Lr'f. AN INVESTIGATION‘OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN 4 7 _ .j 1:} EMPLOYEES’ KNOWLEDGE 0F ORGANIZATIONAL REALITY .: _‘- : ANO CERTAIN INDICES 0F ORGANIZATIONAL - ' EFFECTIVENESS ‘ Thesis for the Degree Of M. A. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY OARIO PEREZ ' 14968 ........ ...... ABSTRACT AN INVESTIGATION OF THE RELRTIONSHIP BETWEEN EMPLOYEES' KNOWLEDGE OF ORGANIZATIONAL REALITY AND CERTAIN INDICES OF ORGANILATIONAL EFFECTIVENEéS by Dario Perez The purpose of the present investigation was to ex— plore the relationship between the employees' knowledge of their organizational reality and certain indices of organiza- tional effectiveness. The study was carried out in a medium- sized Michigan manufacturing organization. The employees were studied and compared according to the three divisions, ten departments and first, second, and third working shifts. The measure of organizational reality as develOped by Silkiner (1964) for management was revised for use in the entire work force. The three scales were designed to measure knowledge of the organizational objectives, programs for implementations, and performance. A composite of the scores on the three scales was also used as a total knowledg- ability score. The indices of organizational effectiveness were turnover, absenteeism and number of suggestions submitted by the employees in the reSpective divisions, departments and working shifts. Dario Perez In order to eXplain the variability in knowledg- ability among the employees in the three divisions, ten departments and first, second, and third working shifts, data was gathered and analyzed for age, sex, length of tenure with the company, number of job changes within the company, wage- salary level, and educational level. The results of the investigation can be summarized as follows: 1. In the three divisions of the company and in the ten departments of the parent division, the employees having higher scores on knowledgability of objectives, implementation, performance and total knowledgability had the lowest indices of turnover as well as the highest indices of turning in suggestions for organizational improvement. 2. In the three divisions of the company and in the ten departments of the parent division, the employees having higher scores on knowledgability of objectives, implementa— tion, performance and total knowledgability had the highest indices of absenteeism. 3. In regard to the group variables within the three divisions and ten departments of the parent division, a con- sistent trend of positive correlations was found between the employees' knowledgability of their organizational reality (objectives, implementation and performance) and the number of job changes within the company, length of tenure with the company, educational level, and wage-salary level. Dario Perez 4. A significant difference in knowledgability of the objectives, implementation, performance, total score and the sex of the employees in the three divisions and ten departments was found, favoring the male employees. Theseresults support the assumption that there is a positive relationship between the employees' knowledgability of their organizational reality and the lower indices of turnover and higher indices of submission of suggestions. The results do not support the assumption of a positive re- lationship of knowledgability of organizational reality and lower absenteeism. The results suggest that the male sex, numerous job changes within the organization, length of service, and educational level are related to the employees knowledg— ability of their organizational reality. Suggestions were offered concerning further research in this area. 2" /' ,, Approved: [f/flfi—ZJVéVW/ Date: (71/ 1541/5/44; /yé/ AN INVESTIGATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EMPLOYEES' KNOWLEDGE OF ORGANIZATIONAL REALITY AND CERTAIN INDICES OF ORGANIZATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS by Dario Perez'\1«« ALTHESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Psychology 1968 ACKNOWLEDGMENT “'1 Appreciation is eXpressed foremost to Dr. Carl E. Frost, research advisor, for his helpful suggestions and guidance in the course of this investigation, and also in the preparation of the manuscript. Appreciation is also extended to Drs. John H. Wakeley and Eugene Jacobson, committee members. Gratitude is eXpressed to the management and employees of the firm where this research was carried out, for the fine COOperation given toward the completion of this study. Acknowledgement is made of the assistance given by Mr. Jerry Gilmore of the Computer Center at Michigan State University in programming the data of the investigation. Finally, a Special note of gratitude to my wife for her patience and help during all these years of study. ii To my parents and wife P REE ACE Early theories of organization referred to profit maximization, efficient service, high productivity, and good employee morale, as criteria of effectiveness. What has undermined these as viable criteria has been the discovery that seemingly rational organizations at times behave in- effectively, regarding their material, monetary or peOple resources, if the sole criterion is profit. The general agreement has been that organizations fulfill multiple func- tions. Today the existence of the problems of develOping satisfactory criteria of organizational effectiveness is well known and many different criteria have been offered. However, there is a growing appreciation of the fact that an investi— gation of organizational effectiveness would necessarily require criteria which are comprehensive in nature. In recent studies Special consideration has been given to such variables as knowledge and insight on the part of the members of the organization of what the organization is: its goals, its means and resources, and its performance. Attention has also been given to the members' ability to accept and implement these goals and to correctly perceive and assess the real prOperties of the industrial environment 1 2 which have relevance for the functioning of the organization. These particular criteria on which to evaluate organizational effectiveness suggest one central factor to be organizational reality, that is, the members' awareness of and reSponse to it. This concept of reality has become one of the promising develOpments for the study of organiza- tional effectiveness. Mental health theorists have used this concept extens- ively in develOping criteria for determination of normality and patients' effectiveness in dealing with their environment. In this context, a person has been diagnosed as mentally healthy by the extent of his ability to be aware and deal with his reality and to adapt to situational requirements confronting him. The analogy of the mental health approach to organiza- tional behavior appears to offer a similar approach to the study of the organization in its totality. If the members of an organization are able to define its Operating environment, and to reSpond apprOpriately, then, this organization might be diagnosed as effective. As a matter of fact, the behavior of the members of an organization is a reflection of its reality; the members' knowledge of the purposes and objectives of the organization, of its programs of action or implementation, and of the critical feed-back which indicates how efficient the action programs are in achieving the objectives. Therefore, personal and organizational effectiveness are related to the knowledge and reSponse to this reality. 3 It is necessary for the members, individually and collectiv- ely, to be aware of the objective reality. When there is awareness of the significant realities of the situation, relatively greater effectiveness in reSponse is predictable. When there is ignorance or discrepancy in the perception of reality, it is predictable that neither the individual nor the organization will achieve a high degree of effectiveness. An investigation of the relationship of management members' knowledgability of reality to effectiveness was carried out by D. Silkiner (1964). The present research is based on the same theoretical framework, and represents an extension of this investigation to include the workers' level and to apply additional measures of organizational effective- ness. TABLE OF CONTEN Page INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 The Concept of Organizational Reality . . . . . l The Organizational Environment . . . . . . . . . 6 Organizational Effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . 7 PROBLEIA. ATP-ID HYPOT‘IVESIS o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 10 Main Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Secondary Relationships to be EXplored . . . . . ll M STE-10D O O O O C O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 11- Demographic Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 The Questionnaires . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l4 Scoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Indices of Industrial Group Behavior . . . . . . 16 Statistical Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Subject, and Returned Questionnaires . . . . . . 2O Indices of Absenteeism . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Indices of Suggestions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Indices of Turnover . