UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Critical requirements of the University librarians job : methodological considerations in collecting… McGilvery, Charles Jude 1968

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1968_A8 M37.pdf [ 6.87MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0093559.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0093559-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0093559-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0093559-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0093559-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0093559-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0093559-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0093559-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0093559.ris

Full Text

THE CRITICAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY LIBRARIANS JOB: METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN COLLECTING INCIDENTS AND WEIGHTING REQUIREMENTS by CHARLES JUDE McGILVERY B.A., University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1962 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n the Department of Psychology We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA A p r i l 1968 In presenting this thesis in p a r t i a l fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make i t freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It i s understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. ^C.H. M c G i l v e r y Department of Psychology The University of British Columbia, Vancouver 3, Canada. Date April 22, 1968.  ABSTRACT Statement o f t h e Problem The o b j e c t o f t h i s s t u d y i s t o examine the e f f e c t o f methodo-l o g i c a l v a r i a t i o n s i n the C r i t i c a l I n c i d e n t T echnique as i t a p p l i e s t o j o b a n a l y s i s . Three m e t h o d o l o g i c a l a r e a s were i n v e s t i g a t e d i n t h i s s t u d y : I The q u e s t i o n s a s k e d the o b s e r v e r s . I t has been common p r a c t i c e i n p a s t s t u d i e s t o ask the o b s e r v e r s t o d e s c r i b e i n c i d e n t s i n w h i c h a p e r s o n a c t e d i n such a manner as t o be p a r t i c u l a r l y e f f e c t i v e o r i n e f f e c t i v e w i t h r e g a r d t o p e r f o r m i n g t h e a c t i v i t y . I t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t by a s k i n g a d d i t i o n a l k i n d s o f q u e s t i o n s w h i c h e s t a b l i s h d i f -f e r e n t c r i t e r i a f o r r e p o r t i n g o r i g n o r i n g i n c i d e n t s d i f f e r e n t k i n d s o f b e h a v i o r s would be r e p o r t e d . I I The o b s e r v e r s ' p e r c e p t i o n s o f the aims o f the a c t i v i t y . F l a n a g a n (1954) s u g g e s t s t h a t the o b s e r v e r s , i n o r d e r t o judge whether a p e r s o n ' s b e h a v i o r i s e f f e c t i v e o r i n e f f e c t i v e w i t h r e g a r d t o a p a r t i c u l a r a c t i v i t y must be aware o f the g e n e r a l aims o f the a c t i v i t y as l a i d down by the a d m i n i s t r a -t o r s o f t h e a c t i v i t y . Few p a s t c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t s t u d i e s have c h e c k e d t h e q u a l i f i c a t i o n s o f t h e o b s e r v e r s used w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e i r awareness of the aims o f t h e a c t i v i t y . No r e s e a r c h has been c a r r i e d out t o d e t e r m i n e the e f f e c t o f o b s e r v e r s p e r c e p t i o n s o f aims, w h i c h a r e i n d i s a g r e e m e n t w i t h the a c c e p t e d aims, on t h e i n c i d e n t s they r e p o r t . I l l The r e l a t i v e i m p o r t a n c e o f the c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t s . I t may be p o s s i b l e t o d e t e r m i n e the r e l a t i v e i m p o r t a n c e of e a ch c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t . Frequency o f b e h a v i o r s r e p o r t e d has been used as an i n d i c a t o r o f t h e r e l a t i v e i m p o r t a n c e o f c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t s . R a t i n g s by s u p e r v i s o r s o f the impor-t a n c e o f each r e q u i r e m e n t , have a l s o been used i n an e f f o r t t o e s t a b l i s h t h e i r r e l a t i v e i m p o r t a n c e . N e i t h e r o f t h e s e methods was p r o v e n t o be v a l i d . To d a t e no e f f e c t i v e , v a l i d method has been d i s c o v e r e d f o r d e t e r m i n i n g the r e l a t i v e impor-t a n c e o f the c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t s . T h i s s t u d y i n v e s t i g a t e d t h e s e t h r e e a r e a s i n an a t t e m p t t o t e s t the f o l l o w i n g p r o p o s i t i o n s : . 1. I n c i d e n t s c o l l e c t e d f r o m a " b e h a v i o r p a t t e r n " q u e s t i o n s w i l l c o n t a i n d i f f e r e n t k i n d s o f b e h a v i o r f r o m t h o s e c o n t a i n e d i n i n c i d e n t s e l i c i t e d f r o m " i s o l a t e d b e h a v i o r " q u e s t i o n s . 2. O b s e r v e r s who a r e i n d i s a g r e e m e n t w i t h the a c c e p t e d aims o f th e a c t i v i t y under s t u d y w i l l r e p o r t d i f f e r e n t k i n d s o f b e h a v i o r f r o m t h o s e r e p o r t e d by o b s e r v e r s who a r e i n a g r e e -ment w i t h t h e s e aims. 3. The r e l a t i v e i m p o r t a n c e o f t h e c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t s c a n be d e t e r m i n e d by u s i n g t h e o b s e r v e r s ' r a t i n g s o f the c r i t i c a l n e s s o f t h e b e h a v i o r s they r e p o r t . The Method I n d i v i d u a l i n t e r v i e w s were h e l d w i t h 126 o b s e r v e r s (52 l i b r a r y s t a f f members, 44 s t u d e n t s and 30 f a c u l t y members) a t the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h . C o l u mbia. To e l i c i t c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t s the o b s e r v e r s were asked two t y p e s o f q u e s t i o n s . " I s o l a t e d b e h a v i o r " q u e s t i o n s , asked f o r d e s c r i p -t i o n s o f b e h a v i o r t h a t was p a r t i c u l a r l y e f f e c t i v e o r i n e f f e c t i v e l i b r a r i a n p e r f o r m a n c e . " B e h a v i o r p a t t e r n " q u e s t i o n s , a s k e d f o r d e s c r i p t i o n s o f b e h a v i o r t h a t , w h i l e n o t p a r t i c u l a r l y e f f e c t i v e o r i n e f f e c t i v e i n a s i n g l e i n s t a n c e , d i d become s i g n i f i c a n t l y c r i t i c a l when r e p e a t e d o v e r a time. C r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t c a t e g o r i e s were g e n e r a t e d and the t y p e s o f b e h a v i o r s e l i c i t e d by each t y p e o f q u e s t i o n and t h e i r r e l a t i v e c o n t r i b u t i o n t o each c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t were i n v e s t i g a t e d . Each o b s e r v e r was asked t o s t a t e h i s p e r c e p t i o n o f the g e n e r a l aims o f the l i b r a r i a n s ' j o b . T h i s s t a t e m e n t was compared w i t h an " o f f i c i a l " s t a t e m e n t o f aims. The b e h a v i o r s r e p o r t e d by o b s e r v e r s who were i n d i s -agreement w i t h t h e " o f f i c i a l " g e n e r a l aims were compared w i t h the b e h a v i o r s r e p o r t e d by o b s e r v e r s who s t a t e d aims t h a t were compatable w i t h t h e " o f f i c i a l " s t a t e m e n t . Each o b s e r v e r was asked t o r a t e t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o r i n e f f e c t i v e -n e s s o f the b e h a v i o r s he r e p o r t e d on a f o u r - p o i n t r a t i n g s c a l e . The ave r a g e r a t i n g o f the b e h a v i o r s i n each c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t c a t e g o r y was c a l c u l a t e d . These average r a t i n g s were used t o r a n k o r d e r the c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t s i n terms o f r e l a t i v e importance.. T h i s r a n k o r d e r i n g was compared w i t h the r a n k o r d e r i n g s o b t a i n e d by c a l c u l a t i n g t h e f r e q u e n c y o f b e h a v i o r s i n each i i i . c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t c a t e g o r y and by h a v i n g t e n s e n i o r l i b r a r i a n s r a t e the im p o r t a n c e o f each c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t c a t e g o r y . C o n c l u s i o n s > T h i r t y - s e v e n c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t c a t e g o r i e s were g e n e r a t e d by b e h a v i o r s c o l l e c t e d by b o t h t y p e s o f q u e s t i o n s . The a d d i t i o n of the " b e h a v i o r p a t t e r n " q u e s t i o n r e s u l t e d i n a g r e a t e r number of n e g a t i v e b e h a v i o r s b e i n g r e p o r t e d and c o n t r i b u t e d g r e a t l y t o the g e n e r a t i o n of 4 c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t c a t e g o r i e s . These f i n d i n g s s u p p o r t t h e h y p o t h e s i s t h a t a d d i t i o n a l k i n d s o f b e h a v i o r s can be e l i c i t e d by v a r y i n g the q u e s t i o n s asked t h u s r e s u l t i n g i n a more complete l i s t of c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t s . No o b s e r v e r s were found who d i s a g r e e d w i t h the " o f f i c i a l " s t a t e -ment of aims so no c o n c l u s i o n s c o u l d be r e a c h e d on the e f f e c t of such d i s a g r e e m e n t on b e h a v i o r s r e p o r t e d . S u b t l e d i f f e r e n c e s i n emphasis w i t h i n the framework of t h e " o f f i c i a l " s t a t e m e n t o f aims d i d not i n f l u e n c e behav-i o r s r e p o r t e d t o a s i g n i f i c a n t e x t e n t . A r a n k o r d e r i n g o f c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t s by a v e r a g i n g the o b s e r -v e r s ' r a t i n g s of the b e h a v i o r s t h e y r e p o r t e d was a c h i e v e d . The r e s u l t s d i d n ot prove t h a t t h i s r a n k o r d e r i n g was a v a l i d i n d i c a t o r of the r e l a t i v e i m p o r t a n c e of the c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t s . i v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page L i s t of T a b l e s . v L i s t of F i g u r e s v i L i s t of A p p e n d i c e s . .. v i i Acknowledgements v i i i C h a p t e r I Review Of The L i t e r a t u r e 1 C h a p t e r I I Purposes Of The S t u d y 22 C h a p t e r I I I C o l l e c t i n g The C r i t i c a l I n c i d e n t s And G e n e r a t i n g The C r i t i c a l Requirements . 27 C h a p t e r IV I n c i d e n t s From " B e h a v i o r P a t t e r n " Q u e s t i o n s V e r s u s " I s o l a t e d B e h a v i o r " Q u e s t i o n s 51 C h a p t e r V The I n f l u e n c e Of The O b s e r v e r s ' S t a t e m e n t s Of Aims On The B e h a v i o r s They R e p o r t 58 C h a p t e r V I The R e l a t i v e Importance Of The C r i t i c a l R e q u i r e m e n t s 73 C h a p t e r V I I Summary 85 B i b l i o g r a p h y 91 A p p e n d i c e s 94 V LIST OF TABLES Page TABLE I D i s t r i b u t i o n of L i b r a r y S t a f f Member O b s e r v e r s , A c c o r d i n g t o Department 30 TABLE I I D i s t r i b u t i o n of St u d e n t O b s e r v e r s A c c o r d i n g t o Academic Year 31 TABLE I I I D i s t r i b u t i o n of St u d e n t O b s e r v e r s A c c o r d i n g t o F a c u l t y of S t u d i e s 33 TABLE IV D i s t r i b u t i o n of F a c u l t y Member O b s e r v e r s A c c o r d i n g t o Department 34 TABLE V The C r i t i c a l R equirements of L i b r a r i a n s i n The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h C olumbia L i b r a r y . . . . 42 TABLE V I Aims S t a t e d by O b s e r v e r s , and the Number of O b s e r v e r s R e f e r r i n g t o Ea c h , i n H i s Statement of Aims 59 TABLE V I I D i s t r i b u t i o n of B e h a v i o r s Among the Broad C r i t i c a l Requirement A r e a s , f o r Aims 1, 2, 3 and 4 70 TABLE V I I I W e i g h t s and Average Weights A s s i g n e d by S e n i o r L i b r a r i a n s t o Requirements 77 TABLE IX Rank Orders of the C r i t i c a l R equirements on the B a s i s of F r e q u e n c y , Average Weight by O b s e r v e r s , and Average Weight by the S e n i o r L i b r a r i a n s . . . 78 TABLE X Rank - D i f f e r e n c e C o r r e l a t i o n C o e f f i c i e n t s Between the Rank Orders of the C r i t i c a l R equirements on the B a s i s o f F r e q u e n c y , Average O b s e r v e r W e i g h t i n g , and Average S e n i o r L i b r a r i a n 80 TABLE X I The Number of B e h a v i o r s , i n Each C r i t i c a l R e q u i r e -ment C a t e g o r y , G i v e n Each R a t i n g , by the O b s e r v e r s 82 v i L IST OF FIGURES Page F i g u r e 1 D i s t r i b u t i o n of b e h a v i o r s among c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t s 46 F i g u r e 2 The p e r c e n t a g e o f b e h a v i o r s r e p o r t e d by each o b s e r v e r group i n each c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t 48 F i g u r e 3 D i s t r i b u t i o n o f b e h a v i o r s f r o m " i s o l a t e d b e h a v i o r " and " b e h a v i o r p a t t e r n " q u e s t i o n s among the c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t s 54 F i g u r e 4 D i s t r i b u t i o n , among t h e c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t s , of b e h a v i o r s r e p o r t e d by o b s e r v e r s g i v i n g aim #1 . . . 61 F i g u r e 5 D i s t r i b u t i o n , among the c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t s , o f b e h a v i o r s r e p o r t e d by o b s e r v e r s g i v i n g aim #2 . . . 62 F i g u r e 6 D i s t r i b u t i o n , among the c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t s , o f b e h a v i o r s r e p o r t e d by o b s e r v e r s g i v i n g aim #3 . . . 63 F i g u r e 7 D i s t r i b u t i o n , among the c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t s , of b e h a v i o r s r e p o r t e d by o b s e r v e r s g i v i n g aim #4 . . . 64 F i g u r e 8 D i s t r i b u t i o n , among the c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t s , of b e h a v i o r s r e p o r t e d by o b s e r v e r s g i v i n g aim #5 . . . 65 F i g u r e 9 D i s t r i b u t i o n , among the c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t s , o f b e h a v i o r s r e p o r t e d by o b s e r v e r s g i v i n g aim #6 . . . 66 F i g u r e 10 D i s t r i b u t i o n , among the c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t s , of b e h a v i o r s r e p o r t e d by o b s e r v e r s g i v i n g a i m #7 . . . 67 F i g u r e 11 D i s t r i b u t i o n , among t h e c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t s , of b e h a v i o r s r e p o r t e d by o b s e r v e r s g i v i n g aim #8 . . . 68 F i g u r e 12 The number o f b e h a v i o r s , and the average o b s e r v e r s r a t i n g o f t h e b e h a v i o r s , i n each c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t 74 v i i LIST OF APPENDICES Page A p p e n d i x A L e t t e r o f I n t r o d u c t i o n Sent t o L i b r a r y S t a f f Members 94 A p p e n d i x B Data Sheets Used t o R e c o r d I n c i d e n t s R e p o r t e d i n I n t e r v i e w s 96 A p p e n d i x C O u t l i n e o f the I n t e r v i e w Conducted w i t h Each O b s e r v e r 99 A p p e n d i x D Data Sheet on Which O b s e r v e r s Rated the B e h a v i o r s t h e y had R e p o r t e d , and Wrote t h e i r O p i n i o n s of the Aims and O b j e c t i v e s of the L i b r a r i a n ' s Job 102 A p p e n d i x E An Example o f a McBee K e y s o r t C a r d , W i t h Data f o r One B e h a v i o r R e c o r d e d , and a P u n c h i n g Key D e s c r i b i n g How the Data Was Recorded on the Cards 104 A p p e n d i x F The O r i g i n of the C r i t i c a l R equirements . . . 108 A p p e n d i x G R a t i n g S h e e t s G i v e n t o Ten S e n i o r L i b r a r i a n s f o r t h e i r R a t i n g s of the Importance of Each R e q u i r e -ment 134 v i i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENT S The c o m p l e t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s was made p o s s i b l e by the a s s i s t a n c e of many pe r s o n s t o whom the a u t h o r w i s h e s t o e x t e n d h i s s i n c e r e a p p r e c i a t i o n . The Dean of Graduate S t u d i e s R e s e a r c h Fund f o r i t s most h e l p f u l s u p p o r t . Mr. S t u a r t S t u b b s , Head L i b r a r i a n of the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C olumbia L i b r a r y and Mr. I n g l i s B e l l , A s s i s t a n t L i b r a r i a n f o r t h e i r i n t e r e s t , c o - o p e r a t i o n , and a s s i s t a n c e . The many l i b r a r i a n s , f a c u l t y members and s t u d e n t s , who v o l u n t e e r e d t o be o b s e r v e r s i n the s t u d y , f o r t h e i r time and c o - o p e r a t i o n . Dr. D. L. Sampson of the Department of P s y c h o l o g y of the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C olumbia f o r h i s a s s i s t a n c e and p a t i e n c e . A s p e c i a l t h a n k s t o P r o f e s s o r E. S. W. B e l y e a of the Department of P s y c h o l o g y of t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia f o r h i s c o n t i n u e d s u p p o r t , encouragement and g u i d a n c e . CHAPTER I REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE A . The f o r m u l a t i o n of the C r i t i c a l I n c i d e n t Technique A constant problem i n i n d u s t r i a l psychology over the years has been t h a t of e s t a b l i s h i n g performance c r i t e r i a a g a i n s t which t o measure how w e l l an i n d i v i d u a l i s per form-i n g h i s j o b . Complementing t h i s problem has been the d i f -f i c u l t y i n a n a l y z i n g and d e f i n i n g the j o b . Flanagan (1949, p . - 3 2 ) has p o i n t e d out t h a t i n o n l y r a r e i n s t a n c e s has an e x p l i c i t statement been made of what the i n d i v i d u a l should and should not do t o be s u c c e s s f u l i n h i s a s s i g n e d d u t i e s . I t seemed c l e a r to Flanagan t h a t the development of job requirements i s an e s s e n t i a l b a s i s f o r s a t i s f a c t o r y work on such important matters as e s t a b l i s h i n g performance c r i t e r i a , measuring p r o f i c i e n c y , s e l e c t i n g content and methods of t r a i n i n g , and s e t t i n g up a p e r s o n n e l s e l e c t i o n t e s t i n g programme. Job a n a l y s i s techniques used before World War I I were l a c k i n g i n s y s t e m a t i c procedures and o b j e c t i v i t y . Most 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 i s t s i n d i c a t e d a l a c k of conf idence i n the r e s u l t s of job a n a l y s i s . They regarded these r e s u l t s as good sources of hypotheses, i d e a s and hunches but as not having s u f f i c i e n t s t a b i l i t y to p r o v i d e a b a s i s f o r p r a c t i c -a l personnel- procedures u n t i l conf irmed or v a l i d a t e d by f o l l o w -up s t u d i e s (Flanagan, 1 9 4 9 , pp. 3 4 - 3 7 ) . 2 There had been a few attempts to improve the system-a t i c nature of the o b s e r v a t i o n and e v a l u a t i o n of job r e q u i r e -ments i n e a r l i e r y e a r s . One of these attempts was the work of C h a r t e r s i n the e a r l y 1 9 2 0 ' s . He attempted to o b t a i n p r e c i s e statements of the v a r i o u s a c t i v i t i e s of workers i n terms of t ime spent at v a r i o u s d u t i e s on a s p e c i f i e d job and a l s o o p i n i o n s by s u p e r v i s o r s as to the most important t r a i t s f o r doing s a t i s f a c t o r y work i n the p a r t i c u l a r j o b . I t was noteworthy t h a t i n t h i s approach the o b s e r v a t i o n s and judge-ments were made by workers and s u p e r v i s o r s and not by the job a n a l y s t ( C h a r t e r s and W h i t l e y , 1924) . I n 1 9 3 2 , V i t e l e s d e v i s e d a job psychograph f o r the use of the job a n a l y s t . T h i s c o n s i s t e d of 32 t r a i t s , the d e f i n i -t i o n s of which u s u a l l y c o n s i s t e d of a sentence f o l l o w e d by examples of jobs b e l i e v e d to r e q u i r e much or l i t t l e of the s p e c i f i c t r a i t . F o l l o w i n g h i s study of the j o b , the a n a l y s t es t imated the job requirements i n terms of the 32 t r a i t s on a f i v e p o i n t s c a l e r u n n i n g from " n e g l i g i b l e " t o " o f utmost importance" ( V i t e l e s , 1 9 3 2 ) . Hendrix and Stewart ( 1 9 5 7 ) , i n d i s c u s s i n g some reasons f o r the i n e f f e c t i v e n e s s of some employee a p p r a i s a l p l a n s , suggested t h a t incomplete knowledge of a c t u a l job r e q u i r e -ments and i n c o r r e c t placement of emphasis among requirements were r e s p o n s i b l e t o no s m a l l e x t e n t . D u r i n g World War I I , the U n i t e d S t a t e s Army A i r F o r c e s , i n i t s A v i a t i o n Psychology Program, c a r r i e d out a s e r i e s of s t u d i e s f o r the purpose of d e v e l o p i n g procedures f o r the 3 selection and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of aircrews. Flanagan, while conducting research i n t h i s program, began to devise a novel approach to job analysis (Flanagan, 1954, p. 3 2 3 ) . His technique was such that the job analyst collected a representative sample of fa c t u a l incidents, regarding successes and f a i l u r e s of workers with reference to the important aspects of t h e i r jobs (Flanagan, 1949, pp. 40-41). The f i r s t objective of the method was to eliminate from further consideration a l l job requirements which are not c r i t i c a l to success or f a i l u r e on the job and thus to arr i v e eventually at a l i s t of c r i t i c a l requirements f o r the job. These requirements are c r i t i c a l i n the sense that they have been frequently observed to make the difference between success and f a i l u r e i n the a c t i v i t y . Flanagan c a l l e d his method the " C r i t i c a l Incident Technique". He defined c r i t i c a l incidents as, "... descriptions of things people did which were especially e f f e c t i v e or i n e f f e c t i v e i n accomplish-ing s p e c i f i c tasks. (American I n s t i t u t e f o r Research (A.I.R.), 1950 a, p. 3 ) . These descrip tions provide job analysis data which are less dependent on vague hunches and general impressions; data which are detailed and s p e c i f i c . The C r i t i c a l Incident Technique was developed not only to cope with the complexities of the observed be-haviour but also to adjust and allow for the f r a i l t i e s and l i m i t a t i o n s of the observers. In many ways i t i s not a "technique" at a l l , but a set of broad p r i n c i p l e s which has been found useful i n studying human behaviours of a wide variety of types (Flanagan, 1 9 5 2 , p. 6 1 ) . By 1954 the technique had become f a i r l y well established and Flanagan (1954) attempted to define i t more c l e a r l y . E s s e n t i a l l y the technique required that the investigator c o l l e c t , from q u a l i f i e d observers, descriptions of observed behaviour, i n which the person engaged i n the a c t i v i t y under study has behaved i n an e f f e c t i v e or i n -e f f e c t i v e manner. The observers should be selected on the basis of t h e i r f a m i l i a r i t y with the a c t i v i t y and t h e i r opportunities f o r observing persons engaged i n the a c t i v i t y . The incidents are drawn from the observer by presenting to him a question or a series of questions which c l e a r l y explain to him what a c t i v i t y he i s to report on and what judgements he i s asked to make regarding the behaviour reported. The incidents, as described by the observers, must be recorded i n an accurate and objective manner by the investigator. In synthesizing the data, the investigator groups together incidents that describe very nearly the same type of behaviour. The descriptive headings of these categories form the c r i t i c a l requirements of the a c t i v i t y i n terms of behaviour. B. Research on methodological variations of the C r i t i c a l Incident Technique  Flanagan ( 1954, p. 335) emphasized that the C r i t i c a l 5 Incident Technique does not consist of a single set of rules governing data c o l l e c t i o n . I t i s a set of p r i n c i p l e s •which must be modified and adapted to meet the s p e c i f i c situation, at hand. Studies using the technique have con-tained many variations i n procedure with the resu l t that a body of knowledge has been b u i l t up concerning the effects that changes i n method have on the re s u l t s obtain-ed. Some of these variations are discussed below. 