LIAISON COMMUNICATION ROLES OF PROFESSIONALS IN A RESEARCH DISSEMINATION ORGANIZATION _ Thesis for the Degreeof Ph. D. . = MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY ‘ EDWIN H. AMEND -1971 I 5mm“.-.LM¢—ar....o I I.) -t “ :I ‘ . 1‘ “X . Air-‘1- ‘ I \ This is to certify that the thesis entitled I LIAISON COMMUNICATION ROLES ‘ OF PROFESSIONALS IN A ‘ RESEARCH DISSEMINATION ORGANIZATION I presented by Edwin H . Amend has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph . D . degree in Communication /. I‘m/u {Jr A ' \ I Major professor Date May 10 . 1971 ' 0-7639 '1 0V E FINES: 25¢ per day per Ite- RETUMIIB LIBRARY MATERIALS: ' _ ..-, ‘ Place in book return to remove “’5'” I charge from circulation records gfl-mx . ' 7;] 4 it . @Q‘xw‘y‘w ( “307W 6......» ' 7 PICKUP SPR 1983 33*QII6 we? 157 I gr '1‘ .__—____,_. Lm- ‘fl IN A Research re;- mlogical ana lysi u. :rgaiization analyze aid [2) an empirical pattern variables am The research sgec;alists in an or i.:. J ‘ ....I::catcon der lved 1:5cussion and model Prmess, along with {war-v.4 ' .qaazatlon studier' Data were 9; academic depaz 7% f“: 0-7511 interview V 73* “meats. BiOgr- C 2:; . Organizationa 1 The first p; r‘w ~13 gener ic *‘-Uni( 1;; ~. N‘.‘ aid not ConSid¢ tint. ‘ “= lor ' LShlpS. It ‘ J it to be H - . 1n te‘ ABSTRACT LIAISON COMMUNICATION ROLES OF PROFESSIONALS IN A RESEARCH DISSEMINATION ORGANIZATION by Edwin H. Amend Research reported here consists of a study in two parts: (1) a tOpological analysis of the extant communication structure of the organization analyzed along three dimensions of communication contact, and (2) an empirical analysis of relationships between communication pattern variables and communication structure. The research is a field study conducted among subject matter specialists in an organization designed for the dissemination of information derived from research. The study includes a theoretical discussion and model of the research dissemination and utilization process, along with a description of the actual research dissemination organization studied. Data were gathered from fifty respondents who are assigned to seven academic departments of Michigan State University. A structured personal interview was used, supplemented by ancillary self-administered instruments. Biographical data and additional information were gathered from organizational records. The first part of the study was undertaken to provide a map of the generic communication structure of the organization. The method used did not consider hierarchical levels or formally prescribed role relationships. It was designed to show "what is," rather than "what ought to be," in terms of intra-organizational communication contact. Results Of 1 penctdents accordl’. res were derived or :crsiiering both th'i mar-group) 0f intv. intact so measured The analysis ssthmthesized If‘ aaglified in the t be of liaisonness .re six independent related to liaisor.r.-: ,.. -<) information inpz; 4; . network central; 74393 diversity. 0f the en: E. 93‘ \‘tl', 5..‘ .e correlatio: .11: Between liaise . 121; Rication diVerg “Climaticn 0U tput C 25 ~‘ . . “‘50 POSitively en ‘ “.IE‘. Edwin H. Amend Results of the first part of the study were used to describe respondents according to typologies of communication contact. Typolo- gies were derived on the basis of reciprocated sociometric choice, considering both the number and the location (i.e., intra-group and inter-group) of interpersonal contact. The attribute of interpersonal contact so measured was defined as liaisonness. The analysis in the second part of the study was designed to test hypothesized relationships between communication structure, as exemplified in the typologies, and communication patterns. The attri- bute of liaisonness was the dependent variable in six formal hypotheses. The six independent variables which were hypothesized to be positively related to liaisonness were: (1) peer-evaluated effectiveness, (2) information input diversity, (3) peer communication diversity, (4) network centrality, (5) Opinion leadership, and (6) information output diversity. Of the six hypotheses tested, five were supported by the data. Positive correlations (at less than the .05 level of significance) were found between liaisonness and: peer-evaluated effectiveness, peer communication diversity, network centrality, opinion leadership, and information output diversity. The variables in the remaining hypothesis are also positively correlated, but not at a statistically significant level. The findings of the present study support the findings of pre- vious research, which suggest that a small percentage of the members of an organization serve as key linking individuals between subsystems of the organization. of Communicat Michigan Stat the requireme Guidance Cor: Accepted by the faculty of the Department of Communication, College of Communication Arts, Michigan State University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doct of Ph osophy degree. Guidance Committee: Fl i n p~ LIAISON COMMUNICATION ROLES OF PROFESSIONALS IN A RESEARCH DISSEMINATION ORGANIZATION by Edwin H.3Amend A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Communication 1971 fCopyright by Edwin Hinshaw Amend 1971 To Dee, My wife and partner, And to our children, Mary, Noel, Carol, and Chris. This thesis represents the culmination of a three-year family effort. It would not have been possible without your encouragement and wholehearted cooperation. ii