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Comparative Analysis of Scores . . . . . . . . . 28 Analysis of Variance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Correlation Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Results of Secondary EXplorations. . . . . . . . 3 COIIElation :Jlal‘y’SiS o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 47 DISCUSSIOIN o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 49 The Hypothesis and Its Verification . . . . . . 51 Organizational Reality and Effectiveness . . . . 52 Secondary EXplorations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 Implications for Further Research . . . . . . . 54 55 S UI‘fifl JERRY . O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O . C C B IBLIOGRLXPE-EY . O . Q . O O O O C O O O C O C C . O 0 iii 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. LIST OF TABLES Returned Questionnaires and Subjects . . . Index of Absenteeism by Divisions . . . . Index of Absenteeism by Departments . . . Index of Absenteeism by Shifts . . . . . . Index of Suggestions by Divisions . . . . Index of Suggestions by Departments . . . Index of Suggestions by Shifts . . . . . . Index of Turnover by Divisions . . . . . . Index of Turnover by Departments . . . . . Index of Turnover by Shifts . . . . . . . Frequencies, E's, and SD's by Divisions . Frequencies, E's, and SD's by Departments Frequencies, Eii's and SD by Shifts . . . Analysis of Variance . . . . . . . . . . . Correlations and Significance Indices by Division . 0 O O O O O C C O O O C O O O . Correlations and Significance Indices by Departments . . o o o o o o o o o o o o o Frequencies, E's, and SD's by Educational Groups 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O I O Frequencies, E's, and SD's by Salary Level Groups . g . . . o 0 O O O O O O O O O O 0 iv Page 21 21 22 23 24 25 26 26 27 28 29 31 32 33 35 36 4O LIST OF TABLES (Continued . . . .) TABLE Page 19. Frequencies, E's, and 83's by Service Time Groups 0 O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 42 20. Frequencies, E's, and SD's by Job Changes Groups 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C 43 21. Frequencies, E's, and SD's by Age Groups . . . . 44 22. Frequencies, E's, and SD's by Sexes . . . . . . 46 23. Correlation indices for group variables . . . . 48 LIST OF APPENDICES A. Instruction to Subjects and Management Letter to Employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 .B. Questionnaires on Knowledge of Objectives, 0 O O O I O 62 Implementations and Performance . . vi INT RODUCT ION The Concept of Organizational Reality The basis for the present investigation is the con- cept of reality often used in clinical psychology Specially in reference to mental health. Hellersberg, (Thomas 1950), asks the question: “how much sense of reality has this patient preserved?" This is a question raised in every clinical report when the normality of an individual is in question. To facilitate the answer, certain stereotyped questions have become traditional:”what is the date today?" "what day is it?", "where are you now?“, etc. The patient's reSponses are taken as evidence of his orientation as to time and place. Hellersberg also points out that the indivi— dual's relations to reality concern not only the forms and contours of the physical images of his material world but also his ways of getting satisfactions for his physical and emotional needs. However, Hellersberg reports that the exact meaning of this "sense of reality” as such has never been an object of investigation and that it has been even denied. Maslow (1941), discusses manifestations of psycho- logical health. Among others, two manifestations of normal- ity are: l. - adequate self knowledge, which includes a realistic appraisal of one's own assets and liabilities, 2 2, - and efficient contact with reality, which has three as- pects: a. the social, b. the physical, c. and the internal world. This implies an absence of excessive fantasy and a realistic and broad outlook of the world. However, he also states that normality is relative to many different variables and the behavior that is healthy in one individual may be questionable if referred to another. Barbara (1956), discussing the value of non-verbal communication in personality understanding, states that in the process of evaluating ourselves and our relationships to the world about us, we tend to rely on words rather than facts. She writes: "The healthier and more aware a person is, the more accurate a map he creates of hbmself, and the more he knows himself as he is and not as he feels he should be." Similarly to the other authors, she states that a "map is not the territory,“ and ”one's self-concept is not one's Self.“ "Verbal statements and reported facts are plagued by variable terms as it seems to me, from my point of view,“ etc. Jahoda (1953), in her article “The Meaning of Psycho- logical Health," criticizes several suggested criteria of psychological health as inappropriate because they neglect the social matrix of human behavior. She regards as a major psyChological health behavior tendency "the absence of dis- tortion in the end product of perceptual and cognitive pro- cesses,“ mostly referred to the social environment. Never- theless, she also states that an adequate pSychological inter— pretation of this concept must account for the deviant 3 minorities and not just for a majority tendency. Cherry (1957), brings up the question of reality as related to the philOSOphical problem of dualism. "We do not perceive and know things as they are, we perceive signs, and from these signs make inferences and build up our mental models of the world; we say, we see and hear it; we talk about 'real things'.“ Cherry says, "we can not Speak of the 'real world' as being 'outside us,‘ for if anything is 'real' to each one of us, it is our eXperience and as such they are all inferences.“ He says, “we can not know reality as such, and by the same token, the fact that we can not observe what goes on in another person's mind, must not lead us to assume that we necessarily do know what goes on in our own." The authors cited above refer to the concept of real- ity in a somewhat similar form. In one way or another, they are not very hOpeful about the possibility of using the con- cept of reality as an eXperimental concept. A philOSOphical problem seems to exist at the bottom of this issue which makes it difficult to state it in a more objective way. Thomas (1927), talks about behavior reactions and the process involved in their formation. In his paper he prOposes an answer to the problem. He states that by studying the situation it is possible to understand the be- havior. "The Situations which the individual encounters, into which he is forced, and which he creates, disclose the character of his adaptive strivings, his claims, attainments, renunciations, and compromises. The situational method, thus, 4 is one in use by the experimental psychologists who prepare situations, introduce the subjects into those situations, observe the behavior reactions, change the situations, and observe the changes in the reactions. A complete study of situations would give a complete account of the individual's attitudes and values.“ Thus it can be noticed that there is shift of emphasis from the philosophical concept of reality to a more objective concept of environmental factors and definitions of the Situ- ation. This different way of looking at the problem of real- ity is the one reflected in the present investigation. Frost and Erickson (1962) talk about the concept of reality from a different point of view. They use a definition of it as a criterion for assessing managerial performance. The whole of their paper is based on the use of managerial performance in the face of reality as a criterion of effec- tiveness. “In the study of normal and abnormal human be— havior, the reSponse to reality proves to be the criterion which differentiates the range and the position within the range of Operating effectiveness. . . . In the industrial organization, if the individual is not aware of reality, does not recognize it and determine its characteristics and its limits, he can scarcely be eXpected to effectively reSpond to it, adapt to it, control it or use and eXploit it." Tannenbaum (1961), in assessing organizational effec- tiveness, also mentions as part of the criteria for so doing, “the perceived activities of peOple in the organization which 5 corresoond to the extent to which persons in the organization are aware of the blueprint." Argyris (1957), discussing the concept of reality, introduces the idea of "reality-centered leadership." He states that the choice of leadership patterns should be based upon an accurate diagnosis of the reality of the situation in which the leader is imbedded. "Reality—centered leader- ship is not a predetermined set of best ways to influence peOple. The only prediSposition that is prescribed is that the leader ought to first diagnose what is reality and then use the appropriate leadership patterns." This concept of reality-centered leadership can be referred to the organization as a whole as well as to the individual in particular. When an organization does not have apprOpriate knowledge of its environment and its in— dustrial factors, it could be considered as ineffective in not being able to adapt itself to changing situations. By the same token, if an individual fails to be aware of the reality of his environment, he could be evaluated as ineffec— tive. If the individual is mistaken about the systemic requirements of his organization or the demands of its environ- ment, his interpersonal abilities may become organizational liabilities. When individuals in the organization are aware of organizational reality they can cope better with a changing environment, behave in more desirable way, and in general adapt better to the organization. 