1) The general aims of the a c t i v i t y under study No evaluation of a s p e c i f i c behaviour i s possible without an awareness of the objectives of the a c t i v i t y under study. Smit (1952) i n studying the c r i t i c a l requirements of instructors of general psychology courses, found that there were substantial differences between patterns of c r i t i c a l incidents reported by students and fa c u l t y members. Apparently one of the p r i n c i p a l reasons was the lack of perspective on the part of the students ana t h e i r i n a b i l i t y to keep the general aim of the a c t i v i t y c l e a r l y i n mind because of i t s divergen.ee from t h e i r own immediate aims, which seemed to be to obtain a passing grade i n the course (Flanagan, 1 9 5 4 , pp. 3 3 3 - 3 3 4 ) . This i s a good i l l u s t r a t i o n of the problem of competence of various types of a vailable observers to evaluate the contribution of a s p e c i f i c behaviour to the general aims of the a c t i v i t y . Unfortunately, i n most situations there i s no one 6 general aim that i s the "correct" one. This does not mean that one aim i s as good as another but i t does mean that we cannot hope to get a completely objective and accept-ably general aim fo r a s p e c i f i c a c t i v i t y . For the purpose of the technique, however, Flanagan ( 1954, pp. 336-337) proposes that the general aim be defined as one that i s acceptable to the poten t i a l users of the detailed state-ment of requirements and he shows how t h i s general aim can be i d e n t i f i e d . Flanagan points out the importance of the observers* having an awareness of the objectives of the a c t i v i t y under study as a c r i t e r i o n f o r t h e i r being q u a l i f i e d to evaluate the performance of those carrying out the a c t i v i t y . However, few previous c r i t i c a l incident studies, Smit (1952) being a notable exception, have checked the q u a l i f i c a t i o n s of the observers with regard to t h i s c r i t e r i o n . I t would seem that further research i s required to evaluate the influence of the observers' perception of the aims and objectives of the a c t i v i t y on the kinds of behaviour they report as being e f f e c t i v e or i n e f f e c t i v e . 2) The directions given to observers and the questions asked i n the interview.  I t i s necessary that the instructions given to the observers be as s p e c i f i c as possible. One of the primary aims of s c i e n t i f i c techniques i s to ensure o b j e c t i v i t y f o r 7 the observations being made and reported. This objectivity-can be established i n independent observers only i f they are a l l following the same set of rules. I t i s essential, therefore, that these rules be clear and s p e c i f i c . The f i r s t necessary s p e c i f i c a t i o n i s of the situation to be described. Flanagan stresses that i t i s es s e n t i a l that a l l incidents be descriptions of actually observed, on-the-job behaviour (A.I.R., 1950 a, p. 3 ) . The observed incident must also be s u f f i c i e n t l y complete i n i t s e l f to permit inferences and predictions to be made about the person performing the act and the effect the act has on the performance of the job (Flanagan 1 9 5 4 , p. 3 2 2 ) . I t i s also necessary to give the observer some ind i c a t i o n of what sort of behaviour constitutes a c r i t i c a l behaviour. There have been a. number of attempts to define a c r i t i c a l behaviour: ...one which w i l l cause a q u a l i f i e d observer to make a judgement concerning the indiv i d u a l s s u i t a b i l i t y fo r the job. (A.I.R., 1 9 5 1 , p. 1 ) . ... those job requirements, expressed i n behavioural terms, which have proved to be important factors i n d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g successful or unsuccessful performance on the job. (Gordon, 1 9 4 9 , p. 1 2 5 ) . To be c r i t i c a l , an incident must occur i n a situation where the purpose or intent of the act seems f a i r l y clear to the observer and where i t s consequences are s u f f i c i e n t l y d e f i n i t e to leave l i t t l e doubt concerning i t s e f f e c t s . (Flanagan, 1 9 5 4 , p. 3 2 7 ) . The directions given to the observers must specify such things as the persons, the place, the conditions and 8" the a c t i v i t y to be observed. I t i s also necessary to c l a r i f y the extent of effect on the general aim necessary to make an incident " c r i t i c a l " and suitable f o r reporting. I t has sometimes been found useful to define an incident as c r i t i c a l i f i t makes a s i g n i f i c a n t contribution, either p o s i t i v e l y or negatively, to the general aim of the a c t i v i t y . In certain situations i t might be desirable to set up quantitative c r i t e r i a of the c r i t i c a l n e s s of incidents, such as saving or wasting 15 minutes of production or a certain number of d o l l a r s saved or l o s t (Flanagan 1 9 5 4 , PP. 3 3 3 - 3 3 9 ) . Finkle (1949) studied the e f f e c t , on the types of incidents obtained, of the degree of importance or exceptionalness set up as a c r i t e r i o n f o r reporting or ignoring incidents. The incidents obtained from the use of questions that asked f o r actions only s l i g h t l y removed from the norm were compared with those obtained from questions intended to e l i c i t more d e f i n i t e l y e f f e c t i v e or i n e f f e c t i v e behaviours. Only three out of 8"0 categories showed s i g n i f i c a n t differences at the .05 l e v e l of con-fidence. This small number of s i g n i f i c a n t differences suggests that the types of incidents obtained are not greatly changed by variations i n wording of the questions asked with regard to degree of importance or severity of the action reported. 9 This i s not to say, however, that the construction of the questions i s not a c r u c i a l aspect of C r i t i c a l Incident Technique. Flanagan ( 1954, p. 341) points out that a s l i g h t change i n wording may r e s u l t i n the observers misunderstanding the questions and produce a substantial change i n the incidents reported. The questions must be s p e c i f i c a l l y designed to e l i c i t the types of incidents desired. In a study by Nevins (1949) of the c r i t i c a l requirements of bookkeepers the question was modified somewhat to su i t the p a r t i c u l a r circumstances involved i n the job being studies. In the bookkeepers profession, offasional mistakes are expected but repeated errors are considered serious. Therefore the question was constructed so that incidents represent-ing a pattern of behaviours or a series of s i m i l a r be-haviours were reported i n addition to the usual i s o l a t e d incidents. The r e s u l t s of the studies by Nevins and Finkle indicate that some valuable additional data may be collected by varying the questions put to the observers. Further research should be conducted to determine the ex-tent to which varying the c r i t e r i o n set up f o r reporting or ignoring incidents would result i n add i t i o n a l data being col l e c t e d . An e f f e c t i v e procedure f o r ensuring that the i n t e r -10 pretation of the question i s close to that intended i s to request a sample of persons t y p i c a l of those to be i n t e r -viewed to state i n t h e i r own words what they understand they have been asked to do. From t h e i r interpretations necessary revisions can be detected and changes made to ensure that a l l observers are aware of the nature of the incidents they are to provide. 3) The effect of examples on the incidents collected.  Flanagan ( 1 9 5 4 , pp. 341-342) emphasizes that the interviewer must be careful i n his conversation with the observer. I f the question does not seem to be understood i t can be repeated and an attempt made to c l a r i f y just what i s meant by i t . He points out, however, that ex-amples- of acceptable incidents should not be given i n an ef f o r t to explain what i s meant. When examples have been used i n the interview to c l a r i f y the procedure, there has been a tendency to bias the observer's answers i n favour of similar incidents. Barrett ( 1 9 5 3 , PP. 102-106) s p e c i f i c a l l y examined the effects of giving examples on the incidents reported. He compared incidents reported when no examples, examples analogous to the a c t i v i t y under study and non-analogous examples were given. He found that there was a s l i g h t increase i n the number of incidents reported when examples 11 were given and that giving examples did not reduce the variety of incidents reported. However the number and variety of incidents were influenced by the s i m i l a r i t y of the a c t i v i t y from which the example was drawn to the ' a c t i v i t y on which the observer was to report. Barrett's study suggested that the use of non-analogous examples was most e f f e c t i v e i n p r e c i p i t a t i n g a large number of i n c i d e n t s and a wide variety of behaviours. It seems that i t i s not whether examples are given or not that i s important but rather that the proced-ure be c l a r i f i e d to the observer without establishing any predisposition to r e c a l l one type of incident over another. 4) The effect of time lapse from occurence to reporting of incidents.  There have been a number of studies which have investigated the degree to which reports of recently occuring incidents d i f f e r from those of incidents occuring i n the more distant past. Finkle ( 1 9 4 9 , p. 6) found that no s i g n i f i c a n t difference between the number or quality of recent incidents and those e l i c i t e d when no time l i m i t was imposed on the observers. Stoyva (1956, pp. 46-50), however, found so great a difference i n the quality of recent and f a r removed incidents that he treated them separately as "new" and "old" incidents. Stoyva found that "old" incidents 12. tended to be of a more dramatic nature than the "new" ones. This supported a si m i l a r finding by Nagay ( 1 9 4 9 , p. 3 3 0 ) . Barrett ( 1 9 5 3 , pp. 110-112) found that there was no great discrepancy i n the d i s t r i b u t i o n of behaviours r e s u l t i n g from methods which impose a time £apse l i m i t and that d i s t r i b u t i o n that would have resulted i f no time l i m i t had been imposed. Barrett also noted that merely imposing a time lapse l i m i t on the observers would not prevent them from reporting "old" incidents as being within the time l i m i t , due to the pressure to produce incidents i n the interview s i t u a t i o n . I t seems that i t i s most important to emphasize to the observer that he report only those incidents which he a c t u a l l y observed and those he i s able to remember c l e a r l y . One advantage i n not imposing a time l i m i t i s that i t reduces the l i k e l i h o o d of seasonal bi a s . There may be seasonal fluctuations i n the types of occurences that lead to incidents. Stoyva ( 1956, p. 61) points out that the incidents he collected, may have been influenced by i r r e g -u l a r conditions at the time of c o l l e c t i o n - rescheduling of bus routes. Flanagan ( 1954, p. 330) points out that a study by Nagay ( 1 9 4 9 ) , on the a i r route contro l l e r ' s job, showed a clear r e f l e c t i o n of seasonal variat i o n s i n f l y i n g conditions i n types of incidents reported. 13 5) The method of c o l l e c t i n g incidents. Since the incidents co l l e c t e d provide a l l the data i n the C r i t i c a l Incident Technique, great care must be taken that they are collected and recorded accurately and completely. There are four basic methods fo r c o l l e c t i n g c r i t i c a l incidents; a) The i n d i v i d u a l interview In t h i s method each observer i s interviewed separately and i s asked to t e l l the interviewer about his observations (A.I.R., 1 9 4 9 .a, 1949 b, 1950 b; Gordon, 1 9 4 9 ). The interviewer must be careful to record the information as i t i s t o l d to him and not to allow any personal biases to creep into the report. I t i s some-times helpful to record the interview on sound tape so that a permanent record of the complete interview can be referred t o . The main disadvantage of the i n d i v i d u a l interview i s the length of time required. Individual interviews tend to be quite expensive and the interviewer i s frequently unable to report the incidents described to him without loosing some of the ideas. (A.I.R., 1950 a, p. 4 ) . The advantages of t h i s method are the high degree of personal contact and the presence of the interviewer to answer questions. b) The group interview In an e f f o r t to save time a number of studies 14 u t i l i s e d the group interview as a means of c o l l e c t i n g incidents (Wagner, 1 9 4 8 ; De Vries, 1957; Barrett, 1958; Otke, 1 9 5 8 ) . This method consists of having the i n t e r -viewer give his introductory remarks to a group much as he would do i n an in d i v i d u a l interview. There i s an opportunity for questions and c l a r i f i c a t i o n . Then each person i s asked to write incidents i n answer to s p e c i f i c questions contained on a s p e c i a l l y prepared form. Wagner's (1948) study showed that the group interview worked very well to get as many incidents and as good descriptions of the s p e c i f i c behaviour as in d i v i d u a l interviews. The interviewer does not, how-ever, have as much control over the interview situation when group as opposed to in d i v i d u a l interviews are used. c) Questionnaires There have been a number of occasions when the method used f o r c o l l e c t i n g c r i t i c a l incidents involved d i s t r i b u t i n g a questionnaire to be completed by the observers (A.I.R., 1949 b, Andersson and Nilsson, 19&4; Crawford, 1 9 6 1 ). The American Psychological Association used c r i t i c a l incidents obtained by means of question-naires, issued to pr a c t i c i n g psychologists, to b u i l d i t s o f f i c i a l code of e t h i c a l standards (American Psycholog-i c a l Association, 1 9 5 3 ) . In order f o r t h i s method to produce useful data 15 the questionnaires must include a detailed explanation of i t s objectives so that observers have a clear understand-ing of the task they are being asked to perform. I t i s also necessary to ensure that the questionnaires are completed thoroughly and conscientiously so that the incidents are understandable to the investigator. As with many forms of questionnaires, the use of t h i s technique i s probably l i m i t e d to rather well educated persons who are a r t i c u l a t e i n reporting i n written form. d) Analysis of f i l e s , reports and records An example of thi s method of data c o l l e c t i o n i s found i n a study by the American I n s t i t u t e f o r Research (1950 b). In t h i s research, analysis of accident reports was used i n conjunction with interviews to get c r i t i c a l incidents with regard to the a i r l i n e p i l o t ' s job. This method r e l i e s heavily on the accuracy of the fa c t s i n the records, and the completeness with which they were reported, and i s subject to errors i n inter p r e t a t i o n and bias on the part of the investigator. 6) When to stop c o l l e c t i n g data A general problem involved i n the c o l l e c t i o n of c r i t i c a l incidents i s determining the number of incidents required. There does not seem to be a simple answer to t h i s question. In one study (A.I.R., 1949 a, p.2) the interviewing 16 was continued u n t i l , "... a study of the incidents being obtained revealed that additional interviews would res u l t l a r g e l y i n rep e t i t i o n of information already received." Andersson and Nilsson (1964, p..399) sought to discover whether or not t h e i r c o l l e c t i o n of data was s u f f i c i e n t l y comprehensive to include a l l types of be-havioral units that the method might be expected to uncover. They found that the subcategories, into which the incidents f e l l , appeared early i n the c o l l e c t i o n procedure and that further c o l l e c t i o n of data contrib-uted progressively less new information. Flanagan ( 1954, p. 343) suggested a simple rule for deciding when to stop c o l l e c t i n g incidents. He suggests that adequate data has been collected when the addition of 100 c r i t i c a l incidents to the sample adds only two or three d i f f e r e n t c r i t i c a l behaviours. 7) Categorization of Incidents A much debated phase of the C r i t i c a l Incident Technique i s the categorization of incidents, which has been regarded as a very subjective and d i f f i c u l t procedure. Flanagan ( 1954, pp. 343-344) points out that the c o l l e c -t i o n of a suitably large number of incidents, i n i t s e l f , provides a v a l i d and functional description of the a c t i v i t y , i n terms of s p e c i f i c behaviors. The only reason for going further and categorizing the data i s to summarize 17 and describe the data i n an e f f i c i e n t manner so that i t can be e f f e c t i v e l y used f o r many p r a c t i c a l purposes. The purpose of categorization i s to increase the usefulness of the data while s a c r i f i c i n g as l i t t l e as possible of t h e i r comprehensiveness, s p e c i f i c i t y and v a l i d i t y . The formulation of categories from the basic data i n the form of incidents i s a task requiring i n s i g h t , experience and judgement. No simple rules are available to ensure the quality and p r a c t i c a l i t y of the f i n a l product• There i s no one correct was i n which a given set of incidents can be c l a s s i f i e d . In selecting a category system consideration should be given to the uses to be made of the c r i t i c a l requirements, the ease and accuracy of c l a s s i f y i n g the data, and the r e l a t i o n to previously developed d e f i n i t i o n s or c l a s s i f i c a t i o n systems (Flanagan, 1954, p. 344). One approach has been to submit tentative categories to others to review. Although there i s no guarantee that re s u l t s agreed on by several persons w i l l be more useful than those obtained from a single worker, the confirmation of judgements by a number of persons i s usually reassuring (Flanagan, 1954, p. 344). Andersson and Nilsson (1964, p. 401) showed that 30$ of the incidents were placed i n the same category when other persons were asked to place the incidents i n the category system chosen. 18 An important consideration pointed out by Flanagan (1954, p. 345) i s that the category headings should a l l be of the same magnitude or l e v e l of importance. Known biases i n the data causing one area to have a dispropor-tionate number of incidents should not be r e f l e c t e d i n the headings. This can only be attempted subjectively and again agreement among a number of judges i s reassuring. 