A dissertat. Tate intangible port. the result of inter. I: the faculty and : "munication, I e:-:. Ever. me to grow 1:. Special the. cmttee; E‘Jerett Reg :setinq in Niger ia :2 littee chairman Hideya rim. "‘1an director a: FIEd 'fi'ais :5 in my e‘ forts Eugene J u . P90 . ‘ :‘e U R n “ed LAPGtUS 34330;) Hi; 1' 503+ ~0ra1 Study AM; . ”WEI/v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS A dissertation is the tangible evidence of a study program. The intangible portion, the intellectual growth of the scholar, is the result of interaction between the student and many other people. To the faculty and my fellow graduate students in the Department of Communication, I express my thanks for the opportunities you have given me to grow intellectually. Special thanks are extended to the members of my doctoral committee: Everett Rogers, whom I have counted as a friend since our first meeting in Nigeria in 1965, and who served as my academic advisor and committee chairman until the time of his sabbatical leave; Hideya Kumata, who counselled and guided me as teacher, disser- tation director and acting committee chairman; Fred Waisanen, whose classes and personal counsel have helped me in my efforts to comprehend the human condition; Eugene Jacobson, whose intellectual stimulation and guidance provided impetus and conceptual support for this dissertation; Mason Miller, with whom I worked as Graduate Assistant during my doctoral studies, and who provided counsel and friendship along with academic stimulation . iii 'ID my c0118 its dissertation i m nth assistance 15: grateful for t ;rcfect. Anita Imel :rp‘xerization an: A large mes snients in the Ins have thoroughly en: 55 an instructor a: "5 intellectual at: personal growth. f To my famii express my deep gr. “611 support and . Fifi» c , ' «0.11 teen- aCc.' J... To my colleague, Nemi Jain, I owe a special debt of thanks. This dissertation is part of a larger research project undertaken by him with assistance from fellow graduate students, including myself. I am grateful for the use of data which emanated from that research project. Anita Immele provided prompt and pleasant assistance in the computerization and analysis of data. To her I express my appreciation. A large measure of appreciation must go to my own graduate students in the Institute for Extension Personnel Development. I have thoroughly enjoyed my three years of association with them, both as an instructor and as counsellor. They have continually challenged my intellectual ability, and have provided interaction leading to personal growth. To them I say, "Thank you." To my family, to whom this dissertation is dedicated, I express my deep gratitude. The real meaning of words acknowledging their support and c00peration can be understood only by other scholars with four teen-agers, undertaking a graduate study program in mid- career. iv LIST OF TABLES . LIST OF FIGURES. EQIER I. INTRODUCT PurPose... Contribut SCOPE of : 11- THEOPETIC.‘ Rationale The Strea: organizer~+ Formal R0le P... RECipr- SYSte: LabOrai RESearCh I Organ:— Orgagl; Orgaii; Resear< RESEarCh I TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABIJES . O O O O O O O O O 0 C O C O . O C . O O O O . Viii LIST OF FIGL’RES O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 CHAPTER I. II. III. INTRODUCTIONOOOO ....... 00............OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. mrmseOOOOOOOOOOCOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO .....IOCOOOOO Contribution of the Study............................ Scope of Literature Search........................... THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND LITERATURE REVIEW......... Rationale............................................ The Stream of History: Previous Research on Organization and Communication............. ....... ... Formal vs. Informal Organizations. ..... ........... Role Relationships................................ Reciprocity and Linkages.......................... System Relationships.............................. Laboratory vs. "Live Organization" Study.......... Research Dissemination and Utilization............... Organizational Constraints........................ Organizations as Linkage Systems.................. Organizing for Information Exchange............... Research on Dissemination Systems................. Research Dissemination and Utilization: The Extension Model...................................... Data Collection...................................... Data Analysis and Display............................ Sociometric Networks and the Liaison Role............ Research Foundations: Selected References........... Hypotheses........................................... RESEARCH METHomLOGYQOOOO......IOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.... Approach to the Study................................ The Research Dissemination Organization: A Theoretic Model...................................... The Linking System of A Research Dissemination Organization......................................... N>H 10 12 13 14 17 18 19 20 21 22 25 26 28 33 43 49 49 51 57 IV The Actt Sam;le.. Samplin: Data Col Data Ana The Corr The Soc: Types 0: Liaison: Operatit Liars Peer- Info: Peer- Comm: Opini nfoz Hypo 1 RESEAR: Intertie Char actE Data Co: Data ARE CommURir TeChnicg COHmuni: SociOSIe SOCiOSIe EmergEn( The Lia; Cmrflu‘r‘i( LiaisOn: The Lia; ”Home: Hypothes other F: SL'T'L‘J‘A‘Del 8 'mary. in CO: Other F1 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd.) CHAPTER Page The Actual Research Setting......................... 