t i v e A u t h o r i t a t i v e and B e n e v o l e n t A u t h o r i t a t i v e r e s p e c t i v e l y t e n d t o be l e s s e f f e c t i v e t h a n o r g a n i z a t i o n s t e n d i n g t o w a r d System I I I and System IV •— C o n s u l t a t i v e and P a r t i c i p a t i v e Group r e s p e c t i v e l y . F i n a l l y , he has i d e n t i f i e d t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e most e f f e c t i v e — System I V — o r g a n i z a t i o n as b e i n g : (1) the use. by t h e manager o f t h e p r i n c i p l e o f s u p p o r t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p s , (2) the use o f group d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g and group methods o f s u p e r v i s i o n , and (3) h i s h i g h p e r f o r m a n c e g o a l s f o r t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n , (p. 47) 23 S i n c e the above concepts are e s s e n t i a l l y the same, as those encouraged and promoted d u r i n g the course o f the human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g program under study, i t can be argued t h a t a System IV type o f o r g a n i z a t i o n — o r one t e n d i n g toward t h a t end of the continuum — w i l l be nec e s s a r y i n the work s i t u a t i o n f o r the course p a r t i c i -pants t o be encouraged t o r e t a i n the l e a r n i n g t h a t o c c u r s d u r i n g the course. Consequently, L i k e r t 1 s approach to de t e r m i n i n g a p r o f i l e o f an o r g a n i z a t i o n ' s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s was used to determine the "back home" c l i m a t e o f the o r g a n i z a t i o n t o which v i r t u a l l y a l l o f the course p a r t i c i p a n t s belonged. Given the f o r e g o i n g , i t i s e v i d e n t t h a t a number of q u e s t i o n s remain r e g a r d i n g the u s e f u l n e s s o f human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n i n d u s t r y . There i s an obvious need t o re-examine the e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g and, as a r e s u l t , t h i s t h e s i s w i l l t e s t the f o l l o w i n g hypotheses: HYPOTHESES (1) The s u b j e c t s i n the e x p e r i m e n t a l treatment group w i l l r e p o r t s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r i n c r e a s e s than the c o n t r o l group i n Con-s i d e r a t i o n (C) as measured by the Leader-s h i p O p i n i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e . (2) The s u b j e c t s i n the e x p e r i m e n t a l treatment group w i l l r e p o r t s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r i n c r e a s e s than the c o n t r o l group i n 24 Employee O r i e n t a t i o n (E) as measured by the LEAD instrument. (3) There w i l l be a s i g n i f i c a n t p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n o f C o n s i d e r a t i o n s c o r e s o f both groups w i t h the Employee O r i e n t a t i o n s c o r e s o f both groups. (4) The s u b j e c t s i n both the e x p e r i m e n t a l treatment group and the c o n t r o l group w i l l r e p o r t no s i g n i f i c a n t change i n S t r u c t u r e (S) as measured by the L e a d e r s h i p O p i n i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e . (5) The s u b j e c t s i n both the e x p e r i m e n t a l treatment group and the c o n t r o l group w i l l r e p o r t no s i g n i f i c a n t change i n D i f f e r e n t i a -t i o n as measured by the LEAD instrument. (6) There w i l l be a s i g n i f i c a n t p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n o f the S t r u c t u r e s c o r e s of both groups w i t h the D i f f e r e n t i a t i o n s c o r e s of both groups. (7) Both the Now (N) and L i k e (L) s c o r e s , as measured by the Form-S instrument, w i l l •remain unchanged f o r both the e x p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l groups. F u r t h e r , g i v e n the c l a i m s of the authors o f both the L e a d e r s h i p O p i n i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e and the LEAD instrument, as d i s c u s s e d elsewhere i n the-study, i t a l s o appears n e c e s s a r y to examine the f o l l o w i n g r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s : (1) Do the r e s u l t s o f t h i s study support Fleishman's (1969) c l a i m t h a t the two v a r i a b l e s , C o n s i d e r a t i o n and S t r u c t u r e are independent of each o t h e r ? (2) Do the r e s u l t s o f t h i s study support Dore's (19 73) b e l i e f t h a t the two v a r i a b l e s , Employee O r i e n t a t i o n and D i f f e r e n t i a t i o n are r e l a t i v e l y independent o f each other? 25 I t s h o u l d be noted here t h a t the s p e c i f i c terms used i n the hypotheses and r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s , t o g e t h e r w i t h the t e s t i n g instruments themselves, w i l l be ex-amined i n d e t a i l i n the next c h a p t e r . 26 CHAPTER I I I ; RESEARCH DESIGN: (1) S u b j e c t s : T h i r t y - s e v e n i n d i v i d u a l s o r i g i n a l l y r e g i s t e r e d f o r the course, Human Behaviour i n O r g a n i z a t i o n s , which forms the b a s i s f o r t h i s study. The m a j o r i t y of the r e g i s t r a n t s were employed i n e n g i n e e r i n g or e n g i n e e r i n g - r e l a t e d p o s i t i o n s and a l l b ut one were employed by the main f i r m o f what was, e s s e n t i a l l y , a o n e - i n d u s t r y l o c a t i o n i n Northern B r i t i s h Columbia. A second major employer sub-se q u e n t l y became a c t i v e i n the community, but i t s p r e -sence was not f e l t on the course under study. I n c l u d e d i n the l i s t o f t h i r t y - s e v e n r e g i s t e r e d p a r t i c i p a n t s was 27 one woman who subsequently became a member o f the exp e r i m e n t a l group. (2) Program I n t e r v e n t i o n s ; The course which forms the b a s i s f o r t h i s s tudy, Human Behaviour i n O r g a n i z a t i o n s , i s a Core course i n the Diploma i n A d m i n i s t r a t i o n f o r En g i n e e r s program which i s o f f e r e d by the B r i t i s h Columbia C o u n c i l on C o n t i n u i n g E d u c a t i o n f o r Engi n e e r s i n c o o p e r a t i o n w i t h the F a c u l t y o f A p p l i e d S c i e n c e and the Centre f o r C o n t i n u i n g E d u c a t i o n a t the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver, B.C. The f o l l o w i n g comments and a course o u t l i n e are taken from the brochure t h a t d e s c r i b e s the t o t a l Diploma program (UBC, 1972) : Human Behaviour i n O r g a n i z a t i o n s (This i s ) An i n t r o d u c t o r y course i n the b a s i c concepts p e r t a i n i n g t o human be h a v i o u r i n o r g a n i z a t i o n s . The course w i l l seek t o communi-cat e some knowledge o f g e n e r a l p s y c h o l o g i c a l p r i n c i p l e s and some s k i l l i n a p p l y i n g t h a t knowledge to s o c i a l and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s i t u a t i o n s . Through the use of d i s c u s s i o n s , cases, s i m u l a t i o n s , b u s i n e s s games and in s t r u m e n t s , the course w i l l examine some problems and procedures i n v o l v e d i n p r o v i d i n g and m a i n t a i n i n g e f f e c t i v e human r e l a t i o n s i n an o r g a n i z a t i o n . The c l a s s e s w i l l e x p l o r e a v a r i e t y o f t o p i c s w i t h i n the s u b j e c t a r e a , but the main emphasis w i l l be on the f o l l o w i n g t o p i c s : 28 L e a r n i n g M o t i v a t i o n Communications L e a d e r s h i p Group Dynamics The course w i l l minimize the f o r m a l l e c t u r e approach w h i l e maximizing an e x p e r i e n t i a l approach which r e l i e s h e a v i l y on i n d i v i d u a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n . I t s h o u l d a l s o be noted t h a t the course i s l i m i t e d t o a maximum o f twenty p a r t i c i p a n t s . F u r t h e r , the m a t e r i a l s u t i l i z e d — whether s e l e c t e d from e s t a b l i s h e d sources or developed s p e c i f i c a l l y f o r the course — attempted, as n e a r l y as p o s s i b l e , t o p r e s e n t s i t u a t i o n s o r problems w i t h which e n g i n e e r s , and o t h e r t e c h n i c a l l y -o r i e n t e d p e r s o n n e l , c o u l d e a s i l y i d e n t i f y . F i n a l l y , w h i l e the course can be p r e s e n t e d i n a v a r i e t y o f ways r a n g i n g from one n i g h t per week f o r t e n weeks to a c o n c e n t r a t e d twenty hours over two o r three c o n s e c u t i v e days, the one under study was g i v e n through two weekend s e s s i o n s , each o f approximately twelve to f o u r t e e n hours d u r a t i o n , w i t h a one-month s e p a r a t i o n between the f i r s t and second weekend. (3) Instruments: In an attempt to e v a l u a t e the e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f the human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g course, t h r e e instruments were u t i l i z e d o f which two are w e l l e s t a b l i s h e d and one i s r a t h e r new and u n t e s t e d . S p e c i f i c a l l y , 29 Edwin A. Fleishman's (1969) L e a d e r s h i p O p i n i o n Ques-t i o n n a i r e , Rensis L i k e r t A s s o c i a t e s ' (1970) P r o f i l e o f O r g a n i z a t i o n a l C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s (Form-S v e r s i o n ) and R u s s e l l Dore's (1973) LEAD q u e s t i o n n a i r e were used i n the study. I t would appear worthwhile, a t t h i s p o i n t , to b r i e f l y examine these i n s t r u m e n t s t o g e t h e r w i t h some of the reasons f o r u s i n g them. (a) L e a d e r s h i p O p i n i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e (LOQ): The LOQ i s s e l f - a d m i n i s t e r i n g and employs a s e l f -s c o r i n g format answer sheet which a u t o m a t i c a l l y s c o r e s a l t e r n a t i v e s t o each i t e m as 0 , 1 , 2, 3, or 4. There are a t o t a l o f f o r t y items w i t h twenty a s s i g n e d to each o f the two s c a l e s . T h i s instrument has been used q u i t e e x t e n s i v e l y as a t t e s t e d by the l a r g e number o f r e f e r e n c e s i n the l i t e r a t u r e . The LOQ p r o v i d e s measures o f two important dimensions o f l e a d e r s h i p i d e n t i f i e d , by the author, as C o n s i d e r a t i o n (C) and S t r u c t u r e ( S ) . These two v a r i a b l e s are d e f i n e d i n the 1969 r e v i s i o n o f the manual f o r the q u e s t i o n n a i r e as f o l l o w s : C o n s i d e r a t i o n : R e f l e c t s the e x t e n t to which an i n d i v i d u a l i s l i k e l y to have job r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h h i s s u b o r d i n a t e s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by mutual t r u s t , r e s p e c t f o r t h e i r i d e a s , c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e i r f e e l i n g s , and a c e r t a i n warmth'between h i m s e l f and them. A h i g h s c o r e i s i n d i c a t i v e o f a c l i m a t e of good r a p p o r t and good communication. 30 A low s c o r e i n d i c a t e s the i n d i v i d u a l i s l i k e l y t o be more impersonal i n h i s r e l a t i o n s w i t h group members.. S t r u c t u r e : R e f l e c t s the e x t e n t t o which an i n d i v i d u a l i s l i k e l y to d e f i n e and s t r u c t u r e h i s own r o l e and those o f h i s s u b o r d i n a t e s toward g o a l attainment. A h i g h s c o r e i n t h i s dimension c h a r a c t e r i z e s i n d i v i d u a l s who p l a y a very a c t i v e r o l e i n d i r e c t i n g group a c t i v i t i e s through p l a n n i n g , communicating i n f o r m a t i o n , s c h e d u l i n g , c r i t i c i z i n g , t r y i n g out new i d e a s , and so f o r t h . A low s c o r e c h a r a c t e r i z e s i n -d i v i d u a l s who are l i k e l y t o be r e l a t i v e l y i n a c t i v e i n g i v i n g d i r e c t i o n i n these ways. (Fleishman, 1969, p. 1) I t s hould be noted here t h a t Fleishman c l a i m s t h a t these two dimensions are independent o f one another and p r e s e n t s data to s u b s t a n t i a t e t h i s c l a i m . However, Weissenberg and Kavanaugh (19 72) have q u e s t i o n e d t h i s c l a i m and have done a r a t h e r thorough examination o f seventy-two s t u d i e s which u t i l i z e d e i t h e r the LOQ or a companion instrument, the Leader Behaviour D e s c r i p t i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e (LBDQ), which was a l s o developed by Fleishman. They concluded: The most important c o n c l u s i o n of t h i s review i s t h a t the two l e a d e r s h i p dimensions of C and S are not always i m p e r i c a l l y independent as s t a t e d and. i m p l i e d i n v a r i o u s r e s e a r c h . s t u d i e s and management t r a i n i n g programs. I t i s c o n t i n g e n t mainly on the type o f q u e s t i o n n a i r e (LOQ or LBDQ) used to measure the b e h a v i o u r . The h i g h frequency o f n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r the LOQ i n d i c a t e s t h a t managers t h i n k they s h o u l d behave as i f C and S are independent. (p. 177) While the r e s u l t s o f the review are f a r from con-c l u s i v e , one way or the o t h e r , the t e n t a t i v e c o n c l u s i o n 31 i s important t o t h i s study. In t h i s r e g a r d , as has been noted, t h i s study w i l l attempt t o show t h a t the t r a i n i n g course brought about an i n c r e a s e i n C o n s i d e r a -t i o n s c o r e s f o r the e x p e r i m e n t a l group w h i l e , a t the same time, the S t r u c t u r e s c o r e s f o r the e x p e r i m e n t a l group w i l l be expected t o remain unchanged. Thus i t can be seen t h a t , i f the two dimensions are not independent, such a p o s i t i o n p e r t a i n i n g t o the S t r u c t u r e dimension o f the e x p e r i m e n t a l group would be i m p o s s i b l e t o a c h i e v e . I t i s a l s o worthwhile to note, a t t h i s p o i n t , a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the above p o s i t i o n w i t h r e s p e c t to the expected l e a r n i n g outcomes, as measured by the LOQ, as a r e s u l t o f exposure t o a human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g program. Many r e s e a r c h e r s — Carron (1964) i s a case i n p o i n t — appear t o b e l i e v e t h a t t h e r e i s a need t o reduce S t r u c t u r e s c o r e s , i n the course o f a human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g program, and they s t a t e t h e i r hypotheses a c c o r d i n g l y . I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o note t h a t these r e s e a r c h e r s never appear to know beforehand what the S t r u c t u r e scores w i l l be and y e t they a u t o m a t i c a l l y assume t h a t the s c o r e s w i l l need t o be reduced. T h i s r e s e a r c h e r d i s a g r e e s w i t h t h i s p o s i t i o n f o r a number o f reasons. 