8) The r e l a t i v e importance of the c r i t i c a l requirements  There has been some controversy about whether i t i s possible to discriminate between c r i t i c a l requirements i n terms of t h e i r r e l a t i v e importance or whether a l l requirements are c r i t i c a l and thus a l l of equal import-ance. The weighing of c r i t i c a l requirements i n r e l a t i o n to one another has been.a d i f f i c u l t problem. Gordon (1949, p. 128) l i s t e d the c r i t i c a l require-ments of a i r l i n e p i l o t s i n order of importance, as determined by the frequency of behaviors i n each c r i t i c a l requirement category. Gordon stated that the most " c r i t i c a l " requirements, as determined by frequency, should receive more emphasis by check p i l o t s . Wagner (1951) weighed the c r i t i c a l requirements of p i l o t s , f l i g h t engineers and radar observers, on the basis of frequency, i n an e f f o r t to determine selection test weights. Stoyva (1956, p. 62), however, contends that i t i s 19 u n l i k e l y that frequency alone would indicate the importance of one c r i t i c a l requirement i n r e l a t i o n to another. He fe e l s that many other fa c t o r s , i n addition to importance, influence how often a p a r t i c u l a r type of behavior i s reported. Some of these factors might be; the frequency with which a type of behavior occurs, the extent to which t r a i n i n g has eliminated i n e f f e c t i v e behavior and made effec t i v e behavior commonplace, the ease with wnich the observer can describe the incident, and the number of observers who are i n a position to observe such behavior. Andersson and Nilsson (1961) had observers rate the 86 category headings, that resulted from t h e i r study of shop managers, on a six point scale from zero (unim-portant) to f i v e (of greatest importance). They found that; The rank correlations between the median ratings of the groups and the number of incidents that the corresponding groups of respondents have provided i n various subcategories showed a s i g n i f i c a n t but s l i g h t l y p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n . The correlations varied between .27 and .42 (Andersson and Nilsson, 1964, p. 402). This was interpreted by Andersson and Nilsson to mean that categories with few incidents may be important and that one must be careful not to use frequency alone as a measure of the importance of c r i t i c a l requirements. A study by Otke (1956), was apparently successful i n d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g between the importance of 33 c r i t i c a l 20 requirements of army o f f i c e r cadets. Otke (1966, pp. 11-14) had cadet instructors evaluate the c r i t i c a l requirements on a four point scale: 1 - must be assessed 2 - should be assessed 3 - could be assessed 4 - need not be assessed This procedure resulted i n an i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of the most and le a s t important requirements by the f a c t that the instructors consistantly ranked soae requirements "must be assessed" and others "need not be assessed". There seems to be no substantial evidence that the frequency of behaviors reported i s highly correlated with the importance of that type of behavior. Gtke's study suggests that having the users rate the requirements i n terms of importance may be a more v a l i d method of d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g between the c r i t i c a l requirements. Further research i n t h i s area of the r e l a t i v e importance of the c r i t i c a l requirements would be h e l p f u l . A review of the l i t e r a t u r e on the C r i t i c a l Incident Technique indicates that there are several methodological areas i n which further investigation i s needed. This study w i l l concern i t s e l f with three such areas: 1) The effect, on behaviors reported, of varying the questions put to the observers. This investigation i s related to the studies of Finkle and Nevin outlined i n section 2 of t h i s chapter. The e f f e c t , on behaviors reported, of the observers perceptions of the aims of the a c t i v i t y under study that are not i n agreement with the general aims stated by the o f f i c i a l s governing the a c t i v i t y . This stems from the findings of Srait and the views of Flanagan d i s -cussed i n section 1 of t h i s Chapter. The use of observers' ratings of the importance of the behaviors they report i n determining the r e l a t i v e importance of the c r i t i c a l requirements. This i s derived from the work of Otke and the general discussion i n section 8 of t h i s Chapter. CHAPTER II PURPOSES OF THE STUDY This study has been designed to investigate the three methodological issues, with respect to the c r i t i c a l incident technique, summarized at the end of Chapter I . Each w i l l be discussed i n greater d e t a i l below. A. Variations i n the instructions given to the observers and i n the questions asked.  As was noted i n Chapter I, the directions given to the observers and the wording of the questions asked i n the interview influence the kind of incidents reported. I t has been the practice i n past c r i t i c a l incident studies to c o l l e c t incidents from each observer by presenting one set of directions and the one type of question thought most suitable f o r the purposes of the study. This question usually required that the observer describe a sp e c i f i c incident involving behavior which he f e l t was "espe c i a l l y " e f f e c t i v e (or i n - e f f e c t i v e ) with regard to the performance of the a c t i v i t y under study. The r e s u l t s of Finkle's (1949) study suggests that the degree of importance or exceptionalriess set up as a c r i t e r i o n f o r reporting or ignoring incidents does not s i g n i f i c a n t l y a f f e c t the data c o l l e c t e d . I t should be pointed out, however, that Finkle collected his 23 incidents by setting one c r i t e r i o n of exceptionalness f o r one group of observers and another c r i t e r i o n for a second group of observers. No attempt was made to change the frame of reference of a single group of observers and c o l l e c t additional incidents. This study investigates the e f f e c t , on incidents reported, of asking two d i f f e r e n t types of questions, each designed to set up d i f f e r e n t c r i t e r i o n f o r deter-mining the c r i t i c a l n e s s of a behavior and thus f o r reporting or not reporting an incident. One type of question asks the observer to report incidents that contain i s o l a t e d behaviors that by themselves are examples of p a r t i c u l a r l y e f f e c t i v e or i n e f f e c t i v e be-havior. This type of question w i l l be referred to as the "isolated behavior" questions. The second type of question asked i n t h i s study asks the observers to re l a t e incidents that contain behaviors which, while not p a r t i c u l a r l y e f f e c t i v e or i n e f f e c t i v e i n d i v i d u a l l y , do become p a r t i c u l a r l y e f f e c t i v e or i n e f f e c t i v e patterns of behavior when repeated over a time. This type of question w i l l be referred to as the "pattern of behavior" question. This study w i l l investigate the p o s s i b i l i t y that a d i f f e r e n t type of incident would be obtained by asking each observer the "behavior pattern" questions a f t e r a l l incidents possible were obtained 24 from the "isolated behavior" questions. I t i s possible that by establishing a d i f f e r e n t frame of reference i n the observer, additional and d i s t i n c t i v e incidents w i l l be reported. I f so, the i n -clusion of these additional behavioral incidents should make the data more representative of the a c t i v i t y under study and more v a l i d f o r job an a l y s i s . B. The observers' perceptions of the general aims of the a c t i v i t y under study  Flanagan ( 1954, p. 339) outlines the spec i f i c a t i o n s necessary f o r observers to be q u a l i f i e d to make v a l i d judgements regarding the a c t i v i t y under study. He con-tends that they must be f a m i l i a r with the a c t i v i t y and be aware of i t s aims and objectives. Observers with i n -accurate opinions of the aims of the a c t i v i t y w i l l make faulty judgements regarding the a c t i v i t y and may report incidents that are not v a l i d . As many aims are being collected i n t h i s study, the statement of aims as given by the Head Li b r a r i a n and the Assistant Librarian w i l l be referred to as the " o f f i c i a l " general aims. In order to assure that a l l observers are q u a l i f i e d to judge the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of the be-haviors they report a statement of aims w i l l be collected from each observer and compared with t h i s " o f f i c i a l " statement of aims. Only those incidents c o l l e c t e d from 25 observers who have an awareness of and are i n agreement with the " o f f i c i a l " general aims w i l l be used i n deter-mining the c r i t i c a l requirements of the a c t i v i t y under study. This part of the study i s intended to investigate the extent to which behaviors reported are influenced by observer's conception of the aims which are i n disagree-ment with the " o f f i c i a l " general aims. I f i t is. found that observers with d i f f e r e n t perceptions of the purpose of the a c t i v i t y , report d i f f e r e n t types of c r i t i c a l be-haviors, then i t i s important that only those incidents collected from observers i n agreement with the " o f f i c i a l " general aims be used to determine the c r i t i c a l require-ments. C. The r e l a t i v e importance of the c r i t i c a l requirements  Another problem with which t h i s study concerns i t s e l f i s that of d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g among the c r i t i c a l re-quirements i n terms of r e l a t i v e importance. I t may be argued that a l l the requirements are " c r i t i c a l " and that i t i s therefore unreasonable to attempt to discriminate among them with regard to importance. The opposing argument i s that d i f f e r e n t requirements do not have the same value i n d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g between e f f e c t i v e and i n e f f e c t i v e performance of the a c t i v i t y and therefore i t i s important to es t a b l i s h the r e l a t i v e importance of each c r i t i c a l requirement. This study attempts to arr i v e at an objective method of weighing the c r i t i c a l requirements by having the observers rate the importance of each c r i t i c a l be-havior they report. The average ratings of the behaviors making up each c r i t i c a l requirement category w i l l then be used to determine the r e l a t i v e importance of the requirements. D. The Hypotheses to be tested This study proposes to test the following hypotheses: 1) Incidents collected from the "behavior pattern" questions w i l l contain d i f f e r e n t kinds of be-havior from those contained i n incidents e l i c i t e d from the "i s o l a t e d behavior" questions. 2) Observers whose statements of aims are i n d i s -agreement with the " o f f i c i a l " general aims w i l l emphasize d i f f e r e n t kinds of behaviors i n the incidents they report from those re-ported by observers whose statements of aims are i n agreement. 3) The r e l a t i v e importance of the c r i t i c a l re-quirements can be determined by using the observers' ratings of the c r i t i c a l n e s s of the behaviors they report. CHAPTER II I COLLECTING THE CRITICAL INCIDENTS AND GENERATING THE CRITICAL REQUIREMENTS In order to test the hypotheses outlined i n Chapter II i t was necessary to carry out a c r i t i c a l incident study on a p a r t i c u l a r a c t i v i t y . The a c t i v i t y chosen was that of l i b r a r i a n i n the University of B r i t i s h Columbia Library. I t should be noted that the a c t i v i t y under study was not l i m i t e d to professional l i b r a r i a n s but encompassed the jobs of a l l l i b r a r y s t a f f members including professional l i b r a r i a n s , l i b r a r y assistants, and c l e r k s . A. The p i l o t study To test the questions, methods and procedures, and to give the investigator practice i n conducting i n t e r -views and recording incidents, a p i l o t study was carried out on a job d i f f e r e n t from, but comparable with, that of l i b r a r i a n . The job of counsellor i n the Student Services Division of the University of B r i t i s h Columbia was chosen as the a c t i v i t y to be studies. The investigator conducted interviews with four counsellors, seven students and two faculty members as representatives of the three approp-r i a t e categories of observers. I t w i l l be noted that these categories p a r a l l e l those used i n the main study. The p i l o t study showed that the questions were c l e a r l y under-28 stood and did bring f o r t h a wide variety of behaviors. There seemed to be no d i f f i c u l t i e s with the procedures an therefore i t was decided to proceed with c o l l e c t i n g data on the l i b r a r i a n s ' job. B. Library authorization and co-operation The cooperation of The University Li b r a r i a n and his authorization f o r the c o l l e c t i o n of data from, the l i b r a r y s t a f f during working hours, was obtained. A private room i n the l i b r a r y was provided for conducting the interviews. In order to avoid any suspicion or misunderstand-ing of the project, a l e t t e r (see Appendix A) was sent to a l l l i b r a r y s t a f f members, o u t l i n i n g the purpose of the study and informing them that they might be calle d on to take part. Receipt of t h i s introductory l e t t e r appeared to f a c i l i t a t e the c o l l e c t i o n of data by putting the observers at ease i n the interview and by reducing the amount of the interviewer's time required to explain the study. C. Observers used i n the study Incidents were collected from three categories of observers: 1) Library s t a f f members; An e f f o r t was made to obtain a good cross-section of l i b r a r y s t a f f members with regard to department worked i n , and professional l e v e l . 29 Library s t a f f members with various degrees of professional t r a i n i n g (professional l i b r a r i a n s , l i b r a r y assistants, clerks of various grades) were selected from each department. (The d i s t r i b u t i o n of l i b r a r y s t a f f member observers, according to department i s shown i n Table I.) TABLE I 2) Students; Student observer's taking part i n the study were chosen randomly by the i n v e s t i -gator asking f o r volunteers i n many d i f f e r e n t areas of the University campus ( l i b r a r y , cafeterias, study rooms-, l e c t u r e halls) . An ef f o r t was made to re c r u i t students i n d i f f e r -ent academic years and from a wide variety of f a c u l t i e s . The d i s t r i b u t i o n of student observers, according to academic year i s shown i n Table I I . TABLE II The d i s t r i b u t i o n of student observers accord-to f a c u l t y of studies i s shown i n Table I I I . TABLE I D i s t r i b u t i o n of L i b r a r y S t a f f Member Observers Acc o r d i n g to Department Department i n Which Worked Number of Observers A c q u i s i t i o n s 5 A d m i n i s t r a t i o n 2 A s i a n S t u d i e s 1 C a t a l o g i n g 6 C i r c u l a t i o n 6 Fine A r t s 3 Government P u b l i c a t i o n s 2 Humanities 3 Science 4 S e r i a l s 5 Sedgwick L i b r a r y f o r 1 s t and 2 n d year Students 4 S o c i a l Sciences 4 S p e c i a l C o l l e c t i o n s 1 Woodward Biomedical L i b r a r y 6 T o t a l 52 TABLE I I D i s t r i b u t i o n o f S t u d e n t O b s e r v e r s A c c o r d i n g t o Academic Y e a r Academic Y e a r Number of O b s e r v e r s 1 s t y e a r 7 2nd y e a r 6 3 r d y e a r 7 4 t h y e a r 12 more t h a n 4 y e a r s 12 T o t a l 44 32 TABLE III Students i n the fac u l t y of Law were excluded from the study because of the special nature of the Law Library, which they use almost exclusively. For the same reason, incidents based on the behavior of Law Library s t a f f were not used i n the study. 3) Faculty members; An e f f o r t was made to r e c r u i t faculty members from many d i f f e r -ent departments and with various degrees of contact with the Library. Five were chosen because they were l i b r a r y represent-atives for t h e i r department and four because they had recently published works that required exhaustive l i b r a r y research. The d i s t r i b u t i o n of fac u l t y members accord-ing to department i s seen i n Table IV. TABLE IV D• Method of c o l l e c t i n g data A l l data were collected i n i n d i v i d u a l interviews conducted by one interviewer. This method was chosen over the group interview method because of the d i f f i c u l t i e s TABLE I I I D i s t r i b u t i o n o f S t u d e n t O b s e r v e r s A c c o r d i n g t o F a c u l t y o f S t u d i e s F a c u l t y Number o f O b s e r v e r s A r t s 14 S c i e n c e 5 Commerce 4 A p p l i e d S c i e n c e 5 E d u c a t i o n 7 G r a d u a t e S t u d i e s 9 T o t a l 44 TABLE IV D i s t r i b u t i o n of F a c u l t y Member Observers According to Department Department No. of.Observers Romance Studies 1 R e l i g i o u s S t u d i e s 1 E n g l i s h 2 C l a s s i c s 1 I t a l i a n 1 Math 2 Chemistry 2 Geography 2 Physics 2 Zoology 1 Commerce 3 Education 3 En g i n e e r i n g 3 A g r i c u l t u r e 1 L i b r a r i a n s h i p 1 Medicine 1 Pharmacy 1 F o r e s t r y 2 T o t a l 30 35 involved i n assembling groups of l i b r a r i a n s and f a c u l t y members. The group method could have been used with student observers, but, to f a c i l i t a t e the comparison of incidents among groups i t was f e l t that the ind i v i d u a l interview should be used throughout. A l l interviews were conducted i n a private room with only the interviewer and the observer present. The same procedure was used f o r each interview and a l l data were recorded immediately on prepared sheets: incidents that were examples of e f f e c t i v e behavior were recorded on yellow data sheets (see Appendix B-l) and those describing i n e f f e c t i v e behavior were recorded on white data sheets (see Appendix B-2). E. The Interview 1) Introduction To prepare the observer f o r the interview and put him at ease, the interviewer outlined the purpose and authorization of the study, explained why the observer had been chosen to parti c i p a t e and gave assurance regarding the c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y of any information given. Details of the introduction given to the observers are shown i n Appendix C, paragraph 1. 2) Questions used to e l i c i t incidents The f i r s t two questions asked the observers were the " i s o l a t e d behavior" questions. These were similar to 3 / o those usually used i n c r i t i c a l incident studies. They asked f o r incidents i n which a l i b r a r i a n acted i n a manner that the observer f e l t that he/she was being p a r t i c u l a r l y e f f e c t i v e or i n e f f e c t i v e i n his/her job. After explaining the study the interviewer asked f o r incidents containing e f f e c t i v e behavior (see-Appendix C, paragraph 2a). The observer was encouraged to give as many incidents as he could. When no more incidents could be re c a l l e d the interviewer asked f o r incidents containing i n e f f e c t i v e behavior (see Appendix C, paragraph 2b). Incidents were again collected u n t i l the observer could give no more. The observer was then introduced to the "behavior pattern" questions (see Appendix C, paragraph 3 ) . These questions attempted to uncover a d i f f e r e n t kind of be-havior. They were to esta b l i s h a d i f f e r e n t set, with regard to the c r i t i c a l n e s s of behaviors to be reported, from that established by the "is o l a t e d behavior" questions. The "behavior pattern" questions asked f o r incidents containing behaviors which, while not appearing to be s i g n i f i c a n t l y e f f e c t i v e or i n e f f e c t i v e when happen-ing i n a single instance, do make a s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r i -bution to the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of perform-ance when occuring repeatedly and when the long run effects of the pattern of behavior are observered. The interviewer f i r s t asked for ef f e c t i v e incidents of t h i s kind (see Appendix C, paragraph 4a) and then when no more were f o r t h -37 coming asked for i n e f f e c t i v e incidents (see Appendix C, paragraph 4b). I f at any time i n the interview the observer re-c a l l e d incidents of a kind previously asked f o r he was allowed to describe them and the interviewer recorded the information i n the usual manner. After each incident was recorded the interviewer had the observer i s o l a t e the s p e c i f i c behavior(s) i n the incident that he believed to be c r i t i c a l . These behaviors were recorded as stated by the observers. 3) Rating the c r i t i c a l n e s s of the behaviors The observers were then introduced to the rating scale (see Appendix D) with an explanation (see Appendix C, paragraph 5a). The observers were then asked to rate each behavior they reported i n terms of i t ' s contribution to the effectiveness/ineffectivess of l i b r a r i a n performance (see Appendix C, paragraph 5b). The interviewer then read out each behavior reported by the observer and the observer rated each i n turn by marking the r a t i n g scale. 4) The observer's statement of the aims of the a c t i v i t y The observer was f i n a l l y asked to state, i n his own words, what he understood to be the aims of the l i b r a r i a n ' s job i n the University of B r i t i s h Columbia Library (see Appendix C, paragraph 6 ) . The observer wrote his statement of aims i n the space provided on the data sheet (see Appendix D, paragraph 2 ) . 33 At the conclusion of the interview the i n t e r -viewer thanked the observer and asked that he not mention to others the questions that were asked or what Ms answers were. I t was explained that his doing so might a f f e c t the incidents reported by observers i n following interviews. F. McBee Keysort Cards For each behavior collected, the observer's category ( l i b r a r i a n , student or faculty member) and i d e n t i f i c a t i o n number, the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n number of the behavior, and a concise summary of the behavior reported, were typed onto a McBee Keysort Card (see Appendix E, paragraph 1). A l l data pertaining to each behavior were edge-punched into a card according to a punching key (see Appendix E, paragraph 2). The kind of information edge-punched into each card was as follows: 1) Kind of behavior ( e f f e c t i v e / i n e f f e c t i v e ) 2) Source of behavior (Librarian, Student, Faculty) 3) The code number of the observer (e.g., student no. 32) 4) The code number of the behavior (e.g., student behavior no. 107) 5) The type of question that l e d to the behavior ("Isolated behavior" or "Behavior pattern") 6) The rating assigned to the behavior by the observer 7) The aims of the l i b r a r i a n ' s job as stated by the observer of the behavior. 