6 Katz (1966), discussing the leader skill requirements in the effective organization, points out "systemic perspec- tive" as a very important factor. This concept refers to obtaining information about the organizational environment, understanding the environmental factors, and the successful relating of facts in the environment to facts about the organization. Reality awareness is, thus, suggested to be influential on individual and industrial group behavior. Thus, it can be seen that the original concept of reality viewed from a clinical point of view, has been further developed with reference to the concepts of organi- zational environment and executive performance. The need for assessing the knowledge of the organizational environment. has been pointed out. In the same way, reference has been made to the use of such a knowledge for changing organizational effectiveness. Just as the individual needs to have know- ledge of his environment in order to reSpond appropriately and adapt in a desirable way, the organization, to be effec- tive, also needs to know about its environment. The Organizational Environment Three major components in the organization's environ— ment can be identified. Silkiner (1964) in this reSpect refers to objectives or goals, implementations or strategies, and performance or ends. Reality is defined within this context as the objectives, implementations, and performance of the organization. Organizational objectives would include all of the goals of the organization: growth forecasts, 7 {predicted profits, predicted sales, production volume, equitable treatment of employees, etc. Implementations would include the strategies, policies, means or operational actions employed by the organization to attain its goals. Budget allocations, manufacturing processes and methods, channels of communication, incentive systems, employee selection, product line, etc., are typical implementations. Performance would indicate the degree to which objectives were attained, such as the actual growth, profits, sales, costs, etc. Performance is the final statement about what the organization has accomplished. Each organization would have its objectives, imple- mentations, and performance. Its members would be faced with the problem of attaining knowledge of these environmental factors and then reSponding in the appropriate manner. Organizational Effectiveness Today the existence of the problem of develOping satisfactory criteria of organizational effectiveness is well knownyits solution is less obvious. It seems that the difficulty is essentially conceptual, and that the remedies must begin with conceptual clarification. Organizational effectiveness has, thus, become one of those convenient, but still problematic pseudo-concepts, cognoting a sort of total- ity of organizational goodness - a sum of such elements as productivity, quality, turnover, grievances, etc. 8 Katz and Kahn (1966), discussing the patterns of individual behavior required for organizational functioning and effectiveness, list low absenteeism, low turnover, COOp- erative activities with fellow members, and creative suggestions for organizational improvement, as major types of activities in an effective organization. "Sufficient per- sonnel must be induced to enter the system and they must also be induced to remain within the system. The Optimum period of tenure will vary for different individuals and situations, but high turnover is almOSt always costly. Moreover, while peOple are members of a system, they must validate their membership by regular attendance. Thus, turnover and absenteeism are both measures of organizational effectiveness, albeit partial measures.“ Katz and Kahn also refer to another set of require- ments for effective organizational functioning which include those actions not Specified by role prescriptions but which facilitate the accomplishment of organizational goals. "The organizational need for actions of an innovative, relatively Spontaneous sort is inevitable and unending. No organiza- tional planning can foresee all contingencies within its own Operations, can anticipate with perfect accuracy all environmental changes, or can control perfectly all human variability. The resources Of peOple for innovation, for Spontaneous coOperatiOn , for creative behavior are thus vital for organizational survival and effectiveness. An 9 organization which depends solely upon its blueprints of pre- scribed behavior is a very fragile social system." Silkiner (1964), in a research study similar to the present investigation, in which he compared two companies of contrasting effectiveness in the degree of reality awareness of their management levels, also used as one of his criteria for organizational effectiveness, the effective use of the suggestion system for organizational improvement. Fleishman (1953), in a research study which follows the same eXperimental model as the present investigation, related an independent variable (leadership patterns: Con- sideration and Structure) with group effectiveness by means of such indices as grievances and turnover, both considered as partial criteria of group effectiveness. Fleishman writes: “There is, of course, a need to eXplore Similar relationships with other criteria. There is no assurance that similar curvilinear pattern and interaction effects will hold for other indices, e.g. group productivity. How- ever, research along these lines may make it possible to Specify the particular leadership patterns which meet nearly 'Optimize' these various effectiveness criteria in industrial organizations.“ Following Fleishman conclusions, it is suggested that this study, relating the work—group awareness of real- ity as an independent variable with some indices of group be- havior, may contribute to our knowledge for a better under- standing of the effectiveness criteria in industrial organi- zations. lO PROBLEM AND HYPOTHESIS The present investigation focuses on one primary_ question: what is the relationship between the work groups' awareness of reality and Specific indices of their group be- havior which may account fororganizational effectiveness. The indices of group behavior to be considered are: employee turnover, absenteeism, and suggestbns submitted for organizational improvement. (These indices will be defined later). Thus, by considering each one of those particular indices of industrial group behavior as partial criteria of effectiveness, it will be possible to Speculate about organ- izational effectiveness and its relationship to the degree of awareness of reality of the work group. It might be considered that such group behavior as absenteeism, turnover, and ineffective use of the sugges- tion system, are related to the lack of knowledge on the part of the workers about the organizational reality, what is eXpected of them, and even what they are supposed to do in the working situation. Stated positively, the more the workers are aware of the Objective reality of the situation, the better they can COpe with a changing environment, behave in a desirable way, and contribute more to the develOpment of the organization. The degree of awareness of organizational reality on the part of the workers is, then, suSpected to be a major determinant of their behavior, their contribution to the 11 organization, and in general their adaptability to it. Thus, indices of group behavior such as turnover, and absenteeism, are likely to be realted to the workers' degree of awareness of the reality of the organization. Hence the main hypo- thesis follows: Main Hypothesis In an industrial organization, those work groups, as defined by the division, department, and shift to which workers belong, which are more aware of organizational real- ity, as defined by its objectives, implementations, and performance; will have lower indices of turnover, absenteeism, and will make better use of the suggestion system by submitt- ing more suggestions for organizational improvement. Secondary Relationships to be EXplored Inasmuch as knowledgability is the major variable in the study, it will be also evaluated according to possible Significant relationships with other characteristics of the work group such as: age, sex, educational level, salary level, length of service time, and number of job changes within the organization. Characteristics of the groups, as defined by shifts, functional departments, and divisions with different physical location, will be related also to their knowledge of reality. METHOD The eXperimental design is not a manipulation of human behavior: rather, it is an assessment of industrial group 12 behavior to find out demographic and situational factors associated with its occurrence. The investigation was carried out in a medium-sized manufacturing company in Michigan. This firm could be con- sidered as having three divisions, (A,B,C), physically S eparat ed, The company has adOpted the Scanlon Plan, an