32 I n t h e f i r s t i n s t a n c e , as n o t e d above, one does n o t know b e f o r e h a n d what t h e l e v e l o f S t r u c t u r e s c o r e s w i l l be f o r any g i v e n group and, as a r e s u l t , c a n n o t p r e t e n d t o know whether t h e s c o r e s s h o u l d be d e c r e a s e d o r n o t . I n a d d i t i o n , even i f one knew the l e v e l o f t h e S t r u c t u r e s c o r e s b e f o r e h a n d , t h e l i t e r a t u r e does n o t g i v e any c l e a r i n d i c a t i o n o f what a " t o o h i g h " s c o r e i s , e x c e p t i n terms o f i t s r e l a t i o n s h i p t o a C o n s i d e r a t i o n s c o r e . A l t h o u g h one mi g h t s u s p e c t , t h e n , t h a t t h e same argument c o u l d be made c o n c e r n i n g C o n s i d e r a t i o n s c o r e s , t h i s p o s i t i o n does n o t h o l d because t h e l i t e r a t u r e does c o n t a i n some i n f o r m a t i o n p e r t a i n i n g t o " t o o low" Con-s i d e r a t i o n s c o r e s . The f i n d i n g s o f a s t u d y by F l e i s h m a n and H a r r i s (1967), a l t h o u g h t h e s t u d y p a r t i c u l a r l y r e l a t e d t o p o s s i b l e c o r r e l a t i o n s , between the C o n s i d e r a t i o n and S t r u c t u r e d i m e n s i o n s and e i t h e r t u r n o v e r o r g r i e v a n c e s a r e w o r t h n o t i n g . These a u t h o r s i n d i c a t e d t h a t : O ther p r i n c i p a l f i n d i n g s c o n c e r n t h e i n t e r a c t i o n e f f e c t s f o u n d between d i f f e r e n t c o m b i n a t i o n s o f C o n s i d e r a t i o n and S t r u c t u r e . Taken i n com-b i n a t i o n , C o n s i d e r a t i o n i s t h e dominant f a c t o r . F o r example, b o t h g r i e v a n c e s and t u r n o v e r were h i g h e s t i n groups h a v i n g low C o n s i d e r a t i o n foremen, r e g a r d l e s s o f t h e degree o f S t r u c t u r e  b e h a v i o u r shown by t h e s e same foremen. Thus, w i t h r e g a r d t o g r i e v a n c e s and t u r n o v e r , l e a d e r b e h a v i o u r c h a r a c t e r i z e d by low C o n s i d e r a t i o n i s more c r i t i c a l t h a n b e h a v i o u r c h a r a c t e r i z e d by h i g h S t r u c t u r e . A p p a r e n t l y , foremen can com- pe n s a t e f o r h i g h S t r u c t u r e by i n c r e a s e d Con- s i d e r a t i o n b u t low C o n s i d e r a t i o n foremen c a n n o t  compensate by d e c r e a s i n g t h e i r S t r u c t u r e b e h a v i o u r , (p. 374) ( u n d e r l i n i n g added) 33 I t would appear, then, t h a t s i n c e C o n s i d e r a t i o n i s the dominant f a c t o r , i t i s most important t o i n c r e a s e the C o n s i d e r a t i o n s c o r e — whatever i t was a t the s t a r t -as the main t h r u s t o f a human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g program. In a d d i t i o n , s i n c e the S t r u c t u r e s c o r e c o u l d as e a s i l y be low r a t h e r than h i g h b e f o r e t r a i n i n g , i t would a l s o appear to be somewhat dangerous to simply assume t h a t i t s h o u l d be decreased by the t r a i n i n g . In a s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t v e i n , and w h i l e t h e r e appears t o be some danger i n a g r e e i n g w i t h the p o s i t i o n i n i t s e n t i r e t y , t h e r e does appear to be a good d e a l o f m e r i t t o the p o s i t i o n taken by S t o g d i l l (1974) -- as noted by Bowen — : The o n l y l e a d e r s h i p p a t t e r n t h a t f a v o u r s c o h e s i v e n e s s , s a t i s f a c t i o n and p r o d u c t i v i t y too ... i s the s t r u c t u r i n g of r o l e s - making i t c l e a r to people what i s expected of them. T h i s p a t t e r n o f b e haviour i s perhaps a c e n t r a l f a c t o r i n l e a d e r s h i p . P h i l o s o p h i e s of l e a d e r -s h i p and t r a i n i n g methods t h a t undermine t h i s f a c t o r d e s t r o y the v e r y f o u n d a t i o n o f l e a d e r s h i p , (p. 243) F i n a l l y , the manual f o r the LOQ i n s t r u m e n t shows r e l i a b i l i t y measures f o r v a r i o u s samples r a n g i n g , f o r C o n s i d e r a t i o n , from .62 to .89 and, f o r S t r u c t u r e , from .67 to .88. In a d d i t i o n , t a b l e s are g i v e n summarizing v a l i d i t i e s o f the LOQ s c a l e s f o r v a r i o u s groups and i n c l u d i n g s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n s (at .05 and .01) w i t h 34 v a r i o u s c r i t e r i a . I t s h o u l d be noted here, however, t h a t a paper p u b l i s h e d a f t e r the r e s e a r c h f o r t h i s study had been completed r a i s e d a number o f q u e s t i o n s about the LOQ, p a r t i c u l a r l y c o n c e r n i n g "unknowns" on v a l i d i t y f a c t o r s . In t h i s r e g a r d , S c h r i e s h e i m and K e r r (1974) noted t h a t the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the LOQ, and i t s companion instruments, have not been c l o s e l y e x p l o r e d . Although an examination of t h e i r subsequent f i n d i n g s and concerns i s beyond the scope o f t h i s study, i t should be noted t h a t , w h i l e they found i n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c y and t e s t -r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t i e s a c c e p t a b l e f o r the LOQ, they ques-t i o n e d whether the s c a l e s are independent and p o i n t e d out t h a t a number o f "unknowns" e x i s t w i t h r e s p e c t t o c o n s t r u c t v a l i d i t y , e x p e r i m e n t a l v a l i d i t y and o t h e r f a c t o r s , (p. 76 3) F i n a l l y , w h i l e r e c o g n i z i n g t h a t the LOQ s c a l e s r e q u i r e r e f i n e m e n t and f u r t h e r v a l i d a t i o n , they note t h a t : They (the s c a l e s ) p r o b a b l y remain s u p e r i o r t o those h a s t i l y developed and s u p e r f i c i a l l y i n v e s t i g a t e d a l t e r n a t i v e s sometimes used i n l e a d e r s h i p r e s e a r c h , (p. 764) (b) LEAD Q u e s t i o n n a i r e (LEAD): The LEAD q u e s t i o n n a i r e i s s e l f - a d m i n i s t r a t i n g and c o n t a i n s s i x t y q u e s t i o n s to which one responds by 35 marking e i t h e r the number 1 o r 2 response on an answer sheet. Each o f the two s c a l e s account f o r t h i r t y o f the s i x t y q u e s t i o n s . A template must.be prepared, f o l l o w i n g the i n s t r u c t i o n s g i v e n , i n o r d e r t o score the i n d i v i d u a l q u e s t i o n n a i r e s . During the se a r c h f o r a companion instrument, by a d i f f e r e n t author, to complement the LOQ, a wide v a r i e t y of instruments — i n c l u d i n g many t h a t had been used i n p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h the LOQ — were c o n s i d e r e d . When the LEAD q u e s t i o n n a i r e was l o c a t e d i n e a r l y 197 3, i t was immediately s e l e c t e d f o r two main reasons. In the f i r s t i n s t a n c e , Dore's comments suggested t h a t there should be a reasonable c o r r e l a t i o n between h i s Employee O r i e n t a t i o n (E) and D i f f e r e n t i a t i o n (D) s c a l e s and the C o n s i d e r a t i o n (C) and S t r u c t u r e (S) s c a l e s o f the LOQ. In t h i s r e g a r d , Dore noted: The i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n o f the s c a l e s i n d i c a t e d t h a t the s c a l e s measure two r e l a t i v e l y i n -dependent a t t i t u d e s : one i n v o l v i n g an employee o r i e n t a t i o n - a b e l i e f i n the d e l e g a t i o n o f a u t h o r i t y and a b e l i e f i n the importance o f teamwork - arid the o t h e r i n -v o l v i n g a d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n o f the l e a d e r ' s r o l e s . These two a t t i t u d e s appear q u i t e s i m i l a r to C o n s i d e r a t i o n and I n i t i a t i n g S t r u c t u r e a t t i t u d e s found i n s t u d i e s by E.A. Fleishman. (1973, p. 95) 36 No s p e c i f i c i n f o r m a t i o n was p r o v i d e d by Dore on r e l i a b i l i t y o r v a l i d i t y o f t h e i n s t r u m e n t s c a l e s . I n a d d i t i o n , none o f t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n c o u l d be found i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e n o r c o u l d s t u d i e s be f o u n d t h a t had employed t h e i n s t r u m e n t . However, t h e d e c i s i o n was made t o u t i l i z e t he LEAD q u e s t i o n n a i r e i n t h e hope t h a t , i f i t d i d show c o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h t h e LOQ, a new i n -s t r u m e n t w o u l d have been t e s t e d t h a t c o u l d be f u r t h e r u t i l i z e d by t r a i n e r s and r e s e a r c h e r s a l i k e . I n t h i s r e g a r d , a number o f r e f e r e n c e s i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e have n o t e d t h a t t h e s m a l l number o f u s e f u l i n s t r u m e n t s a v a i l a b l e a c t u a l l y c o n t r i b u t e s d i r e c t l y t o t h e l i m i t e d amount o f e v a l u a t i o n done. I t was f e l t , t h e n , t h a t i f a n o t h e r i n s t r u m e n t c o u l d d e m o n s t r a t e i t s u s e f u l n e s s , t h e t o t a l f i e l d o f r e s e a r c h and e v a l u a t i o n w o u l d b e n e f i t . (c) P r o f i l e o f O r g a n i z a t i o n a l C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s (Form-S); The Form-S i n s t r u m e n t i s s e l f - a d m i n i s t e r i n g . I t c o n t a i n s e i g h t e e n q u e s t i o n s t o w h i c h one re s p o n d s by p l a c i n g an "N" — i n d i c a t i n g Now — a t t h e p o i n t on a twenty p o i n t s c a l e w h i c h d e s c r i b e s where one sees the. o r g a n i z a t i o n as b e i n g a t t h e p r e s e n t t i m e . The i n -s t r u c t i o n s on t h e form were amended, on t h i s s t u d y , by d e l e t i n g t h e second and t h i r d i n s t r u c t i o n found on the s h e e t and r e p l a c i n g them w i t h one i n s t r u c t i o n r e q u i r i n g 37 the respondent to i n d i c a t e w i t h an "L" — equ a l s L i k e — t h a t p o i n t on the s c a l e which d e s c r i b e s the s t a t e t h a t they would l i k e t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n t o a t t a i n . R e n s i s ' L i k e r t ' s work has been r e f e r r e d t o i n some d e t a i l p r e v i o u s l y . Consequently, o n l y a few p o i n t s need t o be p r e s e n t e d here. I t would appear t h a t the " P r o f i l e " i s the b e s t a v a i l a b l e instrument f o r the purpose o f p r o v i d i n g v a l i d , u s e f u l d a t a on the c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n o f an o r g a n i z a t i o n — i n terms o f i t s manage-ment system. As the l i t e r a t u r e has shown, an o r g a n i z a t i o n ' s c l i m a t e must be conducive i f the m a t e r i a l s l e a r n e d on a t r a i n i n g program are to have any chance o f b e i n g r e t a i n e d and u t i l i z e d . S i n c e a l l but one o f the s u b j e c t s on both the e x p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l groups came from one o r g a n i z a t i o n , i t was f e l t t h a t i t would be worthwhile to determine whether the c l i m a t e o f the o r g a n i z a t i o n would be conducive to p r a c t i s i n g the kind s o f l e a r n i n g t h a t would accrue from the co u r s e . O b v i o u s l y , i f the o r g a n i z a t i o n had a tendency toward the System I and System I I end o f the s c a l e , the chances o f the l e a r n i n g f i n d i n g an o p p o r t u n i t y to be u t i l i z e d would not be as g r e a t as i t would i f the o r g a n i z a t i o n s u b s c r i b e d to the System IV p o s i t i o n and 38 the accompanying f a c t o r s o u t l i n e d e a r l i e r (see p. 22) i n t h i s paper. As w e l l as at t e m p t i n g t o determine the " p r o f i l e " o f the o r g a n i z a t i o n from which the m a j o r i t y o f the p a r t i c i p a n t s were drawn, th e r e was y e t another reason f o r u t i l i z i n g the p r o f i l e form. F o l l o w i n g the t r a i n i n g programs, i t was i n t e n d e d to "f e e d back", to the s e n i o r management o f the o r g a n i z a t i o n , the r e s u l t s o f t h i s r e s e a r c h i n an e f f o r t t o a s s i s t the o r g a n i z a t i o n i n p l a n n i n g i t s f u t u r e development a c t i v i t i e s . In terms of the "feedback" a s p e c t o f the data, the l i t e r a t u r e has c l e a r l y demonstrated t h a t the L i k e r t p r o f i l e i s p a r t i c u l a r l y w e l l s u i t e d to t h i s approach and t h a t the data can be o f g r e a t a s s i s t a n c e to o r g a n i z a t i o n s who choose t o use i t i n an a p p r o p r i a t e manner. In t h i s r e g a r d , p a r t i c u l a r note should be made of Waters' (1971) comments: In u n d e r t a k i n g any program, we have found the survey extremely v a l u a b l e i n d i a g n o s i n g the p r e s e n t s t a t e o f the dynamics o f the o r g a n i z a -t i o n . I t h e l p s make t a n g i b l e what otherwise seems very i n t a n g i b l e t o pragmatic e x e c u t i v e s . T h i s d i a g n o s i s ... g i v e s us a p r e t t y a c c u r a t e f i x on where the company i s i n i t s p r e s e n t s t a t e o f development al o n g the continuum from System I to System IV. (p. 55) Adm i t t e d l y , Waters i s r e f e r r i n g s p e c i f i c a l l y to an instrument t h a t has subsequently been developed by the I n s t i t u t e f o r S o c i a l Research, under L i k e r t . 39 (see Bowers, 1971) However, the b a s i c theory and approach i s e s s e n t i a l l y the same. On a f i n a l note, the a b b r e v i a t e d Form-S v e r s i o n of the P r o f i l e o f O r g a n i z a t i o n a l C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s was u t i l i z e d i n t h i s study because i t s b r e v i t y makes i t e a s i e r t o a d m i n i s t e r and t o examine and ana l y s e the r e s u l t s . (4) Procedures: (a) Procedures on Matching Groups: The t h i r t y - s e v e n o r i g i n a l r e g i s t r a n t s were d i v i d e d i n t o an e x p e r i m e n t a l group o f twenty and a matched c o n t r o l group o f seventeen. ( I t s h o u l d be noted here t h a t t h i s study w i l l r e f e r to the two groups as the experimental and c o n t r o l groups r a t h e r than as the t r a i n i n g and c o n t r o l groups to a v o i d the c o n f u s i o n p r e -v i o u s l y noted about a "T-group" i n a "standard" human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g program, (see p. 12) The matching of the two groups i n t h i s study was attempted on s i x v a r i a b l e s as f o l l o w s : age, number o f years o f u n i v e r s i t y e d u c a t i o n ; P r o f e s s i o n a l Engineer r e g i s t r a t i o n ; number of y e a r s w i t h company; number of years i n c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n ; number of y e a r s a t c u r r e n t geographic l o c a t i o n . 