39 The McBee Keysort system (Fischer, 1947; The McBee Company, 1942) was found to be convenient f o r typing the abstract of the c r i t i c a l incident, for coding data, and f o r the various sorting operations required. Because the card provides more space for typing, and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n sorts nay be performed without machinery, i t i s more sat i s f a c t o r y than the IBM punched card employed by Barrett (1953, pp. 115-126). G. Synthesis of the data to form C r i t i c a l Requirement categories  The c r i t i c a l requirements of l i b r a r i a n s were based on behaviors collected from both the type one and type two questions. This was f e l t to be j u s t i f i e d on the grounds that both questions.asked f o r descriptions of behavior that was c r i t i c a l with regard to the effectiveness or i n e f f e c t i v e -ness of behavior. There are no hard and f a s t rules which govern the synthesis of c r i t i c a l incident data into c r i t i c a l requirements and i t i s carried out i n a r e l a t i v e l y subjective manner. In an attempt to eliminate subjective bias on the part of the investigator, the categorization was done separately by three persons; the investigator, and two other persons who were f a m i l i a r with the c r i t i c a l incident technique and the operations of the University of B r i t i s h Columbia Library, Each sorter studied the data and sorted the cards int o p i l e s with a l l data describing the same kind of 40 behavior being placed i n the same p i l e . The p i l e s were given headings describing the type of behavior each con-tained. Thus the data were grouped into descriptive categories. These categories were then examined and whenever two or more descriptive categories were found to be closely related they were combined under a new category heading that correctly described the behaviors i n the new category. Such combining and recornbining of categories continued u n t i l further combination would have resulted i n the headings becoming so general, that a person unfamiliar with the study would have d i f f i c u l t y seeing a direct relationship between the headings and the c r i t i c a l behavior s to which they referred. The categorizations by the three sorters were then compared and a f i n a l categorisation was decided on which was f e l t to have l o g i c a l organization and to contain head-ings of the same general magnitude or l e v e l of importance. When agreement was reached the categorization process was complete and the category headings became the c r i t i c a l requirements of l i b r a r i a n s at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia Library. H. Results of the synthesis of the data The c r i t i c a l requirements r e s u l t i n g from the synthesis of the data are outlined i n Table V and a breakdown of t h e i r origins i s shown i n Appendix F. 41 TABLE V 1) D i s t r i b u t i o n of e f f e c t i v e and i n e f f e c t i v e behaviors: Of the 500 behaviors collected 269 were examples of e f f e c t -ive behavior and 231 described i n e f f e c t i v e behavior. The d i s t r i b u t i o n of behaviors among c r i t i c a l requirements i s shown i n Figure 1 . FIGURE I There were a number of c r i t i c a l requirements that were formed from a preponderance of either e f f e c t i v e or i n e f f e c t i v e be-haviors. Those that contained a great many e f f e c t i v e be-haviors r e l a t i v e to i n e f f e c t i v e behaviors are c r i t i c a l requirements 2 , 4, 5, 3, 9, 1 3 , 2 1 , 26 and 33 (see Figure 1, v e r t i c a l hatching). The predominance of eff e c t i v e behaviors suggests to the investigator that these require-ments refer to behaviors that are more obvious to observers when the requirement i s being f u l f i l l e d than when i t i s not. For exaiaple, i t i s obviously e f f e c t i v e when a l i b r a r i a n volunteers information i n addition to what was s p e c i f i c a l l y asked for (C.R. # 9 ) . When t h i s information i s not given, however, i t i s not so obviously i n e f f e c t i v e because the user does not know the l i b r a r i a n has any more useful information. When there i s a predominance o f . i n e f f e c t i v e behaviors 42. TABLE V The C r i t i c a l Requirements of L i b r a r i a n s i n the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia L i b r a r y Area A: Service to L i b r a r y User No. of Behaviours  E f f e c t i v e I n e f f e c t i v e 15 16 20 C.R. #1 - Expends e f f o r t w i l l i n g l y to see that users are a s s i s t e d C.R. #2 - Pers is t s i n t r y i n g to a s s i s t users C.R. #3 - Follows through on requests and f u l f i l l s commitments to users C.R. #k - Direc ts and guides users to mater ia l they are seeking C.R. #5 - Finds mater ia l h e l p f u l to user rather than jus t expla ining where i t can be found C.R. #6 - Gives assistance to user promptly rather than put t ing i t o f f u n t i l l a t e r C.R. #1 - Responds promptly to users waiting for service 1 C.R. #8 - Intervenes on behalf of user to f a c i l i t a t e e f f e c t i v e use of l i b r a r y 9 C.R. #9 - Volunteers any assistance thought to be h e l p f u l to users 29 C.R. #10 - Gives correct information based on sound knowledge 14 C.R. #11 - Obtains required information from user regarding h i s needs, before ac t ing 2 15 3 12 16 43. TABLE V (Cont'd) No. of Behaviours  E f f e c t i v e I n e f f e c t i v e C.R. #12 - Refers q u e r i e s to more q u a l i f i e d , person when unable to give s a t i s -f a c t o r y i n f o r m a t i o n 7 3 C.R. #13 - I n s t r u c t s users on how to use l i b r a r y f a c i l i t i e s 19 1 C.R. #14 - Acts i n a pleasant and i n -t e r e s t e d manner.to users 12 21 Area B: Enforcement of L i b r a r y P o l i c i e s C.R. #15 - Administers l i b r a r y r e g u l a -t i o n s and p o l i c i e s with a p p r o p r i a t e f l e x i b i l i t y 16 20 C.R. #16 - Enforces l i b r a r y r u l e s with firmness when r e q u i r e d 14 7 Area C: P u b l i c R e l a t i o n s C.R. #17 - Deals with e r r o r s , i n f r a c -t i o n s or complaints i n a pl e a s a n t and d i p l o m a t i c manner 2 7 C.R. #18 - Rela t e s to p u b l i c i n co r -r e c t and t a c t f u l manner 1 5 C.R. #19 - Avoids making e x c e s s i v e n o i s e i n study areas of l i b r a r y 0 9 44. TABLE V (Cont'd) No. of Behaviours  E f f e c t i v e I n e f f e c t i v e Area D: Performance of Job Tasks C.R. #20 - Plans e f f e c t i v e l y before i n i t i a t i n g a c t i o n 3 4 C.R. #21 - Takes i n i t i a t i v e to improve n o t i c e d i n e f f i c i e n c i e s of l i b r a r y 14 1 C.R. #22 - C a r r i e s out work a s s i g n -ments a l e r t l y and i n t e l l i -g e n t l y so that t h i n g s go smoothly and e f f i c i e n t l y 3 29 C.R. #23 - Works a l e r t l y so as to n o t i c e and c o r r e c t e r r o r s 4 0 C.R. #24 - C a r r i e s out work a s s i g n -ments e f f i c i e n t l y as a r e s u l t of f a m i l i a r i t y with r o u t i n e s and procedures 4 5 C.R. #25 - Works hard and c o n s c i e n -t i o u s l y so as to produce good work 9 9 C.R. #26 - Takes steps to see that most u s e f u l books are purchased by the l i b r a r y 10 0 C.R. #27 - Catalogues books f o r maximum us e f u l n e s s 1 3 C.R. #28 - Follows through on work s t a r t e d so as to complete i t s u c c e s s f u l l y 4 6 45. TABLE V (Cont'd) No. of Behaviours E f f e c t i v e I n e f f e c t i v e C.R. #29 - Seeks and uses advice from others Area E: S u p e r v i s i o n C.R. #30 - Supervises i n a f a i r , honest and democratic manner 4 12 C.R. #31 - I n s t r u c t s and a s s i s t s s t a f f members e f f e c t i v e l y 5 2 C.R. #32 - Communicates e f f e c t i v e l y with subordinates 3 5 C.R. #33 - Is k i n d and f r i e n d l y to subordinates 4 0 C.R. #34 - Organizes work t o use sub-o r d i n a t e s e f f e c t i v e l y 2 2 C.R. #35 - D i s c i p l i n e s s t a f f members e f f e c t i v e l y 2 3 Area F: I n t r a - S t a f f R e l a t i o n s C.R. #36 - Communicates e f f e c t i v e l y with other departments 2 C.R. #37 - I n t e r a c t s with other s t a f f members i n a c o n s i d e r a t e manner 3 6 FIGURE 1 4 D i s t r i b u t i o n of Behaviors among C r i t i c a l Requirements CR |. E f f e c t i v e Behaviors i v i E S Q B U N S S S S B S E U a E i a i i i r i '.sad Q B H Q IE! I B J 25 20 15 10 I n e f f e c t i v e Behaviors i •S'BB' ..... U £H IB E B B E30E3aB0S0! BBS I EH EI E l i .. • . 113 B H ' i . • i , -B l . :m Tot. Behav. JXU....5. 1Q. _15_ .2.Q_J25_J_5X10. SSSSSa- categories with a predominance of e f f e c t i v e behaviors \ \ \ \ \ - categories with a predominance of i n e f f e c t i v e behaviors HBElBSai - categories with-an approximate balance of e f f e c t i v e and i n e f f e c t i v e behaviors 47 such as i n c r i t i c a l requirements 7 , 1 9 , 2 2 , and 30 (see Figure 1, diagonal cross-hatching), i t suggests that not f u l f i l l i n g the requirement i s more obvious to the observer than f u l f i l l i n g i t . 2) Behaviors reported by each observer group: Figure 2 shows graphically the percentage of behaviors reported by each observer group i n each of the c r i t i c a l requirements. FIGURE 2 a) Librarians: The l i b r a r i a n s ' behaviors are more evenly di s t r i b u t e d among the requirements than the other two groups. This may be the re s u l t of t h e i r being acquainted with a l l aspects of the l i b r a r y operation. A l l but two behaviors that contributed to requirements 30 to 3 5 , i n the area of supervision, were given by l i b r a r -ians. This seems reasonable because under ordinary circumstances they are the only group able to observe ana report on such behavior. b) Students: The vast majority of behaviors reported by student observers had to do with service to l i b r a r y user, enforcement of l i b r a r y p o l i c i e s and public r e l a t i o n s (G.R.'s 1 - 1 9 ) . FIGURE 2 The Percentage Of Behaviors Reported By Each Observer Group,In Each C r i t i c a l Requirement LIBRARIANS STUDENTS FACULTY C.R.# 3 t 7 11 i i i i i I Zo Z I 2 2 2 3 Z H 2.S zl zr Zb Z9 3c 3i 32 33 3S 3 t 3 7 E f f e c t i v e E b I n e f f e c t i v e =1 R '. i > i • i i i , . i _ i , i i ft 4 V I o • £• '/ (c a % of 202 C.R.# / 2 V 5 C-, 7 8 9 / / / 2 / 5 / V ' JT / <» / 7 / a / 5 2 o 2 / ;> .?V 2 5 £ 6 Z7. 2 a ' :> <? 3 b 3 / 3 7. 3 7 3 7 L_..., E f f e c t i v e Ineffective! C,R„# :8 i- H ± O Z 1 Z % of 204 z .3 •5 7 3 S-/• o / I i ?. I 3 I V / S' / A, / 7 / 8 1 9 2 c Z l ZZ 2 3 , 2 S Z(y 2 7 Z 8 2 5 3 o S i 3S E f f e c t i v e ' i n e f f e c t i v e Q 1 r 3 7. of 94 49 This probably stems from the students' main concern with being informed and assisted by the l i b r a r y s t a f f . I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note that i n c r i t i c a l requirements 14 (Acts i n a pleasant and interested manner to users) students reported more i n e f f e c t -ive than e f f e c t i v e behaviors and faculty members reported a predominance of ef f e c t i v e behaviors. This suggests that s t a f f members act d i f f e r e n t l y toward students and f a c u l t y members, perhaps being more considerate when dealing with the l a t t e r . c) Faculty: That faculty members are more involved with the inner workings of the l i b r a r y than are students, i s evidenced by the r e l a t i v e l y larger portion of behaviors having to do with c r i t i c a l requirements 25 to 2 9 . A l l behaviors having to do with purchasing useful books (C.R. jf'26) were reported by faculty members. The percentage of faculty behaviors under t h i s requirement ( 1 0 . 6 $ ) indicates t h e i r strong concern i n t h i s area. The fact that d i f f e r e n t observer groups stressed di f f e r e n t requirements and reported d i f f e r e n t patterns of behaviors emphasizes the importance of ca r e f u l l y selecting observers i n a c r i t i c a l incident study. The observer groups should be a good cross-section of a l l types of 50 people who come into contact with the a c t i v i t y under study. Having now completed the c r i t i c a l incident study of l i b r a r i a n s i n the U.B.C. Library, we can now proceed to test the hypotheses, with which t h i s study i s mainly con-cerned CHAPTER IV INCIDENTS FROM "BEHAVIOR PATTERN" QUESTIONS VERSUS "ISOLATED BEHAVIOR" QUESTIONS This chapter w i l l be concerned with te s t i n g Hypothesis 1: Incidents collected from the "behavior pattern" questions w i l l contain d i f f e r e n t kinds of behavior from those contained i n incidents e l i c i t e d from the "isolated behavior" questions. A. Procedure As discussed i n Chapter I I I , incidents were collected by asking each observer two d i s t i n c t l y d i f f e r e n t types of questions. The observers were f i r s t given an introduction to the study and then asked questions of a type usually used i n c r i t i c a l incident studies (see Appendix C, para-graphs 1 and 2 ) . The questions asked f o r descriptions of l i b r a r i a n behavior that the observer f e l t to be particularly, e f f e c t i v e or i n e f f e c t i v e . These questions w i l l be referred to as the " i s o l a t e d behavior" questions. An e f f o r t was made to extract a l l behaviors, of t h i s type, that the observer could report before proceeding to the "behavior pattern" questions. I t can, therefore, reasonably be assumed that the behaviors e l i c i t e d by the "behavior pattern" questions would not have been reported i f the interview was terminated a f t e r the " i s o l a t e d behavior" questions had been 52 exhausted. The "behavior pattern" questions (see Appendix C-4) were asked a f t e r the observers were given an i n t r o -duction designed to change t h e i r frame of reference and to make them think of di f f e r e n t kinds of behaviors from those they reported e a r l i e r (see Appendix C - 3 ). The observers were now asked to report incidents that contained behaviors which were s i g n i f i c a n t l y e f f e c t i v e / i n e f f e c t i v e only when repeated over a period of time. C r i t i c a l behaviors e l i c i t e d by both types of questions were included i n the main sort to esta b l i s h the c r i t i c a l requirements. In order to evaluate the contribu-tion of the "behavior pattern" questions to the f i n a l l i s t of c r i t i c a l requirements, the behaviors from both types of question were separated and examined. B. Results There were 3&*4 behaviors e l i c i t e d by tiie " i s o l a t e d behavior" questions, of which 232 were ef f e c t i v e behaviors and 152 i n e f f e c t i v e . Of the 116 behaviors r e s u l t i n g from the "behavior pattern" questions, 37 were e f f e c t i v e and 152 i n e f f e c t i v e . Forty-two percent of the behaviors r e s u l t i n g from tiie "behavior pattern" questions were contained i n four of the 37 c r i t i c a l requirement categories (C.R.'s 7, 14, 2 2 , 25) . 53 A comparison of the behaviors collected from each type of question i s shown i n Figure 3. FIGURE 3 C. Discussion and Conclusions 1) The "behavior pattern" questions brought f o r t h less than 1/3 the number of behaviors e l i c i t e d by the "isol a t e d behavior" questions. This i s believed to be the r e s u l t of a number of f a c t o r s . a) After having given a l l incidents of the f i r s t type, the observer may have t i r e d of the i n t e r -view and may not have put as much e f f o r t into r e c a l l i n g the "behavior pattern" incidents. b) There may actually be fewer behaviors that be-come c r i t i c a l only when repeated over a period of time. c) I t may require a closer and more consistant relationship with l i b r a r i a n s , than- most student and faculty observers had, to be able to re-port incidents of the "behavior pattern" type. 2) The "behavior pattern" questions e l i c i t e d a dispro-portionately large number of i n e f f e c t i v e incidents. They seem to have been e f f e c t i v e i n uncovering be-havior that i s excusable and normal i f i t happens occasionally but which becomes i n e f f e c t i v e when FIGURE 3 54 D i s t r i b u t i o n of behaviors from "isolated, behavior" and "behavior pattern" questions among the c r i t i c a l requirements C r i t . Behaviors from " i s o l a t e d Req. behavior" questions # " E f f e c t i v e I n e f f e c t i v e I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 Behaviors from "behavior pa£t^!!!!l_.qsesJ^&as E f f e c t i v e I. 2M ?.<? /(, H. Y O V 5 ' i 2 c <>/ , _ J 1 I n e f f e c t i v e J Zf la /fc t<l 3 V ^ 8 12 lj> 2 s M repeated often. To t h i s extent the "behavior pattern" questions did contribute to the f i n a l l i s t of c r i t i c a l requirements. There were four c r i t i c a l requirements to which "behavior pattern" behaviors made a major contribu-ti o n . a) C.R. #7 (responds promptly to users waiting f o r service) - Ten of the 13 behaviors making up t h i s category were the res u l t of the "behavior pattern" questions. Had i t not been f o r these 10 behaviors, i t i s possible that the other three might have been incorporated into some other category or categories. Thus i t appears that t h i s requirement might not have been i n -cluded i n the l i s t of c r i t i c a l requirements i f the "behavior pattern" questions had not been asked. b) C.R. #14 (acts i n pleasant and interested manner to users) - Nineteen of the 33 behaviors under t h i s requirement were the result of the "behavior pattern" questions. c) C.R. #22 (carries out work assignments a l e r t l y and i n t e l l i g e n t l y so that things go smoothly and e f f i c i e n t l y ) - Thirteen of the 32 behaviors under t h i s requirement resulted from the "behavior pattern" questions. 56 d) C.R. #25 (works hard and conscientiously so as to produce good work) - Seven out of 18 behaviors i n t h i s requirement were e l i c i t e d by "behavior pattern" questions. The fact that behaviors r e s u l t i n g from the "behavior pattern" questions contributed so greatly to C.R. #7 and to a le s s e r extent to C.R.'s 1 4 , 22 and 2 5 , suggests that these questions did uncover a type of c r i t i c a l behavior that might not have been exposed by the "i s o l a t e d behavior" questions alone. The results of t h i s investigation support Hypothesis I and suggest that the "behavior pattern" questions did res u l t i n some additional c r i t i c a l requirement categories being generated by uncovering behaviors that would have been missed i f only the "isol a t e d behavior" questions had been asked. The "behavior pattern" questions were e f f e c t i v e i n e l i c i t i n g descriptions of l i b r a r i a n behavior that i s annoy-ing but considered normal when happening occasionally but that becomes more strongly i n e f f e c t i v e when done repeatedly. To a les s e r extent they uncovered l i b r a r i a n behavior that i s taken f o r granted i n an i s o l a t e d instance but that con-tributes s i g n i f i c a n t l y to e f f e c t i v e ppe formance when i t becomes a long range pattern of behavior. The fact that a large proportion of the behaviors resu l t i n g from the "behavior pattern" questions were con-centrated i n four c r i t i c a l requirement categories supports 57 the conclusion that the addition of t h i s question usefully-contributed to the variety of behaviors reported and there-fore to the v a l i d i t y of the f i n a l l i s t of c r i t i c a l require-ments. I t would seem worthwhile to conduct further research i n t h i s area. Perhaps a large variety of questions could be developed that would result i n additional kinds of c r i t i c a l behaviors being reported thus making the body of data c o l -lected more representative of the a c t i v i t y under study. CHAPTER V THE INFLUENCE OF THE OBSERVERS' STATEMENTS OF AIMS ON THE BEHAVIORS THEY REPORT In t i l l s chapter we w i l l test Hypothesis 2: Observers whose statements of aims are i n disagreement with the " o f f i c i a l " general aims w i l l emphasize d i f f e r e n t kinds of behavior i n the incidents they report, from those reported by observers whose statements are i n agreement. A, Procedure As discussed i n Chapter I I I , each observer was asked to state his opinions as to the aims of the l i b r a r i a n ' s job i n the U.B.C. Library. These statements were examined and a l l those making the same point were grouped together. This resulted i n eight groupings, each representing a di f f e r e n t stated aim (see Table VI). TABLE VI The U.B.C. Librarian and Assistant L i b r a r i a n were asked to give an " o f f i c i a l " statement of the aims and objectives of the l i b r a r i a n ' s job. This statement was as follows: Tiie purpose of the university l i b r a r i a n ' s job i s to help further the u n i v e r s i t i e s 59. TABLE VI Aims St a t e d by Observers, and the Number of Observers R e f e r r i n g to each, i n h i s Statement of Aims STATEMENT No. of Observers OF AIMS L i b . Stu. Fac . Tot. To b u i l d the l i b r a r y ' s c o l l e c t i o n so that i t has adequate, up-to-date m a t e r i a l 18 5 15 38 To a s s i s t the u n i v e r s i t y p o p u l a t i o n i n f i n d i n g and us i n g r e f e r e n c e m a t e r i a l 28 30 5 63 To organize and process the l i b r a r y ' s h o l d i n g s so that they are most e a s i l y a v a i l a b l e f o r use by t h e , u n i v e r s i t y p o p u l a t i o n 20 18 16 54 To give s e r v i c e to the users of the l i b r a r y 13 7 6 26 To become f a m i l i a r with the l i b r a r y ' s h o l d i n g s , systems and o r g a n i z a t i o n , e s p e c i a l l y , i n own department 2 6 4 12 To teach the u n i v e r s i t y p o p u l a t i o n how to use the l i b r a r y e f f e c t i v e l y 3 5 5 13 To see that books and other l i b r a r y m a t e r i a l are handled and c i r c u l a t e d i n a proper way to p r o t e c t against t h e f t , damage and misuse 1 3 3 7 To supervise., the l i b r a r y 0 4 •0 4 T o t a l s 85 78 54 217 Note: Some observers s t a t e d more than one aim. A t o t a l of 217 aims were c o l l e c t e d from 126 observers. . 60 teaching and research objectives, through the most e f f e c t i v e provision of resources and services. The statements of aims, as given by the observers, were compared to t h i s o f f i c i a l statement, i n order to determine i f the observers were q u a l i f i e d to roake correct judgements about l i b r a r i a n a c t i v i t y , based on an awareness of the " o f f i c i a l " aims of the l i b r a r i a n ' s job. An e f f o r t was then made to determine the influence that these opinions of aims had on the kinds of behaviors reported. This was done by grouping together a l l the be-haviors reported by observers who stated each aim, and vievdng the d i s t r i b u t i o n of these behaviors among the c r i t i c a l requirements (see Figures- 4 - 11). FIGURES 4 - 1 1 B. Results None of the eight statements of aims was found to be incompatable with the more general " o f f i c i a l " statement of aims given by the Li b r a r i a n and the Assistant L i b r a r i a n . The differences i n aims stated by the observers were treated as differences i n emphasis within the framework of the " o f f i c i a l " aims. As none of the observers stated aims which were i n disagreement with the " o f f i c i a l " statement i t was concluded that no observer d i s q u a l i f i e d himself as an observer. 