incen— tive plan based on a human relation philOSOphy, (McGregor, 1960). The plan is designed to improve communication within a firm, to utilize more effectively the potential of the firm's human resources, and to reward members with financial gains through bonuses paid for plant-wide cost savings. There are some differences among divisions. Division A is three times larger than the other two divisions, and is located at the site of the company offices. Divisions A and B are engaged in the manufacturing of similar products. Division C manufactures somewhat different and unrelated pro- ducts. Divisions A and B have operated under the Scanlon Plan for a longer time. Division C adOpted the Plan more recently. Divisions A, B and C were studied further by breakdown into their departments. Division A and B were studied by grouping the employees into the first, second, and third working shifts. It is eXpected that there might be differences re- lated to the geographic distance from the central office, the length of time in the operations, the nUmber of employees, 13 the difference in supervision, etc. However, all three divisions can be considered typical organizations within the structure of industrial organizations. Naturally, Specific content is different, but generality across the three divi- sions is readily apparent. Statements of the questionnaire in Appendix B apply to any of them, and within the context, all of them face a similar environment and must deal with similar problems in adjusting to their objectives, implementa— tions, and past performance. More Specifically, all of them must deal with similar problems related to competition, customers, production demands, programs of supervision, com- munication, etc. Demographic Data Data was obtained dealing with the following variables: age, sex, length of time with the company, education, salary levels, number of job changes within the company, and func- tional divisions, departments, and shifts. Measures Questionnaires to measure the knowledge of objec— tives, implementations, and performance in the industrial organization were developed by Silkiner (1964). The infor- mation for writing the items came from intensive searches through written records, and from interviews with key company personnel. The questionnaires were designed to be representa- tive of both, economic and psychological factors in the Operating environment of the organization. l4 Silkiner's questionnaires were designed to measure knowledge of organizational reality of personnel in manage- ment. Since the present research is concerned primarily with the worker level instead of management level, it was considered necessary to make a selecfion of those items which related more Specifically to the workers' situation. Thus, some items were eliminated, some were reworded, and some new ones were added to assess the current situation. The Questionnaires l. Questionnaire on Knowledge of Objectives of the Organiza- tion: this questionnaire includes 30 items and is in— tended to be representative of the objectives or goals dimension of organizational reality. 2. Questionnaire on Knowledge of Implementations: this questionnaire is composzed of 31 items and is intended to be representative of the implementation dimension of reality. 3. Questionnaire on Knowledge of Performance: this question- naire has 35 items and is intended to be representative of the actual accomplishments and performance of the organization. Mention should be made that a pilot study on the questionnaires was carried out before concluding the final form of it. Interviews were held with those persons parti- cipating in this pilot study to obtain suggestions which helped to develOp the final form. The subjects involved in 15 this pilot study were tOp executives of the organization who were intimately familiar with the situation over many years. Scoring Three reSponse categories were used: True, False, and Don't Know. The Don't Know category was to serve a dual purpose. First, Don't Know answers were to be scored separately as an additional variable or control measure. The assumption is that a Don't Know answer indicates a lack of knowledge, and this, following the main hypothesis, should be at a minimum in those groups which present lower indices of absenteeism, turnover, and have better use of the sugges- tion system by submitting more suggestions for organizational improvement. Secondly, the use of three reSponse categories would tend to control a positive reSponse set. The instruc- tions on the questionnaire emphasize that Don't Know category was to be used only in case the subject lacked completely any knowledge or information regarding the item. Scoring was done on the basis of correct answers to the item. The questionnaire yields six scores: one score in accuracy of knowledge for each one of the three dimensions of reality (objectives, implementations, and performance), and also a correSponding Don't Know score for each one of them. The questionnaire also gives total scores in accuracy of knowledge and Don't Know by totalling the scores of the subsections. 16 Since each one of the scales of the questionnaire has different number of items, they were equated to obtain the total scores, by dividing in each scale the knowledge and Don't Know scores into the number of items of that scale. So, the highest possible score, either in accuracy of know— ledge or Don't Know, and for any scale, is a "100." The same rule also applies for the total knowledge and Don't Know scores. The study was officially announced to the peOple as a Michigan State University study. Time was Spent establish- ing familiarity and rapport with the employees by being available in the plants. Testing was done on employee time. The question- naires were given personally to the subjects at work at the end of the particular shift. Employees filled them out at home. The questionnaires were pi cked up by the eXperimenter when the subjects came back to work next day on their reSpec- tive shifts. They were picked up at the time clock to reduce the possibilities of comparisons. Sealed addressed envelOpes were used in handling the questionnair es. Indices of Industrial Eroup Behavior 1. Index of Turnover. Turnover was interpreted as the number of workers who voluntarily left the employ of the company within the last year period. It was recorded for each division, department and shift, and was equated for each group by dividing the number who left that group into the number of actual workers in that group. 17 2. Index of Absenteeism. Absenteeism was recorded in terms of the total number of days missed for various reasons during the last year. A total number of days missed was calculated for each division, department, and shift, and groups were equated by calculating the mean absence for each one of them. A company-wide index of absenteeism was also calculated by adding all three divisions. 3. Index of Effective Use of Suggestion System. It is defined as the number of suggestions submitted by employees for organizational improvement during the last year. Groups were equated by calculating the mean number of suggestion for each group. It was also recorded by divisions, depart- ments, and shifts. Statistical Analysis The reSponses for each individual were recorded so that the analysis could be carried out for the various group characteristics of the employees and company as well as by divisions, departments, and shifts. Statistical analysis of the major hypothesis was accomplished by correlation and variance analysis. Accuracy of Knowledge scores and Don't Know scores for each scale, as well as the total Accuracy of Knowledge and Don't Know scores, for each division, department, and shift, were correlated with the indices of Absenteeism, Turnover, and Suggestions obtained for these groups. Correlation analysis was also applied in the eXplor- ation of secondary relationships between Knowledge and Don't 18 Know scores and age, educational level, Salary level, length of time with the company, and number of job changes. These factors helped to characterize and identified the employee pOpulation as well as organization. - Mean tests and variance analysis were useful in testing for possible significant differences between sexes, divisions, departments, and shifts. 1K RESULT 5 Results are presented in the following order: Returned questionnaires and subjects Main Hypothesis a, b. C. Indices of absenteeism, suggestions, and turnover found for each division, department, and shift. Comparative analysis of scores obtained for divi- sions, departments, and Shifts. Analysis of variance made to test for significant differences among divisions, departments, and shifts. (This analysis of variance was carried out only in regard to total scores in knowledge and Don't Know). Correlation indices found between absenteeism, suggestions, and turnover, and knowledge and Don't Know scores. (This correlation analysis was made by divisions and departments, and for each one of the scores yielded by the questionnaire). Secondary EXplorationS 3. Comparison of the mean scores obtained on knowledge and Don't Know among the different groups as defined by the following characteristics: age, sex, education, salary level, length of time with the company, and number of job changes within the organization. Correlation indices found between knowledge and Don't Know scores and the above mentioned characteristics of the groups. Mean test for significant differences between sexes in total knowledge and Don't Know scores. 