59 Sample........................ ..... ................. 61 Sampling procedure.............. ...... .............. 62 Data Collection................. ......... ........... 63 Data Analysis and Display........................... 65 The Communimatrix................................... 65 The Sociogram....................................... 69 Types of Liaison Roles.............................. 71 Liaisonness as a Role Concept....................... 73 Operationalization of Variables..................... 75 Liaisonness...................................... 76 Peer-Evaluated Effectiveness..................... 78 Information Input Diversity.............. ........ 79 Peer-Communication Diversity..................... 81 Communication Network Centrality................. 83 Opinion Leadership............................... 84 Information Output Diversity........ .......... ... 85 Hypothesis Testing............................... 85 IV. RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION.. .................. 88 Interviewee ReSponse................................ 88 Characteristics of the Respondents.................. 89 Data Collection Using the Sociometric Technique..... 90 Data Analysis and Display........................... 91 Communimatrix Analysis: Reciprocation on Technical Matters................................... 92 Communimatrix Decomposition: Technical Matters..... 95 Sociograms as a Method of Data Display.............. 97 Sociogram: Liaisons and Technical Matters.......... 98 Emergence of the Liaison Role....................... 100 The Liaison Set..................................... 102 Communication Isolates.............................. 102 Liaisonness as a Continuous Variable................ 103 The Liaisonness Index............................... 104 Hypothesis Testing.................................. 107 Hypothesis Testing: Summary........................ 111 Other Findings...................................... 112 V. SWM'ARY AND CONCLUSIONS.......OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO...... 1'18 Summary............................................. 119 Main Conceptual Findings............................ 121 Main Empirical Findings............................. 122 Other Findings...................................... 123 vi ”‘7' KER 5J1 ContribUi Limitatic Practica; Suggesti: E.ELlOGRAPH‘i. . . , , . A Organizai tensio: 3 Entry Le C lntervie Instrumc D Additio; E Prescri Teachin F IntEr-1 G LiaiSO: TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd.) CHAPTER Page Contributions of the Present Study.................. 123 Limitations of the Present Study.................... 124 Practical Implications............ .......... ........ 127 Suggestions for Future Research..................... 130 BIBLImRAPHYOOOOOOOOIOCO ..... .....OOOOOOOOOOOOIOOOO ..... .0... 136 APPENDIX A Organization Chart of Michigan C00perative mtenSion serViCe..............OOOCCOOOOOOOOOOOOO... 145 B EI‘try LetteIOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO......OOOOOOOO0.0.0.0.... 146 C Interview Schedule Including Self-Administered InstrmentSOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.00.0.........OOOOOOOOOOOO 147 D Additional Data Analysis and Display................ 159 E Prescribed Forms for Reporting Extension Teaching Activities and Instructions................ 168 F Inter-Item Correlation Matrices..................... 174 G Liaisonness IndeXOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO......OOOOOOOOOOOO 181 Vii HIE 1 Items In Input In 2 Items Ir Indices, 3 Items I: IndlCes 4 CharaCt. 6 RESultE 7 Results Tested LIST OF TABLES TABLE Page 1 Items Included in Constructing Information Input Indices.............OCOOOOOOOO0.00.00......... 80 2 Items Included in Constructing Peer-Communication IndiceSOOOIOOOOO0.0....0.0.0.000.........OOOOOOOOOCO 82 3 Items Included in Constructing Information Output IndiceSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.0.........OOOOOOOOOOO 86 4 Characteristics of the Respondents.................. 89 5 Respondent Categories and Liaisonness Index Scores.. 105 6 Results of Statistical Tests of Hypotheses.......... 112 7 Results of Other Variables not Formally TeSted in HymtheseSOOQOOOOOOOOOOOOOno... oooooooooo o 114 viii I-Omw-r ' ' a"... aobv M. ll Q The linki person... The cone: Nature a: Patterns utilizat; The Systr research Schematic under st: Example : member h; Graph th. and brie PiIOt Co: tEChnicéf mental a; FiISt an:| ChoiCeS a groups _ aSsignmel Sociogra: CthuhiC | LI ST OF FIGURES FIGURE Page 1. The linking function performed by L, the liaison mrsonOOCOOCOOOOOOOOOO.......OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOI0.... 36 2. The communication system, with liaison L removed.... 37 3. Nature and interrelationships of communication patterns in the three social systems in research utilization ProceSSOOOCOCOCI.......OOOOOCOOOCOOOOOOO 56 4. The systems and the functions they perform in a research dissemination organization................. 57 5. Schematic representation of the linking system under StUdYOOOOOOCOOO.0.0.0.0000...0.0.0.000...0.... 58 6. Example of a binary matrix representing a five- member hypothetical communication network........... 66 7. Communimatrix showing segments, e.g., cliques or work groups, and region of outside contacts......... 68 8. Example of a reciprocated-choice sociogram.......... 