61 FIGURE 4 D i s t r i b u t i o n , among t h e c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t s , o f b e h a v i o r s r e p o r t e d by o b s e r v e r s g i v i n g A im #1 Aim #1 ; To b u i l d t h e l i b r a r y ' s c o l l e c t i o n so t h a t i t has a d e q u a t e , u p - t o - d a t e m a t e r i a l , ( 163 B e h a v i o r s - ) N.B. t o t . % r e f e r s t o t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f t h e s e 163 b e h a v i o r s f a l l i n g i n t o each c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t c a t e g o r y . CR# / 2 3 V 5 6 7 8 lo It ii 13 '1 tS lb 1/ IS 19 Zo 31 St 23 *</ as at *e Jo. 3f si 33 39 35 31 37 E f f e c t i v e ; I n e f f e c t i v e t o t ] . .4 ( 1. Si in i.ia 3.48 M.t.i-6 7 4 • - 6 ( S-Si 3-S9 1.21. .C ' 2 . « / 6 •o o l.gV S.S2 \5.Si \l.2Z .CI \l-Bf 1.2 2 \3.»7 3-o7 >• ZJ I- it • tl •4 1 ^2^ .4; ~5£ 62 FIGURE 5 D i s t r i b u t i o n , among th e c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t s , o f b e h a v i o r s r e p o r t e d by o b s e r v e r s g i v i n g Aim #2 Aim #2 V . ' . To a s s i s t t h e u n i v e r s i t y p o p u l a t i o n i n f i n d i n g and u s i n g r e f e r e n c e , m a t e r i a l . ( 255 B e h a v i o r s ) N.B 0 : t o t . 7. r e f e r s t o t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f t h e s e 255 b e h a v i o r s f a l l i n g i n t o each c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t c a t e g o r y . CR# / 2 3 V S 7 8 9 /o II '2 'S "t >S /6 ' / ' S IS So 2.1 ?2 2jr 2H zs ?«, 27 2 8 29 •30 3/ 32 S3 31 35 3& 27 E f f e c t i v e a ,-JL ; tot;. I n e f f e c t i v e j % Z 3 •I—i 5 S J l _ I — 1 — v . FIGURE 6 D i s t r i b u t i o n , among the c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t s , o f b e h a v i o r s r e p o r t e d by o b s e r v e r s g i v i n g Aim #3 Aim #3 ; To o r g a n i z e and p r o c e s s t h e l i b r a r y ' s h o l d i n g s so t h a t t h e y a r e most e a s i l y a v a i l a b l e f o r use by t h e u n i v e r s i t y p o p u l a t i o n . ( 210 B e h a v i o r s ) N.B. : t o t . % r e f e r s t o t h e p e r c e n t a g e .of t h e s e 210 -beha v i o r s f a l l i n g . i n t o each c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t c a t e g o r y . CR# ' Ef f ective _ Ine.f.£e_c_tjLye]_% it '3 iH iS it, 17 18 19 Zo Zl Z2 Z3 is ZU 27 28 2.9 3a 3/ Si 33 •W 3S 3h 37 t o t . l _ U _ U J J J _ l l - . l — l . . l . . l _ . . - l _ L _ _ */0&7 i S 1 3 z I I £ 3 </ £ (.7 8 % FIGURE 7 D i s t r i b u t i o n , among the c r i t i c a l requirements, of behaviors reported by observers giving Aim #4 Aim #4 : To give service to the users of the l i b r a r y . ( 115 Behaviors ) N.-B. : tot„ % r e f e r s to the percentage of these 115 behaviors f a l l i n g into each c r i t i c a l requirement category. 2 3 f 5 C 7 8 <7 /O II i2 13 if IS 11= 17 18 19 2o n 22 23 i i ?S 2l> 27 28 i9 3o 31 3z 33 3V 3 S 34 3 7 " f f i I n e f f e c t i v e 1 . . xn zi i % V 7 & S V 3 Z I I Z -3 1 S i 7 8 % 65 FIGURE 8 . D i s t r i b u t i o n , among the c r i t i c a l requirements, of behaviors reported by observers giving Aim #5 Aim #5 : To become f a m i l i a r with the l i b r a r y ' s , systems, and organization, e s p e c i a l l y i n own department. ( 41 Behaviors ) CRJL / 2 3 V r (, 7 8 9 lo it il 13 /V /S /(, >7 18 19 ZO 21 ZZ -?3 2V 2S 2b 27 28 29 3o 31 32 33 3<V 35. 34 37 -Efi.ejsJj^e. I n e f f f t r r i v p IZ3 tot, 7.2.9 Z.Yi •OO >4.g& • OO 2-43 7.2 9 </..?& IOO •<3o 1. yt 2.1 i .£> 5 • 0 o • 0 o 2-^3 . 0 o 'O-O' 9.7-2 .-OO •'OCS • V O .CO .00 • CO ?.V3 • CO •O .0 Z-/3 °/ It n/LlS.'i-i}'! «.»f-(7il'fi!l / 2 3 V.S t> 7 g ?./o " U 'J 'S 'L >7>» a/a N.B. : t o t . 7o r e f e r s to the percentage of these 41 behaviors f a l l i n g into each c r i t i c a l ^ requirement category. 66 FIGURE 9 Distribution, among the c r i t i c a l requirements, of behaviors reported by observers giving Aim #6 Aim #6 : To teach the university population how to use the library. ( 51 Behaviors ) LCftSL / ? 3 V S 7 & 9 fo II IZ '3 /<•/ IS /4 17 'S 19 2o 2\ 21 23 24 2S 2t 27 28 29 i o •3/ 3 2 33 3V 3S -3 6 37 .Effective. O / It IU l<i Ineffective. /2 W t y A J_ '•o N.B. : tot. 7. refers to the percentage of these 51 behaviors f a l l i n g into each c r i t i c a l requirement category. 67 FIGURE 10 D i s t r i b u t i o n , among the c r i t i c a l requirements, of behaviors reported by observers giving Aim #7 Aim #7 : To see that books and other l i b r a r y materials are handled and c i r c u l a t e d in a proper manner, to protect against t h e f t , damage and misuse. ;CR # ( 15 Behaviors ) / 2 3 7 7 lo il .1.1 IS i l 'S i(, 17 IS 19 to XI Z2 13 2<f AS At A7 A 3 A 1 So 21 • 31 S3 3V 45" 3 6 3 7 E f f e c t i v e 1 X I 1 % IS "f «• i° I n e f f e c t i v e Z3 tot, % 2. 0, <?° -do . D O , O A ,ab / C O iD3 •ao 13 .33 6.67 .<?o. .6.A7. • . 0 0 ' 3 .^3. • 0 0 .•£>(? ' 3 - - i J . 0 0 , 0 5 .00 •00 • 00 t>~. 6 7 1 Co • 06 ,>.Oo ,00 • OO • ao • c>o .00 • CO . 0 0 •O-O 1^  2 HoB. : t o t . 7. r e f e r s to the percentage of these 15 behaviors f a l l i n g into each c r i t i c a l requirement category. 68 FIGURE 11 . . . . . . D i s t r i b u t i o n , among c r i t i c a l requirements, of behaviors reported by observers g i v i n g Aim #8 Aim #8 : To supervise the l i b r a r y . ( 23 Behaviors ) -CR_#-i° //• 12 13 II 'S IL n a /$ 2o Z\ 22. Zl 2<t ZS it, 27 ZS Z9 .3,0 Zl 32 33 31 3S 3h 37 - E f f e c t i v e , tot. / 7. Vo • o o • 1.3 5 .00 .co • •OO • oo ^•25 .Oo , co Q.lo 1.3S I 7.4 a Z I.->s <Oc -.OO .0 0 .CO l . i S . . 0 0 • OI3. ,00 ;0O ,0o \O0 ,0o • i O o ' 1 0 0 • 00 • OO % /(, <<f 12 la & 6 H 12 'V lb N.B. : t o t . % r e f e r s to the percentage of these 23 behaviors f a l l i n g into each c r i t i c a l requirement category. 69 In stating what they considered to be the objectives of the l i b r a r i a n ' s job, the observers often referred to several of the eight aims. Therefore, the groups of behaviors l i s t e d under each aim, i n Figures 4 - 11, are not independent of one another. I f an observer mentioned more than one aim the behaviors reported by him were i n -cluded under each aim he mentioned. This lack of independ-ence prevents the use of s t a t i s t i c a l correlations i n com-paring the d i s t r i b u t i o n s . Study of the bar diagrams i n Figures 4 - 11, show-ing the percentage of behaviors i n each c r i t i c a l require-ment for each aim, seems to indicate that the d i s t r i b u t i o n s f o r aims 1, 2, 3 and 4 are very si m i l a r and that the be-haviors reported were not greatly influenced by differences i n the observer's statements of aims. Aims 5 , 6, 7 and & were mentioned by small numbers of observers and there were so few behaviors mentioned by these observers that the percentage d i s t r i b u t i o n s of be-haviors i n these aims, were not smooth and could not reason-ably be compared with the d i s t r i b u t i o n s of aims 1, 2, 3 and 4. The d i s t r i b u t i o n s of behaviors among the broad c r i t i c a l requirement areas, for aims 1, 2, 3 and 4, were compared (see Table VII) and were found to be very s i m i l a r . TABLE VII 70. TABLE VII D i s t r i b u t i o n - o f Behaviours Among the Broad C r i t i c a l Requirement Areas, f o r Aims 1 , 2 , 3 and 4 C r i t i c a l Requirement Area Percentage of Behaviours i n each C r i t i c a l Requirement Area f o r Aims #1 #2 #3 #4 S e r v i c e to l i b r a r y user (C.R. Nos. 1 - 14) 5 0 . 9 1 $ 5 5 . 6 7 $ 4 9 . 0 1 $ 46 . 7 1 $ Enforcement of l i b r a r y p o l i c i e s (C.R. Nos. 1 5 - 16) 4 . 2 9 $ 1 2 .14$ - 9 - 9 9 $ 9 . 5 7 $ P u b l i c R e l a t i o n s (C.R. Nos. 17 - 19) 3 - 0 7 $ 5 . 4 9 $ 5 - 2 3 $ 4 . 3 5 $ Performance of job tasks (C.R. Nos. 2 0 . - 2 9 ) 2 8 . 2 1 $ 1 7 . 2 5 $ 24 . 7 5 $ 24 . 3 6 $ S u p e r v i s i o n (C.R. Nos. 30 - 3 5 ) 7 - 9 6 $ 7.46$ 8 . 5 5 $ 9 . 5 7 $ I n t r a - s t a f f r e l a t i o n s (C.R. Nos. 36 - 3 7 ) 3 . 0 6 $ 1. 96$ 2 . 3 8 $ 5 . 2 2 $ 71 C. Discussion and Conclusions Inspection of the observer's statements of aims revealed that no observers were i n disagreement with the " o f f i c i a l " statement of aims but that they emphasized di f f e r e n t points. There were, therefore, no data which could be used to determine the influence, on the behaviors reported, of opinions of aims that disagreed with the " o f f i c i a l " statement. I t was possible, however, to deter-mine the relationship between the behaviors reported and differences i n points emphasized within the framework of the " o f f i c i a l " statement of aims. I t can be seen from Figure 4, aims 1, 2 , 3 and 4 and from Table VII, that observers who emphasized d i f f e r e n t aims did not d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n the pattern of be-haviors they reported. Nor i s there any reasonable re-lati o n s h i p between the aims stated and the percentage of behaviors i n any c r i t i c a l requirement. For example, look at c r i t i c a l requirement 26 for each aim i n Figures 4 - 1 1 . This requirement indicates that-the e f f e c t i v e l i b r a r i a n "Takes steps to see that the most useful books are purchased by the l i b r a r y " . I f there was a strong re l a t i o n s h i p between aims emphasized and the type of behavior reported, we would expect those who stated aim number one ("To b u i l d up the l i b r a r y ' s c o l l e c t i o n so that i t has adequate, up-to-date material") to report behaviors under c r i t i c a l requirement 26 more often than those who stated other aims. I t can be 72 seen i n Figure 4, however, that t h i s was not the case. Those observers who stated aim #3 reported a la r g e r per-centage of t h i s type of behavior than did those who stated aim #1. The evidence collected here i s inconclusive with re-gard to Hypothesis I I , due to the fact that no aims so stated by the observers were i n disagreement with the " o f f i c i a l " general aims. Examination of the data did re-veal that subtle differences i n emphasis within the frame-work of the " o f f i c i a l " general aims did not influence the kinds of behavior reported to any s i g n i f i c a n t extent. This finding cannot be generalized to statements of aims which are in disagreement with one another and therefore the results-of t h i s study are inconclusive and neither support nor oppose Hypothesis I I . CHAPTER VI THE RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF THE CRITICAL REQUIREMENTS This chapter w i l l be concerned with testing Hypo-thesis 3: The r e l a t i v e importance of the c r i t i c a l requirements can be determined by using the observers' ratings of the c r i t i c a l -ness of the behaviors they report. A. Procedure This study attempted to determine the r e l a t i v e importance of the c r i t i c a l requirements of l i b r a r i a n s i n the U.B.C. Library. Three methods were used to rank order the requirements i n terms of t h e i r r e l a t i v e importance. 1) The f i r s t method was to determine the frequency of behaviors waking up each c r i t i c a l requirement (see Figure 12). FIGURE 12 The requirements were then ranked i n order of. these frequencies. 2) The second method was to have the observers rate the importance of each of the behaviors they re-ported. This was done i n the c r i t i c a l incident FIGURE 12 74 The number o f b e h a v i o r s , and t h e aver a g e o b s e r v e r s ' r a t i n g o f t h e b e h a v i o r s , i n each c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t CR# ' E f f e c t i v e B e h a v i o r s 15 i 2 3 - .V 5' 6 7 <? ? >/ /2 '3 •;V /S /& 17 18 IS ?o 21 A2 21 2\ 251 H 27'\ i ?? J o 3\ - 31 . 33 31 3S 3£ 37 fi.U,- + 3 . 0 0 A . u ' . - + 2 . c o ft,U*.:-t3.cZ £ fi.kl.:+J.Sl) "T *W.-T>3.OO [ •FL.W..- f 3-co fl.W.---»-3,2V A.u.= +Z.i$ | fl.u.- y 3. oo /).io.- + 3 . ' 7 •fi..U=+ 3 . g P -4 , u . r - t ? . 3 9 J d , U . V r . ' . 3 . 0 [ . f lao . --13 .13 | fl,w.=-r3.67 r fl.u. + 3 . 3 o j _ f W - t 3 . ' 7 [ ' A.'w.- + .1 .33 £ ft.u, - + 2.So, ?7 21 zi is is tz~q~ Z I j j T o t . j O v e r a l l I n e f f e c t i v e B e h a v i o r s ; i B e h a v . i A v g 0 R a t i n -2.So •Z.OO 3- - - 2.75 -I.S A.u.= -Z<3>3 0 w . = - 3 . 3 3 d.uj.- -'/,0 0 j -'3.27 fi.w, - - V. DO A . l U , . r-z.8a. • * . W . - -/) . a- - - 2, /Uj. • ^ 70 J A-V.= - 2 . 8 3 i V U . - - / . 5 0 ? 4. ft. u>.-- -2,15 ? i ?u ?? 3 0 Z.83 1 3 3.39 i " . Z.Zo 7 Z.I 3 2£ 3-oo 7 0 2.3o / 3 / Z 3. 08 3<? . 3.27 3o . 3.1 z V z.so / £ 3 So 2(? Z.S8 33 Z-B£ 3 6 z.si Z I 2,7V 9 2.67 C Z.-&7 9 3.27 7 Z-?3 IS 2. SI 3z • Z.78 </ 3.2S 9 3,11 15 l 0 r 3,3o . 4 ' Z.7S 10 Z.7v S 3.ZS 2-97 r 3 2.88 3,33 M 2.35 5 Z.i>3> 9 So 0 N„3, :"A.W." i s a measure o f the a v e r a g e w e i g h t o f r a t i n g s g i v e n t he e f f e c t i v e o r i n e f f e c t i v e b e h a v i o r s i n each c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t . N,Bo : " O v e r a l l Avg„ R a t i n g " i s a measure o f t h e combined a v e r a g e w e i g h t s o f t h e r a t i n g s o f e f f e c t i v e and i n e f f e c t i v e b e h a v i o r s i n each c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t . 75 interview following the procedure as outlined i n Chapter I I I , section E, paragraph 3. Behaviors e l i c i t e d by the "behavior pattern" questions were given two separate ratings by observers; the f i r s t r a t i n g i n d i c a t i n g the importance of the behavior as an i s o l a t e d incident and the second rating i n d i c a t i n g the importance of t h i s kind of behavior repeated over a period of time. In cases of behaviors from the "behavior pattern" questions the second rating was used as the observer's i n d i c a t i o n of importance. This cumulative rating was chosen over the ra t i n g for a single occurance because these behaviors were of a type that only became c r i t i c a l when repeated over time. The averages of the ratings assigned, by the observers, to the behaviors i n each category were calculated (see Figure 5). In calcul a t i n g these averages the signs ( or - ) of the ratings were disregarded. I t was assumed that an e f f e c t i v e be-havior given the corresponding negative rating were of equal importance. The requirements were then ranked i n order of the o v e r a l l average ratings, assigned by the observers. The t h i r d method was to give l i s t s of the c r i t i c a l 76 requirements (see Appendix G) to ten senior members of the l i b r a r y s t a f f and ask each one to rate each c r i t i c a l requirement on the basis of a 10 point scale from "of l i t t l e importance" (given a value of 1) to "absolutely e s s e n t i a l " (given a value of 10). The average weights assigned to each c r i t i c a l r e-quirement by the senior l i b r a r i a n s were calculated (see Table VIII), and the requirements were ranked i n order of the average v.*eights assigned. TABLE VIII These weights were taken to indicate the r e l a t i v e importance of the c r i t i c a l requirements. B. Results The rank orders of the c r i t i c a l requirements on the basis of frequency, average weight by observers, and average weight by the senior l i b r a r i a n s are shown i n Table IX. TABLE IX A co r r e l a t i o n a l analysis of these three rankings (see Table X) was carried out by the rank-difference method (Smith, p. 92). TABLE V I I I W e i g h t s and Average Weights A s s i g n e d by S e n i o r L i b r a r i a n s t o Requirements C.R.# Weights A s s i g n e d by S e n i o r L i b r a r i a n s Average Weight A B C D E F G H I J 1 10 10 10 10 10 10 8 10 10 10 9.8 2 10 10 10 10 10 10 8 10 10 10 9.8 3 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10.0 4 10 4 4 10 10 10 8 10 10 10 8.6 5 10 4 4 10 10 10 7 10 10 10 8.5 6 10 10 10 10 10 10 5 8 10 10 9.3 7 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 9 10 10 9.9 8 10 10 10 10 10 10 7 10 10 10 9.7 9 10 10 10 10 10 10 5 10 10 10 9.5 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 .10. 0 11 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10.0 12 10 10 10 10 10 10 8 10 10 10 9.8 13 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10.0 14 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10.0 .15 10 10 10 10 10 10 7 8 10 10 9.5 16 10 3 6 10 10 8 7 10 10 10 8.4 17 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10.0 18 10 10 10 10 10 10 8 8 10 10 9.6 19 1 3 5 10 10 8 8 9 10 10 7.4 20 10 10 9 .10 10 10 8 9 10 1.0 9.6 •21 10 10 10 10 10 10 8 10 10 10 9.8 22 10 3 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 9.3 23 10 5 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 9.5 24 10 7 10 10 10 10 10 9 10 10 9.6 25 10 8 10 10 10 10 8 10 10 10 9.6 26 10 7 10 10 10 10 7 8 10 10 9.2 27 10 10 8 1 10 10 10 8 10 10 8.7 28 10 9 10 10 10 10 8 10 10 10 9.7 29 10 10 10 10 10 10 8 10 10 10 9.8 30 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10. 0 31 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10. 0 32 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10.0 33 10 10 10 10 10 10 8 10 10 10 9.8 34 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10.0 35 10 10 7 10 5 10 8 10 10 10 9.0 36 10 10 7 10 10 10 8 10 10 10 9.5 37 10 10 7 10 10 10 8 10 10 10 9.5 TABLE IX Rank Orders o f the C r i t i c a l Requirements on the Bases o f Frequency, Average Weight by O b s e r v e r s , and Average Weight by t h e S e n i o r L i b r a r i a n s R A N K I N G By S e n i o r By By O b s e r v e r s L i b r a r i a n s •C.R.# Frequency Average Wt. Average Wt. 1 5 23 14.5 2 10 2 14.5 3 30.5 37 5.5 4 27 16 34 5 7 12 35 6 17.5 36 29.5 7 14 34 11 8 15 11 18.5 9 5 5.5 26 10 5 9 5.5 11 34,5 33 5.5 12 17.5 1 14.5 13 9 19.5 5.5 14 2 22 5.5 15 1 24 26 16 8 27 36 17 21.5 29.5 5.5 18 29 29.5 21.5 19 21.5 5.5 37 20 27 16 21.5 21 13 21 14.5 22 3 25 29.5 23 34.5 7.5 26 24 21.5 10 21.5 25 11 18 21.5 26 17.5 4 31 27 34.5 26 33 28 17.5 28 18.5 29 24.5 7.5 14.5 30 12 13 5.5 31 27 16 5.5 32 24.5 19.5 5.5 33 34.5 3 14.5 34 34.5 35 5.5 35 30.5 32 32 36 34.5 31 26 37 21.5 14 26 79 TABLE X No s i g n i f i c a n t correlations between the rankings were found. C. Discussion and Conclusions The fact that no s i g n i f i c a n t correlations were found among the rank orders indicates that there i s l i t t l e re-lationship between: 1) the importance of the behaviors i n a c r i t i c a l requirement category, as seen by the observers, and the frequency of behaviors i n the category - which has previously been used to determine the r e l a t i v e importance of requirements (YJagner, 1951 ; Gordon, 1 9 4 9 ) . 2) the frequency of behaviors i n a c r i t i c a l requirement category and the r e l a t i v e importance of the require-ment as seen by the senior l i b r a r i a n s . 3) the importance of the behaviors i n a c r i t i c a l require-ment category as seen by the observers and the re-l a t i v e importance of the requirement as seen by the senior l i b r a r i a n s . The senior l i b r a r i a n s , who rated the c r i t i c a l re-quirements, assigned a rating of "10" (absolutely essential) a very high percentage of the time. Of the 370 ratings . (see Table VIII) only 54 were les s than "10". Thus these ratings give l i t t l e information about the r e l a t i v e import-80. TABLE X Rank - D i f f e r e n c e C o r r e l a t i o n C o e f f i c i e n t s Between the Rank Orders of the C r i t i c a l Requirements on the B a s i s of Frequency, Average Observer Weighting and Average Se n i o r L i b r a r i a n Weighting Rankings Being C o r r e l a t e d C o r r e l a t i o n C o e f f i c i e n t S i g n i f i c a n c e Frequency and Average Observer Weighting r ' = + . 1 6 8 P> . 2 Frequency and Average Senior L i b r a r i a n Weighting r ' = + .0 2 0 P> . 8 Average Observer Weighting and Average S e n i o r L i b r a r i a n Weighting r ' = - . 0 7 5 P> . 6 Note: Formulas used to c a l c u l a t e rank d i f f e r e n c e c o r r e l a t i o n and s i g n i f i c a n c e i n above are as f o l l o w s : I n 6 z D r ' = 1 - —f—5 n ( n z -r ' /n - 2 / l - r ' 2 (Smith, P.93) 61 ance of the requirements but do suggest that, i n the judge-ment of the senior l i b r a r i a n s , a l l are c r i t i c a l . Otke (1966) used a sim i l a r approach to determine the r e l a t i v e importance of c r i t i c a l requirements f o r army-o f f i c e r cadets. He had the cadet instru c t o r s rate the requirements on a four point scale, and obtained more varied ratings. The ins t r u c t o r s had been using the require-ments, for some time, i n evaluating the cadets and were, therefore, more experienced i n evaluating the importance of the requirements than the l i b r a r i a n s who were unfamiliar with the requirements. There i s no apparent relationship between the weights given to the behaviors i n the requirement categories, by the observers, and the importance assigned to the re-quirements by the senior l i b r a r i a n s . For example, C.R. $3, which was assigned a maximum weight of "10" by a l l senior l i b r a r i a n s , was given the lowest average weight by the observers. However, as the senior l i b r a r i a n s rated a l l the requirements high i n importance but gave l i t t l e information about t h e i r r e l a t i v e importance, no meaningful conclusions can be drawn from these findings. Table XI shows that the behaviors i n each c r i t i c a l requirement category were given a wide range of ratings by the observers (see Table XI). TABLE XI 82. TABLE X I The number o f b e h a v i o r s , i n each c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t c a t e g o r y , g i v e n each r a t i n g , by the o b s e r v e r s . C.R.# No. o f B e h a v i o r s G i v e n E a c h R a t i n g T o t a l B e h a v i o r s ±. - 5 + 1.0 ± 1-5 + 2.0 ± 2.5 + 3.0 ± 3.5 + 4.0 1 2 7 3 10 1 7 30 2 1 1 5 4 8 19 3 1 2 1 1 5 4 1 1 1 2 2 7 5 2 2 2 8 2 6 22 6 2 2 1 1 2 2 10 7 2 2 1 7 1 13 8 3 4 2 3 12 9 1 2 8 13 6 30 10 2 3 11 7 7 30 11 1 3 4 12 4 2 4 10 13 1 . 