40 The f i r s t two o f these v a r i a b l e s , age and edu-c a t i o n , are f a i r l y s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d matching items and do not r e q u i r e f u r t h e r e x p l a n a t i o n . The t h i r d item, P r o f e s s i o n a l Engineer r e g i s t r a t i o n , was used i n an attempt to ensure t h a t the two groups had equal r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f confirmed, t e c h n i c a l l y - o r i e n t e d p r o f e s s i o n a l s . I t i s r e c o g n i z e d t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s w i t h a degree i n e n g i n e e r i n g do n o t have t o r e g i s t e r b u t i t would appear t h a t a hi g h percentage do, i n t h i s p r o v i n c e , w i t h the r e s u l t t h a t t h i s v a r i a b l e i s a f a i r l y a c c u r a t e matching item. The item, years w i t h the company, was s e l e c t e d i n an e f f o r t t o ensure t h a t the two groups had matched numbers o f i n d i v i d u a l s who had been w i t h the company f o r both s h o r t and long p e r i o d s o f time. The concern here was, of course, t h a t one o r the o t h e r group might be o v e r - r e p r e s e n t e d by e i t h e r young people who had not been w i t h the company f o r l o n g — and hence who c o u l d not have been as a f f e c t e d by any p a r t i c u l a r c l i m a t e — or by o l d e r i n d i v i d u a l s who have been w i t h the company f o r some years and may have become more s e t i n t h e i r ways through l o n g exposure t o a p a r t i c u l a r c l i m a t e . I t i s r e c o g n i z e d t h a t the argument c o u l d be made t h a t some " o l d e r " people c o u l d a l s o have been w i t h the company f o r o n l y a s h o r t l e n g t h o f time or they c o u l d have been w i t h 41 the company f o r many years b ut a t a d i f f e r e n t l o c a t i o n and, hence, p o s s i b l y s u b j e c t t o a d i f f e r e n t c l i m a t e . Given the na t u r e o f the p a r t i c u l a r company i n q u e s t i o n and the somewhat uniqueness o f many p o s i t i o n , p a r t i c u l a r l y a t the more s e n i o r l e v e l , i t was not f e l t t h a t the former i t e m was p a r t i c u l a r l y a p p l i c a b l e . The l a t t e r item, on the o t h e r hand, w i l l be d e a l t w i t h under a l a t e r matching v a r i a b l e . The matching item, years i n c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n , was used to ensure t h a t n e i t h e r group had an excess r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f people who had j u s t changed p o s i t i o n s and who might be caught up i n the e f f e c t s o f such a change. -On the o t h e r hand, t h i s v a r i a b l e a l s o sought to ensure t h a t n e i t h e r group was o v e r - r e p r e s e n t e d by people who had been i n t h e i r c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n f o r an e x t e n s i v e p e r i o d o f time and who might have adverse a t t i t u d e s as a r e s u l t o f the simple l a c k o f change i n t h e i r p o s i t i o n . The f i n a l item, y e a r s a t c u r r e n t geographic l o c a t i o n , was s e l e c t e d t o ensure t h a t n e i t h e r group had an o v e r - r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f people who had spent many years a t the l o c a t i o n . I t sh o u l d be kept i n mind t h a t , up u n t i l v ery r e c e n t l y , the community had had o n l y one major employer. In e f f e c t , i t c o u l d have 42 been c o n s i d e r e d almost a "company" town w i t h a l l o f the s i d e e f f e c t s , both good and bad, t h a t the term i m p l i e s . In a d d i t i o n , the company and the community have e x p e r i e n c e d some severe t u r n o v e r problems i n r e c e n t y e a r s . As a r e s u l t , any p o s s i b l e i n s t a b i l i t y o r s o l i d s t a b i l i t y growing out o f t h i s s i t u a t i o n c o u l d be o v e r - r e p r e s e n t e d i n e i t h e r o f the two groups i f care were not taken t o attempt t o match t h i s v a r i a b l e . (b) A d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f Instruments: Both the ex p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l groups completed LOQ, LEAD and Form-S forms on a pre and p o s t - c o u r s e b a s i s under the p e r s o n a l s u p e r v i s i o n o f the author. The second s e t of forms (post-course) were completed a t a p o i n t i n time approximately one month a f t e r the f i r s t s e t o f forms. Approximately t h i r t y days a f t e r the completion o f the p o s t - c o u r s e s e t of forms, each e x p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l group member was sent an LOQ form, by m a i l , and asked t o complete and r e t u r n i t t o the author. (c) A d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f the Course: As has been noted e a r l i e r , t h i s study i s o f a human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g course, Human Behaviour i n O r g a n i z a t i o n s , t h a t was conducted a t a Nor t h e r n l o c a t i o n 43 i n B r i t i s h Columbia i n the S p r i n g , 1973. S p e c i f i c a l l y , the course was g i v e n d u r i n g two weekends, spaced one month a p a r t — a t the end of March and the end o f A p r i l and t o t a l l e d approximately t w e n t y - s i x hours o f course time. On each o f the two weekends, the course s t a r t e d on the F r i d a y a f t e r n o o n and c o n t i n u e d through to Sunday w i t h s e s s i o n s on the F r i d a y a f t e r n o o n and evening, a l l day Saturday and Sunday morning. (d) P r o c e s s i n g o f Data: O r i g i n a l l y , a l l the forms were hand-scored and the data compiled manually by the r e s e a r c h e r . Sub-sequently, the data was coded f o r p r o c e s s i n g by the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia IBM 370/68 computer. (5) S t a t i s t i c a l P rocedures: Three p r i n c i p a l procedures were u t i l i z e d i n the study, namely: H o t e l l i n g s T t e s t ; Hoyt E s t i m a t e o f R e l i a b i l i t y ; F i s h e r ' s Z-Transformation o f C o r r e l a t i o n C o e f f i c i e n t s . 2 (a) H o t e l l i n g s T (Morrison, 1967) : S i n c e the s i x pre and p o s t - c o u r s e t e s t s c o r e s are i n t e r c o r r e l a t e d , m u l t i v a r i a t e t e s t procedures 44 s h o u l d be used to t e s t f o r s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s o f mean sc o r e s between the e x p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l 2 groups. The H o t e l l m g s T t e s t on d i f f e r e n c e s between the two groups on the twelve v a r i a b l e s would t e s t any s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s . (b) Hoyt Estimate o f R e l i a b i l i t y (Helmstadter, 1964) : Because o f the v a r y i n g r e l i a b i l i t y r e s u l t s a v a i l a b l e on the LOQ instrument and the absence o f any r e l i a b i l i t y measures on the LEAD instrument, r e l i a b i l i t y e s t i m a t e s f o r these two instruments from the data o f t h i s study would prove u s e f u l . A c c o r d i n g l y , the Hoyt Esti m a t e s o f R e l i a b i l i t i e s would p r o v i d e a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n f o r t h i s study. (c) F i s h e r ' s Z-Transformation o f C o r r e l a t i o n C o e f f i c i e n t s  ( M a r a s c u i l o , 1971); In o r d e r to determine the s t a t i s t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e o f v a r i o u s c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s among the v a r i a b l e s , F i s h e r ' s Z-Transformation o f C o r r e l a t i o n C o e f f i c i e n t s was u t i l i z e d . (6) A n a l y s i s o f Data; At the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia Computer Centre, the UBC TRIP program was u t i l i z e d t o develop c o r r e l a t i o n m a t r i c e s on: 45 (a) a l l v a r i a b l e s w i t h one m a t r i x f o r t h e combined e x p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l groups t o d e t e r m i n e c o r r e l a t i o n s and t h e i n -dependence o f s u b - v a r i a b l e s w i t h i n e a c h i n s t r u m e n t ; (b) a l l v a r i a b l e s w i t h one m a t r i x f o r t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l group and one f o r t h e c o n t r o l group t o d e t e r m i n e i f any s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a t i o n s o c c u r r e d , on c o r r e l a t i o n s and t h e independence o f s u b - v a r i a b l e s , w i t h t h e s m a l l e r groups when compared t o t h e combined group. The TRIP program a l s o was used t o d e t e r m i n e 2 H o t e l l i n g s T t e s t r e s u l t s . F u r t h e r , t h e UBC LERTAP program was used t o de t e r m i n e Hoyt E s t i m a t e s o f R e l i a b i l i t i e s f o r t h e LOQ and LEAD v a r i a b l e s . 46 CHAPTER IV: RESULTS: Matching of Experimental and Control Groups: Although thirty-seven i n d i v i d u a l s o r i g i n a l l y registered for the course and were separated into an experimental group of twenty and a control group of seventeen, a number of factors including i l l n e s s , resignation from the company and, l a t e r , improper com-pl e t i o n of forms contributed to reducing the numbers u n t i l the f i n a l r e s u l t was that there were f i f t e e n subjects i n both the experimental and con t r o l groups. 47 T a b l e 1 shows t h e r e s u l t s o f the m a t c h i n g o f t h e means and medians, o f t h e two g r o u p s , on f i v e o f t h e s i x v a r i a b l e s d i s c u s s e d e a r l i e r namely: age; y e a r s o f u n i v e r s i t y ; y e a r s w i t h company; y e a r s i n c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n ; y e a r s a t c u r r e n t g e o g r a p h i c l o c a t i o n . F o r t h e s i x t h m a t c h i n g v a r i a b l e , R e g i s t e r e d P r o f e s s i o n a l E n g i n e e r , means c o u l d n o t be d e v e l o p e d s i n c e t h e v a r i a b l e r e q u i r e d o n l y a s i m p l e y e s o r no r e s p o n s e . However, an a n a l y s i s o f the r e s p o n s e s showed t h a t f i f t y - t h r e e p e r c e n t o f t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l group and s i x t y p e r c e n t o f t h e c o n t r o l group i n d i c a t e d a R e g i s t e r e d P r o f e s s i o n a l E n g i n e e r s t a t u s . A v i s u a l e x a m i n a t i o n o f T a b l e 1 s u g g e s t s e q u i -v a l e n c y o f the two gr o u p s . However, t h e r e s u l t s shown i n T a b l e 2 a r e o f even g r e a t e r i m p o r t a n c e i n c o n s i d e r i n g t h e m a t c h i n g o f t h e two gr o u p s . I n t h i s r e g a r d , T a b l e 2 shows t h e means o f the p r e - c o u r s e t e s t s c o r e s , f o r b o t h the e x p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l g r o u p s , f o r the s i x v a r i a b l e s measured by t h e LOQ, LEAD and Form-S i n s t r u m e n t s . The 2 r e s u l t s o f t h e H o t e l l i n g s T t e s t showed t h a t no s i g -n i f i c a n t . d i f f e r e n c e e x i s t s i n t h e s i x p r e - c o u r s e means between t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l groups and, hence, t h a t t h e two groups can be c o n s i d e r e d t o be e q u i v a l e n t . TABLE 1 MEANS AND MEDIANS OF MATCHING VARIABLES FOR EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUPS E x p e r i m e n t a l (n = 15) Mean S.D. Median Range C o n t r o l (n = 15) Mean S.D. Median Range Age, y e a r s 37.53 9.91 32 25-57 38.73 9.60 37 27-60 Y e a r s o f U n i v e r s i t y 3.87 2.17 4.2 0-8 4.27 1.64 4.3 0-8 Y e a r s w i t h Company 8.92 7.75 1-24 9.98 7.08 8 1.5-24 Y e a r s i n C u r r e n t P o s i t i o n 2.55 2.70 2.25 .25-11 3.73 4.64 2.25 .25-19 Y e a r s a t C u r r e n t L o c a t i o n 6.40 5.98 4 1-20 8.70 6.40 6 .75-19 49 TABLE 2 MEANS OF LOQ, LEAD AND FORM-S PRE-COURSE SCORES FOR EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUPS Ex p e r i m e n t a l C o n t r o l (n = 15) (n = 15) Mean S.D. Mean S.D. C o n s i d e r a t i o n 57.27 6.55 57.40 4.31 S t r u c t u r e 44.13 5.91 45.53 7.62 Employee O r i e n t a t i o n 16.27 2.34 15.80 2.40 D i f f e r e n t i a t i o n 14.47 2.00 14.33 1.54 Now 10.91 2.72 10.40 2.90 L i k e 16.89 0.96 16.39 1.42 Note: H o t e l l i n g s T 2 = 41.73 v i n s i g n i f i c a n t a t oC - .05 F-Value = 2 . 0 0 6 50 Hypotheses: (1) The s u b j e c t s i n the e x p e r i m e n t a l t r e a t m e n t group w i l l r e p o r t s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r i n c r e a s e s t h a n t h e c o n t r o l group i n Con-s i d e r a t i o n (C) as measured by the L e a d e r s h i p O p i n i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e . T a b l e 3 shows the means o f t h e p r e and p o s t - c o u r s e C o n s i d e r a t i o n s c o r e s f o r the e x p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l g r o u p s . A l t h o u g h t h e mean o f t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l group, f o r t h e p o s t - c o u r s e s c o r e , i s 7.60 p o i n t s above t h e 2 c o n t r o l group, the H o t e l l i n g s T t e s t shows no s i g -n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e . C o n s e q u e n t l y , H y p o t h e s i s 1 i s n o t s u p p o r t e d . TABLE 3 PRE AND POST-COURSE CONSIDERATION MEANS FOR EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUPS E x p e r i m e n t a l • C o n t r o l (n = 1 5 ) (n = 15) Mean S.D. Mean S.D. C o n s i d e r a t i o n - P r e 57.27 6.55 57.40 4.31 C o n s i d e r a t i o n - P o s t 64.07 6.57 56.47 4.94 Note: H o t e l l i n g s T 2 = 41.73 ^ > i n s i g n i f i c a n t a t cC = .05 F-Value = 2 . 0 0 6 51 (2) The s u b j e c t s i n t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l t r e a t m e n t group w i l l r e p o r t s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r i n c r e a s e , t h a n the c o n t r o l group, i n Employee O r i e n t a t i o n (E) as measured by t h e LEAD i n s t r u m e n t . T a b l e 4 shows t h e means o f t h e p r e and p o s t - c o u r s e Employee O r i e n t a t i o n s c o r e s f o r the e x p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l groups. E s s e n t i a l l y , t h e r e i s no d i f f e r e n c e 2 between the two s c o r e s and t h e H o t e l l i n g s T t e s t s u p p o r t s t h i s o b s e r v a t i o n . C o n s e q u e n t l y , H y p o t h e s i s 2 i s n o t s u p p o r t e d . TABLE 4 PRE AND POST-COURSE EMPLOYEE ORIENTATION (E) MEANS FOR EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUPS E x p e r i m e n t a l (n = 15) C o n t r o l (n = 15) Mean S.D. Mean S.D. E-Pre 16.27 2. 34 15.80 2.40 E - P o s t 14.80 2.21 14.93 2. 