19 20 Subjects and Returned Questionnaires The goal of this study was to completely cover all three divisions of the organization. However, those questionnaires returned showed that this was only achieved for Division B where 100% of the subjects returned the questionnaires. Although the goal in this reSpect was not fully achieved for the other two divisions, the returning of questionnaires from these was satisfactorily high; being 68.6% for Division A, and 60.2% for Division C. In general, a 69.4% of returned questionnaires was achieved for the whole company. These percentages do not include management peOple who did not participate in the study or the workers who had been laid off at the time the research was carried out. Some of the returned questionnaires were not taken into account because they were not answered properly due to the fact that some of the workers were foreigners and could not read Englishwell enough. Because of the company reorganization of some departments, it was necessary for the statistical analysis to join two departments in Division A and in Division C. Table 1 presents a breakdown of subjects and returned questionnaires by divisions. This table shows the number of actual employees, the number of subjects tested and the percentage of employees returning the questionnaires. 21 Table 1. Subjects and Returned Questionnaires Divisions Number of Npmber of Percentage Persons Subjects Returning Employed Tested A 239 164 68.6% B 28 23 100.0% C 73 44 60.2% Total 340 236 69.4% Indices of Absenteeism Absenteeism was defined as the total number of days missed for various reasons during the past year period. Table 2 presents the indices of absenteeism by divisions. This table shows the total number of days missed, the actual number of employees in the particular division, Table 2. Index of Absenteeism by Divisions for Year 1967 Number of Number of Divisions Days Persons Index .Migsed Employed A 1917 239 8.2 B 398 28 14.2 C 414 73 5.6 Total 2729 340 8.1 22 and the indices of absenteeism which come to be the mean absence for each division. A total index of absenteeism for the whole company is also shown. This was done by putting together divisional absenteeism data. The ranking on absenteeism places Division B as first, with the highest index; Division A as second, and Division C in third place with the lowest index. Table 3 shows the indices of absenteeism by depart- ments. This table also presents the total number of days missed, Table 3. Index of Absenteeism by Department For Year 1967 Missed Emplgyed ._ 1 A 378 46 8.2 2 A 148 22 6.7 3 A 1419 124 11.4 4 A 26 9 5.2 5 B 336 16 21.0 6 B 62 12 5.1 7 C 52 19 2.7 8 C 134 9 14.8 9 C 99 13 7.6 10 C 129 17 7.5 Totals 2783 287 9.6 23 number of actual employees in each department, and their reSpective indices of absenteeism. This index was recorded for ten departments with hourly rated workers. Department 5 in Division B has the highest index of absenteeism and Department 7 of Division C has the lowest index of absentee— ism. In the same way, Table 4 presents the indices of absenteeism by Shifts. There is little difference in this index between second and third shifts. A more marked difference is found with first shift which presents the lowest index. Table 4. Index of Absenteeism by Shifts For Year 1967 _ - W — 1 Shifts Nuggig Of Ngggzgnzf Index Missed Employed lst 1715 238 7.2 2nd 687 64 10.7 3rd 379 37 10.2 Total 2781 339 8.2 NOTE: First Shift 7:00 AM to 3:00 PM Second Shift - 3:00 PM to 11:00 PM Third Shift - 11:00 PM to 7:00 AM Indices of Suggestions This index was defined as the number of suggestions submitted by employees for organizational improvement during 24 the last year period. As an index, the mean suggestion for each group was computed. Table 5 presents the number of suggestions by divi- sions, the number of actual employees, and the reSpective indices for each division. A total index which includes the whole company is also shown. It was computed by accumulating the information from the three divisions. Table 5. Index of Suggestions by Divisions For Year 1967 Number of Number of Divisions Suggestions Persons Index Employed A 156 239 0.65 B 17 28 0.60 C 39 73 0.53 Total 212 340 0.62 On this index, Division A comes to have the highest index, followed by Divisions B and C. Table 6 shows the number of suggestions by depart- ments and their correSponding indices. An extra group com- posed of salaried employees was included along with the ten departments considered. It can be noticed that department number 7 which be- longs to Division C has the highest index of suggestions, and department Number 4 from Division A appears with the lowest index. 25 Table 6. Index of Suggestions by Departments For Year 1967 Number of Number of ::§::t- Divisions Suggestions ”Persons Index bmplgyed 1 .A 28 46 0.60 2 A 16 22 0.72 3 A 89 124 0.71 4 A 3 9 0.33 5 S 11 16 0.68 6 B 6 12 0.50 7 C 20 19 1.05 8 C 6 9 0.66 9 C 6 13 0.46 10 C 6 17 0.35 Salaried A,B,C 21 53 0.39 Total‘ 212 340 0.62 Table 7 presents in the same manner the indices of suggestions by shifts. The ranking on suggestions places the first Shift as first, with the highest index. Second and third Shifts follow in that order. 25 Table 7. Index of Suggestions by Shifts For Year 1967 —_—__. .- fi- ‘— siggzziizis “Eiiiinif Innex Employed lst 156 238 0.65 2nd 38 64 0.59 3rd 19 37 0.51 Total 213 339 0.62 NOTE: First Shift — 7:00 AM to 3:00 PM Second Shift - 3:00 PM to 11:00 PM Third Shift — 11:00 PM to 7:00 AM Indices of Turnover Turnover was defined as the number of employees who voluntarily left the company. This data was collected for the past year. The indices were calculated by dividing the number of employees who left from each group into the number of actual workers in that group. Table 8 shows this data by divisions plus a total index of turnover for the whole organization. Table 8. Index of Turnover by Divisions For Year 1967 * Number of Number of Divisions Workers Persons Index Who Left Employed The Company A 120 239 0.50 B 5 28 0.17 C 36 73 0.49 Total 161 340 0.47 27 There is no large difference on this index between A and C, however, the difference between these two divisions as compared with B is quite noticeable. Table 9 presents these indices by departments; here also the group of salaried employees is included. The number of actual employees, and the number who left the com- pany from each department are presented too. In comparison with other departments, a high index of turnover can be observed from Department 8 from Division C. Department Numbers 5 and 6 from Division D appear with the lowest indices of turnover. Table 9. Index of Turnover by Departments For Year 1967 Depart- Divisions Number of Number of Index ments Workers Persons Who Left Employed The Company 1 A 10 46 0.21 2 A 13 22 0.59 3 .A 75 124 0.60 4 A 5 9 0.55 5 B 3 16 0.18 6 B 2 12 0.16 7 c 7 19 0.36 8 c 13 9 1.44 9 c 4 13 0.30 10 c 10 17 0.58 Salaried A,B,C 19 53 0.35 Total 161 340 0.47 28 Table 10 shows the turnover data by shifts, along with the number of employees who left and the number of employees actually employed. Third shift appears with the highest index followed by the second and first. The difference between first and second shifts as compared with the third is quite noticeable. Table 10. Index of Turnover by Shifts Number of Number of Shifts Workers Persons Index Who Left Employed The Company lst 96 238 0.40 2nd 31 64 0.48 3rd 34 37 0.91 Total 161 339 0.47 NOTE: First Shift - 7:00 AM to 3:00 PM Second Shift - 3:00 PM to 11:00 PM Third Shift - 11:00 PM to 7:00 AM Comparative Apalysis of Scores Table 11 shows the frequencies, means, and standard deviations of knowledge and Don't Know scores obtained for each division on each one of the three scales, (Objectives, Implementations, Performance), and totals. A study of knowledge scores shows Division B as hav— ing the highest score followed by Divisions A and C. The degree with which the Don't Know category of reSponse is used by these divisions, complements the ranking they obtained on knowledge scores. 29 m.ma m.ma N.NH m.mo o.ma mood H.ma N.m® m.ma m.hH O.mH N.No m.mH v.MH ¢.NH m.v© 0mm HMDOB n.ma m.mm m.mH m.mm moma 0.5N m.mH ¢.mm N.mH N.0m v.ma 0.0m m.da ®.HN v.va H.H© mm 0 m.oa H.0H H.0H m.@® moad ®.OH m.va H.m® H.HH Hoaa 5.0 H.h© hoaH m.m mooa mono mm m moma h.ma m.aa m.v© N.¢H N.mH ¢.VH m.vw o.va o.ma H.¢H m.vw N.ma m.HH O.NH w.¢® mma a an s on 2 am 2 an x mm 2 an s an 2 gal s 8386518 meow zocx mmpmazocx sosx mmpma3osx socx mmpmwmocx socx mmpmazocx Imum IH>HQ 5:09 0.28 feed face nmmovm QdBOB muz¢2m0mmmm ZOHBfiBZmEMHmZH mm>HBUMDmO “If 11'. IIHI II, I wSOHmH>aQ >3 msoHumH>mQ pumpsmum 0cm .msmmz .mmaucmSWmum .HH magma 1'1 ll 30 Table 12 presents the frequencies, means, and standard deviations of knowledge and Don't Know scores obtained for each department on objectives, implementations, and performance as well as total scores. Besides the ten departments considered, salaried employees as a group is also included. The salaried employees obtained the highest scores in knowledge on all three scales as compared with other departments staffed with hourly-rated workers. The less frequent use of Don't Know reSponses by this salaried group, complements its higher knowledge scores. Table 13 shows the frequencies, means, and standard deviations of knowledge, Don't Know, and total scores obtained for the three different shifts. From these scores it can be noticed that third shift has the highest score on knowledge: first shift is next followed by the second. For all these three shifts this ranking on knowledge scores is complemented by the same ranking on Don't Know scores. Third shift, which obtained the highest score in knowledge uses the Don't Know category of response the least, First and Second shifts follow. I o.ma N.oa m.oa v.05 o.ma H.ma m.ma m.mo m.ma v.HH m.ma b.Hn m.mH v.m N.HH H.mh hm U.m.