5 7 5 2 20 14 2 11 1 8 1 1,0 33 15 6 1 5 1 8 6 , 9 36 16 4 2 2 8 5 21 17 1 2 4 1 1 9 18 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 19 1 1 4 3 9 20 1 1 1 1 1 2 7 21 1 3 6 4 1 15 22 1 10 3 10 3 5 32 23 1 1 2 4 24 1 1 4 1 2 9 25 2 1 1 6 4 4 18 26 2 2 2 4 10 27 1 3 4 28 1 1 4 2 2 10 29 1 3 4 8 30 1 1 2 8 1 3 16 31 1 2 1 1 2 7 32 1 1 4 1 1 8 33 2 1 1 4 ' 34 2 1 1 4 35 1 1 1 2 5 36 1 1 1 1 4 37 1 1 4 3 9 500 83 In t h i s table the number of behaviors given each rating i s shown for each c r i t i c a l requirement. The wide d i s t r i b u t i o n of ratings suggests that the importance of a behavior, i n -cluded i n a c r i t i c a l requirement category v a i l vary, accord-ing to the si t u a t i o n , and that the importance of the require-ment i s not necessarily related to the importance of i n d i v -idual component behaviors. However, the average importance of a l l component behaviors could s t i l l be a v a l i d i n d i c a t o r of the r e l a t i v e importance of the requireiaent • The frequency with which a type of behavior i s re-ported seems to have l i t t l e r e l a t i o n s h i p with the degree of effectiveness of that type of behavior. C r i t i c a l require-ments 19> 2 3 , 29 and 33 contained few1 behaviors but these behaviors were given high ratings of eff e c t i v e n e s s / i n e f f e c t -iveness. I t seems that the number of times a behavior i s reported i s dependent on something else besides the degree of effectiveness/ineffectiveness of that type of behavior. The fact that behaviors witiiin a c r i t i c a l requirement were given a wide range of ratings from "of l i t t l e importance" to "absolutely e s s e n t i a l " (see Table XI) does suggest that the frequency of c r i t i c a l behaviors generating a c r i t i c a l requirement i s not by i t s e l f a v a l i d measure of the importance of a requirement. The attempt i n t h i s study to determine the r e l a t i v e importance of c r i t i c a l requirements by comparing the average ratings given the behaviors i n each requirement category, 84 by the observers, was only partly successful. A rank ordering i n terras of r e l a t i v e importance was obtained by t h i s method (see Table I I ) , but no evidence was found to prove that i t i s a v a l i d i n d i c a t o r of r e l a t i v e importance. The results of t h i s study f a i l to support or re j e c t Hypothesis I I I and must be looked on as being inconclusive u n t i l further research can be conducted to prove the rank ordering obtained to be a v a l i d i n d i c a t i o n of the r e l a t i v e importance of the c r i t i c a l requirements. CHAPTER VII SUMMARY A c r i t i c a l incident study was undertaken to determine the c r i t i c a l requirements of the job of l i b r a r i a n i n the University of B r i t i s h Columbia Library, and to test the following hypotheses concerning the methodology of the technique: Hypothesis 1 - Incidents collected from the "behavior pattern" questions w i l l contain d i f -ferent kinds of behavior from those contained i n incidents e l i c i t e d from the " i s o l a t e d behavior" questions. Hypothesis 2 - Observers whose statements of aims are i n disagreement with the " o f f i c i a l " general aims w i l l emphasize d i f f e r e n t kinds of behaviors i n the incidents they report from those reported by observers whose statements of aims are i n agreement. Hypothesis 3 - The r e l a t i v e importance of the c r i t i c a l requirements can be determined by using the observers' ratings of the c r i t i c a l n e s s of the behaviors they report. 8 6 A. The C r i t i c a l Requirements The c r i t i c a l incident study resulted i n 37 c r i t i c a l requirements being i d e n t i f i e d f o r the univer s i t y l i b r a r i a n s job. The l i s t of c r i t i c a l requirements obtained seemed to point out some important demands made by the job on the l i b r a r i a n s . The high degree of pertinence of the c r i t i c a l requirements to the job was indicated by the high ratings of importance given to the requirements by ten senior members of the l i b r a r y s t a f f . The a c t i v i t y investigated i n t h i s study i s l e s s s p e c i f i c a l l y defined than those i n most other studies using the C r i t i c a l Incident Technique. The l i s t of c r i t i c a l r e -quirements obtained, refers to a l l members of the l i b r a r y s t a f f and not just those who are q u a l i f i e d professional l i b r a r i a n s . There are some requirements that w i l l not be applicable to some of the jobs. For example, requirements 30 to 35 are concerned with supervisory behavior and w i l l apply only to those s t a f f members with supervisory r o l e s . Requirement 27 refers to cataloging and w i l l apply only to those s t a f f members whose jobs involve catologing. The requirements determined by the study are f e l t to be a l l in c l u s i v e , however. That i s to say, a l l the requirements made by the various s p e c i f i c jobs can be found i n the l i s t of c r i t i c a l requirements. B. Hypothesis 1 Two types of questions were asked to e l i c i t descrip-37 tions of c r i t i c a l behavior fron observers. The f i r s t type, the " i s o l a t e d incident" questions asked f o r examples of behavior i n which a l i b r a r i a n acted i n such a way as to be p a r t i c u l a r l y e f f e c t i v e or i n e f f e c t i v e . This i s the usual type of question used i n C r i t i c a l Incident studies. The second type, the "behavior pattern" questions, asked f o r incidents which when taken i n d i v i d u a l l y do not appear to be s i g n i f i c a n t l y e f f e c t i v e or i n e f f e c t i v e but which becomes more important when repeated over a period of time and the long run effects are observed. Differences were found i n the behaviors e l i c i t e d by the two types of questions. The "behavior pattern" questions brought f o r t h a r e l a t i v e l y higher number of negative be-haviors which could be interpreted to mean that some poor performance i s expected once i n a while but when often re-peated the behavior i s considered s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n e f f e c t i v e . A large proportion of behaviors which generated C r i t i c a l Requirements 7 , 14, 22 and 25 were collected as a result of asking the "behavior pattern" questions. This was p a r t i c u l a r l y true of C r i t i c a l Requirement 7 which con-tained 13 behaviors of which 10 were e l i c i t e d by the "be-havior pattern" questions. This evidence suggests that the "behavior pattern" questions did contribute to the genera-tion of additional c r i t i c a l requirement categories. The re s u l t s of t h i s part of the study support Hypo-thesis 3. Further research i n t h i s area could produce 88 additional v a r i e t i e s of questions that would generate s t i l l more c r i t i c a l requirements thus making the f i n a l l i s t more representative of the a c t i v i t y under study. C. Hypothesis 2 In t h i s portion of the study, observers were asked to state t h e i r ideas as to the aims of the l i b r a r i a n s job in the University of B r i t i s h Columbia Library. We wished to f i n d out i f any observers were i n disagreement with the " o f f i c i a l " aims as stated by the Head Libr a r i a n and the Assistant L i b r a r i a n and what influence t h i s disagree-ment had on the behaviors they reported. None of the observers was found to be i n disagree-ment with the " o f f i c i a l " aims. A l l aims stated by observers were included i n the broad general aim stated by the Lib r a r i a n and Assistant L i b r a r i a n . However, d i f f e r e n t points were stressed by di f f e r e n t observers. Examination of behaviors reported by groups of observers who stated dif f e r e n t aims revealed that these differences i n emphasis did not seem to have any influence on the kinds of be-haviors reported. These findings cannot be taken to mean that the observers' ideas of the objectives of the a c t i v i t y i s not an important factor i n c r i t i c a l incident studies. I f the observers had stated aims which were imcompatable with the " o f f i c i a l " statement, the value judgements they would make concerning e f f e c t i v e / i n e f f e c t i v e behavior might have been 39 i n v a l i d . In t h i s study, however, the observers a l l gener-a l l y agreed with the o f f i c i a l statement and no incompatable airas were stated. There were therefore no data with which to test Hypothesis 2. The results of t h i s study neither prove nor d i s -prove Hypothesis 2. I t seems that, i n order to be q u a l i f i e d to judge effectiveness/ineffectiveness of performance, observers must be aware of the general aims of the a c t i v i t y but subtle differences i n emphasis have l i t t l e effect on the kinds of behaviors reported. D. Hypothesis 3 This part of the study asked observers to rate the c r i t i c a l n e s s of the behaviors they reported on a scale from "neutral" to "extremely e f f e c t i v e " or "extremely i n e f f e c t i v e . " An attempt was made to determine the r e l a t i v e importance of each c r i t i c a l requirement by averaging the ratings given to the behaviors which generated the requirement. A rank ordering of the c r i t i c a l requirements was achieved by t h i s method and a comparison was made between t h i s and the rank orderings based on frequency of behaviors generating a requirement and importance assigned to each requirement by 10 senior l i b r a r i a n s . No s i g n i f i c a n t correlations were found between any of the three methods of ranking the requirements i n order of importance. The comman assumption that the r e l a t i v e importance of c r i t i c a l requirements i s represented by the 90 frequency of incidents from which each was derived i s exposed to serious question by the findings i n t h i s study; behaviors i n categories of low frequency of incidents often had nigh average ratings with respect to t h e i r " c r i t i c a l -ness," and/or were given high ratings of importance by senior l i b r a r i a n s . The senior l i b r a r i a n s rated a l l c r i t i c a l require-ments as being very important and thus t h e i r ratings did not i d e n t i f y any differences between the importance of the requirements. I t was, therefore, not possible to compare the rank ordering of the requirements, i n order of r e l a t i v e importance, by t h i s method with the rank ordering by the method of average weights assigned to the behaviors by observers, The attempt i n t h i s study to determine the r e l a t i v e importance of the c r i t i c a l requirements by comparing the average ratings of behaviors i n each requirement category, by the observers, was only partly successful. A rank ordering i n terms of r e l a t i v e importance was obtained by t h i s method, but no evidence was found to prove or u i s -prove i t s v a l i d i t y . Therefore the evidence with regard to Hypothesis 3 is inconclusive. Further research might attempt to have senior l i b r a r i a n s rank-order the requirements i n order of import-ance so as to provide a yardstick against which to compare the rank ordering by the average weight method. BIBLIOGRAPHY American I n s t i t u t e f o r Research, The development of a procedure f o r evaluating o f f i c e r s i n the United States A i r Force. Research Notes #1. Pittsburgh, 1 949 (a). American I n s t i t u t e f o r Research, C r i t i c a l Requirements for Research Personnel: A Study of observed behaviors of personnel i n research laboratories. Pittsburgh, Research Notes #2, 1 949 (b). American I n s t i t u t e f o r Research, A Report of Three Years  of Experience. Pittsburgh, 1950 (a). American I n s t i t u t e f o r Research, Measuring Proficiency; A standard f l i g h t check. Researcxi Notes a!3» Pittsburgh, 1950 (b). American Ins t i t u t e f o r Research, The Development of Job Analysis Procedures. Research Notes #4, Pittsburgh, 1951. American Psychological Association: Committee on E t h i c a l Standards for Psychology, E t h i c a l Standards f o r Psychologists. American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C., 1953. Andersson, Bengt-Erik, and Nilsson, Stig-Goran, Studies i n the R e l i a b i l i t y and V a l i d i t y of the C r i t i c a l Incident Technique. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1964, v. 48, no. 6, pp. 398-403. Andersson, B-E., and Nilsson, S-G., An application of the C r i t i c a l Incident Technique to the study of .job and " tra i n i n g requirements of shop managers. A summary of Andersson and Nilsson, C r i t i c a l Incident Hetoden f o r analys av arbets-och utbildningskrav. Pedagogiska institutionem, Gotesborgs Universitet, miineo, 1961, 311 p. Barrett, J.E., The c r i t i c a l requirements of f i r s t l i n e  supervisors i n the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Co.  of Canada Ltd., T r a i l Operation. Unpublished Master's Thesis, Vancouver, The University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1958 92 BIBLIOGRAPHY (cont'd) Charters, VJ. W. and Whitley, I.B., Analysis of S e c r e t a r i a l  Duties and T r a i t s . Baltimore, Williams and Wilkes, 1 9 2 4 . Crawford, D. G., An application of the C r i t i c a l Incident  Technique to teaching. Unpublished Master's Thesis, Vancouver, The University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1961. Devries, A.G. A study of t r a i n i n g needs i n the selling;  of r e a l estate through the use of the c r i t i c a l  incident technique. Vancouver, University o f ~ B r i t i s h Columbia, 1 9 5 7 , Unpublished Master's Thesis. Finkle, R.B., A study of the c r i t i c a l requirements of foremanship. University of Pittsburgh B u l l e t i n , 1950, 46, pp. 291-297 (abstract). Fischer, R.P., Rapparlie, J.H., and Gibbons, C.C., A system for coding, f i l i n g , and using b i b l i o g r a p h i c a l material f o r research purposes. Journal of Applied  Psychology, 1947, 3 1 , PP, 329-339. Flanagan, J.C., Job requirements, i n Dennis, W. (Ed): Current Trends i n i n d u s t r i a l Psychology. Pittsburgh, University of Pittsburgh Press, 1949, Pp. 32-54. Flanagan, J.C., The C r i t i c a l Incident Technique i n the study of i n d i v i d u a l s . American Council on Education, . T952t Flanagan, J.C., The C r i t i c a l Incident Technique, Psychological B u l l e t i n , 1 9 5 4 , 5 1 , pp. 327-3 _ 58. Gordon, Thomas, The A i r l i n e P i l o t ' s Job. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1949, 3 3 , PP, 1 2 2 - 1 3 1 7 Hendrix, A.A., and Stewart, B., Appraisal of Employee Performance, i n Addresses on I n d u s t r i a l Relations, Bureau of I n d u s t r i a l Relations, University of Michigan, B u l l e t i n #26, 1 9 5 7 . McBee Keysort Manual. Athens, Ohio, The McBee Company, 1 9 4 2 . BIBLIOGRAPHY (cont'd) 93 Nagay, J.A., The development of a procedure f o r evaluat- ing the proficiency of a i r route t r a f f i c c o n t r o l l e r s . Washington: C i v i l Aeronautics Administration, 1 9 4 9 . (Division of Research, Report #83). Nevins, Charlotte I., An analysis of reasons f o r the  success or f a i l u r e of bookkeepers'in sales companys. Unpublished Master's Thesis, Pittsburgh, University of Pittsburgh, 1949. Otke, P.G., A Study of Assessment Procedures f o r Pre- Commission Tr-aining, Volume i T l Director of Personnel Selection and Research at Canadian Forces Headquarters, 1966. Suit, Jo Anne, A study of the C r i t i c a l Requirements f o r instructors of general psychology courses. University  of Pittsburgh B u l l e t i n , 1 9 5 2 , 4 3 , pp. 2 7 9 - 2 8 4 . (Abstract) Smith, G. Milton, A Simplified Guide to S t a t i s t i c s . Toronto, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1 9 6 2 . Stoyva, J.M., C r i t i c a l Requirements of a t r o l l y - b u s operator's job. Unpublished Master's Thesis,'Vancouver, The University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1 9 5 6 . V i t e l e s , M.S., I n d u s t r i a l Psychology. New York, W.W. Norton & Co., 1 9 3 2 . Wagner, R.F., A group sit u a t i o n compared with i n d i v i d u a l interviews f o r securing oersonnel information. Personnel  Psychology, 1 9 4 3 , 1 , pp/93-107. Wagner, R.F., Using c r i t i c a l incidents to determine-selection test weights. Personnel Psychology, 1 9 5 1 , 4 , PP. 3 7 3 - 3 8 1 . . APPENDIX A T h i s a p p e n d i x c o n t a i n s a copy o f t h e l e t t e r s e n t t o a l l members o f the 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 L i b r a r y s t a f f , t o i n t r o d u c e them t o the s t u d y , ask t h e i r c o o p e r a t i o n and a s s u r e them o f t h e c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y o f the i n t e r v i e w s . APPENDIX A 95. THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA VANCOUVER 8, CANADA DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY February 25"th 1?6£ A l l Members of Staff of the university Library You may r e c a l l that, during last summer, Mr. I'&rtin Gifford interviewed several members of the Library Staff regarding their satisfactions and dissatisfactions with their work as librarians. Mr. Gifford and I are most grateful for your help: the data are s t i l l being analysed and w i l l form the f i r s t phase of a compre-hensive study I am undertaking of the librarian's job. The time has now come for the in i t i a t i o n of the second phase of the research which i s concerned with the demands the job of librarian makes upon those employed in i t . In this phase data w i l l be collected from users of the Library services (faculty and students) as well as from librarians themselves. Mr. Jay Iv£:Gilvery, a graduate student in psychology, is my research assistant, and w i l l conduct most ox the interviews. You may therefore, hear of professors and students being asked to recount incidents from their experiences in using the Library services. Iii due course a sample of Librarians w i l l also be asked to recount incidents regarding themselves or others working in the Library. A specific appointment to meet your convenience w i l l be.made for these 30 minute interviews. As with the f i r s t phase, the details collected in these interviews w i l l be kept s t r i c t l y confidential by Mr. r&Gilvery and myself, although i t i s hoped that the findings of the research vrill.be of interest and value to Librarians generally. Mr. Stuart-Stubbs and other Senior members of the Staff of the University Library and School of Librarianship have expressed interest in this research, and have kindly offered their co-operation^ but you may be assured that no information identifying particular individuals on their Staffs w i l l be made available to them or anyone else. I believe you w i l l find the interview interesting, and I hope very much that you w i l l co-operate in the study should you be one of those nominated for interview. Sincerely yi&fys, Edwin S.J\I. .belyea Associate Professor APPENDIX B T h i s a p p e n d i x c o n t a i n s examples o f the d a t a s h e e t s used t o r e c o r d the i n c i d e n t s r e p o r t e d i n t h e i n t e r v i e w s . A p p e n d i x B - l shows a copy of t h e y e l l o w c o l o r e d d a t a s h e e t s used t o r e c o r d i n c i d e n t s o f e f f e c t i v e b e h a v i o u r . A p p e n d i x B-2 shows a copy o f t h e w h i t e d a t a s h e e t s used t o r e c o r d i n e f f e c t i v e i n c i d e n t s . APPENDIX B - l 97. CRITICAL INCIDENT SHEET OBSERVER: DATE: FACULTY & YEAR: QUESTION # HCW OFTEN USES LIBRARY: INCIDENT # WHEN DID IT HAPPEN ? WHERE DID IT HAPPEN ? WHAT WERE CIRCUMSTANCES LEADING UP TO INCIDENT 1 DESCRIBE WHAT HAPPENED. WHAT WAS THE RANK OF THE PERSON OBSERVED ? WHAT JOB WAS THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR AT THE TIME ? OTHER INFORMATION i APPENDIX B-2 CRITICAL INCIDENT SHEET OBSERVER: DATE: FACULTY & YEAR: QUESTION # HOW OFTEN USES LIBRARY: INCIDENT # WHEN DID TT HAPPEN ? WHERE DID TT HAPPEN ? WHAT WERE CIRCUMSTANCES LEADING UP TO INCIDENT ? DESCRIBE WHAT HAPPENED. WHAT WAS THE RANK OF THE PERSON OBSERVED ? WHAT JOB MS THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR AT THE TIME ? OTHER INFORMATION : APPENDIX C T h i s a p p e n d i x c o n t a i n s an o u t l i n e of t h e i n t e r v i e w s c o n d u c t e d w i t h each o b s e r v e r . 1) I n t r o d u c t i o n 2) " I s o l a t e d b e h a v i o u r " q u e s t i o n s 3) I n t r o d u c t i o n t o second t y p e q u e s t i o n s 4) " B e h a v i o u r p a t t e r n " q u e s t i o n s 5) R a t i n g o f b e h a v i o u r s 6) The o b s e r v e r ' s s t a t e m e n t o f aims 100. APPENDIX C THE INTERVIEW 1. I n t r o d u c t i o n . T h i s s t u d y i s c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e work of the l i b r a r y s t a f f i n the U.B.C. L i b r a r y . I t s purpose i s t o d i s c o v e r s p e c i f i c a c t i o n s on t h e p a r t o f l i b r a r i a n s , w h i c h c o n t r i b u t e t o t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s or i n e f f e c t i v e n e s s w i t h w h i c h t h e y p e r f o r m t h e i r d u t i e s . ( I t s h o u l d be n o t e d t h a t t h e t e r m " l i b r a r i a n " r e f e r s t o a l l members of the l i b r a r y s t a f f engaged i n l i b r a r i a n t y p e d u t i e s . ) The s t u d y i s b e i n g c o n d u c t e d under t h e d i r e c t i o n o f P r o f e s s o r E.S.W. B e l y e a o f t h e P s y c h o l o g y Department and w i t h t h e endorsement o f Mr. B. S t u a r t - S t u b b s , the Head L i b r a r i a n at U.B.C. The d a t a w i l l be c o l l e c t e d from s t u d e n t s , f a c u l t y members, and l i b r a r y s t a f f members a t U.B.C. because t h e s e groups a r e i n unusu-a l l y good p o s i t i o n s t o o b s e r v e and r e p o r t on l i b r a r i a n a c t i v i t y . You may be a s s u r e d t h a t any i n f o r m a t i o n i t s e l f w i l l be u n r e c -o g n i z a b l e i n t h e f i n a l r e s u l t s of t h e s t u d y . 2. I s o l a t e d b e h a v i o u r q u e s t i o n s : a) Would you p l e a s e t r y t o r e c a l l an i n c i d e n t , w h i c h you a c t u a l l y o b s e r v e d o r were i n v o l v e d i n , w h i c h happened i n the l a s t s e v e r a l months i n w h i c h a l i b r a r i a n a c t e d i n such a way as t o make you f e e l t h a t he/she was b e i n g p a r t i c u l a r l y e f f e c t i v e i n h i s / h e r j o b . Do not m ention who i t was but t e l l me e x a c t l y what happened t h a t made you f e e l he/she was b e i n g p a r t i c u l a r l y e f f e c t i v e . b) same as above e x c e p t i n e f f e c t i v e i s s u b s t i t u t e d f o r e f f e c t i v e . 3. I n t r o d u c t i o n t o " b e h a v i o u r p a t t e r n " q u e s t i o n s ; I t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s a number of o r d i n a r y , e v e r y -day i n c i d e n t s , w h i c h when t a k e n i n d i v i d u a l l y do not appear t o be s i g n i f i c a n t i n c o n t r i b u t i n g t o e f f e c t i v e or i n e f f e c t i v e p erformance o f t h e j o b . However, i f t h e s e i n c i d e n t s o c c u r v e r y o f t e n t h e y may become s i g n i f i c a n t when t h e i r o v e r a l l e f f e c t on performance i n t h e l o n g r u n i s o b s e r v e d . 