7O 9. Graph theory representation of articulation point and bridge........ ....... .. ........ ... ...... ........ 73 10. Pilot communimatrix: Reciprocated choices on technical matters without reference to depart- mental assj—gment.........OOOOOCOOO0.00.0.000....... 94 11. First analytic communimatrix: Reciprocated choices on technical matters with primary work groups (segments) identified by departmental assignment of respondents........................... 96 12. Sociogram representing intra-organizational communication on the topic of technical matters..... 99 ix FIGURE 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. LIST OF FIGURES (Cont'd.) Sociogram representing intra-organizational communication on the tOpic of technical matters with liaisons removed............................... Second communimatrix: Reciprocated choices on peer-evaluated effectiveness........................ Third communimatrix: Reciprocated choices on opinion leaderShj—p.0.00.00.00.00.........OOOOOOOO... Sociogram representing intra-organizational communication on the tOpic of peer-evaluated effectiveneSSOCCOOOO0..........OOOOOCOOOOOOOOOOOO... Sociogram representing intra-organizational communication on the topic of peer-evaluated effectiveness, with liaisons removed................ Sociogram representing intra-organizational communication on the topic of opinion leadership.... Sociogram representing intra-organizational communication on the topic of opinion leadership, with liaisons removed............................... page 101 160 162 163 165 166 167 The p’JrPCi asset the flow of #1-- iissenination org; tier. about patter: agloyees engaged research and at: Knowledge fetter understand me'ledge of the 'a'ld‘aals and sub-g l‘srger organizat; 210’- links in the The basic CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Pur se The purpose of the present study is to increase our knowledge about the flow of communication among specialists* in a research ”Ml-“1......- - ---—"~- n. 7".-' ' dissemination organization.** The study is designed to yield informa- tion about patterns of interpersonal contacts among professional employees engaged in University extension work, classroom teaching, research and administration. Knowledge of interpersonal communication patterns will provide better understanding of the communication structure of the organization. Knowledge of the communication structure and the degree to which indi- viduals and sub-groups of an organization are integrated into the larger organization will help us understand the function of communica- tion links in the organization. The basic objectives of the present work will be to (l) deve10p a t0pological, or "mapping" analysis of the extant communication structure, and (2) functionally analyze the dynamics of information *The "specialists" in the present study are highly trained, subject-matter experts who are full-time faculty members in the Michigan COOperative Extension Service, belonging to their respective academic departments in the university. **A research dissemination organization is defined as a large, complex organization whose basic function is to disseminate useful research results and other innovations to clients, and to receive from clients feedback regarding research needs and their utilization of the information. in through the P. fish'will include . :easureuent of the I: azalyzing communic ._ H . mes in a resea er. the liaison cor- will be expressed a _* :1! s cc...I-EtlthIl of t‘r. The presen mama and flow "ichisan State um i‘ltth a college, C“:-§~' u. nahées to ca'l‘par ‘3 Zations, For ex 3313] .....al cmparative ::¢dings ' SChWar- fat“ as ‘LY 0f the Co a‘llz ed the pr 2 flow through the pOpulation under study. The analysis of information flow Will include a search for the liaison communication role* and measurement of the liaison role with other pertinent variables. In analyzing communication patterns among specialists performing linking roles** in a research dissemination organization, the focus will be on the liaison communication role. Liaisonness in communication roles will be expressed in the form of a numerical index. Contribution of the Study The present study will provide a measure of the communication structure and flow among specialist staff members of a college in Michigan State University. Besides describing communication patterns within a college, the index of liaisonness might be useful in other studies to compare communication patterns between other complex organi- zations. For example, Schwartz (1968:164) points out the need for addi- tional comparative studies to validate the generalizability of his findings. Schwartz investigated liaison communication roles among the faculty of the College of Education at Michigan State University. He recognized the problem of applying statistical tests to samples and *The liaison communication role was discovered by Jacobson and Seashore (1951:37) who noted that "some individuals appear to function as liaison persons between groups, and characteristically have many, frequent, reciprocated, and important contacts which cut across the contact group structure. The (liaison) persons, who appear to have liaison functions in the communication system of the organization, participate widely in the communication system but are not identifiable in any simple way with a single sub~group." **"Linking roles," as discussed by Jain (l970:3), "perform the function of facilitating the effective communication of research know- ledge from the research system to the client system in such a way that the knowledge is put to effective use." populations derive: smdies to extend 1 MacDonald 3f the liaison com studied the liaiso zation within a F e the need for addit specially since :0- tially been case s The presen 51°?