31 Note: H o t e l l i n g s T F-Value = 41.73 i n s i g n i f i c a n t a t c C = -05 = 2.006 52 (3) There w i l l be a s i g n i f i c a n t p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n o f C o n s i d e r a t i o n s c o r e s o f b o t h groups w i t h t h e Employee O r i e n t a t i o n s c o r e s . T a b l e 5 shows the c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s . f o r t h e C o n s i d e r a t i o n and Employee O r i e n t a t i o n v a r i a b l e s f o r t he t o t a l sample. As can be c l e a r l y seen, none o f the c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s a r e a t o r above t h e s i g -n i f i c a n c e f o r cC = .05. C o n s e q u e n t l y , H y p o t h e s i s 3 i s n o t s u p p o r t e d . TABLE 5 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS FOR CONSIDERATION (C)  AND EMPLOYEE ORIENTATION (E) VARIABLES FOR TOTAL GROUP (n = 30) C-Pre C-Post E-Pre 0.1532 0.1959 E - P o s t 0.0949 -0.0695 Note: F o r n = 30 r = .355 o r g r e a t e r would be s i g n i f i c a n t atcC = .05 53 (4) The subjects i n both the experimental . treatment group and the control group w i l l report no s i g n i f i c a n t change i n Structure as measured by the Leadership Opinion Questionnaire. Table 6 shows the means of the pre and post-course Structure scores for the experimental and control groups. I t would appear that e s s e n t i a l l y , there was no difference i n the means of the two groups 2 and the Hotellings T t e s t supported t h i s observation. Consequently, Hypothesis 4 i s supported. TABLE 6 PRE AND POST-COURSE STRUCTURE MEANS FOR EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUPS Experimental (n = 15) Control (n = 15) Mean S.D. Mean S.D. S t r u c t u r e - Pre 44.13 5.91 45.53 7.62 Structure - Post 40.00 6. 32 41. 33 6.78 Note: Hotellings T F-Value = 41.73 i n s i g n i f i c a n t at c C = -05 = 2.006 54 (5) The s u b j e c t s i n both the e x p e r i m e n t a l treatment group and the c o n t r o l group w i l l r e p o r t no s i g n i f i c a n t change i n D i f f e r e n t i a t i o n as measured by the LEAD instrument. Table 7 shows the pre and p o s t - c o u r s e D i f f e r e n -t i a t i o n means f o r the e x p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l groups. I t would appear t h a t e s s e n t i a l l y t h e r e i s no d i f f e r e n c e i n the means o f the two groups and the H o t e l l i n g s T t e s t c o n f i r m s t h a t t h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e . Consequently, Hypothesis 5 i s supported. TABLE 7 PRE AND POST-COURSE DIFFERENTIATION (D)  MEANS FOR EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUPS Exp e r i m e n t a l C o n t r o l (n = 15) (n = 15) Mean S.D. Mean S.D. 2.00 14.33 1.54 2.02 14.73 1.87 Note: H o t e l l i n g s T F-Value D - Pre D - Post 14.47 13.93 =41.73 i n s i g n i f i c a n t atc[.05 = 2.006^ 55 (6) There w i l l be a s i g n i f i c a n t p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n o f t h e S t r u c t u r e s c o r e s o f b o t h groups w i t h t h e D i f f e r e n t i a t i o n s c o r e s o f b o t h g r o u p s . T a b l e 8 shows t h e c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r the S t r u c t u r e and D i f f e r e n t i a t i o n v a r i a b l e s f o r t h e t o t a l group. As can be seen, none o f t h e c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s a r e a t o r above t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e f o r c C = .05. C o n s e q u e n t l y , H y p o t h e s i s 6 i s n o t s u p p o r t e d . CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS FOR STRUCTURE (S) AND DIFFERENTIATION (D) VARIABLES FOR TOTAL GROUP TABLE 8 (n = .30) S - P r e S - P o s t D - P r e -0.1050 -0.2034 D - P o s t 0.3133 0.0500 Note: F o r n = 30 r = .355 o r g r e a t e r w o u l d be s i g n i f i c a n t a t dC = • 05 (7) Both the Now (N) and L i k e (L) s c o r e s , as measured by the Form-S instrument, w i l l remain unchanged f o r both the ex p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l groups. Table 9 shows the pre and p o s t - c o u r s e Now (N) and L i k e (L) means f o r the e x p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l groups. An examination suggests t h e r e i s v i r t u a l l y no d i f f e r e n c e i n the means o f the two groups. The 2 H o t e l l i n g s T t e s t confirms t h a t t h e r e i s no s i g n i f i -c a n t d i f f e r e n c e and, consequently, Hypothesis 7 i s supported. TABLE 9 PRE AND POST-COURSE NOW (N) AND LIKE (L)  MEANS FOR EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUPS Exp e r i m e n t a l C o n t r o l Mean S.D. Mean S.D. Now - Pre (n = 15) Now - Post (n = 15) L i k e - Pre L i k e - Post Note: H o t e l l i n g s T F-Value 10.91 2.72 10.40 2.90 11.12 2.74 10.13 2.52 16.89 0.96 16.39 1.42 (n = 13) (n = 12) 17.56 1.07 16.82 1.24 (n = 13) (n = 12) 41.73 i n s i g n i f i c a n t a t cC = .05 2.006 ^ 57 R e s e a r c h Q u e s t i o n s : (1) Do t h e r e s u l t s o f t h i s s t u d y s u p p o r t F l e i s h m a n ' s (1969) c l a i m t h a t t h e two v a r i a b l e s , C o n s i d e r a t i o n and S t r u c t u r e . -a r e i n d e p e n d e n t o f each o t h e r ? T a b l e 10 shows t h e c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r the C o n s i d e r a t i o n and S t r u c t u r e v a r i a b l e s measured by the LOQ. As can be seen, none o f t h e c o r r e l a t i o n c o -e f f i c i e n t s a r e a t o r above t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e f o r c C = .05. C o n s e q u e n t l y , t h e r e s u l t s o f t h i s s t u d y appear t o s u p p o r t F l e i s h m a n ' s c l a i m . CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS FOR STRUCTURE (S) AND CONSIDERATION (C) VARIABLES FOR TOTAL GROUP TABLE 10 (n = 30) C - P r e C - P o s t S — P r e -0.0350 -0.0242 S - P o s t -0.2450 -0.1554 Note: F o r n = 30 r = .355 o r g r e a t e r w o u l d be s i g n i f i c a n t a t cC = .05 5H (2) Do t h e r e s u l t s o f t h i s s t u d y s u p p o r t Dore's (1973) b e l i e f t h a t t h e two v a r i a b l e s , Employee O r i e n t a t i o n and D i f f e r e n t i a t i o n , a r e r e l a t i v e l y i n -dependent o f each o t h e r ? T a b l e 11 shows t h e c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r the Employee O r i e n t a t i o n and D i f f e r e n t i a t i o n v a r i a b l e s measured by t h e LEAD i n s t r u m e n t . As can be se e n , t h e r e s u l t s o f t h i s s t u d y show t h a t , w h i l e t h e r e i s no c o r r e l a t i o n between D-Pre and e i t h e r E-Pre o r E - P o s t s c o r e s , t h e r e a r e s i g n i f i c a n t p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n s between D-Post and b o t h E-Pre and E - P o s t s c o r e s . C o n s e q u e n t l y , t h e r e s u l t s o f t h i s s t u d y do n o t s u p p o r t Dore's b e l i e f , as o u t l i n e d above. TABLE 11 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS FOR EMPLOYEE ORIENTATION  AND DIFFERENTIATION VARIABLES FOR TOTAL GROUP (n = 30) E-Pre E - P o s t D-Pre -0.1545 0.1291 D-Post 0.3595* 0.3439** Note: * F o r n = 30: r = .355 o r g r e a t e r i s s i g n i f i c a n t a t < = .05 * * F o r n = 30: r - .301 o r g r e a t e r i s s i g n i f i c a n t a t dC = .10 59 R e l i a b i l i t y : As has been n o t e d e l s e w h e r e , s i n c e low r e l i a b i l i t y can s e r i o u s l y a f f e c t the o p p o r t u n i t y t o a t t a i n s i g -n i f i c a n t change i n s c o r e s on a v a r i a b l e , the Hoyt E s t i m a t e o f R e l i a b i l i t y , f o r t h e LOQ and t h e LEAD i n s t r u m e n t s , were o b t a i n e d among the s c a l e s as a r e f e r e n c e p o i n t i n t h i s s t u d y . T a b l e 12 shows t h e Hoyt E s t i m a t e s o f R e l i a b i l i t i e s . As can be c l e a r l y s e e n , t h e LOQ r e s u l t s a r e r e l a t i v e l y low and the LEAD r e s u l t s s u g g e s t t h a t the i n s t r u m e n t i s e s s e n t i a l l y u n r e l i a b l e . TABLE 12 HOYT ESTIMATES OF RELIABILITY  FOR LOQ AND LEAD INSTRUMENTS LOQ LEAD C o n s i d e r a t i o n - P r e 0.51 E-Pre 0.13 C o n s i d e r a t i o n - P o s t 0.77 E - P o s t 0.19 T o t a l 0.66 S t r u c t u r e - P r e 0.69 D-Pre 0.00 S t r u c t u r e - P o s t 0.70 D-Post 0.00 T o t a l 0.59 bU CHAPTER V: DISCUSSION: The r e s u l t s p r e s e n t e d i n t h e p r e v i o u s c h a p t e r c l e a r l y show t h a t , o f the seven h y p o t h e s e s " e x a m i n e d , the d a t a c o l l e c t e d i n t h i s s t u d y s u p p o r t s t h r e e o f t h e hyp o t h e s e s w h i l e t h e r e m a i n i n g f o u r a r e n o t s u p p o r t e d . F u r t h e r , o f the two r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s posed, one was answered i n the a f f i r m a t i v e and one i n t h e n e g a t i v e . However, g i v e n the a p p a r e n t t o t a l l a c k o f r e l i a b i l i t y and the h i g h l y q u e s t i o n a b l e independence o f s c a l e s o f the LEAD i n s t r u m e n t t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e t o t a l absence o f p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n o f t h e 61 Employee O r i e n t a t i o n and D i f f e r e n t i a t i o n s c a l e s w i t h the C o n s i d e r a t i o n and S t r u c t u r e s c a l e s , r e s p e c t i v e l y , o f the LOQ, s e r i o u s q u e s t i o n s are r a i s e d p e r t a i n i n g to the r e l a t i v e s i g n i f i c a n c e of the r e s u l t s on f o u r hypotheses namely (2), (3), (5) and (6). While Hypothesis 5 was supported by the r e s u l t s , the t o t a l l a c k of p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n o f D i f f e r e n t i a t i o n w i t h S t r u c t u r e t o g e t h e r w i t h the s i g n i f i c a n t p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n o f D i f f e r e n t i a t i o n w i t h Employee O r i e n t a -t i o n r a i s e s s e r i o u s q u e s t i o n s as to j u s t what i s measured by the LEAD instrument. T h i s s i t u a t i o n i s f u r t h e r underscored by the l a c k of p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n o f Employee O r i e n t a t i o n w i t h C o n s i d e r a t i o n . I t would f u r t h e r appear t h a t the v a r i a b l e s measured by the LEAD instrument — whatever they are — were v i r t u a l l y unchanged by the t r a i n i n g c ourse. Since the r e s u l t s o f t h i s study a l s o found the LEAD inst r u m e n t to be un-r e l i a b l e , there would appear to be no u s e f u l purpose s e r v e d by f u r t h e r p u r s u i n g a d i s c u s s i o n o f the LEAD instrument. Consequently, we s h o u l d now t u r n our a t t e n t i o n to a d i s c u s s i o n o f the remaining hypotheses and t h e i r p e r t i n e n t r e s u l t s . (1) The s u b j e c t s i n the e x p e r i m e n t a l treatment group w i l l r e p o r t s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r i n c r e a s e , than the c o n t r o l group, i n C o n s i d e r a t i o n as measured by the Leader-s h i p O p i n i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e . 62 As has been p r e v i o u s l y noted, a l t h o u g h t h e r e was a s i z e a b l e d i f f e r e n c e i n means, f a v o u r i n g the ex-p e r i m e n t a l group, on the p o s t - c o u r s e measurement, the d i f f e r e n c e was not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t . However, i t i s b e l i e v e d t h a t a number of f a c t o r s — o u t s i d e o f the t r a i n i n g course i t s e l f — c o u l d have c o n t r i b u t e d to p r e v e n t i n g the e x p e r i m e n t a l group's C o n s i d e r a t i o n mean from a t t a i n i n g d i f f e r e n c e a t a s i g n i f i c a n t l e v e l . In the f i r s t i n s t a n c e , the s m a l l number o f s u b j e c t s (15) i n the group was a l i m i t i n g f a c t o r i n t h a t a s u b s t a n t i a l d i f f e r e n c e i n the means would have been r e q u i r e d to achieve s i g n i f i c a n c e . F u r t h e r , w h i l e a s u b s t a n t i a l change i n some of the i n d i v i d u a l s c o r e s d i d occur (as can be seen i n Appendix 2 ) , the i n i t i a l l y h i g h l e v e l of the p r e - c o u r s e C o n s i d e r a t i o n mean f o r the e x p e r i m e n t a l group e f f e c t i v e l y l i m i t e d the amount o f change t h a t c o u l d o c c u r . In t h i s r e g a r d , r e f e r e n c e to the manual f o r the LOQ i n s t r u m e n t (Fleishman, 1969) shows t h a t t h e r e are no norms a v a i l a b l e f o r a s p e c i f i c e n g i n e e r i n g group. However, the same manual p r o v i d e s norms f o r a "General S u p e r v i s o r y " group (n = 3008) which can be used as a b a s i s f o r comparison w i t h the e x p e r i m e n t a l group o f t h i s study. The norms t a b l e shows t h a t the p o s t - c o u r s e C o n s i d e r a t i o n mean of 64.07 ( f o r the e x p e r i m e n t a l group) r e p r e s e n t s approx-i m a t e l y the 94th p e r c e n t i l e w h i l e the p r e - c o u r s e 63 C o n s i d e r a t i o n mean o f 57.27 r e p r e s e n t s the 69th p e r c e n t i l e — a score shown as "high average" by the manual, (p. 13) Hence i t can be seen t h a t the p o s i t i v e change i n the C o n s i d e r a t i o n mean f o r the e x p e r i m e n t a l group r e p r e s e n t s a s u b s t a n t i a l change i n p e r c e n t i l e r a n k i n g s but t h a t the e x t e n t o f the change was l i m i t e d by the high-average, p r e - c o u r s e C o n s i d e r a t i o n mean. In the same v e i n , an examination o f the i n d i v i d u a l C o n s i d e r a t i o n s c o r e s (found i n Appendix 2) r e v e a l s some i n t e r e s t i n g r e s u l t s . For example, on the p r e -course s c o r e s , f i v e s u b j e c t s had s c o r e s i n the 50th p e r c e n t i l e or lower (50th p e r c e n t i l e = 53), f o u r had s c o r e s between the 51st and the 80th p e r c e n t i l e s (80th p e r c e n t i l e - 59) and s i x had s c o r e s i n the 90th p e r -c e n t i l e or b e t t e r (90th p e r c e n t i l e = 62). On the p o s t -course s c o r e s , o n l y one s u b j e c t s c o r e d below the 50th p e r c e n t i l e , f o u r had s c o r e s between the 65th and 85th p e r c e n t i l e s and ten had s c o r e s i n the 90th p e r c e n t i l e o r above. (As a matter o f f a c t , o n l y one s u b j e c t ' s s c o r e decreased between the pre and p o s t - c o u r s e t e s t s and t h a t person s t a r t e d a t the 95th p e r c e n t i l e . ) In o t h e r words, even though the s u b j e c t s s t a r t e d w i t h r e l a t i v e l y h i g h s c o r e s , the course succeeded i n i n c r e a s i n g them. F i n a l l y , the r e l a t i v e l y low r e l i a b i l i t i e s o f the LOQ s c a l e s might have c o n t r i b u t e d t o the s t a t i s t i c a l l y i n s i g n i f i c a n t r e s u l t s . In t h i s 64 rega r d , i t s h o u l d be r e c a l l e d t h a t the r e l i a b i l i t y e s t i m a t e s , f o r the LOQ, i n t h i s study were below those r e p o r t e d i n the instr u m e n t ' s manual. In