< pmfiumamm m.ma n.mm m.ma m.mm N.ma m.mm m.ma v.mv m.ma m.mm N.HH m.mv m.ma w.am m.©H p.00 0a 0 0H m.o m.oa m.oa 0.05 H.va o.mH m.ma H.m© v.0 0.0H H.ma o.vm a.m H.> o.oa m.m© 0H d m m.ma h.mm H.Na m.mm m.oa m.Hm m.m o.mm o.mm m.vm m.mH m.am v.ma m.NN o.ma m.mm o 0 m o.Hm m.om m.ma N.mm m.mm m.am m.om N.hv m.mm m.om 5.0N m.mv m.ma h.ma o.ma o.mo m o n H.ma v.mm N.HH m.mm n.ma m.mm N.mH H.mm v.oa m.hm n.aa n.vv m.ma b.mm H.NH >.hm ma 0 m m.ma h.va n.0a m.mo H.va m.ma o.va m.mm m.va m.oa m.ma m.H© v.ma v.ma m.HH o.m© mo 4 m add at: 0.2.. 6.09 o.ma m.ma n4: H60 m.ma h.m.fi med 5J0 m.m._n m.m m.o.m m.mm. ma 4 v m.NH m.ma o.aa m.ao m.ma b.ma H.ma m.mm ®.ma ©.@H H.va m.mo m.NH m.mH H.NH m.mo mm d N n.ma N.mH o.oH H.Hw H.mH m.ma m.ma ¢.mm m.ma v.ma H.m o.mo o.ma w.HH v.0H m.¢m m m N H.0H m.m m.m m.mo m.m v.5 H.HH 0.00 m.oa m.m m.b v.mo ©.NH m.oa m.oa a.mm 6H m H n... .3 am a an 2 mm 2 mm 2 mm 2 mini 2 pm 2 mwaucwmm macaw 3:06 3 GM mmwa3OcM 30cm wmbmasocx socx wWWmH3ocx 3ocx mmtmazocm nmnm IH>fiQ lumpewm uqcom u.soa u.con p.con ndmoom ddBOB mUZ¢Zm0mmmm ZOHB¢BZMEWQQZH mm>HBUMme wucmfiuummmo >3 mcoHumfi>mQ pumpcmum psm .mcmmz .mmfiocmSWmHm .NH manme 0.0 m.m H.ma 0.00 0.HH 0.0H m.ha 0.m0 0.0a N.0H 0.0H m.¢0 0.0H m.h O.NH m.N0 0H Gum m.ma e.ea S.Ha o.H0 H.ea 4.54 4.6H m.mo 0.0H «.ma m.ma 0.00 v.ea m.eH H.ma H.00 me pan 0.3 08H 06a m.ma m.m0 m.ma mKa afia 0&0 0.0a 0.4..“ 0.00” 6&0 H.m.n m.ma 0.: 6.00 one um." an 2 an. 2 am e an x am 2 an 2 am 2 an s 33:30 socx mmpmasocx 30cm mmvmabocx Bocx mmpmasosx 30cm wmpwasocx Imnm muwwbm arcs u..COD.. nae-COD ”SCOQ adoom 4.309 m04w4§o§mm 2035.202»qu $39380 muwflbm an msoHu0fi>mQ pumvsmuw 0cm .mcmmz .mmfiucmSanm .mH maflme 33 Analysis of Variance Table 14 presents the results of the analysis of variance carried out for divisions, departments, and shifts. This analysis of variance was accomplished for total scores in knowledge and Don't Know only. Table 14. Analysis of Variance Total DoHTt Groups Total Knowledge Scores Know Scores F Sig. leypl F Sigilevel Divisions 11.16 0.0005 18.21 0.0005 Departments 5.24 0.0005 5.02 0.0005 Shifts 0.62 0.53 2.15 0.11 The F statistics for divisions are F = 11.16 for knowledge scores, and F = 18.21 for Dbn't Know scores; both yielding a significance level of 0.0005. This finding indicates divisions are significantly different in know- ledge of organizational reality and, their use of the Don't Know category of responses on the questionnaire. The F statistics for departments are also high: F = 5.24 for knowledge scores, significant at a 0.0005 level; and F = 5.04 for Don't Know scores, also significant at a 0.0005 level. These results demonstrate quite signi- ficant differences among departmental groups in their know- ledge of organizational reality. 34 Contrasting with these results for divisions and departments, the analysis of variance for shifts shows very low F's; being F = 0.62 for knowledge scores, with a signi— ficance level of 0.53; and F = 0.53 for Don't Know scores, with a significance level of 0.11. Thus, no significant differences are obtained for Shifts on knowledge or Don't Know scores. Correlation Analysis Table 15 presents the correlation and significance indices by divisions found between Absenteeism, Suggestions, and Turnover, and all the different scores of the question- naire. (Objectives, Implementations, Performance, and total). On Turnover, the analysis shows a negative correla- tion between the knowledgability of the company and the index of turnover, that is, the higher the score on know- ledge of the objectives, implementations, and performance of the company, the lower the index of turnover among the employees; and the greater the frequency of use of the Don't Know answering category, the higher the index of turnover. The analysis also shows a positive correlation be— tween the knowledgability of the company and the index of number of suggestions submitted, that is, the higher the score on knowledgability of the objectives, implementations, and performance of the company, the greater the number of suggestions submitted; also, the less the frequency of the use of the Don't Know answering category, the greater the number of suggestions submitted. 35 Table 15. Correlation and Significance Levels by Division Between the Indices of Absenteeism, Suggestions, and Turn- over, and each one of the Scores Yielded by the Suestionnaire Absenteeism Suggestions Turnover Variables CorrypSig. Corr. Corr. Sic. _ S 0 . . Knowledge 0.95 0.005 0.63 0.12 -0.81 0.04 ObJGCtlveS Don't Know-OLE} 0.04 -9ys 0.04 0.60 0.13 Imple- Knowledge 0.82 0.04 0.83 0.03 ~0.60 0.14 mentation Don't Know—0.85 0.03 —0.81 0.04 0.63 0.12 Perform- Knowledge 0.74 0.07 0.90 0.01 -0.49 0119 ance Don't Know—0.89 0.02 -0.76 0.06 0.69 0.09 Total Knowledge 0.84 0.03 0.82 0.04 -0.62 0.13 Scores Don't Know-0.86 0.02 -0.79 OLQS 0.65 0.11 ‘On absenteeism, the analysis shows a reverse pattern of correlations. There is positive correlation between knowledge scores and the indices of absenteeism, and nega- tive correlation between this index and Don't Know scores. This is to say, the higher the score on knowledge of the objectives, implementations, and performance of the company, (reality), the higher theindex of absenteeism among employees; and the greater the frequency of use of the Don't Know answering category the lower the index of absentee— ism. The range of positive correlations goes from 0.60 to 0.95. The range of negative correlations goes from -0.60 to -0.89. In regard to turnover the highest correlation, -0.81, was found with Knowledge of Objectives. The lowest correlation with this index, -0.49, was obtained with know- ‘1edge of Performance. 36 Significance indices of correlations range from 0.0005 to 0.19. These significance levels are higher for absenteeism and decrease for turnover and suggestion in- dices. Table 16 Shows the correlation and significance indices by departments for turnover, suggestions, and absenteeism as they relate to knowledgeability of objec- tives, implementations, and performance. Correlations with total scores are also shown. The analysis by departments shows Similar results as those found for divisions. Negative correlations were found between turnover and knowledge of objectives, imple- mentations, and performance; and positive correlations were obtained between this index and the frequency of use of Don't Know reSponses.I Table 16. Correlation and Significance Levels by Departments Between the Indices of Absenteeism, Suggestions, and Turnover, and each one of the scores Yielded by the Questionnaire Absenteeism Suggpstions Turnover Corr. Sig. Corr. SigLCorrLSigll 0b ti K“°W1edge 0-26 0-20 0.06 0.42 -0.10 0.37 Jec ”es Don't Know-0.19 0.26-0.44 0.06 0.20 0.24 Variables Imple- Knowledge 0.10 0.39 0.37 0.10 —0.37 0.10 mentation Don't Know—0.26 0.19:0y43 0.06 0136 0-10 Perform— Knowledge 0.10 0.37 0.35 0.11 -0.48 0.04 ance Don't Know-0.28 0.18-0y13 0.33 0.49 0-04 Total Knowledge 0.14 0.32 0.007 0.49 -0.36 0.10 Scores Don't Know—0y37 0.19-0.36 0.11 0.39 0.08 37 Likewise, positive correlations were found between suggestions and knowledge scores, whereas negative correla— tions were found between this index and frequency of use of the Don't Know answering category. On absenteeism, the reverse pattern of correlations found at divisional analysis can also be noticed here. There is positive correlation between absenteeism and knowledge of objectives, implementations, and performance; and negative correlation between this index and Don't Know scores. This correlation analysis made by departmental groups yielded lower correlation and significance levels as compared with those obtained in the analysis carried out by divisions. Negative correlations range from —0.10 to -0.43, and positive correlations range from 0.10 to 0.49. Signi- ficance indices for these correlations go from 0.39 to 0.04. Results of Secondary EXplorations Results in this section deal first with a descrip— tive analysis of the mean scores found for those group variables mentioned early, (age, sex, education, salary level, length of time with the company, and number of job changes within the organization). Secondly, a correlation analysis made between scores and the above mentioned characteristics, is reported. Table 17 presents the frequencies, means, and standard deviations obtained for the different educational groups on each one of the scores yielded by the N.ma 0.HH v.50 N.HH m.NH N.NH 0.00 0.0a 0.0a 5.0H m.b0 m.NH 0.0 N.ma N.05 mm mmmHHOU v.0H N.NH m.m0 0.0a o.hH 0.0a N.m0 m.0H o.ha m.va H.N0 N.¢H m.MH 0.NH N.¢0 m0a HOOfium .m h.ma N.HH H.00 0.¢Hamoma m.vH N.o0 0.mH N.0N m.mH v.00 h.NH 0.5H m.HH 0.0m ow humucmfiwam 300M umpmasosx .rocx mmpmasocx mmpmasosx mmMOUm ddBOB mozazmommmm ZOHBflBZflEflAmZH on 2 an 2 3889.6 63605.6...” 