- SPeCialists i Riversity, It ma Peed With the fin 4,‘ 1 ’9‘ mm) and MacDo“a cuminication pat+ 91”.“, No.35 . . "33E f‘r' .' d‘ L‘tera‘l‘v The genera Jamlcation, 9r c :71» . ' There e - y v 398 c e 33.: h are . C . Info ma ”1““ t1 I! the 3 p0pulations derived from saturation sampling, and called for further studies to extend his findings. MacDonald (1970) echoed Schwartz' call for additional studies of the liaison concept in different organizational settings. MacDonald studied the liaison role as it appeared in a large Civil Service organi- zation within a Federal bureaucracy. He, like Schwartz, pointed out the need for additional studies in order to validate the concept, expecially since previous research using the liaison concept has essen- tially been case studies within complex organizations. The present study will provide data about the COOperative Exten- sion specialists in the College of Agriculture at Michigan State University. It may be that findings of the present study can be com- pared with the findings of Jacobson and Seashore (1951), Schwartz (1968) and MacDonald (1970), thus offering a basis for comparison of communication patterns among four different types of complex organiza- tions. Scope of Literature Search The general literature search was in the area of organizational communication, group dynamics, research utilization and the liaison function. There exists a large body of research literature on the social/psychological aspects of communication within organizations. mm _' 'rcn v...“ Much of the literature on the phenomenon of human communication within t~,—.~,—.. 7 r. ....— ~...r.a.- r-n—-—rh- ... - . . ‘A -..... formal organizations is directed toward the management of communication "' '»'¥‘“I ‘ ‘ .' ‘1‘ .'\I'-‘. q..— ‘for the purposes of the organization. , -wM—c—fl' _ ..__ "u—‘e “"“ In the area of group dynamics, there exists a great deal of research information about communication patterns and human interaction within the boundaries of small groups. Much laboratory research has be done with com gall, closed netw< research of this me try, in the "real Part of the reason research has been Lack of measuremer The par ti: y’- 535‘! are those w' --.-..ch informat $510Pliers Of the j desi fin as: Ed f0]: the d3PIOXimati0n it 331.5 of that re Bhic' ' n 15 Perce'h Rent has been saw-3t ion as :ngligation 4 been done with communication structural and pattern variables, using small, closed networks of interacting participants. Very little research of this nature appears to have been done outside the labora- tory, in the "real" world of open-system, steady-state organizations. Part of the reason for the lack of such real-life organizational research has been the difficulty of structural identification and a lack of measurement tools. r_The particular types of organization pertaining to the present f" study are those which are established for the purpose of_getting. information from one.sub-system to another; and more especially, getting Jresearch information disseminated to the clients who are potential, adepters of the information. - {I There are few reports of studies conducted on such organizations designed for the dissemination of research information. The nearest approximation is the study of the diffusion of innovations. But the ———-ir_.m_,_u_,w_c.mim-w~~ u~uew~.mnmflfl,mnr focus of that research tradition is on the movement of an innovation which is perceived as new through a social system over time. Measure- ment has been at the level of the individual, with the adoption of the innovation as the critical measurement point. The organizations or -—_.__ .....--'-4.—-* ' “"'\i 7“ -rs.-v4r"- “r. . ..r- communicatignmstructureswthemselveSgwhichrgnablewtheiéiffPSiODp9f W “ Wlw’"; W innovation have been largely ignored as objects of research. ...”,- “gm-I’m Mp-..~,. I K . \I Mbre germane to the present study is the research literature on communication within and between groups, and methods of analyzing communication flow within an organization. There appears to be less research literature available on communication between groups than there is on communication within groups. Previous I present study are are directly relat are reports of re hema'ement of 1:. regcrts bear on t:. literature review If there ; :“i‘fer from a dear Eeiioiology , The reports dealing w; Ella: enough to for the conduct 0! 5 Previous research studies which bear Specifically upon the present study are scarce. Only five research reports were found which are directly related to the type of study reported here. There are some reports of research which utilized the liaison concept in tracing the movement of information through an organization. Where such reports bear on the present study, they have been referenced in the literature review or at appropriate points in the present report. If there is one area of the literature search which does not suffer from a dearth of information, it is on the topic of research methodology. The present author found a large number of research reports dealing with a variety of methods and concepts which are similar enough to the present study to provide stimuli and rationale for the conduct of the research. THEO?