l i g h t o f the f o r e g o i n g , i t can r e a s o n a b l y be argued t h a t , although the C o n s i d e r a t i o n means d i d not d i s p l a y a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e , i n f a v o u r o f the e x p e r i m e n t a l group, the human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g program appears t o have accomplished i t s o b j e c t i v e by i n c r e a s i n g the C o n s i d e r a t i o n s c o r e s . The s i g -n i f i c a n c e o f t h i s f i n d i n g w i l l be d i s c u s s e d i n g r e a t e r d e t a i l l a t e r i n the paper. A t t h i s p o i n t , we now need t o t u r n our a t t e n t i o n to the remaining two hypotheses. (4) The s u b j e c t s i n both the e x p e r i m e n t a l treatment group and the c o n t r o l group w i l l r e p o r t no s i g n i f i c a n t change i n S t r u c t u r e as measured by the Leader-s h i p O p i n i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e . As has been noted e a r l i e r , t h i s h y p o t h e s i s d i f f e r s s u b s t a n t i a l l y from those u s u a l l y p r e s e n t e d , on the S t r u c t u r e v a r i a b l e , f o r human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g c o u r s e s , (see Carron, 1964) Consequently, the f a c t t h a t the r e s u l t s support the h y p o t h e s i s i s p a r t i c u l a r l y s i g -n i f i c a n t . T h i s i s f u r t h e r underscored by the f a c t t h a t , u s i n g the manual r e f e r e n c e noted p r e v i o u s l y (Fleishman, 1969) the pre-course means o f 44.13 and 45.53, f o r the exp e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l groups r e s p e c t i v e l y , r e g i s t e r 65 a t the 20th and 25th p e r c e n t i l e s . Consequently, i f the i n t e n t o f the course had been to reduce these s c o r e s , the r e s u l t — i f the course had succeeded i n t h i s p l a n — c o u l d have been t h a t the S t r u c t u r e s c o r e s were reduced t o meaningless f a c t o r s — d e s p i t e the f a c t t h a t S t r u c t u r e i s r e c o g n i z e d as an important element of l e a d e r s h i p . D e s p i t e the p l a n t o r e t a i n the e x p e r i m e n t a l group's S t r u c t u r e s c o r e s i n an unchanged s t a t e , the r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e t h a t the means d e c l i n e d , by 4.13 p o i n t s , from 44.13 to 40.00. However, the p u z z l i n g p a r t o f the r e s u l t s i n t h i s area i s t h a t the means f o r the c o n t r o l group a l s o d e c l i n e d , i n t h i s case by 4.20 p o i n t s , from 45.5 3 to 41.33. As can be seen, the d e c l i n e i n each i n s t a n c e i s almost e x a c t l y the same. While no c l e a r e x p l a n a t i o n f o r t h i s behaviour seems e v i d e n t , a h i g h l y s p e c u l a t i v e e x p l a n a t i o n can be developed. Before p r o c e e d i n g on t h i s matter, however, one needs to examine the one remaining h y p o t h e s i s . (7) Both the Now and L i k e s c o r e s , as measured by the Form-S instrument, w i l l remain unchanged f o r both the e x p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l groups. While t h i s h y p o t h e s i s was supported, as expected, by the r e s u l t s , i t i s important t o note p a r t i c u l a r l y 6 6 t h e Now means f o r b o t h g r o u p s . I n t h i s r e g a r d , i t s h o u l d be r e c a l l e d t h a t t h e p r e and p o s t - c o u r s e Now means f o r t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l group were 10.91 and 11.12 w h i l e , f o r t h e c o n t r o l group, t h e y were 10.40 and 10.13. These means, t h e n , i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e s u b j e c t s o f b o t h groups f e l t t h a t t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n was c h a r a c t e r i z e d by a management s t y l e t h a t was on t h e b o r d e r l i n e between System I I ( B e n e v o l e n t A u t h o r i t a t i v e ) and System I I I ( C o n s u l t a t i v e ) . A f u r t h e r e x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l means f o r members o f b o t h groups (Appen-d i x 2) r e v e a l s t h a t some o f t h e s c o r e s range down i n t o t h e mid-System I ( E x p l o i t i v e A u t h o r i t a t i v e ) a r e a . F u r t h e r , f o r b o t h the e x p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l g r o u p s , e i g h t o f .the f i f t e e n p o s t - c o u r s e s c o r e s , f o r Now, d e c l i n e d . T h i s l a t t e r s i t u a t i o n o c c u r r e d , i t s h o u l d be n o t e d , on an i n s t r u m e n t t h a t i s c r e d i t e d w i t h b e i n g r a t h e r r e s i s t e n t t o s h o r t - t e r m f l u c t u a t i o n s . ( L i k e r t , 1967) The r e s u l t s d i s c u s s e d on t h e s e t h r e e h y p o t h e s e s s e t the s t a g e f o r a r a t h e r s p e c u l a t i v e , b u t p o s s i b l e and e x t r e m e l y i m p o r t a n t , e x p l a n a t i o n o f t h e d e c l i n e o f the S t r u c t u r e s c o r e s f o r b o t h the e x p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l groups. 67 In t h i s r e g a r d , s i n c e both the e x p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l groups were exposed to the same o r g a n i z a t i o n a l c l i m a t e — and s i n c e the r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d on t h i s study suggest t h a t the c l i m a t e was not o v e r l y s u p p o r t i v e o f , or conducive t o , change -- i t i s q u i t e c o n c e i v a b l e t h a t an event, or s e r i e s o f events, c o u l d have o c c u r r e d a t the company l o c a t i o n t h a t c o u l d have a f f e c t e d the S t r u c t u r e means f o r both groups. I t i s f u r t h e r suggested t h a t the event (events) p r o b a b l y o c c u r r e d d u r i n g the month between the b e g i n n i n g and end o f the two-part human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g c o urse. While the event may a l s o have had an i n f l u e n c e toward r e s t r i c t i n g the i n c r e a s e i n the C o n s i d e r a t i o n s c o r e s f o r the experimental group and c a u s i n g the s l i g h t decrease i n the C o n s i d e r a t i o n scores f o r the c o n t r o l group, we are concerned here p r i m a r i l y w i t h the S t r u c t u r e s c o r e s f o r both groups. One might q u e s t i o n t h a t t h i s " n e g a t i v e " event (or s e r i e s o f events) c o u l d have had such an e f f e c t and i n such a s h o r t p e r i o d of time. However, a t l e a s t one study, conducted by L i t w i n a n d S t r i n g e r (1968), would appear to suggest t h a t such a r e s u l t i s q u i t e p o s s i b l e . In t h i s r e g a r d , these authors noted t h a t , i n a two-week e x p e r i -ment, one group —- which had a h i g h power-oriented l e a d e r — d i s p l a y e d the f o l l o w i n g r e s u l t s : 68 The a u t h o r i t a r i a n , s t r u c t u r e d c l i m a t e c r e a t e d i n the B r i t i s h o r g a n i z a t i o n aroused a h i g h l e v e l of power m o t i v a t i o n . Changes i n b e f o r e -a f t e r p e r s o n a l i t y t e s t s showed a d e c l i n e on the s c a l e s l a b e l l e d S e l f - A c c e p t a n c e , Communality and R e s p o n s i b i l i t y , s u g g e s t i n g t e n s i o n ( r e s t l e s s , c o n f l i c t e d ) and withdrawal (moody, l a z y ) . Job s a t i s f a c t i o n was low and a t t i t u d e s were generated which suggested t h a t members were c l o s e d to o t h e r s ' i d e a s , independent and r e b e l l i o u s toward a u t h o r i t y . O r g a n i z a t i o n a l performance was g e n e r a l l y low. (p. 140) F u r t h e r , these same authors noted " F i r s t , i t seems c l e a r t h a t d i s t i n c t o r g a n i z a t i o n a l c l i m a t e s can be c r e a t e d by v a r y i n g o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s t y l e . Such c l i m a t e s can be c r e a t e d i n a s h o r t p e r i o d of time . . . ." (p. 144) ( u n d e r l i n i n g added) While c o n s i d e r i n g the s p e c u l a t i v e s i t u a t i o n o u t -l i n e d p r e v i o u s l y , i t should be kept i n mind t h a t the LOQ i n s t r u c t i o n s ask the respondent to choose the a l t e r n a t i v e answer which most n e a r l y expresses one's o p i n i o n on how f r e q u e n t l y one should do what i s o u t l i n e d . Consequently, i f the t o t a l group had been exposed to some extreme behaviour on the p a r t of t h e i r o r g a n i z a -t i o n , they c o u l d c o n c e i v a b l y have r e a c t e d by r e g i s t e r i n g t h e i r d i s a p p r o v a l on s i m i l a r items which appeared i n the LOQ instrument. For example, to take a s p e c i f i c i t e m from the instrument i t s e l f , i t e m 20 i s concerned w i t h "Emphasize meeting o f d e a d l i n e s " and the f i v e p o t e n t i a l responses range from "A g r e a t d e a l " to "Not a t a l l " . While e n g i n e e r s are f a m i l i a r w i t h the need to meet 69 d e a d l i n e s and c o u l d , n o r m a l l y , q u i t e c o n c e i v a b l y be e x p e c t e d t o answer toward t h e "A g r e a t d e a l " end o f the s c a l e , i t i s a l s o c o n c e i v a b l e t h a t , i f t h e y had been s u b j e c t e d t o p r e s s u r e t o meet u n r e a l i s t i c dead-l i n e s by t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n , t h e y c o u l d have, on t h e p o s t - c o u r s e t e s t , r e a c t e d t oward t h e "Not a t a l l " end o f t h e s c a l e . W h i l e one f r e e l y a d m i t s t h a t t h e f o r e g o i n g i s a r a t h e r s p e c u l a t i v e example w i t h i n a h i g h l y s p e c u l a t i v e s i t u a t i o n , when one t u r n s t o an e x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e P r o f i l e r e s u l t s , t h e r e appears t o be f u r t h e r s u p p o r t f o r t h i s l i n e o f c o n j e c t u r e . F o r example, as p r e v i o u s l y n o t e d , the Now r e s u l t s s u g g e s t an o r g a n i z a t i o n a l c l i m a t e t h a t i s , e s s e n t i a l l y , System I I ( B e n e v o l e n t A u t h o r i t a t i v e ) . F u r t h e r , some o f the i n d i v i d u a l r e s u l t s s u g g e s t a System I ( E x p l o i t i v e A u t h o r i t a t i v e ) o r g a n i z a t i o n and s l i g h t l y more t h a n h a l f o f t h e members i n b o t h t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l and c o n t r o l groups saw t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n i n a more n e g a t i v e l i g h t a t the p o s t - c o u r s e measurement. F i n a l l y , an e x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l means f o r the p r e - c o u r s e Now i t e m s (see A ppendix 3) r e v e a l s the f o l l o w i n g r e s u l t s f o r f o u r c r i t i c a l q u e s t i o n s : 70 10. How w e l l do s u p e r i o r s know problems f a c e d by s u b o r d i n a t e s ? Means: E x p e r i m e n t a l 7.65 C o n t r o l 6.76 5. Where i s the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f e l t f o r a c h i e v i n g o r g a n i z a t i o n ' s g o a l s ? Means: E x p e r i m e n t a l 9.68 C o n t r o l 9.2 3 4. I s predominant use made of f e a r , t h r e a t s , punishment, rewards, involvement? Means; C o n t r o l 9.58 11. A t what l e v e l are d e c i s i o n s made? Means: E x p e r i m e n t a l 10.50 C o n t r o l 9.82 The above f a c t o r s p e r t a i n to communication, g o a l s e t t i n g , d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g , rewards and m o t i v a t i o n . In t h i s r e g a r d , a number o f authors have noted the c r i t i c a l n ature o f s i m i l a r f a c t o r s . F o r example, Patchen (19 70), when he d i s c u s s e d the c r i t i c a l importance of " i d e n t i f i c a -t i o n " i n terms of the work o r g a n i z a t i o n , noted t h a t s e v e r a l f a c t o r s c o n t r i b u t e d to enhancing or r e s t r i c t i n g i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . These i n c l u d e d : congruence o f i n d i v i d u a l and o r g a n i z a t i o n g o a l s ; p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n d e c i s i o n s ; -reward systems; o p p o r t u n i t y f o r achievement; nature o f i n t e r p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s , (p. 68 ) In a s i m i l a r v e i n , Hollman (1973) has noted a number of c o r r e l a t i o n s i n -c l u d i n g G l a s n e r ' s f i n d i n g t h a t , i n examining management by r e s u l t p a t t e r n s , one o f the p r i n c i p l e s t h a t emerges i s t h a t "the impact of the t o t a l p r o c e s s i s i n c r e a s e d i f the people i n v o l v e d are aware o f , and committed t o , the d e s i r e d r e s u l t s ; t h i s k i n d of commitment can be 71 generated through p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n g o a l s e t t i n g " (p. 128) o r Scanlan's (1968) comment to the e f f e c t t h a t i n v o l v e -ment and commitment are c l o s e l y i n t e r r e l a t e d . F i n a l l y , i n terms o f the c l i m a t e impact on the C o n s i d e r a t i o n and S t r u c t u r e r e s u l t s , Davidson and L e t t (1968) (both o f whom, i n c i d e n t a l l y , are P.Eng.'s) have noted: The problem of t u r n i n g p o t e n t i a l managers i n t o r e a l managers w i l l c o n t i n u e t o be a r e s p o n s i -b i l i t y o f the o r g a n i z a t i o n to which they belong. The e f f i c i e n c y w i t h which they do t h i s w i l l depend i n p a r t on the s p e c i f i c programs designed f o r u p d a t i n g and u p s k i l l i n g c u r r e n t managers but, perhaps more important, on the k i n d o f c l i m a t e  a l lowed w i t h i n the o r g a n i z a t i o n . T h i s , i n t u r n , w i l l be i n f l u e n c e d s t r o n g l y by the management p h i l o s o p h y o f the o r g a n i z a t i o n as p e r c e i v e d by those i t hopes to develop, (p. 169) ( u n d e r l i n i n g added) Given the above comments, tog e t h e r w i t h numerous o t h e r s o f a s i m i l a r nature t h a t occur i n the l i t e r a t u r e , i t would appear t h a t t h e r e d e f i n i t e l y i s some fou n d a t i o n to the s p e c u l a t i o n i n i t i a t e d e a r l i e r . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , of course, t h e r e i s no f u r t h e r o p p o r t u n i t y , i n t h i s study, to pursue more c o n c r e t e s u p p o r t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n . I m p l i c a t i o n s o f the Study: A t the b e g i n n i n g of t h i s study, i t was noted t h a t a wide v a r i e t y of a u t h o r i t i e s agree t h a t e n g i n e e r s tend to l a c k human r e l a t i o n s s k i l l s — p r i n c i p a l l y because such matters do not r e c e i v e a t t e n t i o n i n t h e i r formal t r a i n i n g — and t h a t t h i s l a c k can o f t e n have a s e r i o u s n e g a t i v e e f f e c t on t h e i r managerial e f f e c t -i v e n e s s . ' The course under study, Human Behaviour :. 