30cm mmpmflsomm Imum p.200 mm>H90m0mo mdsowo HmcofimeSUm an macauma>ma pumpcmum 0cm .mcmmz .mweosmSUmwm .na manna 39 questionnaire, (Objectives, Implementations, Performance, and Totals). All knowledge scores rank in order: elementary, education, high school, and college. The use of Don't Know reSponses rank inversely according to these educational levels; college education group having the least use of this reSponse category, followed by high school and elementary education groups. Table 18 shows the frequencies, means, and standard deviations and knowledge and Don't Know scores for different salary levels or job groups. These wage levels increase in the same alphabetical order in which they are presented, Group A being at the low— est level of wage and group H at the highest. These eight job groups are composed of hourly-rated workers. Besides them, another group of salaried employees are included in this table. Different job groups generally rank from lowest to highest on knowledge scores according to level of income. A complementing pattern in the use of Don't Know responses is also present; generally, those job groups with higher scores on knowledge use the Don't Know category of reSponse less. However, there is an exception with group C which does not maintain this general trend. Salaried employees, when compared to hourly—rated workers, showed the highest scores on knowledge and com- paratively made less use of Don't Know reSponses. Y f-_l 4.1-— .v.._' .1: l 4O 0.NH N.0H 0.0a 0.05 0.0a H.NH 0.NH 0.00 m.ma 0.Ha 0.0H 5.H5 m.ma 0.0 N.HH H.m5 5m pmanmamm 0.0a 0.0 m.ma 5.00 0.0a m.0 m.mH m.05 0.5a 0.ma 0.5a N.00 0.HH m.m 5.Na 0.00 0 m 0.00” 0.NH N.m.n 0.00 0.NH N.NH m.ma 0.50 0.0a m.ma NJ...” 0.00 H.0H 0.NH 0.0a 0.50 0H 0 0.HH 5.HH 0.HH 0.00 0.HH 0.0a 0.0H H.00 0.0a 0.0a 0.0a 5.00 m.aa 0.0H H.HH 0.00 mm m 0.0a 0.0a m.0H 0.H0 0.0a 0.5a H.0H 0.00 0.0a 5.0a m.mH 0.m0 N.5H 5.0a 5.NH 0.00 mm m m.aa 0.0a 0.mH 0.H0 H.0H 0.0a 0.0a 0.m0 0.NH 0.0a 0.HH 0.H0 H.0H m.ma m.0H 0.H0 0m 0 0.0a 0.0m 0.NH 0.00 5.5a N.0N 0.5a 0.00 0.0a 0.0m 0.0a 0.00 5.0a 0.0H 0.HH m.50 mm 0 m.mH 0.5a 0.HH 0.H0 5.0a 0.0a 0.0a ~.N0 «.0H 0.HN 0.0a 0.00 0.0a 0.0a 0.HH 0.00 0m 0 0.0a 0.0a 0.Ha 0.00 0.5a 0.0m 0.0a 5.00 0.0a 0.0m 0.0a 0.50 m.ma N.0H 0.0a 0.00 mm 0 an 2 an, 2 am 2 am 2 gm 2 mm 2 am a am. a 338:0 magma socx mmpmasosx socx mmcmasocx 30cm mmpwasosx 30:0 mmpmaaosm Imam mumamm u.coo p.200 u.c0Q u.c00 mmmoum A4805 mUZQZmommmm ZOHBdBZmEmAmEH mm>HBUflme masonw Hm>ma mumHmm an msofiumH>mQ pumpcmum pcm .mcmmz .mmeuc0500wm .ma magma 41 Table 19 presents the frequencies, means, and stand- ard deviations of knowledge and Don't Know scores obtained on each one of the scales (Objectives, Implementations, and Performance), by each one of the different groups as defined by length of time with the company. Five groups with different service time were con- sidered. They range from 0-4 years to 20-24 years of service to the company. These groups generally rank from lowest to highest on knowledge scores according to their length of time with the company. However, it is interesting that this trend is disrupted sharply by the group with most years of service (20-24), and for which higher scores in knowledge were ex- pected. Table 20 presents the frequencies, means, and stand- ard deviations of knowledge and Don't Know scores for those groups with different number of job changes within the organ- ization. With one exception for group Number 2, on knowledge of Implementations, scores rank lowest to highest according to number of job changes. A complementing pattern in the use of Don't Know reSponses is similarly observed. Those groups with more job changes use this reSponse category less. Table 21 shows the frequencies, means, and standard deviations of knowledge and Don't Know scores for the differ- ent age groups. Five age groups were considered and they were distributed with a class interval of 10 years. 42 I... . : {P1 0.0 0.HH 0.0 0.00 H.aa 5.ma 0.NH 0.00 H.0a 0.Ha 0.HH 0.00 0.0 H.HH 0.0 0.00 NH 0m|0~ 0.0 0.0 0.0a m.H5 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.05 H.0 0.5 0.0a 0.00 0.0 H.0 0.0 H.H5 5 0HI0H 0.0a 0.0a m.NH 0.50 N.0H 0.0a 0.0a 5.00 0.0a 0.0a 0.0a H.00 0.0a m.0H H.NH 0.00 00 0HI0H 0.0a 0.HH 0.aH 0.00 0.0a N.NH 0.0a 0.00 0.0a 0.0a 0.0a 0.00 0.0a 0.0a 0.0H 0.50 00 010 0.0a 5.5a 0.0a H.H0 0.0a m.ma m.0a 0.H0 0.0a 0.0a H.0H 0.00 0.0a 0.0a m.ma 0.m0 00H 010 an s an 2 0m 2 mm s 9... 2 am 2 mm 2 00 s 332050 Gummfl BOCM 0000.30ch 39.30 mmtplmwazocx 30ch 000035083” 430ch mwpmazosm Imum mmEHB u.con u.con u.soa u.con mUHSHmm 000000 1.2.909 0072.2000me onedemaqmzH mm>HBUmbmo mdsouo mafia mofi>umm mo numsmq an maceumw>0n pumpcmum paw .msmmz .mmfiusmswwwm .ma manna 3 4 Paulie-lint!- m.m m.m m.a e.mn m.m m.m 0.0 m.am e.a o.H m.m m.mm m.5 m.6 o.m m.m5 m .m o.ma m.HH m.HH 6.x0 m.HH H.oa e.ga H.oe n.6H 0.6H m.mH N.00 o.ea 4.HH 0.mH H.eo mm 6 S.m o.mH e.m m.m0 o.ma e.ma H.6H 0.x0 H.0H 0.NH 0.4a m.m0 e.ma 0.04 6.0a 5.m0 mm m H.HH m.ma m.OH m.60 m.ma m.vH e.mH 0.00 H.ma «.4H m.ma m.~0 H.HH 6.0H e.HH 0.m0 mm N m.ma e.mH m.aa m.m0 o.mH 0.0a m.6H m.40 m.mH n.6H 0.ma m.60 0.HH m.oa o.NH m.m0 mm a m.ma H.om H.ma 0.6m m.RH N.Hm H.0H «.mm o.mH m.mm e.ma «.mm m.0a m.ka m.ma 0.40 om 0 an s an s an 2 nm 2 mm 2 mm 2 am 2 mm 2 0309050 80820 30cm mmmmazocx mocx mmpmazocx Edam mUUmasocx BUCK mmvmasosx Imum £00 00 0.200 0.c00 u.cpu u.con 000952 mmmoum dance academommmm moneaezmzmqmsH mm>Heomnmo museum mmmGMLU non mo “mnesz mg msoHumH>ma vumpsmum 0cm .msmmz .mmaocmSmem .om magma .I ‘;w‘ m.oH m.oa >.m m.H® o.HH o.ma m.HH m.mo m.ma >.>H m.ma H.om m.HH m.ma w.m m.mo mm omuam v.va m.oa m.mH o.mo m.mH m.mH «.ma m.wo m.na ¢.mH m.ma ¢.Nm o.¢a m.va m.mH m.mm om omuav 0.9H v.0H m.va m.mo «.mH o.ha m.ma m.mm H.mH H.mH H.5H m.mm n.ma m.mH H.¢H m.mo vv ovuam o.ma «.ma o.HH n.¢o o.mH o.ma o.vH o.mo m.ma n.ma o.mH o.m® m.ma m.HH H.ma H.om Hm omaam m.¢a o.m~ m.HH o.vm n.wfl.m.om o.va ¢.Hm m.ma m.wm m.¢a m.mm m.ma m.oa n.mH m.mm ma omnaa an 2 mm a mm 2 mm 2 1‘ mm. 2 mm 2 mm 2 gm 3 mmfiocmsm‘ mmmq 30cm mmwwazocx zocx mmmma3ocx 30cm wwwmazocx 30cm wwwmazoqm Imum u.coa u.com u.con u.con ammoum Q4909 mozmzmommmm monamazmzmamzH mm>Heomnmo masonw mm¢ >9 mcoflumH>mm cumncmum 6cm ~mcmm2 .mmfiocmsvmnm .Hm magma 45 For these groups there can not be observed any Ferticular relationship or trend between knowledge and Hmflt.Know scores and age. 0n the study of scores, the 11- 20 yearsHBomme Ll mmxmm >9 mcoHuma>wQ Unmocmum 0cm .mcmmz .wmfiocdewnm .NN magma 47 Correlation Analysis Table 23 presents the correlation indices between all scores of the questionnaire (Objectives, Implementations, JPerformance and Totals), and.the group variables mentioned previously. These correlations are quite low for all the group ‘variables considered; they range from 0.03 to 0.33. Although no significance tests for these correla- ‘tions were accomplished, it is noted that all correlations Instween knowledge scores and the variables of education, _yob groups, service time, and number of job changes, are Exasitive. Secondly, a trend toward negative correlations between these variables and Don't Know scores can be also noticed. REgarding age, there seems to be no linear relation- sflmip between this group variable and knowledge of organ— ;Lzational reality. Correlations here are very close to zero. v~.on @N.o mm.0l mm.o ¢N.OI Hm.o na.ou na.o mmmcmco non m0 amnesz ma.on ma.o ma.on ma.o ha.OI va.o oa.o: va.o mEfiB mUH>umm om.ou mm.o mm.o- mm.o am.ou mm.o ma.ou mm.o Hm>mu sumamm mH.OI mH.o NH.0I Ha.o mo.on oa.o vH.OI mm.o cofiumusom Ho.o Ho.o mo.o mo.o mo.o mo.0I mo.o mo.OI mmm 30cx mmowa3ocz socx mmpwasocx 30cx mmwwasocx 3ocx mmpmazocx mmaflmwum> UZLOQ u.COQ u.COQ u.COQ nmmOUm AgHOB mo .Emommmm ZOHB¢BZm2mamEH mm>HaumhmO mmHQMaum> macho 0cm mmuoom cmmzumm mcofiumamnnoo .mm magma DISCUSSION The eXperimental problem was to measure the knowledge of organizational reality and to relate this measure empiric- ally to organizational effectiveness as indicated by turn- over, absenteeism, and submission of suggestions for organiza— tional improvement. This design required not only the develOpment of scales to measure organizational reality, but also differing indices of group behavior (absenteeism, turnover, and suggestions), for the eXperimental investigation of the hypo- thesis. In the development of the scales, the information was derived from records provided by the company. In this reSpect, the definition of the environment that was to be measured did not reflect biases or artificial manipulations, and was as objectively constructed as possible. A question arises regarding the sample of items used to measure this environment. The questionnaire did not intend to be inclusive of the entire range of items which could have been used. It is just intended to give a representative cross-section of the information obtained from the company. 