‘ Communicai tiltencing the be argafizations. Co gaie'it variables , enable, in resea tear. camunicatic sion is lirked u The basic | .z‘erature relevar. trgaiizational set Signed for the dis LIra review is a c Present study . The chant 1"“.er ' Jane and pro 'ilth a Statement CHAPTER II THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND LITERATURE REVIEW Communication has long been recognized as a major force influencing the behavior of individuals both within and outside of organizations. Communication behaviors have been manipulated as inde- . .._ w' pendent variables, and measured in a variety of ways as the dependent H“ u‘.v.~~-W-—.w m “a. ~--<\-» ...,. M variable, in research attempts to better understand the phenomenon of- ” ”-91- .. vw‘ "“'" M "’h an communication. Researchers have attempted to specify how communi- ”, 5." .LA nau- r.»'- ""4““ cation is linked with other aspects of human behavior in organizations. The basic purpose of the present chapter is to discuss the literature relevant to the study of communication processes within organizational settings, with special attention to organizations de- signed for the dissemination of information. Contained in the litera- ture review is a discussion of research methodology to be used in the present study. The chapter includes a review of cogent studies which lay a 7theoretic and procedural foundation for the present research, and closes with a statement of hypotheses to be tested. Rationale for the Present Study Humanficommunication appears to be an essential, though somewhat J “I " ' .. ""0’ 7'“ " r.,..._._._-. « , 0,. ' "" “am-... ... -7 ~ ,r.n~q¢w-mpfi. elusive, concept in understanding the operation of organizations. In ’— K.._.r' one of the early treatises on the essential nature of communication within an organization, Barnard (l938:9) wrote: oi'in a munica: ,' the St: . tion a: tion tC To Barnarr’.‘ tion. and had an ‘1 meanthe organi: Walton (1 accounting for t?" non system; and . Hwy .1 understanding that if we can ma} hemeen different to the outside wo: organization . Bavelas a 1‘. existing net 0 -5 a complicated U. - me 151 Portance of (in :4 ' ‘ - ntdatlon 7 \x ...in any exhaustive theory of organization, com- .! munication would occupy a central place, because {' the structure, extensiveness, and sc0pe of organiza- ;, tion are almost entirely determined by communica- ii tion techniques. To Barnard, communication was pervasive throughout the organiza- tion, and had an effect on both the formal and informal structures within the organization. Walton (1963:46) contended that "...the most significant factor accounting for the total behavior of the organization is its communica- tion system, and the dynamics of the organization can be best understood by understanding its system of communication". Deutsch (1952) observed that if we can map the pathways by which information is communicated between different parts of an organization and by which it is applied to the outside world, we will have gone far in understanding the organization. Bavelas and Barrett (1951:37) warned that "the job of mapping an existing net of communications, even in a relatively small company, is a complicated and difficult one." Bavelas and Barrett also emphasized the importance of bridging the lacuna between the simple, directly con- trolled experiment and the very complex, indirectly controlled social situation. Havelock (1969:3-14) observed that communication among peers is important. He stated that "among scientists there is a tremendous motivation to communicate, especially to disseminate one's own ideas in printed form to the relevant professional audience of other certified scientists in one's own discipline." He claimed that in the scientific community, the coin of the realm is recognition from colleagues. Scientists compete fiercely for it, sometimes to the exclusion of other considerations. Such com: I cation. Interper :rcups, between (3 4 relevant, in some: rpraviors vary w; Research “...... trained speciali. in“, potentially fruit W '-~-- .-_, 53,3951, existing 501711 ibution to i Chou Within an or organizatim a 21:5 . a $ues’ Includin IElat' . 510.18, and O tur ' d ~: . o d by 8 Such competition may be sustained through interpersonal communi- cation. Interpersonal communication includes communication within groups, between groups, and with persons seen by the individual as relevant, in some way, to his interests. Patterns of communication behaviors vary widely between individuals. Research on the communication behaviors of scientifically- ww.i“~'trmlt-w '11-""" ,r'. _-'--,‘.W trained specialists in a research_dissemination*organizationniSra""= h MHHWWWNIWWWL heard...rr I potentially fruitful area of investigation. Such a study, in a real \wfl,,.r.rrnmwmwfimflfiwmhmmwngwi.,-r_i--. 