72 i n O r g a n i z a t i o n s , sought t o remedy, i n p a r t , t h i s s i t u a t i o n and the r e s u l t s o f the r e s e a r c h appear to suggest t h a t the o b j e c t i v e was accomplished. Con-s e q u e n t l y , i t would appear t h a t the course can make a c o n t r i b u t i o n t o the growth and development o f , a t l e a s t , a t e c h n i c a l l y - o r i e n t e d p o p u l a t i o n . T h i s r e s u l t has some very d e f i n i t e and p r a c t i c a l i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r the Diploma Program i n A d m i n i s t r a t i o n f o r En g i n e e r s o f f e r e d , p r i n c i p a l l y f o r en g i n e e r s i n the P r o v i n c e o f B r i t i s h Columbia, by the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia. In t h i s r e g a r d , i t has been e s t i m a t e d t h a t t h e r e are more than 5,600 en g i n e e r s i n the p r o v i n c e and t h a t over 500 o f these are e n r o l l e d i n the Diploma Program. S i n c e the Human Behaviour i n O r g a n i z a t i o n s i s c o n s i d e r e d a Core course, and hence r e q u i r e d , a h i g h percentage o f these e n r o l l e e s can be expected t o e v e n t u a l l y take the course and, h o p e f u l l y , b e n e f i t as those on t h i s study have done. A t t h i s p o i n t , i t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note t h a t a r e c e n t major study on the e d u c a t i o n needs of P r o f e s s i o n a l Engineers i n B.C. (Wilson, 1975) found t h a t 75 p e r c e n t o f the study sample "spent a t l e a s t h a l f o f t h e i r time i n a s u p e r v i s o r y r o l e on the job" (p. 5 ) , t h a t con-t i n u i n g e d u c a t i o n programs, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the broad l i b e r a l a r t s area " c o u l d g r e a t l y a s s i s t e n g i n e e r s to 73 broaden t h e i r background, e s p e c i a l l y e n g i n e e r s e n t e r i n g the management f i e l d " and t h a t , i n the sample groups, "41 p e r c e n t p r e f e r r e d g e n e r a l management o r i e n t a t i o n c o u r s e s . " (p. 6) While the prime focus o f the Diploma Program i s on e n g i n e e r s , i t s h o u l d a l s o be noted t h a t o t h e r groups o f t e c h n i c a l l y - o r i e n t e d p e r s o n n e l have need o f s i m i l a r k i n d s o f human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g programs. I t i s suggested t h a t the Human Behaviour i n O r g a n i z a t i o n s course may a l s o be o f b e n e f i t t o these o t h e r groups. In g e n e r a l terms, the course may a l s o be b e n e f i c i a l f o r o t h e r n o n - t e c h n i c a l l y o r i e n t e d groups, but r e s e a r c h would have t o be conducted t o c o n f i r m t h i s p o s s i b i l i t y . F u r t h e r , the m a t e r i a l s u t i l i z e d would have t o be a d j u s t e d t o s u i t d i f f e r e n t p o p u l a t i o n s . There i s a second area which suggests r a t h e r s i g -n i f i c a n t i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h and p r a c t i c e . In t h i s r e g a r d , the data c o l l e c t e d and the review o f the r e l a t e d l i t e r a t u r e , suggests t h a t a t l e a s t a s u p e r f i c i a l b e g i n n i n g case can be made f o r the course's p o s s i b l e c o n t r i b u t i o n to improved p r o d u c t i v i t y . I f subsequent r e s e a r c h s t u d i e s can be so de s i g n e d t h a t they c a r e f u l l y examine t h i s p o s s i b l e c o r r e l a t i o n between the l e a r n i n g t h a t o c c u r s on the course and improved p r o d u c t i v i t y , 74 a major c o n t r i b u t i o n w i l l have been made both to manage-ment development programs and t o the a c t u a l p r a c t i c e o f management i t s e l f . For example, i n a r e c e n t study, Jacobs and J i l l s o n (1974) noted t h a t a l a r g e sample o f U.S. b u s i n e s s e x e c u t i v e s and managers f e l t t h a t " e x e c u t i v e p r o d u c t i v i t y i s b e i n g hampered by inadequate, i n e f f e c t i v e , in-house management development programs ...." (p. 2) and t h a t "management t r a i n i n g and development programs must be improved; some o f the programs i n o p e r a t i o n now are a c t i v e l y harmful to p r o d u c t i v i t y . " (p. 3) ( u n d e r l i n i n g added) T i e d i n c l o s e l y w i t h the above s i t u a t i o n i s the f a c t t h a t , d e s p i t e many o b s t a c l e s and f r u s t r a t i o n s , t h i s e v a l u a t i o n study •— u s i n g a worthwhile d e s i g n — was completed. Given t h a t the r e s u l t s , and the t o t a l i t y o f the study i t s e l f , c o u l d be g r e a t l y improved, the f a c t t h a t the study d i d take p l a c e suggests t h a t more such r e s e a r c h c o u l d be r e a d i l y done i f those d i r e c t l y i n v o l v e d i n the t r a i n i n g and development o f a d u l t s saw f i t t o work towards such ends. T h i s study r e c e i v e d a g r e a t d e a l o f a s s i s t a n c e from the course p a r t i c i p a n t s , the s p o n s o r i n g o r g a n i z a t i o n s , members o f the U n i v e r s i t y community and o t h e r s . I t i s s t r o n g l y f e l t t h a t s i m i l a r k i n d s o f a s s i s t a n c e are a v a i l a b l e to o t h e r s , i f they w i l l o n l y seek them out. The e x p e r i e n c e o f c o n d u c t i n g the study and p a r t i c u l a r l y the examination o f the 75 l i t e r a t u r e , r e i n f o r c e d the b e l i e f t h a t one o f the main reasons t h a t more r e s e a r c h has not been done r e s t s w i t h the t r a i n e r s themselves and t h e i r i n a b i l i t y or u n w i l l i n g -ness to undertake the n e c e s s a r y work. Given the f i n d i n g s of Jacobs and J i l l s o n , noted above, i t i s suggested t h a t the time i s l o n g overdue f o r t r a i n e r s t o examine whether, i n f a c t , t h e i r courses are " a c t i v e l y h a r m f u l " . A f u r t h e r c r i t i c a l i m p l i c a t i o n o f t h i s study, suggested a t the end o f an e a r l i e r s e c t i o n , i s the need to pursue a d e t a i l e d examination o f the e f f e c t s of " c l i m a t e " on the r e s u l t s o f v a r i o u s types o f development e f f o r t s i n c l u d i n g , of course, human r e l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g programs. For example, a b e t t e r c a t a l o g u e and examination of o r g a n i z a t i o n a l events -- perhaps through the use o f a l o g — t h a t o c c u r r e d d u r i n g the month between the f i r s t and second weekend of the course under study might have r e v e a l e d i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t would have f u r t h e r supported the " s p e c u l a t i v e " p o s i t i o n o u t l i n e d e a r l i e r . In o t h e r words, s u b j e c t i v e data c o u l d have complemented the o b j e c t i v e r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d through the use o f the LOQ and Form-S i n s t r u m e n t s . T h i s was not done on t h i s study, o f course, and i t remains f o r f u t u r e s t u d i e s t o e x p l o r e t h i s p o s s i b i l i t y . A l t e r n a t i v e l y , the course c o u l d be g i v e n as one two-to-three day course to a v o i d the p o s s i b i l i t y o f o r g a n i z a t i o n a l events a f f e c t i n g the r e s u l t s . 76 F i n a l l y , and once a g a i n t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e s t u d y can o n l y b e g i n t o s u g g e s t some i m p l i c a t i o n s , one s h o u l d n o t l o s e s i g h t o f the f a c t t h a t t h e c o u r s e t h a t formed the base f o r t h i s s t u d y was c o n d u c t e d a t a " N o r t h e r n " l o c a t i o n . I n t h i s r e g a r d , a r e c e n t s t u d y i n t h e l o g g i n g and s a w m i l l i n g i n d u s t r y i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a (Ross, 1 9 7 3 ) , d i d q u i t e a c l o s e e x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e human r e s o u r c e problems i n v o l v e d a t N o r t h e r n l o c a t i o n s and i s o l a t e d " t u r n o v e r " as one o f t h e key problems a f f e c t i n g v a r i o u s a s p e c t s , i n c l u d i n g the p r o f i t a b i l i t y , o f t h a t i n d u s t r y . I n the s t u d y , many f i n d i n g s were n o t e d t o the e f f e c t t h a t " w h i l e t h e f a c t o r s c o n t r i b u t i n g t o t u r n o v e r a r e many and v a r i e d , t h e most v i t a l r e q u i r e m e n t s a r e : (1) .Improved r e c r u i t m e n t and s e l e c t i o n e f f o r t s . (2) L e s s e n i n g o f problems a s s o c i a t e d w i t h i s o l a t i o n i n remote a r e a s t h r o u g h i mprove-ments i n m a r r i e d accommodations, community l i v i n g and camp c o n d i t i o n s . (3) U p g r a d i n g o f p e o p l e management s k i l l s and  knowledge o f s u p e r v i s o r y and management  p e r s o n n e l . " (p. 25-26) ( u n d e r l i n i n g added) F u r t h e r , the s t u d y found t h a t t u r n o v e r i n one p a r t i c u l a r N o r t h e r n a r e a ranged from z e r o p e r c e n t t o 5 0 0 p e r c e n t and one o f t h e main d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e f o r m e r ( z e r o ' p e r c e n t ) l o c a t i o n and a l l o t h e r l o c a t i o n s was: That t h e r e was a d i r e c t c o r r e l a t i o n between s u p e r v i s o r y a t t i t u d e s and t h e f a v o u r a b l e t u r n o v e r r a t e ... a h i g h t u r n o v e r r a t e was u s u a l l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h n e g a t i v e s u p e r v i s o r y a t t i t u d e s and g e n e r a l l a c k o f awareness by management (p. 92) A l t h o u g h s i m i l a r c o r r e l a t i o n s were found i n Southe r n l o c a t i o n s i n the P r o v i n c e , the N o r t h e r n f i n d i n g s have f a r g r e a t e r i m p l i c a t i o n s s i n c e a number o f o t h e r v a r i a b l e s , i n c l u d i n g i n c l e m e n t w e ather, and l a c k o f e d u c a t i o n a l and o t h e r f a c i l i t i e s , con- . t r i b u t e t o making i t d i f f i c u l t f o r o p e r a t i o n s i n N o r t h e r n p a r t s o f the P r o v i n c e t o l o c a t e , and keep, q u a l i f i e d employees. S i n c e the c o u r s e Human B e h a v i o u r i n O r g a n i z a t i o n s seeks t o encourage — w i t h some a p p a r e n t s u c c e s s -- those a t t i t u d e s w h i c h c o r r e l a t e h i g h l y w i t h low t u r n o v e r r e s u l t s , i t may v e r y w e l l be t h a t the c o u r s e can make a p a r t i c u l a r c o n t r i b u t i o n i n N o r t h e r n a r e a s . The c o u r s e must be complemented, however, by a genuine attempt by management t o e s t a b l i s h and m a i n t a i n a c l i m a t e t h a t w i l l be c o n d u c i v e t o the l e a r n i n g t h a t o c c u r s . F u r t h e r , t h i s same management w i l l need t o s u p p o r t an ongoing program f o r measuring the c l i m a t e o f t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n . C o n c l u s i o n s : As has been n o t e d p r e v i o u s l y , the r e s u l t s o f t h i s s t u d y s t r o n g l y s u g g e s t t h a t the s t r u c t u r e d human r e -l a t i o n s t r a i n i n g c o u r s e , Human B e h a v i o u r i n O r g a n i z a t i o n s , met i t s o b j e c t i v e . As a r e s u l t , the c o u r s e can be 7 8 c o n s i d e r e d t o have c o n t r i b u t e d t o the growth and development o f the t e c h n i c a l l y - o r i e n t e d s u b j e c t s who p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the c o u r s e . F u r t h e r , d e s p i t e the many q u e s t i o n s t h a t have been r a i s e d p e r t a i n i n g t o v a r i o u s a s p e c t s o f the Leader-s h i p O p i n i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e s c a l e s o f C o n s i d e r a t i o n and S t r u c t u r e , the i n s t r u m e n t produced d a t a t h a t was b o t h r e l e v a n t and u s e f u l t o the m a t t e r s under s t u d y . I t i s hoped t h a t f u t u r e s t u d i e s w i l l c o n t i n u e t o u t i l i z e t h i s i n s t r u m e n t and t h a t f u t u r e e f f o r t s w i l l c o n t i n u e t o be made t o f u r t h e r r e f i n e the i n s t r u m e n t and improve i t s v a l i d i t y . On the o t h e r hand, the LEAD i n s t r u m e n t r e s u l t s r a i s e d a number o f q u e s t i o n s t h a t , i t i s su g g e s t e d , must be answered b e f o r e the i n s t r u m e n t i s used more e x t e n s i v e l y . The key q u e s t i o n , o f c o u r s e , c o n c e r n s the a t t i t u d e s measured by t h i s i n s t r u m e n t . U n t i l such time as more complete e v i d e n c e i s a v a i l a b l e , the s u g g e s t e d r e l a t i o n s h i p o f the i n s t r u m e n t ' s two s c a l e s w i t h those o f the LOQ appe a r s , from the r e s u l t s of t h i s s t u d y a t l e a s t , t o be h i g h l y q u e s t i o n a b l e . F i n a l l y , the Form-S i n s t r u m e n t p r o v i d e d v a l u a b l e i n f o r m a t i o n on the management s t y l e o f the o r g a n i z a t i o n t o w hich most o f t h e c o u r s e p a r t i c i p a n t s b e l o n g e d . I t would appear t h a t the o r g a n i z a t i o n has ample scope t o grow i n the d i r e c t i o n d e s i r e d by the c o u r s e p a r t i c i -p a n t s . I f t h i s o c c u r s , i t i s s u g g e s t e d t h a t s u b s t a n t i a l b e n e f i t s w i l l a c c r u e n o t o n l y t o those c o u r s e p a r t i c i -p a n t s who d e s i r e t h i s growth, b u t a l s o t o the o r g a n i z a -t i o n i t s e l f . I t would appear, however, t h a t -- w h i l e n o t d e n y i n g the importance and s i g n i f i c a n c e o f th o s e f a c t o r s w h i c h c o n t r i b u t e t o m a i n t a i n i n g h i g h l e v e l s on the C o n s i d e r a t i o n v a r i a b l e -- b o t h the i n d i v i d u a l members and the o r g a n i z a t i o n i t s e l f must g i v e s e r i o u s a t t e n t i o n t o th o s e m a t t e r s w h i c h would c o n t r i b u t e t o i m p r o v i n g the c o n c e r n f o r the S t r u c t u r e v a r i a b l e . I t s h o u l d be remembered t h a t b o t h C o n s i d e r a t i o n and S t r u c t u r e are i m p o r t a n t elements o f l e a d e r s h i p and t h a t b o t h must r e c e i v e s e r i o u s , ongoing a t t e n t i o n . 80 BIBLIOGRAPHY American So c i e t y f o r Engineering Education. "Education i n Industry", J o u r n a l of Engineering Education. May, 1965. Bare, C E . and M i t c h e l l , R. "Experimental E v a l u a t i o n of S e n s i t i v i t y T r a i n i n g " , Journal of Ap p l i e d Behavioural  Science, V o l . 