49 50 Results bring up an important question regarding the generality of the applicability of this method of relating organizational reality to organizational effectiveness. Would this method apply to all types of industrial situations on a continuum of size? Would it apply as well to small in— dustrial grOUps as to larger systems? would it apply at different levels within the same organization? Ffi‘ In this reSpect it should be said that this method has evolved from the original concept of reality with appli- cation to the individual in particular, and the concept has been further extended to the industrial organization. There— ._m fore, the methodology could possibly be applied to all types of industrial organizations and to other social systems as well. However, the generality of the applicability of this method at different levels within the same industrial organ- ization is a different problem. Vertical application would require a change in content. Provided that content is changed, it is possible to apply this method at different levels within the same organ— ization. In the investigation carried out by Silkiner (1964) the organization was taken as a whole and the level consider— ed was the management level. In this context the method was Successful in determining differences in effectiveness in two Contrasting companies with different degree of knowledge of 51 reality on the part of their members. Silkiner writes: "the method possesses an inherent generality of application for the induStrial, for small organization, for industrial organiza— tions, as well as for larger social systems." Silkiner also points out that further research is needed in this area. In the present investigation, the content of the scales to measure reality was changed to be applicable at the workers' level. The organization was considered in its separated groups (divisions, departments). Additional cri- teria of effectiveness were used. Thus, this investigation was aimed to extend our knowledge on this area as well as the generality of the applicability of this method. T_e Hypothesis and Its Verification Results indicate that, as hypothesized, those divi— sional groups with greater knowledge of organizational real- ity have indeed lower indices of turnover. This is supported by high negative correlations be- tween turnover and knowledge scores, and high positive corre- lations between these indices and the use of Don't Know reSponses. This later fact complements the definition of Don't Know category of reSponse as a control measure, the assumption being that this category should be used least by those work groups that know most about reality and, consequently, positive correlations were eXpected between turnover and Don't Know scores. Ir. 52 In regard to suggestions, the hypothesis was equally confirmed. Positive correlations were found between suggestion indices and knowledge scores, and negative corre- lations between these indices and Don't Know reSponses. Although correlations and significance indices are lower for departmental groups, in regard to turnover and suggestions; results in this reSpect also keep in line with F5“ what was hypothesized. However, for absenteeism indices, the hypothesis was i not confirmed, rather, the main assumption reverses here. g High positive correlations, instead of negative, were found §m_ between knowledge scores and absenteeism, and high negative correlations, instead of positive, between Don't Know scores and these indices. Organizational Reality and Effectiveness Results indicate that it is possible to differentiate groups with differing degree of effectiveness, considering turnover and suggestions as partial criteria, through the knowledge of reality which members of those groups possess. However, results also indicate that if absenteeism is considered as a criteria of effectiveness, the incidence of this group behavior in industrial organizations is not re- lated to knowledge of organizational reality, at least in the sense that more knowledge of reality does not consequently relate to less absenteeism in industrial groups. On the one hand, results support the assumption that knowledge of organizational reality, as defined by its objectives, 53 implementation and performance, is influential on industrial group behavior such as turnover and submission of suggestions for organizational improvement. 0n the other hand, such be- havior accounts for organizational effectiveness. However, the question still remains as to what factors could have accounted for differing degrees in knowledge of organization- al reality among groups. Secondary explorations were carried I? out on this reSpect. Its discussion follows. Secondary Explorations In regard to those relationships investigated as secondary eXplorations, two things deserve to be mentioned. First, correlations between knowledge scores and the variables of education, wage-salary level, length of service time with the company, and number of job changes within the organiza— tion, are all positive. This trend toward positive correla- tions is very much in line with what was expected on this reSpect. Also, a trend toward negative correlations between these variables and Don't Know scores, complements this find- ing. It is felt that more detailed and extensive research is needed in this area before making any conclusive state- ments about the relationship between these variables and knowledge of organizational reality. Special attention should be given to those factors influencing communication as well as to the possible existence of differing patterns of communication among the different groups considered. 54 However, to a certain extent it might be anticipated that employees with the advantage of more years of formal education, might be more knowledgeable about the_organiza— tional reality since they might take more advantage of infor- mation reports and other materials available. It is further possible to eXpect that employees with longer tenure with the company and with experience in P more job assignments would be better informed and more ex— posed to more parts, facts, and practices of the company. This finding has implications for personnel training and *- develOpment as well as for job enlargement programs. aim Implications for Further Research Considering further research in this area, two approaches are of Special interest. On the one hand, the framework of this research could be extended to organizations other than industrial to test the practicability of the method in other situations and extend its generality. By the same token, this extension could be also done along vertical and horizontal continuums, eXperimenting with organizations of various sizes as well as along different levels within the same organization. On the other hand, research appears promising in- cluding training as a prime variable. The situation could be analyzed as in this research and then design the training needs according to the degree of knowledge of reality, or discrepancies on this knowledge, among industrial groups. S UEVII‘ ZA RY A medium-sized Michigan manufacturing organization was chosen for study with the purpose of eXploring the re- lationship between the employees' knowledge of organizational r‘ reality and certain indices of organizational effectiveness. Employees were studied and comparedeccording to the divisions, departments and working shifts to which they belonged. -—w—- Silkiner (1964) develOped a three—scale question- naire to measure knowledge of organizational reality as de- fined by its objectives, implementation, and performance. These scales were designed to measure organizational reality at the management level. As part of the present research, the three scales were revised for the use in the entire work force. Besides the three measures of organizational reality yielded by the questionnaire (objective, implementation, and performance), a composite of the scores of the three scales was also used as a total knowledgeability score. Three indices of industrial group behavior were con- sidered as partial criteria of organizational effectiveness, They were: turnover, absenteeism, and submission of sugges- tions by employees for organizational improvement. Other group characteristics such as sex, age, length of time with the company, number of job changes within the 55 56 organization, wage-salary level, and educational level, were also considered. Data was gathered and analyzed according to these variables in order to eXplain the variability in know- ledge of organizational reality among the employees in the different divisions, departments and working shifts. The following results were obtained: 1. In the three divisions of the company as well as in their r1 reSpective departments, the employees who obtained higher scores in knowledge of objectives, implementation, perform- IA“! ance, and total knowledgeability score, had the lowest indices s of turnover as well as the highest indices of turning in suggestions. 2. In the three divisions of the company as well as in their reSpective departments, the employees who obtained higher scores on knowledge of objectives, implementation, performance, and total knowledgeability score, had the highest indices of absenteeism. 3. In regard to the other group variables considered, a con- sistent trend of positive correlationsvas found between the employees' knowledge of organizational reality (objectives, implementation, and performance), and the number of job changes within the organization, length of time with the company, educational level, and wage-salary level. 4. It was found a significant difference in knowledge of organizational reality and the sex of the employees in the three divisions and their reSpective departments. This difference favoring the male employees. 57 These results support the assumption that knowledge <3f organizational reality, as defined by its objectives, .bmplementation, and performance, is influential on industrial t\\s\ MICHIGAN STQTE UNIV. LIBRQRI IES 1 III! HIIHIIIWIIHNIIIHII llll NH Ill 1 31293102461120 ll