77m . system, existing in its natural settings, could make a significant contribution to the literature. The Stream of History: Previous Research on Organization and Communication There are a wide variety of approaches to the study of communi- cation within an organizational setting. Literature on the elements of organizational communication is found across a wide span of disci- plines, including psychology, sociology, business management, human relations, and other types of human organization. Common to the litera- ture is the assumption that human organization is centered around role designations, hierarchical statuses, and patterned interactions among the persons within the organization. The concept of human organization is described by Merton (1949:151): A formal, rationally organized social structure involves clearly defined patterns of activity in which, ideally, every series of actions is function- ally related to the purposes of the organization. In such an organization there is an integrated series of offices, of hierarchized statuses, in which inhere a number of obligations and privi- leges closely defined by limited and specific rules. sexton‘s view all ;;terrelation5hi? gaporarily occup Formal vs sore simply descr aost useful conce systems is embodi sister: of conscio persons.“ Consci lemlcati‘le eff Contrasti {15}, . '- ' ' 2.3.3.113) identi I EC L '1 C ' egate of the”: groups of people. "1!; 5' ' ....ermite and r .at common resul P " '1‘ ' ”Isirlzation, Mitchell 9 Merton's view allows the organization to endure as a dynamic set of interrelationships, regardless of the individual persons who may temporarily occupy a role or status. Formal vs. informal organization. The formal organization is more simply described by Barnard (1938:73), who observed that "...the most useful concept for the analysis of experience of cooperative systems is embodied in the definition of a formal organization as a system of consciously coordinated activities or forces of two or more persons." Conscious coordination of activity requires deliberate communicative efforts by the principals involved in the activity. Contrasting the formal and informal organization, Barnard (1938:115) identified the informal organization as consisting of the "aggregate of the personal contacts and interactions and the associated groups of people." He described the informal organization as being "indefinite and rather structureless." Barnard recognized, however, that common results of important character can come from the informal organization. Mitchell (1970:99) found in a study within a university that down-flow of messages followed the lines of authority, up-flow of messages followed the reporting function, while the cross-flow of messages could not be traced with the formal organizational chart. The important fact Mitchell pointed out is that "while the up and down flow 0f messages followed organizational lines, much of the more important message flow went across organizational lines by means of the routes 0f influence and cooperation." The messages which followed the informal routes in Mitchell's Study'were those which energized the day-by-day activities of the {imam under St‘v’ reach the depart? :‘id not know what scorered by Mite. trough the use 0 There nee zit-cation system". suggested that "C depeident on effe turn regiires inf ford that formal jottly active or effective formal A trouble formal organizat t; «at, the funct‘ not even aPprox '1 10 program under study. Since the informal messages usually did not reach the department heads, those peOple later complained that they did not know what was going on in the program. The clique structure uncovered by Mitchell's communication questionnaire existed mostly through the use of informal cross-flow of messages. There need not be conflict between the formal and informal com- munication systems within an organization. In fact, Davis (l953a:43) suggested that "communication to the worker and from the worker is dependent on effective management communication; and clearly this in turn requires informal as well as formal channels." Davis (l953a) found that formal and informal communication systems tend to be jointly active or jointly inactive. In other words, where there was effective formal communication, there was also an active grapevine. A troublesome aspect of organizational study is that while the formal organization may be clearly spelled out by administrative fiat, the functional communication dynamics of the organization may not even approximate the pattern specified by the organizational chart. As pointed out by Cartwright and Zander (1953) the structure of a group consists not only of differentiated parts, but also of relations between the parts. It may be one thing to identify the components of organization, but quite another thing to comprehend the dynamic rela- tionships between the components. Role relationships. One useful way to analyze an organization is to examine the role-relationships which exist, either by decree or by custom, between the organizational sub-units. Hage and Marwell (1968) argue that the use of role-relationships, rather than the individual, as theB‘unit of analysis may be conducive to the generation of testable Propositions at the level of role theory. The cones networks. Accor: set of expectati: L of a person who : aidition to the s mutation net iegrees of comple- Jacobson, 4... 4:12.56 of in tecr a .4 1: Part from the .....E Dehd'v'ior of y- K m tent On to State ”hill at i T. Wile] :c ‘h' :Ela titre 1‘] uni h u I ~H'J u r h . 4 ~e lderlgical Cmparln gen: ‘ECCl'd 0f thEir One Of . 