8, No. 3, 1972. Bay ton, J.A.. and Chapman, R.L. Transformation of  S c i e n t i s t s and Engineers i n t o Managers. Washington, D.C.: Na t i o n a l Aeronautics and Space A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , 19 72. Belasco, J.A. and T r i c e , H.M. "Unanticipated Returns of T r a i n i n g " , T r a i n i n g and Development J o u r n a l , J u l y , 1969 . Bowers, D.B. "The S c i e n t i f i c Data Based Approach to Or g a n i z a t i o n a l Development: P a r t 2" i n O r g a n i z a t i o n a l  Development: The State of the A r t . Ann Arbor, Michigan: Foundation f o r Research on Human Behaviour, 19 71. Bradford, L.P. "Human Re l a t i o n s and Leadership T r a i n i n g " , i n Knowles, M.S. Handbook of Adult Education. Chicago, I l l i n o i s : A dult Education A s s o c i a t i o n of the U.S.A., 1960. Burke, R.J. "A P l e a f o r a Systematic E v a l u a t i o n of T r a i n i n g " , T r a i n i n g and Development J o u r n a l , August, 1969. Carron, T.J. "Human Re l a t i o n s T r a i n i n g and A t t i t u d e Change: A Vector A n a l y s i s " , Personnel Psychology, V o l . 17, 1964. C a t a l a n e l l o , R.F. and K i r k p a t r i c k , D.L. "Evaluating T r a i n i n g Programs - The State of the A r t " , T r a i n i n g and Development J o u r n a l , May, 196 8. Crocket t , J.M. The Research and Development Engineer  as a Manager: An A n a l y s i s of the Management Development  Needs: of Engineers a t the NASA Manned Spacecraft Centre. Houston, Texas: N a t i o n a l Aeronautics and Space A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , October, 1968.. Davidson, R. and L e t t , H.B. "O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Climate and Management Development", Canadian Chartered Accountant, September, 1968. DeSimone, D.V. E d i t o r . Education f o r Innovation. New York, New York: Pergamon Press, 19 68. Dore, R. "LEAD ( L e a d e r s h i p : Employee O r i e n t a t i o n and D i f f e r e n t i a t i o n ) Q u e s t i o n n a i r e " i n P f e i f f e r , J.W. and Jones, J.E. E d i t o r s . The 19 7 3 Annual Handbook f o r  Group F a c i l i t a t o r s . Iowa C i t y , Iowa: U n i v e r s i t y A s s o c i a t e s , 1973. D r o t n i n g , J . " S e n s i t i v i t y T r a i n i n g Doesn't Work Magic", Management o f P e r s o n n e l Q u a r t e r l y , Summer, 1968. Dubin, S.S. and Marlow, L. "Research Report o f Con-t i n u i n g E d u c a t i o n f o r E n g i n e e r s i n P e n n s y l v a n i a " , C o n t i n u i n g E d u c a t i o n , 1965. Fleishman., E.A. "The D e s c r i p t i o n o f S u p e r v i s o r y B e h a v i o u r " , J o u r n a l o f A p p l i e d P s y c h o l o g y , V o l . 37, F e b r u a r y , 1953. F l e i s h m a n , E.A. "Manual f o r L e a d e r s h i p O p i n i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e " . C h i c a g o , I l l i n o i s : S c i e n c e Research A s s o c i a t e s , 1969. F l e i s h m a n , E.A. and H a r r i s , E.F. " L e a d e r s h i p B e h a v i o u r R e l a t e d t o Employee G r i e v a n c e s and Turnover", i n F l e i s h m a n , E.A. E d i t o r . S t u d i e s i n P e r s o n n e l and  I n d u s t r i a l P s y c h o l o g y . Homewood, I l l i n o i s : Dorsey P r e s s , 1967. F l e i s h m a n , E.A. and P e t e r s , D.R. " I n t e r p e r s o n a l V a l u e s , L e a d e r s h i p A t t i t u d e s and M a n a g e r i a l S u c c e s s " , P e r s o n n e l  P s y c h o l o g y , V o l . 15, 1962. G i v e n , W.B. J r . "The E n g i n e e r Goes I n t o Management", H a r v a r d B u s i n e s s Review, J a n u a r y - F e b r u a r y , 19 55. G l a s n e r , D.M. " P a t t e r n s o f Management by R e s u l t s " , B u s i n e s s H o r i z o n s , V o l . X I I , F e b r u a r y , 1969. Hand, H.H. and Slocum, J.W. J r . "A L o n g i t u d i n a l Study of the E f f e c t s o f a Human R e l a t i o n s T r a i n i n g Program on M a n a g e r i a l E f f e c t i v e n e s s " , J o u r n a l o f A p p l i e d  P s y c h o l o g y , V o l . 56, No. 5, 1972. H a r r i s o n , R. "Resarch i n Human R e l a t i o n s T r a i n i n g : D e s i gn and I n t e r p r e t a t i o n " , J o u r n a l o f A p p l i e d B e h a v i o u r a l  S c i e n c e , V o l . 7, No. 1, 1971. H e l m s t a d t e r , G.C. P r i n c i p l e s o f P s y c h o l o g i c a l Measure- ment, New York, New York: A p p l e t o n - C e n t u r y - C r o f t s , 19 64. 83 Hollman, R.W. "A Study o f the R e l a t i o n s h i p s Between O r g a n i z a t i o n a l C l i m a t e and M a n a g e r i a l Assessment o f Management by O b j e c t i v e s " , U n p u b l i s h e d Ph.D. T h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y o f Washington, S e a t t l e , 1973. House, R.J. Management Development: Design E v a l u a t i o n  and I m p l e m e n t a t i o n . Ann A r b o r , M i c h i g a n : Bureau o f I n d u s t r i a l R e l a t i o n s , U n i v e r s i t y o f M i c h i g a n , 1967. Ja c o b s , H.S. and J i l l s o n , K. E x e c u t i v e P r o d u c t i v i t y . New York, New York: American Management A s s o c i a t i o n , .1974. Kohn, V. "A S e l e c t e d B i b l i o g r a p h y on E v a l u a t i o n o f Management T r a i n i n g and Development Programs". New York, New York: American F o u n d a t i o n f o r Management Re s e a r c h , I n c . , 1969. Kornhaeuser, W. S c i e n t i s t s i n I n d u s t r y : C o n f l i c t and  Accommodation. B e r k e l e y and Los A n g e l e s , C a l i f o r n i a : U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a P r e s s , 1963. La s s e y , W.R. "Dimensions o f L e a d e r s h i p " , i n L e a d e r s h i p  and S o c i a l Change, Iowa C i t y , Iowa: U n i v e r s i t y A s s o c i a t e s P r e s s , 1971. L a v o i e , F . J . " C o l l e g e Was Never L i k e T h i s " , Machine  Design., March, 1972. L a y t o n , E . J . J r . The R e v o l t o f the E n g i n e e r s . C l e v e l a n d , Ohio: The P r e s s o f Case Western Reserve U n i v e r s i t y , 1971. L i k e r t , R e n s i s . New P a t t e r n s o f Management. New York, New York: M c G r a w - H i l l , 1961. L i k e r t , R e n s i s . The Human O r g a n i z a t i o n : I t s Manage- ment and V a l u e . New York, New York: M c G r a w - H i l l , 1967. L i k e r t , R e n s i s . "How S u c c e s s f u l Managers Manage", I n d u s t r y Week, December 17, 1973. L i p p i t t , G.L. O r g a n i z a t i o n Renewal. New York, New York: A p p l e t o n - C e n t u r y - C r o f t s , 1969. L i t w i n , G.H. and S t r i n g e r , R.H. J r . M o t i v a t i o n and  O r g a n i z a t i o n a l C l i m a t e . B o s t o n , M a s s a c h u s e t t s : H a r v a r d U n i v e r s i t y , 1968. 84 McGehee, W. and Thayer, P.W. T r a i n i n g i n B u s i n e s s and  I n d u s t r y . New York, New York: John W i l e y and Sons, 1961. McGregor, D. The Human S i d e o f E n t e r p r i s e . New York, New York: M c G r a w - H i l l , 1960. McGregor, D. "An A n a l y s i s o f L e a d e r s h i p " i n W.R. L a s s e y , E d i t o r , L e a d e r s h i p and S o c i a l Change. Iowa C i t y , Iowa: U n i v e r s i t y A s s o c i a t e s P r e s s , 1971. Mahle r , W.R. " E v a l u a t i o n o f Management Development Programs". P e r s o n n e l , 1953. M a r a s c u i l o , L.A. S t a t i s t i c a l Methods f o r B e h a v i o u r a l S c i e n c e Research. New York, New York: M c G r a w - H i l l , 1971. Megginson, L.C. P e r s o n n e l : A B e h a v i o u r a l Approach t o  A d m i n i s t r a t i o n . Homewood, I l l i n o i s : R i c h a r d D. I r w i n , 1967. Middleman, R.R. and G o l d b e r g , G. "The Concept of. S t r u c t u r e i n E x p e r i e n t i a l L e a r n i n g " i n J.W. P f e i f f e r and J.E. Jones, E d i t o r s , The 19 72 Handbook f o r Group  F a c i l i t a t o r s . Iowa C i t y Iowa: U n i v e r s i t y A s s o c i a t e s P r e s s , 1972. M o r r i s o n , D.F. M u l t i v a r i a t e S t a t i s t i c a l Methods. New York, New York: M c G r a w - H i l l , 1967. Mo s v i c k , R.K. "Human R e l a t i o n s T r a i n i n g f o r S c i e n t i s t s , T e c h n i c i a n s and E n g i n e e r s : A Review o f R e l e v a n t E x p e r i m e n t a l E v a l u a t i o n s o f Human R e l a t i o n s T r a i n i n g " . P e r s o n a l P s y c h o l o g y , V o l . 24, 1971. N i e m i , J.A. " E x e c u t i v e Development from S p e c i a l i s t t o G e n e r a l i s t " , U n p u b l i s h e d D o c t o r a l D i s s e r t a t i o n , UCLA, 1967. P a t c h e n , M. P a r t i c i p a t i o n , Achievement and Involvement  i n the Job. Englewood C l i f f s , New J e r s e y : P r e n t i c e -H a l l , 1970 . Perham, J . "Management T r a i n i n g : An A c t o f F a i t h " , Dun's Review, V o l . 92, No. 6, December, 1968. R i z z o , J.R. "The E v a l u a t i o n o f Management Development" i n R.J. House, Management Development: D e s i g n ,  E v a l u a t i o n and I m p l e m e n t a t i o n . Ann A r b o r , M i c h i g a n : Bureau o f I n d u s t r i a l R e l a t i o n s , U n i v e r s i t y o f M i c h i g a n , 1967. 85 Ross, P.S. and P a r t n e r s . A Study o f Manpower i n the  L o g g i n g and S a w m i l l i n g I n d u s t r y o f B.C. Vancouver, B.C.: 19 73. Rush, H.M.F. B e h a v i o u r a l S c i e n c e : Concepts and  Management A p p l i c a t i o n . . M o n t r e a l , P.Q.: The Conference Board i n Canada, P e r s o n n e l P o l i c y Study No. 216, 1969. S c a n l a n , B.K. " Q u a n t i f y i n g the Q u a n t i f i a b l e , o r Can R e s u l t s Management be A p p l i e d t o the S t a f f Man's Job?" P e r s o n n e l J o u r n a l , March, 1968. S c a n l a n , B.K. " S e n s i t i v i t y T r a i n i n g - C l a r i f i c a t i o n s , I s s u e s and I n s i g h t s " P e r s o n n e l J o u r n a l , J u l y , 1971. S c h r a d e r , C.R. " E d u c a t i o n f o r C r e a t i v i t y " , The B.C.  P r o f e s s i o n a l E n g i n e e r , September, 1972. S c h r i e s h e i m , C. and K e r r , S. " P s y c h o m e t r i c P r o p e r t i e s o f the Ohio S t a t e L e a d e r s h i p S c a l e s " P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , V o l . 81, No. 11, 1974. Sherwood, F.P. " E x e c u t i v e Development and the F e d e r a l E x e c u t i v e I n s t i t u t e : S e l e c t e d P a p e r s " . C h a r l o t t e s v i l l e , V i r g i n i a : 1971. Stephenson, H. " E v a l u a t i n g Human R e l a t i o n s T r a i n i n g " , P e r s o n n e l A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , J u l y - A u g u s t , 1966. S t o g d i l l , R.M. Handbook o f L e a d e r s h i p . E x e c u t i v e P r e s s , 19 74 as n o t e d i n W. Bowen, "Almost E v e r y t h i n g You Wanted t o Know About L e a d e r s h i p " , F o r t u n e , June, 19 74. S t r a u s s , G. and S a y l e s , L.R. P e r s o n n e l : The Human  Problems o f Management. Englewood C l i f f s , New J e r s e y : P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1964. Teare, B. " E d u c a t i o n a l O b j e c t i v e s i n the P r e p a r a t i o n o f E n g i n e e r s " i n D.V. DeSimone, E d i t o r , E d u c a t i o n f o r  I n n o v a t i o n . New Y ork, New York: Pergammon P r e s s , 1968. T h o r n d i k e , R.L. and Hagen, E. Measurement and E v a l u a t i o n  i n P s y c h o l o g y and E d u c a t i o n . Second E d i t i o n . New York, New York: John W i l e y and Sons, 19 61. U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia. " C o n t i n u i n g E d u c a t i o n f o r E n g i n e e r s Diploma Program ( b r o c h u r e ) . C e n t r e f o r C o n t i n u i n g E d u c a t i o n , 1972. 86 Waters, C.A. "The S c i e n t i f i c Data Based Approach t o O.D." i n O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Development: The S t a t e o f the  A r t . Ann.Arbor, M i c h i g a n : F o u n d a t i o n f o r Research on Human B e h a v i o u r , 19 71. Weissenberg, P. and Kavanagh, M.J. "The Independence o f I n i t i a t i n g S t r u c t u r e and C o n s i d e r a t i o n : A Review o f the E v i d e n c e " , P e r s o n n e l P s y c h o l o g y , V o l . 25, 1972. W i l s o n , D.C. " F a c t o r s R e l a t e d t o the C o n t i n u i n g E d u c a t i o n Needs o f a S e l e c t e d Group o f P r o f e s s i o n a l E n g i n e e r s i n B.C." The B.C. P r o f e s s i o n a l E n g i n e e r , V o l . 26, No. 4, A p r i l , 1975. 8 7 APPENDIX 1 TOTAL DATA ON MATCHING VARIABLES TABLE 13 MATCHING VARIABLES DATA  EXPERIMENTAL GROUP (n = 15) S ub j e c t Age Years o f U n i v e r s i t y R e g i s t e r e d P. Eng. Y e a r s W i t h Company Years i n C u r r e n t P o s i t i o n Y e a r s a t C u r r e n t L o c a t i o n 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 43 32 41 57 48 39 28 25 32 45 31 53 32 29 28 5 4 0 4 5 6 1 4 4 4 3 5 5 N Y N Y N Y Y N N Y Y Y N N Y 4.5 1 13 18. 16 3 6 1. 7 22 2 . 24 7. 4 3 75 3, 1 4 2 25 1 4 1 4 2.5 1 11 1 1. 75 .25 4 . 1 13 6. 18 3 4 1. 7 2. 2, 20 7, 1. 3 75 5 5 5 75 Mean S. D. 37.53 9.91 3.87 2.17 53% 8.92 7. 75 2.55 2 . 7 0 6.40 5.98 TABLE 14 MATCHING VARIABLES DATA  CONTROL GROUP (n - 15) Y e a r s Y e a r s Y e a r s Years o f R e g i s t e r e d W i t h i n C u r r e n t a t C u r r e n t S u b j e c t Age U n i v e r s i t y P. Eng. Company P o s i t i o n L o c a t i o n 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 38 37 43 60 48 39 27 30 35 45 31 54 33 31 30 4 3 4 4 5 5. 5 4 4 0 4 5 5 N N Y N Y Y N Y Y N Y Y Y N Y 13 2.5 17 19 24 7.5 1.5 6 5 , 17 5 . 16 4 3 25 3 19 2 7 . 1, 4 5 , 3 1. 1, 1 25 5 5 25 25 5 75 13 2 . 5 19 19 7. 1. 6 5. 17 5 , 16 4 5 5 25 8.5 . 75 8.5 Mean S.D. 38. 73 9.6 4.27 1.64 60% 9.98 7.08 3.73 4.64 8. 70 6 .40 APPENDIX 2 PRE AND POST-COURSE SCORES FOR EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUPS ON LOQ, LEAD AND FORM-S SCALES 9 1 TABLE 15 INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION AND STRUCTURE  PRE AND POST-COURSE SCORES  EXPERIMENTAL GROUP (n = 15) C o n s i d e r a t i o n S t r u c t u r e S u b j e c t Pre P o s t Pre Posi 01 52 68 50. ' 40 02 58 72 41 30 03 62 66 42 47 04 48 49 46 41 05 50 56 32 43 06 50 64 40 38 07 . 48 58 4 2 45 08 64 70 55 41 09 55 60 47 40 10 59 68 41 36 11 64 69 40 32 12 66 69 46 45 1.3 63 71 39 41 14 65 59 49 29 15 55 62 52 52 Mean 57.27 64.07 44.13 40 .0 S.D. 6.55 6.57 5.91 6 . 3 : 92 TABLE 16 INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION AND STRUCTURE PRE AND POST-COURSE SCORES CONTROL GROUP (n = 15) C o n s i d e r a t i o n S t r u c t u r e S u b j e c t Pr e P o s t Pre Posl 16 63 57 39 35 17 51 56 55 . 47 18 51 51 39 36 19 54 55 48 44 20 61 61 45 44 21 62 62 42 34 22 61 66 50/ 45 23 55 55 46 42 24 50 55 58 51 25 58 49 43 42 26 59 56 44 . 38 27 56 52 36 33 28 60 57 60 56 29 59 51 44 40 30 61 64 34 33 Mean 57.40 56.47 45.53 41. 3! S.D. 4. 31 4.94 7.62 6.7? TABLE 17 INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION AND STRUCTURE  PRE AND FOLLOW-UP SCORES  EXPERIMENTAL GROUP ' (n = 1 0 ) C o n s i d e r a t i o n S t r u c t u r e S u b j e c t 01 02 05 08 09 10 11 12 13 15 Pre 52 58 50 64 55 59 64 66 63 55 Follow-Up 60 54 54 74 65 68 66 64 68 54 Pre 50 41 32 55 47 41 40 46 39 52 Follow-Up 48 23 39 49 37 39 33 42 . 45 52 Mean 58.6 62. 7 44. 