101. Appendix C ( c o n t ' d ) " B e h a v i o u r p a t t e r n " q u e s t i o n s a) T r y t o r e c a l l an i n c i d e n t of t h i s t y p e , w h i c h i s an example o f l i b r a r i a n a c t i v i t y w h i c h i n the l o n g r u n c o n t r i b u t e s s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s w i t h w h i c h t h e l i b r a r i a n does h i s / h e r j o b . b) same as above e x c e p t i n e f f e c t i v e n e s s i s s u b s t i t u t e d f o r e f f e c t i v e n e s s . R a t i n g t h e b e h a v i o u r s a) T h i s r a t i n g s c a l e i s t o be used t o i n d i c a t e the i m p o r t a n c e of t h e b e h a v i o u r s you have mentioned, i n c o n t r i b u t i n g t o t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o r i n e f f e c t i v e n e s s of l i b r a r i a n p e r f o r m a n c e . You w i l l n o t i c e t h a t t h e r e a r e r a t i n g s c a l e s f o r t e n b e h a v i o u r s t o be r a t e d a c c o r d i n g t o t h e model s c a l e on t h e l e f t , w h i c h runs from " e x t r e m e l y e f f e c t i v e " (+4), t h r o u g h " n e u t r a l " ( o ) , t o " e x t r e m e l y i n e f f e c t i v e " (-4). b) Would you p l e a s e i n d i c a t e t h a t p o i n t on t h e s c a l e t h a t c o r r e s p o n d s t o t h e b e h a v i o u r ' s c o n t r i b u t i o n t o the e f f e c t i v e n e s s or i n e f f e c t i v e -ness w i t h w h i c h t h e l i b r a r i a n p e r f o r m e d h i s / h e r j o b . I w i l l c a l l out the b e h a v i o u r s t o you by number and you r a t e each on the s c a l e o f t h e same number. I w i l l r e mind you w h i c h b e h a v i o u r s were of the second t y p e and would you p l e a s e g i v e two r a t i n g s f o r each b e h a v i o u r o f t h i s t y p e ; t h e f i r s t r a t i n g i n d i c a t i n g t h e i m p o r t a n c e of t h e b e h a v i o u r as an i s o l a t e d i n c i d e n t and the second r a t i n g i n d i c a t i n g t h e i m p o r t a n c e of t h i s k i n d o f b e h a v i o u r r e p e a t e d o v e r a p e r i o d o f t i m e . The o b s e r v e r ' s s t a t e m e n t of aims Would you p l e a s e s t a t e i n g e n e r a l terms what, i n your o p i n i o n , a r e t h e aims and o b j e c t i v e s of t h e l i b r a r i a n ' s j o b i n the 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 L i b r a r y . APPENDIX D T h i s a p p e n d i x c o n t a i n s a copy of t h e d a t a s h e e t s on h t h e o b s e r v e r s : r a t e d t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s / i n e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f t h e b e h a v i o u r s t h e y r e p o r t e d , and w r o t e t h e i r o p i n i o n s o f t h e aims and o b j e c t i v e s o f t h e L i b r a r i a n ' s j o b i n 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 mbia L i b r a r y . APPENDIX E 103. OBSERVER 8 DATE RATE IMPORTANCE OP BEHAVIORS , EXTREMELY EFFECTIVE "exemplifies the most effective performance possible„ NEUTRAL -contributes neither to effectiveness nor ineffectiveness of performanceo EXTREMELY INEZ?FECTr\/E •'exemplifies the most ineffective performance possible* •* J Behaviors, +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3 4 J L t a 11 Please state;, in general terms,what in your opinion are the aims and objectives of the -librarians job in the U0B<,C. Library. \ APPENDIX E T h i s a p p e n d i x shows t h e MacBee K e y s o r t c a r d s on whic t h e d a t a was r e c o r d e d f o r a n a l y s i s p u r p o s e s . A p p e n d i x E - l shows an example of a MacBee K e y s o r t c a r d w i t h complete da f o r one b e h a v i o u r r e c o r d e d , and A p p e n d i x E-2 shows how t h e d a t a were r e c o r d e d on t h e c a r d s . TOP E f f e c t i v e ? Student Student No. 32 Student Behavior No. 107, LEFT SIDE Behavior Rated +3.5 > 32 31 30 29 Isolated Incident Question > •-a M o X! W 1 V 24 23 22 21 r IW-S 32 - 107 - when t o l d by some students t h a t they d i d not know how to lo o k up a book i n the c a r d catalogue, the l i b r a r i a n showed them how to use the c a r d catalogue, l o c a t i o n f i l e and indexes and taught them the l i b r a r y system.so t h a t they might b e t t e r h e l p themselves i n the f u t u r e . S 9 L 8 6 ' 0 1 11 21 U H 91 SI n e i 61 02 12 22 £2 H S2 92 IZ 82 62 0£ I t 2 £ 1 Z > L I Z V L I Z t L (___, {.' , . • 1 Z t . L L- ' . ' I 2 > £ I Z t L ; Z 1 L C r i t i c a l Requii-ement No. 13 RIGHT SIDE Aims Nos. 1 & 4 BOTTOM o APPENDIX E-2 The d a t a were r e c o r d e d on t h e c a r d s as f o l l o w s : The t y p e o f o b s e r v e r , the o b s e r v e r number, and t h e b e h a v i o u r num-ber were t y p e d onto t h e m i d d l e o f t h e c a r d . A d e s c r i p t i o n o f the b e h a v i o u r was t y p e d b e n e a t h t h i s . key: A d d i t i o n a l d a t a was punched i n t o t h e c a r d a c c o r d i n g t o the f o l l o w i n g ON THE TOP OF THE CARD - numbers 32 and 33: e f f e c t i v e o r i n e f f e c t i v e b e h a v i o u r numbers 29 t o 31: number 32 - i n e f f e c t i v e number 33 - e f f e c t i v e t he t y p e o f o b s e r v e r number 29 - f a c u l t y member number 30 - s t u d e n t number 31 - l i b r a r i a n - numbers 21 t o 28: the number a s s i g n e d t o the o b s e r v e r - numbers 9 t o 20: - numbers 7 and 8: the number of t h e b e h a v i o u r t h e t y p e o f q u e s t i o n asked t o e l i c i t t h e b e h a v i o u r number 7 - " b e h a v i o u r p a t t e r n " q u e s t i o n number 8 - " i s o l a t e d i n c i d e n t " q u e s t i o n ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE CARD -- numbers 5 t o 12: the number of t h e c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e -ment under w h i c h the b e h a v i o u r was c a t e g o r i z e d . 107. A ppendix E-2 ( c o n t ' d ) ON THE BOTTOM OF THE CARD -- numbers 25 t o 32: the aims o f the l i b r a r i a n ' s j o b as s t a t e d by t h e o b s e r v e r o f the b e h a v i o u r number 25 - aim number 1 number 26 - aim number 2 number 27 - aim number 3 number 28 - aim number 4 number 29 - aim number 5 number 30 - aim number 6 number 31 - aim number 7 number 32 - aim number 8 ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE CARD -- numbers 1 t o 8: t h e r a t i n g o f i m p o r t a n c e a s s i g n e d t o t he b e h a v i o u r by t h e o b s e r v e r i n t h e i n t e r v i e w number 1 - 0.5 r a t i n g number 2 - 1.0 r a t i n g number 3 - 1.5 r a t i n g number 4 - 2.0 r a t i n g number 5 - 2.5 r a t i n g number 6 - 3.0 r a t i n g number 7 - 3.5 r a t i n g number 8 - 4 . 0 r a t i n g 108. APPENDIX F T h i s a p p e n d i x shows t h e o r i g i n s o f the c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t s : each c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t i s broken down i n t o the k i n d s o f b e h a v i o u r s from w h i c h i t was formed th e numbers o f b e h a v i o u r s of e a c h . k i n d , t h a t were r e p o r t e d by each o b s e r v e r group a r e i n d i c a t e d t h e numbers of e f f e c t i v e and i n e f f e c t i v e b e h a v i o u r s of each k i n d , t h a t - w e r e r e p o r t e d by each o b s e r v e r group a r e shown APPENDIX F A r e a A: S e r v i c e t o L i b r a r y User C.R. #1: Expends e f f o r t w i l l i n g l y t o see t h a t u s e r s a r e a s s i s t e d L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y . T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) Goes t o c o n s i d e r a b l e t r o u b l e and spends time n e c e s s a r y t o a s s i s t u s e r s . 1 3 4 10 3 13 1 2 3 12 8 20 b) A c t s i n manner t h a t shows c o n c e r n f o r u s e r s p r o b l e m and a w i l l i n g n e s s t o h e l p . 0 1 1 1 2 3 0 2 2 1 5 6 c) Makes s e l f a v a i l a b l e t o a s s i s t us e-rs.. 2 1 3 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 2 4 T o t a l 3 5 8 11 6 17 1 4 5 15 15 30 A r e a A: C.R. #2: P e r s i s t s i n t r y i n g t o a s s i s t u s e r s L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) C o n t i n u e s t r y i n g t o a s s i s t u s e r u n t i l s o l u t i o n t o p r o b l e m i s found. 4 0 4 6 3 9 0 0 0 10 3 13 b) T r i e s v a r i o u s approaches t o p r o b l e m i n e f f o r t t o a s s i s t u s e r s . 4 0 4 2 0 2 0 0 0 6 0 6 T o t a l 8 0 8 8 3 11 0 0 0 16 3 • 19 A r e a A: C.R. #3: F o l l o w s t h r o u g h on r e q u e s t s and f u l f i l l s commitments t o u s e r s L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) Informs u s e r s when books., and m a t e r i a l o r d e r e d a r e not a v a i l a b l e 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 3 3 0 4 4 b) P e r f o r m s t a s k s and p r o v i d e s m a t e r i a l t h a t has been p r o m i s e d . 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 T o t a l 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 3 0 5 5 A r e a A: C.R. #4: D i r e c t s and g u i d e s u s e r s t o m a t e r i a l t h e y a r e s e e k i n g a) Gets i n f o r m a t i o n from c a r d c a t a -l o g u e o r r e f e r e n c e f i l e s t o h e l p u s e r s f i n d t he m a t e r i a l t h e y a r e s e e k i n g . b) Guides u s e r s t o t h e s e c t i o n o f t h e l i b r a r y where they can f i n d t h e m a t e r i a l t h e y a r e s e e k i n g . T o t a l L i b r a r i a n s + Sum St u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + Sum + Sum + A r e a A: C.R. #5.: F i n d s m a t e r i a l h e l p f u l t o u s e r r a t h e r than j u s t e x p l a i n i n g where i t can be found L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) F i n d s m a t e r i a l o r i n f o r m a t i o n needed by u s e r . 1 0 1 10 0 10 1 0 1 12 0 12 b) Gets m a t e r i a l from p l a c e s i n a c -c e s s i b l e t o u s e r . 1 0 1 6 0 6 0 0 0 7 0 7 c) Does not make u s e r fend f o r him-s e l f when h e l p c o u l d be e a s i l y g i v e n . 1 0 1 0 2 2 0 0 0 1 2 3 T o t a l 3 0 3 16 2 18 1 0 1 20 2 22 A r e a A: C.R. #6: G i v e s a s s i s t a n c e t o u s e r p r o m p t l y r a t h e r t h a n p u t t i n g i t o f f u n t i l l a t e r L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) T r a c e s books i m m e d i a t e l y r a t h e r t h a n a s k i n g u s e r t o l o o k a g a i n or come back l a t e r . 2 0 2 0 3 3 0 1 1 2 4 6 b) A t t e m p t s t o f i n d m a t e r i a l w i t h r e f e r e n c e i n f o r m a t i o n on hand r a t h e r t h a n a s k i n g u s e r t o get more i n f o r m a t i o n . 1 1 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 2 3 c) P r o c e s s e s books c a l l e d i n i m m e d i a t e l y so t h a t u s e r can t a k e book out a g a i n . 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 T o t a l 3 1 4 1 4 5 0 1 1 4 6 10 A r e a A: C.R. #7: Responds P r o m p t l y t o u s e r w a i t i n g f o r s e r v i c e L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) Does not spend t i m e t a l k i n g t o f r i e n d s w h i l e p e o p l e a r e w a i t i n g f o r s e r v i c e . 0 3 3 0 4 4 0 2 2 0 9 9 b) Acknowledges p e r s o n s w a i t i n g f o r s e r v i c e and i s prompt i n o f f e r i n g a s s i s t a n c e . 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 2 2 1 3 4 T o t a l 0 3 3 1 5 6 0 4 4 1 12 13 A r e a A: C.R. #8: I n t e r v e n e s on b e h a l f o f u s e r t o f a c i l i t a t e e f f e c t i v e use o f l i b r a r y L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) A t t e m p t s t o make books t h a t a r e i n p r e - b i n d a v a i l a b l e t o u s e r s . 2 0 2 1 0 1 0 1 1 3 1 4 b) Speeds up p r o c e s s i n g o f books t h a t a r e i n h i g h demand so t h a t t h e y a r e made a v a i l a b l e t o u s e r s q u i c k l y . 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 2 2 1 3 c) A r r a n g e s f o r u s e r s t o have space t o work i n l i b r a r y . 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 2 0 2 d) A t t e m p t s t o get books, on i n d e f i n i t e l o a n t o f a c u l t y mem-b e r s , and make them a v a i l a b l e t o u s e r s who need them. 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 2 e) A r r a n g e s meetings between u s e r s and l i b r a r y s t a f f members i n s p e c i a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s . 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 T o t a l 3 0 3 3 1 4 3 2 5 9 3 12 A r e a A: C.R. #9: V o l u n t e e r s any a s s i s t a n c e thought t o be h e l p f u l t o u s e r s L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) Suggest a d d i t i o n a l s o u r c e s of i n f o r m a t i o n thought h e l p f u l t o u s e r s . 4 0 4 10 0 10 2 0 2 16 0 b) V o l u n t e e r s a s s i s t a n c e when u s e r s seem t o be h a v i n g t r o u b l e . 4 0 4 0 0 0 3 0 ' 3 7 0 7 c) O f f e r s a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n beyond t h a t s p e c i f i c a l l y r e q u e s t e d . 0 0 0 6 0 6 0 1 1 6 1 7 T o t a l 8 0 8 16 0 16 5 1 6 29 1 30 A r e a A: C.R. #10: G i v e s c o r r e c t i n f o r m a t i o n based on sound knowledge. L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + -• Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) Has s u f f i c i e n t knowledge of l i b r a r y s e r v i c e s , p r o c e d u r e s and h o l d i n g s t o be a b l e t o a s s i s t and answer questions.. 7 1 8 6 5 11 0 2 2 13 8 21 b) G i v e s c o r r e c t i n f o r m a t i o n and a d v i c e . 0 6 6 1 1 2 0 1 1 1 8 9 T o t a l 7 7 14 7 6 13 0 3 3 14 16 30 A r e a A: C.R. #11: O b t a i n s r e q u i r e d i n f o r m a t i o n from u s e r , r e g a r d i n g h i s needs, b e f o r e a c t i n g L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - • Sum a) Takes t i m e t o f i n d out what t h e u s e r r e a l l y wants b e f o r e attemp-t i n g t o a c t on the r e q u e s t . 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 2 b) Asks p r o b i n g and l e a d i n g q u e s t i o n s i n an attempt t o c l a r i f y a vague r e q u e s t . 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 T o t a l 2 1 3 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 2 4 A r e a A: C.R. #12: R e f e r s q u e r i e s t o more q u a l i f i e d p e r s on when u n a b l e t o g i v e s a t i s f a c t o r y i n f o r m a t i o n L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) R e f e r s q u e s t i o n t h a t she i s una b l e t o answer t o more e x p e r i e n c e d staff'member. 4 3 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 3 7 b) R e f e r s q u e s t i o n s t o department of l i b r a r y b e s t q u a l i f i e d t o g i v e c o r r e c t answer when she can not answer h e r s e l f 2 0 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 ' 3 0 3 T o t a l 6 3 9 1 0 1 0 0 0 7 3 10 A r e a A: C.R. #13: I n s t r u c t s u s e r s on how t o use l i b r a r y f a c i l i t i e s L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) Teaches u s e r s how t o f i n d r e f e r e n c e m a t e r i a l by u s i n g c a r d c a t a l o g u e , c r o s s r e f e r e n c e f i l e s , l o c a t i o n f i l e s , e t c . 2 0 2 9 0 9 3 1 4 14 1 15 b) G i v e s u s e r s t o u r s of the l i b r a r y and e x p l a i n s l i b r a r y s e r v i c e s and o p e r a t i o n . 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 2 c) E x p l a i n s how t o use l i b r a r y equipment and f a c i l i t i e s 0 0 0 2 0 2 1 0 1 3 0 3 T o t a l 3 0 3 12 0 12 4 1 5 19 1 20 A r e a A: C.R. #14: A c t s i n p l e a s a n t manner t o u s e r s a) I s t o l e r a n t towards i n a n e q u e s t i o n s and p e t t y m i s t a k e s and does not r i d i c u l e o r be-l i t t l e u s e r s f o r t h e i r l a c k o f knowledge of t h e l i b r a r y . b) I s f r i e n d l y and warm t o u s e r s and s y m p a t h e t i c t o t h e i r p r o b l e m s . c) G i v e s s e r v i c e i n a manner t h a t i n d i c a t e s i n t e r e s t i n u s e r s 1 p r o b l e m s . T o t a l L i b r a r i a n s + Sum 14 St u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + 12 Sum + Sum + 15 12 21 A r e a B: Enforcement of L i b r a r y P o l i c i e s C.R. #15: A d m i n i s t e r s l i b r a r y r e g u l a t i o n s and p o l i c i e s w i t h a p p r o p r i a t e f l e x i b i l i t y L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) Takes c i r c u m s t a n c e s i n t o c o n s i - ' d e r a t i o n i n a d m i n i s t e r i n g book b o r r o w i n g r u l e s . 0 1 1 7 4 11 5 1 6 12 6 18 b) R e c o g n i z e s s i t u a t i o n s where u s u a l r u l e s do not a p p l y and does not demand l i b r a r y c a r d , forms, e t c . when t h e s e a r e not n e c e s s a r y . 0 0 0 9 0 9 0 1 1 9 1 10 c) A l l o w s a c c e s s t o l i b r a r y f a c i -l i t i e s not open t o p u b l i c when s i t u a t i o n w a r r a n t s . 0 0 0 2 1 3 1 2 3 3 3 6 d) Takes s p e c i a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s i n t o a c count when a d m i n i s t e r i n g f i n e s . 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 2 T o t a l 0 2 2 18 6 24 6 4 10 24 12 36 A r e a B: C.R. #16: E n f o r c e s l i b r a r y r u l e s w i t h f i r m n e s s when r e q u i r e d . L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + Sum a) Checks f o r p o s s i b l e r u l e v i o l a t i o n s and does not i g n o r e t h o s e d e t e c t e d . 1 2 3 4 4 8 3 0 3 8 6 14 b) Stops p e r s o n s who are making t o o much n o i s e and a r e d i s t u r b i n g t h o s e s t u d y i n g . 0 0 0 4 3 7 0 0 0 4 3 7 T o t a l 1 2 3 8 7 15 3 0 3 12 9 21 A r e a C: C.R. #17: D e a l s w i t h e r r o r s , i n f r a c t i o n s o r c o m p l a i n t s i n a p l e a s a n t and d i p l o m a t i c manner. L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) G i v e s l o g i c a l e x p l a n a t i o n f o r a c t i o n t a k e n r a t h e r t h a n engag-i n g i n argument w i t h u s e r over i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f r u l e s . 2 3 5 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 4 6 b) D e a l s w i t h i n f r a c t i o n s i n a d i p l o m a t i c , p Leas ant manner. 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 3 3 T o t a l 2 3 5 0 4 4 0 0 0 2 7 9 A r e a C: C.R. #18: R e l a t e d t o P u b l i c i n c o r r e c t and t a c t f u l manner L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - • Sum a) Answers t e l e p h o n e s i n c o r r e c t manner s t a t i n g name and d e p a r t -ment . 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 b)'Words l e t t e r s and p u b l i c a t i o n s i n t a c t f u l manner. 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 c) Keeps s e l f w e l l groomed and s u i t a b l y d r e s s e d . 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 2 2 T o t a l 1 3 4 0 2 2 0 0 0 1 5 6 A r e a C: C.R. #19: A v o i d s making e x c e s s i v e n o i s e i n s t u d y a r e a s o f l i b r a r y L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) Speaks s o f t l y i n s t u d y areas so as not t o d i s t u r b t h o s e s t u d y i n g . 0 0 0 0 7 7 0 0 0 0 7 7 b) Does not make e x c e s s i v e n o i s e when w a l k i n g t h r o u g h s t a c k s and s t u d y a r e a s . 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 2 2 T o t a l 0 0 0 0 9 9 0 0 0 0 9 9 A r e a D: P e r f o r m a n c e of j o b t a s k s C.R. #20: P l a n s e f f e c t i v e l y b e f o r e i n i t i a t i n g a c t i o n L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) P l a n s and o r g a n i z e s work so t h a t g o a l s can be a c h i e v e d most e f f i c i e n t l y . 2 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 1 3 1 4 b) P l a n s changes e f f e c t i v e l y so th e y do not have t o be changed a g a i n soon a f t e r b e i n g put i n t o e f f e c t . 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 c ) P l a n s changes so as t o d i s r u p t l i b r a r y s e r v i c e as l i t t l e as p o s s i b l e w h i l e b e i n g put i n t o e f f e c t . 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 T o t a l 2 4 6 0 0 0 1 0 1 3 4 7 A r e a D: C.R. #21: Takes i n i t i a t i v e t o improve n o t i c e d i n e f f i c i e n c i e s o f l i b r a r y L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) Makes l i b r a r y h o l d i n g s more a c c e s s i b l e t o u s e r s by r e o r g a n i -z i n g s t o r a g e , x e r o x i n g a r t i c l e s i n g r e a t demand, r e p l a c i n g m i s s i n g books, and p r o v i d i n g ade-quate r e c o r d s . 5 1 6 1 0 1 1 0 1 7 1 8 b) Suggests and i n s t i t u t e s more e f f i c i e n t p r o c e d u r e s . 4 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 1 5 0 5 c) C o m p i l e s b i b l i o g r a p h i e s i n areas where needed. 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 2 T o t a l 10 1 11 2 0 2 2 0 2 14 1 15 A r e a D: C.R. #22: C a r r i e s out work a s s i g n m e n t s a l e r t l y and i n t e l l i g e n t l y so t h a t t h i n g s go sm o o t h l y and e f f i c i e n t l y . L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) Works a l e r t l y , and does j o b . t h o r o u g h l y so t h a t no e r r o r s a r e made and no d i f f i c u l t i e s a r i s e l a t e r on as a r e s u l t o f i n c o m p l e t e work. 0 10 10 2 11 13 0 5 5 2 26 28 b) R e l e a s e s t u r n s t i l e gate a t checkout c o u n t e r at p r o p e r t i m e . 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 3 3 c) Uses s h o r t c u t s when a v a i l a b l e and a p p r o p r i a t e . 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 T o t a l 1 10 11 2 14 16 0 5 5 3 29 32 A r e a D: C.R. #23: Works a l e r t l y so as t o n o t i c e and c o r r e c t e r r o r s L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + Sum + - Sum No s u b d i v i s i o n s : e r r o r s were i n c a r d c a t a l o g u e , m a i l a d d r e s s and f i l i n g . 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 T o t a l 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 A r e a D: C.R. #24: C a r r i e s out work assignments e f f i c i e n t l y as a r e s u l t o f f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h r o u t i n e s and p r o c e d u r e s L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) I s f a m i l i a r w i t h the p r o c e d u r e s and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s o f her department and p e r t i n e n t r u l e s and r e g u l a t i o n s . 