3 4 0 . 7 S.D. 5.54 6.96 6 .96 8.58 TABLE 18 INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION AND STRUCTURE PRE AND FOLLOW-UP SCORES  CONTROL GROUP (n = 10) C o n s i d e r a t i o n S t r u c t u r e S u b j e c t Pre Follow-Up Pre Follow-Up 17 51 52 55 46 18 51 50 39 31 20 61 65 45 42 21 62 61 42 37 22 61 66 50 50 23 55 55 46 42 25 58 54 43 34 26 59 58 47 37 27 56 52 36 40 29 59 54 44 41 30 61 68 34 36 Mean 57.64 57.73 43.73 39.64 S.D. 3.93 6.31 6.03 5.43 TABLE 19 INDIVIDUAL E AND D PRE AND POST-COURSE SCORES  EXPERIMENTAL GROUP (n = 15) E D Subject Pre Post Pre Post 01 12 11 15 14 02 18 13 13 17 03 20 18 14 16 04 14 12 12 11 05 12 19 15 12 06 18 15 14 13 07 17 15 12 13 08 18 16 16 17 09 16 14 15 17 10 16 16 15 14 11 18 16 19 15 12 . 14 15 16 13 13 16 12 16 12 14 17 16 14 12 15 18 14 11 13 Mean 16.27 14.80 14.47 13.93 S.D. 2 . 34 2. 21 2.00 2.02 TABLE 20 INDIVIDUAL E AND D PRE AND POST-COURSE SCORES CONTROL GROUP (n = 15) E D Subject Pre Post Pre Pos1 16 18 13 14 14 17 17 17 16 18 18 16 15 17 16 19 18 16 . 15 16 20 10 17 16 14 21 .17 17 13 17 22 16 15 12 14 23 20 19 13 14 24 14 11 15 13 25 13 14 14 15 26 17 17 16 17 27 16 15 12 12 28 16 15 13 16 29 14 13 14 13 30 15 11 15 12 Mean 15 . 80 15.00 14 . 33 14. 7: S.D. 2 . 40 2. 30 1.54 1.8' TABLE 21 INDIVIDUAL N AND L PRE AND POST-COURSE SCORES EXPERIMENTAL GROUP N L (n = 15) (n = 13) Subject Pre Post Pre Post 01 12.24 10.67 02 12.59 12.17 16.18 16.39 03 12.56 13.28 15.94 17.22 04 12.35 11.44 16.63 16.39 05 8.83 11.39 06 11.50 10.26 16.28 18.00 07 9.83 10.72 15.11 16.11 08 10.22 8.94 17.14 20.00 09 12.94 12.67 17.11 17.33 10 10.53 12.50 17.18 16.89 11 5.17 5.33 18.78 18.66 12 13.39 13.35 17.39 17.06 13 5.56 5.61 16.69 18.00 14 14.94 14.61 17.33 18.06 15 11.06 13.89 17.78 18.11 Mean 10.91 11.12 16.89 17.56 S.D. 2.72 2.74 0.96 1.07 9 8 TABLE 2 2 INDIVIDUAL N AND L PRE AND POST-COURSE SCORES CONTROL GROUP N L (n = 1 5 ) (n - 1 2 ) Subject Pre Post Pre Post 1 6 6 . 7 6 4 . 8 2 1 5 . 6 5 1 7 . 2 9 1 7 9 . 4 4 1 0 . 1 7 1 5 . 2 8 1 5 . 2 2 1 8 1 1 . 8 3 1 2 . 5 0 1 6 . 1 1 1 6 . 1 1 1 9 1 2 . 1 2 9 . 2 2 1 8 . 1 0 1 7 . 3 9 2 0 1 2 . 2 9 1 2 . 3 3 1 7 . 5 9 1 8 . 2 7 2 1 1 4 . 6 1 1 4 . 1 1 1 6 . 3 9 1 7 . 4 4 2 2 5 . 3 3 6 . 2 8 1 6 . 2 2 1 8 . 6 7 2 3 1 5 . 0 6 1 3 . 4 4 1 7 . 3 3 1 6 . 3 9 2 4 9 . 6 6 7 . 9 4 1 5 . 6 7 1 5 . 5 6 2 5 9 . 8 3 8 . 8 9 1 6 . 6 1 1 6 . 6 1 2 6 7 . 6 6 1 0 . 6 1 1 8 . 7 2 1 8 . 1 1 2 7 8 . 0 6 1 0 . 8 3 1 3 . 0 6 1 4 . 8 3 2 8 1 2 . 4 4 1 0 . 8 9 2 9 8 . 1 1 9 . 5 0 3 0 1 2 . 9 4 1 0 . 4 4 Mean 1 0 . 4 0 1 0 . 1 3 1 6 . 3 9 1 6 . 8 2 S.D. 2 . 9 0 2 . 5 2 1 . 4 2 1 . 2 4 APPENDIX 3 N AND L PRE-COURSE MEANS JLUU-TABLE 2 3 EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUP  PRE-COURSE NOW (N) MEANS FOR INDIVIDUAL FORM-S QUESTIONS Q u e s t i o n E x p e r i m e n t a l C o n t r o l (n = 15) (n = 15) How much c o n f i d e n c e and t r u s t i s shown i n s u b o r d i n a t e s ? 10.05 9.64 How f r e e do they f e e l t o t a l k t o s u p e r i o r s about j o b ? 12.00 10.40 How o f t e n a r e s u b o r d i n a t e ' s i d e a s sought and used con-s t r u c t i v e l y ? 11.35 10.10 I s predominant use made o f 1. f e a r , 2. t h r e a t s , 3. punishment, 4. rewards, 5. i n v o l v e m e n t ? 12.35 9.5 0 Where i s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f e l t f o r a c h i e v i n g o r g a n i z a t i o n ' s g o a l s ? 9.68 9.23 How much c o o p e r a t i v e teamwork e x i s t s ? 11.94 11.41 What i s the u s u a l d i r e c t i o n o f i n f o r m a t i o n f l o w ? 11.36 10.64 How i s downward communication a c c e p t e d ? 13.00 10.56 How a c c u r a t e i s upward communication? 13.15 12.76 How w e l l do s u p e r i o r s know problems f a c e d by s u b o r d i n a t e s ? 7.65 6.76 A t what l e v e l a r e d e c i s i o n s made? 10.50 9.82 Are s u b o r d i n a t e s i n v o l v e d i n d e c i s i o n s r e l a t e d t o t h e i r work? 11.30 11.58 TABLE 2 3 (cont'd) ^ Question Experimental C o n t r o l (n = 15) (n = 15) What does decision-making process c o n t r i b u t e to motivation? 12.80 10.76 How are o r g a n i z a t i o n a l goals e s t a b l i s h e d ? 11.50 11.64 How much covert r e s i s t a n c e to goals i s present? 12.05 .10.47 How concentrated are review and c o n t r o l f unctions? 11.50 11.17 Is there an in f o r m a l organiza-t i o n r e s i s t i n g the formal one? 11.80 12.29 What are cost, p r o d u c t i v i t y , and other c o n t r o l data used f o r ? 14.15 12.58 102 TABLE 2 4 EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUP  PRE-COURSE LIKE (L) MEANS FOR INDIVIDUAL FORM-S QUESTIONS Q u e s t i o n How much c o n f i d e n c e and t r u s t i s shown i n s u b o r d i n a t e s ? How f r e e do they f e e l t o t a l k t o s u p e r i o r s about job? How o f t e n a re s u b o r d i n a t e ' s i d e a s sought and used con-s t r u c t i v e l y ? I s predominant use made o f 1. f e a r , 2. t h r e a t s , 3. punishment, 4. rewards, 5. i n v o l v e m e n t ? Where i s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f e l t f o r a c h i e v i n g o r g a n i z a t i o n ' s g o a l s ? How much c o o p e r a t i v e teamwork e x i s t s ? What i s the u s u a l d i r e c t i o n o f i n f o r m a t i o n f l o w ? How i s downward communication a c c e p t e d ? How a c c u r a t e i s upward communication? How w e l l do s u p e r i o r s know problems f a c e d by s u b o r d i n a t e s ? A t what l e v e l a r e d e c i s i o n s made? Are s u b o r d i n a t e s i n v o l v e d i n d e c i s i o n s r e l a t e d t o t h e i r work? E x p e r i m e n t a l C o n t r o l (n = 15) 15. 75 16. 47 15 .47 16. 92 17.58 17.12 17.18 18.12 17. 87 16.58 16.58 .17.6 8 (n = 15] 15.78 16.21 15.28 16.60 16.78 17.28 15.28 17. 38 17. 35 15.92 16. 48 16. 78 •-I TABLE 24 (cont'd) Q u e s t i o n E x p e r i m e n t a l C o n t r o l (n = 15) (n = 15) What does d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g p r o c e s s c o n t r i b u t e t o m o t i v a t i o n ? 18.26 16.35 How are o r g a n i z a t i o n a l g o a l s e s t a b l i s h e d ? 15.75 16.50 How much c o v e r t r e s i s t a n c e t o g o a l s i s p r e s e n t ? 16.68 16.35 How c o n c e n t r a t e d a re r e v i e w and c o n t r o l f u n c t i o n s ? 16.25 15.57 Is t h e r e an i n f o r m a l o r g a n i z a -t i o n r e s i s t i n g t he f o r m a l one? 17.93 17.64 What are c o s t , p r o d u c t i v i t y , and o t h e r c o n t r o l d a t a used f o r ? 17.66.' 16.50 APPENDIX 4 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS MATRICES MATRIX 1 TOTAL GROUP (n = 30) VARIABL E AGE YEARSU R_E GPE TEARSC YEAR SP YEARSL CPRE CPGST C FG_L 'SPRE SPOST SFCL EPRE" EPOST DPR E • POST NP RE NPGS.T L PRE L POST AGE "' r.oooo" -0.2965 -0.0551 0 .8294 0.5C6 3 0.7174 -G .24 94 -0.3 124 -0.2772 -0.2372 0.G1 18 -0 .1606 -0.36 8 3 0.0881 0 .0428 -0.1789 0.1730 _0. 15 68_ -0.15 36 -0.2966 YEARSU _ • 1 .0000 -0.2205 REGPF 1 . c c c c YEARSC YEARSP Y EARSL CPRE CPOS.T CFOL -0.2527 -0.0677 -0.3643 '0.308 8 0. 1465 0.02 61 -C. 1226 0 .0572 C. 1 0 0 5 0. 14 6 5 0.00 53 0.08 72 0.1171 -0.1191 -0 .099 1 " 0 .3 886 0.0C22 -0.2576 0. 10 3 2 0.0 5 63 0. 392^ -0 .04 19" -G.C062 0. 1092 1 .ccoo 0 .4249 0.7780 "0. GG0 9" -0.2379 -0.C062 -0.3551 -0.0000 -C. 1693 -0.4 20 0.' 0.168 7 0.1381 0.06 84 •0. 0269 _ 0 .0E75_ -0. C9 54 0.1527 0.12 84 -0.2396 _-0.3141 0.0 0 44" 0.2619 -0. 2282 0.1669 0._20 9 8 -0 . 015 0" 1 .0000 0.5062 " 0. 016 1 -0.0627 G .1431 1 .0000 0 o G 8 8 4 -0.2 188 -0.0874 1 .COOO 0.49 21 0 .7 1 10 0.0 83 9 0 .1066 -0. C812 0.0 86 2 0.0630 C.0705 -0, 0. _ ri 0 , 3 383 1 141 0 80 7 3621" 2220 0.0973 •0.0350 -0. 2645 0.0150 0. 1.5 22 0.0949 0.2454 -0. :01 0. 1429 •C. 3209 0. 0_781_ 0.1539 - 0. 0951 -0.1560 0.0857 _C._0506 -0 .0729" -0.1691 0.1253 •0 .0803 •0.11 79 0.2 58 2' 0.5906 1.00 0 0 0.7126 -0.0242 -0.1 554 0 .128 4 "0.1959 -0 .069 5 0 .2417 0.1211 -0 .02 7 8 -C'.. 07 40. 0.2002 0 .559 5 1.0000 0.1285 -0. 0749 0.2572 -0. 0128 -0.1737 0.3316 -0. 0476 -0.0965 -0.3396 0. 4668 0.7674 SPRE 1 .OOdO 0. 6 2 09 0.6 142 0.0441 -0.0925 -0.10 50 0.2123 0. 1 72 0 0.0304 0. 2122 0.1325 SPOST 1. 00 0 0 0.7513 -0. 8 9 0. 04 9 5 -0.2034 0. 0500 - 0. 0081 -0.00 3 6 0. 03 09 -0.06 12 CORRELATION MATRIX VARIABLE SFOL EPPE EPOST DPRE DPCST KPRE NPPST LPRE LPOST SFOL V I 1 .0000 " I L EPRE -0.C621 1. 00 CO EPOST -0.0095 0.2922 l.OCCC DPRE_ -0. 22 18 -0. 1545 0.1291 1 .0000 DPOST -0. 2707 0. 3 594 C.5429 - 0. 2618 " 1 .0000 : " -0.1798 0.0407 0. 16 59 -0.2071 0. 1071 1. 0000 .'>ip.Q_sI ~ ° * 13 3 > °JLCi 09_ 0.38 03 Z0_._2_76 6_ 0.063 1 0.8 262 1 . 0000 LPRE i'f 0. 0520 0.0107 " 072299" " 0.4102 "C.T623"" 0.10~57 0TC"T69 HOGGO" L P G S T 0.3608 0.1133 0.1501 0.2497 0.1050 -0.1530 -0.1943 0.6843 1.0000 MATRIX 2 EXPERIMENTAL GROUP (n = 15) CO'-. RE LA T I CN MATFI X V A R I A G E " ' • YEARSU R EG F E YEARSC YEARSP YEA RSL GL E AGE 1.OOO 0 - 0 . 3 7 5 3 - 0 . L'I 11 C . E 3 12 0 . - 1 *4 0 . c 1 7 0 Y : ARSU 1 . -0 - 3 - 0 - 0 c o c o -5 IL 2 5 17 C3 42 '•2 17 RE GP: 1 . 0 0 0 C _ . „ . . _ _ . . . _ . _ _ . - 0 . 1 2 0 3 0 . 2 0 1 4 YE A R SC 1 . 0 0 0 0 0 . ' 5 3 5 0 • S 5 C ~ Y E A R S P Y E A P. S L 1 . 0 0 0 0 0 . 5 7 i L 1 .. CGOO CP; CPCST CFGL S P R E S P 0 S T CPR E - 0 . 2c 3 2 0 . 3 4 4 8 0 . 2 1 3 9 0 . 0 0 1 5 0 . 2 - 2 4 0 . 0 5 5 0 1 .uOOG CPCST - u . 3 17 6 j . 27 15 0 . 0 3 2 2 - 0 . 2 3 6 9 0 . 117 5 - 0 . 140 3 0 . -i* 1 4 1 .0 0 00 C F G L - 0 . 2 o 2 0 0 . 0 7 7 0 0 .227 1 0 .0 8 A 6 0 . 1 6 8 1 - C . 1 8 £ e . o . 6 7 c 3 C . 1 5 1 . 0 0 0 0 SPR E - 0 . 2 5 5 1 0 . 2 1 8 9 0 . 1 1 8 5 - 0 . 2 6 C 7 0 . 1 4 8 2 - 0 .36 34 0 . 2 1 6 5 • G . C 54 9 0 . 2 6 1 8 1.OOOC SPOST G . l c . 0 3 - 0 . 19 8 1 0 . 02 19 0 . 2 6 9 3 0 . 2 5 7 1 . 0 . 4 75 3 - 0 . 2 6 5 5 - 0 . 2 0 96 - 0 .17 16 0 . 1 5 ^ 7 1.CO 0 0 SFOL - 0 . C 5 • J 8 - 0 . 2 923 0 . 3 5 ) 4 J . 0 2 6 0 0 . 0 4 1 6 0 . 0 7 9 7 - 0 . 044 9 - C . 16C2 0 . 2 3 ^ 7 0 . 5 6 7 4 0 .r 0 C 1 EPR E - 0 . c 2 4 8 0 . 7 3 E 7 . r\ . 1 6 9 2 - J • ' v 6 •' 7 - 0 . 2 3 : 3 -0 .^-5 0" 5 "' " 0 . 36 2 5"' 0 . 3 0 9 3 " 0 . ' 2 - c r 3 C . 13 6~4 - C . C 7 7 1 c POST - 0 . 0 1 7 6 J . 0 3-38 0 . 15 0 2 0 . 2 U 9 - C . 0 2 2 1 0 . 3 6 0 7 0 . 2 1 1 1 - G . 0 3 7 5 0 . 0 2 6 2 - 0 . 3 5 30 0 . C 6 6 <-r.pp, P- - 0 . C2C7 - 0 . 2 8 20 0 . 2 5 3 8 0 . 0 3 2 7 0 . 1 2 7 9 0 . 1629 0 . 5 799 C . 52 57 0 . 6 3 9 6 - 0 . 1 9 3 3 - 0 . 3 6.7 9 OPGST " - 0 7 - 2 7 2 " '072757 "~"o . 1 6 9 2 -0~. 3 6 : C " 0 . 0 170 - 0 . 2 3 ^ 2 0 . 3 096 "0 . 5 3 3 3 0 . 2 ^ 5 6 0 . 2 3 4 4 "" -0 . 16,80 N'PRE 0 . 2253 0 . 14 95. 0 . 04 > 3 0 . 1 4 7 1 0 . 3 9 9 5 0 . C 5 6 1 - C . 0 6 8.9 - C . 2 5 6 8 - 0 . 2 7 6 1 0 . 4 5 6 2 - 0 . 0 2 2 2 NPQST 0.. 22 7 9 0 . 1 1 3 3 - 0 . 0 3 4 6 0 . 3 0 1 5 0 . 3 2 6 5 0 . 1 3 9 5 - 0 . 1 1 0 8 - 0 . 3446. - 0 . v fc 6 4 0 . 2 7 7 1 0 . 1 8 4 0 LPF.E - J . 0 5 7 2 - 0 . 2 3 6 2 - 0 . 0 4 1 1 - 0 . 0 2 3 9 . - 0 . C?>: 1 - 0 . 0 6 9 7 0 ^ .j2ze 0 . 2 118 0 . 2 8 5 8 - 0 . 206 8 L F C S T • - 0 . 4 7 c 1 - 0 . 0 1 2 6 0 . 4 3 4 6 -0 . - 7 0 0 - 0 . 3 62 1 - C . 2 5 4 0 • 0 . 5 C 9 C C . 3 7 17 G . 5c 11 0 . ^ 9 7 y - 0 . 0 5 3 1 CC4 Ft LAT I CN M A T R I X V A R I A B L E S F C L E? R E EPCST DP RE DPOST r.;p R r NPGST LFRE LPCST SFOL 1 . COOC E PR E - 0 . I96 0 1 . 0 0 0 0 E POST - 0 . 1240 0 .2 454 1 . 0 0 0 0 OPRE - 0 . Ic 6 4 - 0 . 0 8 96 0 . 2 1 7 0 1 . 0 0 0 0 DFOST - 0 . - 1 7 4 " " 0 . 1 0 9 C 0 . 2 5 6 8 1 . C C C C NPR E - 0 . C I 32 - J . C 3 72 - 0 . 0 6 2 5 - 0 9 6 r 0 . 0 9 0 5 1 . 0 0 0 0 . NPGST 0 . 0 2 7 8 - 0 . 029 8 0 . 182 1 ^ 0 ^ 0 06 2 - 0 . 0 1 8 2 0 . 8757 1 . 0 0 0 0 L PR E 0 . 2 1 7 0 - 0 . 1 1 5 9 0 . C 8 9 1 0 . 5 "t 0 5 " 0 . 0 2 ^ 8 - 0 . 2 56 3 - 0 . 1 9 04 1 . O J C O L P C S T 0 . 5 7 8 8 0 . 35 54 0 . 2 9 2 3 0 . 5 1 2 3 0 . 2 2 6 9 - 0 . 3269 - 0 . H C 4 C C . 5 5 c 8 1 . 0 0 0 0 MATRIX 3 CONTROL GROUP (n = 15) C C F F T L AT I C M M A T F I X V A R I A B L E A G E Y : A R S U R E G P E S C . Y E A R S P A G E " 1 . C O C O Y E A R S U - 0 . 2 i 5 1 l . C O C O R E G F E 0 . 0 o 2 2 - .) . 1 3 8 3 T . 0 0 0 0 Y I Z A R S C 0 . i. ?. •:. <t - 0 . 2 £ 2 - - C . C 7 7 o ' i . 0 0 3 0 " Y L A R S F - 0 . 1 0 13 0 . 1 8 5 2 G . 3 £ 7 1 1 . C C 0 0 YL A RS L C . 8 2 C 7 — j . 3 7 3 3 0 . 0 3 4 1 } . f. 8 7 2 0 . - 6 - 2 C PR t - 0 . 2 7 0 . 2 3 9 0 " 0 . 0 5 2 3 -J.0 0 2 7 - 0 . 1 8 - 0 C F C S T - 0 . 3'; -o 0 . 2 1 4 8 - 0 . 13 6 9 - 0 . 2 - 1 4 - 0 . 0 2 8 5 •VrL L - 0 . 3 5 2 6 0 . 1 5 o 8 - 0 . 1 5 4 2 -0 . 0 5 9 5 0 . 1 1 3 4 SPF'E ' - C . 210 8 - G . C 0 0 3 0 . 1 0 7 2 " - 0 . 4 4 & ^ "0 . 0 3 3 1 S F C ST - 0 . I T 4-6 -0 . 0 5 4 1 0 . 1 0 3 9 - 0 . 2 9 10 0 . 0 C ^ 3 S F O L T U . 2 2 3 L 0 . 3 1 0 9 0 .45 4: 9 - 0 . ' + B - ? - 0 . 3 7 1 6 E P F E - 0 . l-t2 3 - _ . 02 20 " ' 0 . C 7 0 D - 0 . 3 6 4 6 " 0 . 3 0 3 2 E PC S T o . i >3 n -0 . 0 5 2 0 - 0 .15 6 3 0 . 1 1 5 6 0 . 1 1 8 0 J P R E 0 . 1 3 6 7 - 0 . 2 0 9 0 - 0 . 0 9 1 3 0 . 2 9 6 6 0 . 0 5 0 7 p r ^ - " 0 . C 1 9 5 - 0 . 2 8 C 7 0 . 12 0 5 " - 0 . 112 8 " ' " 0 . 1 ? 2 7 ~ \ P R E 0 . 1 3 5 9 - 0 . 0 7 9 3 - 0 . 5 2 8 1 0 . 2 0 6 8 0 . 2 2 2 5 M F C S ! 0 . I 1 C 5 0 . 1 C 7 7 - J . i : <,', 4 0 . 1 4 2 6 - 0 . 0 1 ^ 3 L F R E - 0 . 1 ; 7 2 - J . 0 7 2 6 " " 0 . 0 4 8 3 " ' 0 . 0 5 6 1 ' " " " 0 . 3 6 9 5 " L P C S T - 0 . 2 2 10 0 . 2 3 2 2 0 . 1 5 0 6 G . 0 5 0 0 0 . 1 4 5 1 C C P R E L A T I C N M A T S I X V A R I A E L E S F C L EP Re E F G S T C P R E ' D ? 0 S T S F O L 1 . C O O 0 = F R E 0 . 1 0 12 " " 1 . C C 0 0 E P O S T C . 1.2 6 5 0 . 3 4 5 3 1 . 0 0 0 0 C F R E R 0 . 4 0 d 4 - 0 . 2 5 1 1 0 . 02 6 7 1 . 0 C 0 0 D F O S T . - 0 . 0 7 2 6 0 . 3 0 6 1 0 . 59 0 1 ' " - " 6 T 3 T - 9 ~ " 1 . C O C O N P P E - 0 . 4 1 1 3 0 . 0 9 4 9 0 . 3 7 7 8 0 . 1 2 8 6 0 . 1 7 0 1 'si P C S T - 0 .<'< 5 9 j . 0 1 3 6 0 . 6 U 2 G . 1 4 6 8 0 . 2 6 3 2 L P R E - 0 • C-r 7 o -0 . 0 0 0 0 . 0 . 3 8 2 0 0 . 3 4 4 5 0 . 4 C 5 2 L P Q S T 0 . 2 0 0 5 - 0 . 1 3 5 9 0 . 1 6 0 5 - 0 . 0 2 0 6 0 . 1 6 3 1 YEAF SL CPRE C P C S T CFCL SPRE S P C S T 1 . C C O C 0 .14 0 1 1 .0 0 00 - 0 . 1--2 L 0 . 5 2 7 6 . 1 . 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 9 1 1 0 . S C 9 9 C . 9 C 1 2 1 . 0 000 - 0 "• 37 2 1 " ""-073399"" ' " 0 . 0 2 27" - U . 0 3 7 1 "'""""1.0G0 0" - C . 2 3 3 5 - 0 . 2 6 8 7 - G . C G 71 - 0 . 0116 L . 9 5 ~ 5 1 .OOCC - 0 . 3 0 7 1 0 . 11C4 C 527 0 . 2 7 4 2 0 . 7 03 7 0 . 6 5 7 C - 0 . 2 6 0 4 - 0 . 1 4 4 0 " " " • - 0 . 0 0 9 7 - 0 . 29 67 - 0 . 0 0 5 5 " - 0 . 1 5 8 3 C . C 9 5 1 - 0 . 0 6 8 6 - 0 . 0 3 * 6 - 0 . 2 6 9 0 0 . 0 9 1 3 0 . 0 2 8 8 0 .04-16 - 0 . 4 0 8 5 - 0 . 1 8 1 1 - 0 . 1 3 5 2 - 0 . 0 1 6 2 - 0 . CC4--6 - 0 . 17 14 - 0 . 1 7 2 1 - 0 . 0 4 74 """"-0 1 2 64 1 G . 3 6 1 5 0". 2 27 3 G . 1 ^ 9 0 - 0 . 1C 13 0 . 0 7 3 2 0 . 0 3 5 3 - 0 . 0 1 3 9 0 .0224, - 0 . 0 1 0 4 - 0 . 1 3 34 - C . G 5 C 0 - 0 . 1 7 1 8 - 0 . 1 3 63 - C . 1522 0 . 0 3 7 9 0 . 2 1 2 6 " 0 . 2 c 34 "0 . 5 0 9 7" 0 . 2 0 6 3 0 . 2 74 1 0 . 0 7 1 0 0 . 7 2 2 1 C . c 7 C5 0 • 2 8 55 - 0 . 05 89 - 0 . 0 1 2 1 NPF .E NPOST L F R E LPCST 1 . 0 0 0 0 —^ 0 . 7 8 2 2 1 . 0 0 0 0 " " C . 3C4 9 " 0 . 1 3 5 6 1 . 'J 0 u 0 - 0 . 0 9 7 9 - 0 . 1297. C . 7 4 16 1 . 0 0 0 0 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0055959/manifest

Comment

Related Items