3 3 6 0 2 2 0 0 0 3 5 8 b) Knows what i s happening i n o t h e r departments of t h e l i b r a r y . 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 T o t a l 4 3 7 0 2 2 0 0 0 4 5 9 A r e a D: C i R . #25: Works h a r d and c o n s c i e n t i o u s l y so as t o produce good work L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) Works d i l i g e n t l y at t a s k . a s s i g n e d and t a k e s an i n t e r e s t i n s e e i n g t h a t i t i s done w e l l , and on t i m e . 3 0 3 1 0 1 4 1 5 8 1 9 b) Makes s e l f a v a i l a b l e f o r work at the t i m e most needed. 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 c) Works h a r d d u r i n g w o r k i n g hours not t a k i n g time o f f t o waste t i m e or f o o l around. 5 0 5 2 0 2 0 0 0 7 0 7 T o t a l 9 1 10 3 0 3 4 1 5 16 2 18 A r e a D: C.R. #26: Takes s t e p s t o see t h a t t h e most u s e f u l books a r e pu r c h a s e d by t h e l i b r a r y L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) C o n t a c t s f a c u l t y members f o r t h e i r o p i n i o n s o f u s e f u l books t o o r d e r . 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 6 0 6 b) Informs f a c u l t y members of books b e i n g p u b l i s h e d and books on hand i n l i b r a r y . 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 4 0 4 T o t a l 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 10 10 0 10 A r e a D: C.R. #27: C a t a l o g u e s books f o r maximum u s e f u l n e s s L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum No sub c a t e g o r i e s 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 2 2 1 3 4 T o t a l 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 2 2 1 3 4 A r e a D: C.R. #28: F o l l o w s t h r o u g h on work s t a r t e d so as t o c o m p l e t e i t s u c c e s s f u l l y L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) F o l l o w s t h r o u g h on work s t a r t e d t o see t h a t i t i s completed on t ime. 1 1 2 0 0 0 2 1 3 3 2 5 b) Does not p r o c r a s t i n a t e and put t h i n g s o f f u n t i l l a t e r . 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 1 2 3 c) P r o c e s s e s books r e c a l l e d f o r p r o c e s s i n g q u i c k l y , r e t u r n s them as soon as p o s s i b l e . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 2 T o t a l 1 2 3 0 0 0 3 4 7 4 6 10 A r e a D: C.R. #29: Seeks and uses a d v i c e from o t h e r s L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) A c c e p t s and i n v e s t i g a t e s sug-g e s t i o n s from u s e r s . 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 2 2 1 3 b) Seeks a d v i c e from more know-l e d g e a b l e p e r s o n when r e q u i r e d . 0 2 2 0 0 0 1 2 3 1 4 5 T o t a l 0 2 2 1 0 1 2 3 5 3 5 8 A r e a E: S u p e r v i s i o n C.R. #30: S u p e r v i s e s i n a f a i r , h onest and d e m o c r a t i c manner L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) Does not Let p e r s o n a l b i a s i n f L u e n c e h i s e v a l u a t i o n o f h i s s t a f f members or s e l e c t i o n f o r t r a i n i n g o r p r o m o t i o n . 1 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 4 b) Does not s u p e r v i s e too c l o s e l y and does not have too many s t r i c t r u l e s and r e g u l a t i o n s about t a l k i n g , c o f f e e break t i m e s j d r e s s , e t c . 2 4 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 6 c) Stands b e h i n d h i s s t a f f members, does not b e t r a y t h e i r c o n f i d e n c e or c r i t i c i z e them u n j u s t l y . 1 5 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 6 T o t a l 4 12 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 12 16 A r e a E: C.R. #31: I n s t r u c t s and a s s i s t s s t a f f members e f f e c t i v e l y L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) Answers q u e s t i o n s asked by s t a f f members and i n s t r u c t s them on e f f e c t i v e j o b performance 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 b) E x p l a i n s new t e c h n i q u e s and equipment t o s t a f f members. 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 c) G i v e s s t a f f members work w h i c h e n a b l e s them t o g a i n knowledge and use t h e i r c a p a b i l i t i e s . 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 T o t a l 5 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 2 7 A r e a E: C.R. #32: Communicates e f f e c t i v e l y w i t h s u b o r d i n a t e s L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum • + - Sum + - Sum a) D i s c u s s e s work problems and , changes f r e e l y w i t h s t a f f . 1 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 -b) Makes s e l f a v a i l a b l e f o r a d v i c e o r a s s i s t a n c e when needed. 1 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 1 3 c) N o t i f i e s o t h e r s t a f f members o f happenings i m p o r t a n t t o t h e i r j o b s . 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 T o t a l 2 5 7 0 0 0 1 0 1 3 5 8 A r e a E: C.R. #33: I s k i n d and f r i e n d l y t o s u b o r d i n a t e s L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) A c t s i n warm and f r i e n d l y manner t o s u b o r d i n a t e s . 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 b) I s s y m p a t h e t i c t o s t a f f members 1 problems and i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g . 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 T o t a l 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 A r e a E: C.R. #34: O r g a n i z e s work t o use s u b o r d i n a t e s e f f e c t i v e l y L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) D i v i d e s and a l l o c a t e s r e s p o n s i -b i l i t y and work l o a d among s t a f f members e f f e c t i v e l y . 1 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 b) A l l o c a t e s some work t o me e t i n g f u t u r e l i b r a r y needs as w e l l as immediate needs 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 T o t a l 2 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 4 A r e a E: C.R. #35: D i s c i p l i n e s s t a f f members e f f e c t i v e l y L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l a) + - Sum + - Sum + Sum + - Sum Encourages s t a f f members who ar e not d o i n g good work t o do b e t t e r . 2 1 3 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 2 4 b) Does not d i s c i p l i n e s t a f f mem-be r s i n a manner t h a t i s so sweet and n i c e t h a t i t i s i n e f f e c t i v e . 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 T o t a l 2 2 4 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 3 5 A r e a F: I n t r a - s t a f f R e l a t i o n s C.R. #36: Communicates e f f e c t i v e l y w i t h o t h e r departments L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum No sub c a t e g o r i e s 3 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 1 4 0 4 T o t a l 3 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 1 4 0 4 A r e a F: C.R. #37: I n t e r a c t s w i t h o t h e r s t a f f members i n a c o n s i d e r a t e manner L i b r a r i a n s S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y T o t a l + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum + - Sum a) C o o p e r a t e s w i t h s t a f f members from o t h e r departments i n s o l v i n g problems 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 2 b) Does own s h a r e of work and p u t s out e x t r a e f f o r t t o a s s i s t f e l l o w w o r k e r s . 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 c) I s p l e a s a n t and h e l p f u l , not rude and u n k i n d t o f e l l o w s t a f f members 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 4 4 T o t a l 1 6 7 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 7 9 APPENDIX G T h i s a p p e n d i x shows t h e r a t i n g s h e e t s and t h e l e t t e r of i n s t r u c t i o n g i v e n t o t e n s e n i o r l i b r a r i a n s f o r t h e i r r a t i n g s o f t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f each o f t h e c r i t i c a l r e q u i r e m e n t s . APPENDIX G 135. March 1966 D u r i n g t h e p a s t y e a r we have been c o l l e c t i n g d a t a f o r a s t u d y of the L i b r a r i a n ' s j o b i n t h e U.B.C. L i b r a r y . The a n a l y s i s o f t h i s d a t a has r e s u l t e d i n t h e f o r m u l a t i o n o f "The C r i t i c a l R e q u i r e m e n t s o f the L i b r a r i a n ' s J o b i n the U.B.C. L i b r a r y . " On t h e f o l l o w i n g pages t h e s e r e q u i r e m e n t s a r e l i s t e d a l o n g w i t h a few b e h a v i o u r s t o b e t t e r d e s c r i b e each. We would a p p r e c i a t e your c o o p e r a t i o n i n h e l p i n g us t o d e t e r m i n e t h e r e l a t i v e i m p o r t a n c e o f each of t h e s e r e q u i r e m e n t s . Next t o each r e q u i r e m e n t t h e r e i s a s q u a r e . Would you p l e a s e p l a c e i n t h e sq u a r e a number from 1 ( o f l i t t l e i m p o r t a n c e ) t o 10 ( a b s o l u t e l y e s s e n t i a l ) , a c c o r d i n g t o t h e i m p o r t a n c e you a s s i g n t o t h e r e q u i r e m e n t . i . e . I f you put 1 i n t h e sq u a r e t h i s w i l l be t a k e n t o mean t h a t you f e e l t h i s i s not a v e r y i m p o r t a n t r e q u i r e m e n t f o r l i b r a r i a n s . - I f you put 3 i n t h e square t h i s w i l l be t a k e n t o mean t h a t you f e e l i t i s f a i r l y i m p o r t a n t (more i m p o r t a n t than t h o s e you r a t e d 1 and n o t as i m p o r t a n t as t h o s e you r a t e d 5 ) . - I f you put 10 i n t h e sq u a r e t h i s w i l l i n d i c a t e t o us t h a t you f e e l t h a t t h i s r e q u i r e m e n t i s a b s o l u t e l y e s s e n t i a l f o r a U.B.C. L i b r a r i a n . Thank you f o r your c o o p e r a t i o n . APPENDIX G ( c o n t ' d ) 136. C r i t i c a l R e q u i r e m e n t s o f L i b r a r i a n s i n t h e U.B.C. L i b r a r y A r e a A: S e r v i c e t o L i b r a r y User 1. Expends e f f o r t w i l l i n g l y t o see t h a t u s e r s a r e a s s i s t e d . spends t i m e h e l p i n g u s e r , goes t o c o n s i d e r a b l e t r o u b l e t o meet r e q u e s t s o f u s e r s , r e c o g n i z e s t h e s e r v i c e a s p e c t of j o b , p u t s f o r t h e x t r a e f f o r t when r e q u i r e d . 2. P e r s i s t s i n t r y i n g t o a s s i s t u s e r s . c o n t i n u e s s e a r c h i n g u n t i l m a t e r i a l i s found, t r i e s v a r i o u s approaches t o pro b l e m u n t i l s a t i s f a c t o r y answer i s f ound, does not g i v e up e a s i l y i n f a c e o f d i f f i c u l t y . 3. F o l l o w s t h r o u g h on r e q u e s t s and f u l f i l l s commitments t o u s e r s . i n f o r m s u s e r s when books r e q u e s t e d a r e not a v a i l a b l e , p e r f o r m s t a s k s and p r o v i d e s m a t e r i a l t h a t has been p r o m i s e d . 4. D i r e c t s and g u i d e s u s e r s t o m a t e r i a l t h e y a r e s e e k i n g . d i r e c t s u s e r s t o a p p r o p r i a t e s h e l v e s and r e f e r e n c e s , t a k e s u s e r t o a p p r o p r i a t e s e c t i o n o f l i b r a r y , goes t h r o u g h c a r d c a t a l o g u e w i t h u s e r t o f i n d l o c a t i o n o f r e f e r e n c e m a t e r i a l . 5. F i n d s m a t e r i a l h e l p f u l t o u s e r r a t h e r t h a n j u s t e x p l a i n i n g where i t can be fo u n d . g a t h e r s i n f o r m a t i o n f o r u s e r s , l o o k s f o r and f i n d s m a t e r i a l i n p l a c e s i n a c c e s s i b l e t o u s e r , does not make u s e r s e a r c h by h i m s e l f . 6. G i v e s a s s i s t a n c e t o u s e r p r o m p t l y r a t h e r t h a n p u t t i n g i t o f f u n t i l l a t e r . has books t r a c e d i m m e d i a t e l y when p o s s i b l e , t r i e s t o f i n d r e f e r e n c e s even though i n f o r m a t i o n i n c o m p l e t e , does not use d e l a y i n g t a c t i c s . 7. Responds p r o m p t l y t o u s e r s w a i t i n g f o r s e r v i c e . pays a t t e n t i o n t o s e r v i c e c o u n t e r , does not i g n o r e t h o s e a w a i t i n g s e r v i c e . APPENDIX G ( c o n t ' d ) - 2 -137. 8. I n t e r v e n e s on b e h a l f o f u s e r t o f a c i l i t a t e e f f e c t i v e use o f l i b r a r y . a t t e m p t s t o o b t a i n books from f a c u l t y members f o r s t u d e n t s , g e t s books from b i n d e r y when p o s s i b l e , r u s h e s books i n g r e a t demand i n t o c i r c u l a t i o n , makes s p e c i a l arrangements when n e c e s s a r y . 9. V o l u n t e e r s any a s s i s t a n c e thought t o be h e l p f u l t o u s e r s . s u g g e s t s a d d i t i o n a l r e f e r e n c e s , i n f o r m s f a c u l t y about new p u b l i c a t i o n s , s u g g e s t s a l t e r n a t i v e approaches t o problems, g i v e s i n f o r m a t i o n about r e g u l a t i o n s . 10. G i v e s c o r r e c t i n f o r m a t i o n based on sound knowledge. draws on knowledge and e x p e r i e n c e t o be o f a s s i s t a n c e , g i v e s s u f f i c i e n t i n f o r m a t i o n t o be h e l p f u l , does not g i v e wrong i n f o r m a t i o n . 11. O b t a i n s r e q u i r e d i n f o r m a t i o n from u s e r , r e g a r d i n g h i s needs, b e f o r e a c t i n g . f i n d s out e x a c t l y what p e r s o n wants, asks p r o b i n g q u e s t i o n s . 12. R e f e r s q u e r i e s t o more q u a l i f i e d p e r s o n when u n a b l e t o g i v e s a t i s f a c t o r y i n f o r m a t i o n . s u g g e s t s a l t e r n a t i v e s o u r c e s o f i n f o r m a t i o n , c o n t a c t s o t h e r s t a f f members f o r a s s i s t a n c e , r e c o g n i z e s l i m i -t a t i o n s i n own knowledge. 13. I n s t r u c t s u s e r s on how t o use l i b r a r y f a c i l i t i e s . e x p l a i n s how t o f i n d r e f e r e n c e m a t e r i a l , t e a c h e s u s e r t o use l i b r a r y f a c i l i t i e s , e x p l a i n s l i b r a r y s e r v i c e s . 14. A c t s i n a p l e a s a n t and i n t e r e s t e d manner t o u s e r s . shows i n t e r e s t i n s t u d e n t s ' p r o b l e m s , answers s t u p i d q u e s t i o n s i n t o l e r a n t manner, a c t s i n f r i e n d l y manner toward u s e r s , g i v e s s e r v i c e i n a way t h a t shows she i s i n t e r e s t e d . A r e a B: Enforcement o f L i b r a r y P o l i c i e s 15. A d m i n i s t e r s l i b r a r y r e g u l a t i o n s and p o l i c i e s w i t h a p p r o p r i a t e f l e x i b i l i t y . a l l o w s a c c e s s t o r e s t r i c t e d a r e a s when s i t u a t i o n w a r r a n t s , a l l o w s books t o be t a k e n out f o r l o n g e r p e r i o d s o f time under s p e c i a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s , t a k e s c i r c u m s t a n c e s i n t o account when a d m i n i s t e r i n g f i n e s , r e c o g n i z e s s i t u a t i o n s when u s u a l r o u t i n e s do not a p p l y . APPENDIX G ( c o n t ' d ) - 3 -16. E n f o r c e s l i b r a r y r u l e s w i t h f i r m n e s s when r e q u i r e d . checks l i b r a r y c a r d s when c h e c k i n g out books, c o n f i s c a t e s f o r g e d l i b r a r y c a r d s , i n s p e c t s books g o i n g out of s t a c k s , s t o p s p e r s o n s making too much n o i s e , p r e v e n t s u n l a w f u l smoking i n l i b r a r y , a c c e p t s t h e s e s o n l y i f t h e y meet l i b r a r y s t a n d a r d s . A r e a C: P u b l i c R e l a t i o n s 17. D e a l s w i t h e r r o r s , i n f r a c t i o n s or c o m p l a i n t s i n a p l e a s a n t and d i p l o m a t i c manner. does not become i n v o l v e d i n arguments w i t h u s e r s o v e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f r u l e s , g i v e s l o g i c a l e x p l a n a t i o n f o r a c t i o n t a k e n . 18. R e l a t e s t o p u b l i c i n c o r r e c t and t a c t f u l manner. answers t e l e p h o n e s i n c o r r e c t manner s t a t i n g name and department, words l e t t e r s and p u b l i c a t i o n s i n t a c t f u l manner, i s w e l l groomed and s u i t a b l y d r e s s e d . 19. A v o i d s making e x c e s s i v e n o i s e i n s t u d y a r e a s o f l i b r a r y . speaks s o f t l y so t h o s e s t u d y i n g a r e not d i s t u r b e d , does not w a l k w i t h heavy f o o t s t e p s . A r e a D: P e r f o r m a n c e of J o b Tasks 20. P l a n s e f f e c t i v e l y b e f o r e i n i t i a t i n g a c t i o n . p l a n s p o l i c y changes so t h a t t h e y do not have t o be changed a g a i n soon a f t e r b e i n g put i n t o e f f e c t , p l a n s changes so as t o d i s r u p t l i b r a r y s e r v i c e as l i t t l e as p o s s i b l e , o r g a n i z e s work so as t o be most e f f i c i e n t . 21. Takes i n i t i a t i v e t o improve n o t i c e d i n e f f i c i e n c i e s o f l i b r a r y . i n s t i t u t e s new program of b u y i n g w h i c h d e c r e a s e s d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n and c o s t , t a k e s a c t i o n t o r e p l a c e m i s s i n g books, a r r a n g e s t o have c o p i e s made of a r t i c l e s t h a t a r e i n g r e a t demand, c o m p i l e s b i b l i o g r a p h y i n a r e a where i t i s needed, t a k e s s t e p s t o see t h a t e r r o r s a r e not r e p e a t e d 22. C a r r i e s out work a s s i g n m e n t s a l e r t l y and i n t e l l i g e n t l y so t h a t t h i n g s go s m o o t h l y and e f f i c i e n t l y . p u t s c o r r e c t a d d r e s s on c o r r e s p o n d e n c e , pays a t t e n t i o n t o i n s t r u c t i o n s , uses e f f i c i e n t s h o r t - c u t s where p o s s i b l e , r e s h e l v e s books c o r r e c t l y , o p e r a t e s t u r n s t i l e s e f f i c i e n t l y APPENDIX G ( c o n t ' d ) - 4 -23. Works a l e r t l y so as t o n o t i c e and c o r r e c t e r r o r s . n o t i c e s and c o r r e c t s e r r o r s i n a d d r e s s i n g , c a t a l o g i n g , e t c . 24. C a r r i e s out work a s s i g n m e n t s e f f i c i e n t l y as a r e s u l t o f f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h r o u t i n e s and p r o c e d u r e s . knows book d e a l e r s and k i n d s o f books t h e y c a r r y , knows what k i n d of m a t e r i a l h e r department h a n d l e s and what s h o u l d go t o a n o t h e r department, i s aware o f l i b r a r y p o l i c i e s and r e a s o n s f o r them. 25. Works h a r d and c o n s c i e n t i o u s l y so as t o produce good work. t a k e s an i n t e r e s t i n s e e i n g t h a t j o b i s done w e l l , gets t o work on t i m e , works e x t r a t i m e so as t o meet d e a d l i n e , does not f o o l around on the j o b . 26. Takes s t e p s t o see t h a t the most u s e f u l books a r e p u r c h a s e d by t h e l i b r a r y . c o n t a c t s f a c u l t y members about w h i c h books would be most u s e f u l , b r i n g s new p u b l i c a t i o n s t o a t t e n t i o n o f f a c u l t y members, f a c i l i t a t e s o r d e r i n g of books by l i s t i n g p u b l i c a t i o n s a v a i l a b l e and t h o s e w h i c h the l i b r a r y a l r e a d y has. 27. C a t a l o g u e s books f o r maximum u s e f u l n e s s . a s s i g n s books t o department o r a r e a of s t a c k s where i t w i l l be most e f f e c t i v e l y used, does not a p p l y c a t a l o g i n g g u i d e too r i g i d l y . 28. F o l l o w s t h r o u g h on work s t a r t e d so as t o c o m p l e t e i t s u c c e s s f u l l y . does not p r o c r a s t i n a t e , p e r s i s t s i n t r y i n g t o meet dead-l i n e s , f o l l o w s up r e q u e s t s and l e a d s . 29. Seeks and uses a d v i c e from o t h e r s . a c c e p t s and i n v e s t i g a t e s s u g g e s t i o n s from u s e r s , asks a d v i c e from more k n o w l e d g e a b l e p e r s o n when r e q u i r e d . A r e a E: S u p e r v i s i o n 30. S u p e r v i s e s i n a f a i r , h o n est and d e m o c r a t i c manner. rewards t h o s e s t a f f members d o i n g good work, backs up s t a f f members i n t h e i r a t t e m p t s t o e n f o r c e l i b r a r y p o l i c i e s does not l e t p e r s o n a l a t t i t u d e s i n f l u e n c e s u p e r v i s o r y d e c i s i o n s , i s not .overly c r i t i c a l . APPENDIX G ( c o n t ' d ) - 5 -31. I n s t r u c t s and a s s i s t s s t a f f members e f f e c t i v e l y . h e l p s s t a f f members d e v e l o p p o t e n t i a l , t e a c h e s s t a f f about new work or new methods. 32. Communicates e f f e c t i v e l y w i t h s u b o r d i n a t e s . l e a v e s word where he can be r e a c h e d i f needed, encourages q u e s t i o n s from s t a f f , d i s c u s s e s i m p o r t a n t m a t t e r s w i t h s t a f f . 33. I s k i n d and f r i e n d l y t o s u b o r d i n a t e s . d i s c u s s e s problems w i t h s t a f f members and t r i e s t o h e l p , e s t a b l i s h e s a f r i e n d l y atmosphere, o f f e r s a s s i s t a n c e t o s t a f f members when t h e y need i t . 34. O r g a n i z e s work t o use s u b o r d i n a t e s e f f e c t i v e l y . - r e c o g n i z e s f u t u r e needs o f l i b r a r y and works toward m e e t i n g t h e s e , d e l e g a t e s a u t h o r i t y and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y e f f e c t i v e l y , s c h e d u l e s work e f f e c t i v e l y . 35. D i s c i p l i n e s s t a f f members e f f e c t i v e l y . makes e f f o r t t o get good p e r f o r m a n c e from s t a f f , i s not too s o f t on s t a f f members, encourages s t a f f members t o do t h e i r b e s t . A r e a F: I n t r a - S t a f f R e l a t i o n s 36. Communicates e f f e c t i v e l y w i t h o t h e r d e p a r t m e n t s . knows o f work b e i n g done i n o t h e r d e p a r t m e n t s , d i s c u s s e s i n t e r - d e p a r t m e n t a l p r o b l e m s . 37. I n t e r a c t s w i t h o t h e r s t a f f members i n a c o n s i d e r a t e manner. does not pass o f f work t o o t h e r s t a f f members, p u t s out e x t r a e f f o r t t o h e l p o t h e r s t a f f members, i s f r i e n d l y and c o o p e r a t i v e w i t h o t h e r s t a f f members. 

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.831.1-0093559/manifest

Comment

Related Items