11 The concept of social role appears to be cogent to the study of networks. According to Hare (1962:122), "role" refers primarily to the set of expectations which group members share concerning the behavior of a person who occupies a position in a group. Hare stated that "in addition to the specification of expected role content, the expected communication network and interaction rate may be viewed with various degrees of complexity." Jacobson, Charters and Lieberman (1951:20) suggested that "the degree of integration existing within an organization at any time stems in part from the degree of consensus or sharing of expectations about the behavior of people who occupy various positions." These authors went on to state that "behavior can be predicted more accurately in an organization where consensus is highly developed than in one where it is relatively undeveloped, even though the formal organization charts may be identical." Comparing roles, Burns (1954) asked a number of executives in a British firm to keep records of their own behavior: what sorts of things they did, with whom they talked, what they told others, etc. He collected the records, analyzed them and then asked the administrators some questions in order to find out what they thought they did. Compar- ing observation with interview, Burns found that administrators erred systematically in summarizing and describing their own behavior. He also noted that the administrators were astonished at the sharp diver- gence between their perceptions of what they were doing and the actual record of their own behavior. One of Burns' noteworthy findings was that in 40 percent of the 'CaSes when a superior claimed he had given a subordinate "an instruction," :he subordinate r. ‘iidings illustra famal organizat; of the roles. Weiss (13‘ for sore, with 0'. met members of : 3021‘; be nonorgar. the formal struc': Reciproci \— L‘n‘ 3.4. — ....aL interperswnc 37nd by reciproc involves a SYSte; reciPIOCity and s"-‘§9ested that " .eCLprocity —- , flawed by int; ia- (ijé‘j‘ «:65) that ' ‘ 3&6 lack adec 12 the subordinate noted that he had merely been "given advice." Burns' findings illustrate that authority relationships as outlined in the formal organization chart may be differently perceived by the tenants of the roles. Weiss (1956:50) succinctly observed that an individual "...works .fgr some, with others, and is responsible for still a third group. With most members of the organization he does not work at all; to do so would be nonorganizational, an avoidance of the channels laid down by the formal structure." Reciprocity and linkages. Sussman (l969b:l9) took the view that interpersonal relationships may be studied as systems of linkages bound by reciprocity. According to Sussman's conceptualization, linkage involves a system of exchanges of unequal value within expectations of reciprocity and continuous bargaining by individuals involved. He suggested that "systems of relationships are woven into a matrix of reciprocity -- exchanges of unequal amounts and of different genus received by interacting individuals or groups." Sussman also stated (l969a:65) that "linking is undertaken by functionaries of organizations. ...We lack adequate analytic descriptions of the mechanisms, processes, and consequences of participation in such linkage systems." The linkage concept, according to the findings of Beal and others (1967), may be applied on the individual or group level, intra- organizationally, or inter-organizationally. In a study of structural system linkages existing between organizations within a community, Beal and others (1967:23) found that there is an overlapping in memberships of formal and informal leaders of the organizations. They pointed out that "the importance of membership linkages can possibly be best visualized in terl lnes among orgar. Beal and others a fun one organize. organizations . Thomas (1 Elle reciprocit fern-5. that mutua; respective roles a: locomotion tow Ed experienCed j 13 visualized in terms of their function as communication and influence lines among organizations." Such membership linkages were viewed by Beal and others as possible methods for getting information transferred from one organization to another, and thus, to the memberships of the organizations. Thomas (1957) viewed role interdependence (more complex than simple reciprocity) as a crucial factor in group performance. He found that mutually dependent persons in the performance of their respective roles felt increased responsibility, increased their Speed of locomotion toward the group goal, felt increased emotional tension, and experienced increased group cohesiveness. System relationships. Organizations have been characterized as being dynamic and at the same time stable social institutions. Modern systems theory takes a relationship View, in which organizations may be viewed as "open, in a steady state" according to Bertalanffy (l968:3). Katz and Kahn (1966)* integrated open systems theory, the study of human roles, and the functions of communication in organizations. Katz and Kahn (1966:223) perceived an organization as consisting of energic and information systems, with the latter contolling the former. These authors observed that: the closer one gets to the organizational center of control and decision-making, the more pronounced is the emphasis on information exchange. In this sense, communication -- the exchange of informa- tion and the transmission of meaning -- is the very essence of a social system or an organiza- tion. The input of physical energy is dependent upon information about it, and the input of human energy is made possible through communicative acts. Communication is thus a social process of the broadest relevance in the functioning of any group, organization or society. It is possible *See especially Chapter 10. I to sul actior tion, leader Laboratc; mmmemummi Lamar. communicat. “reality" of an * echoed the plair. :neudcation irr There tions inclur Stildlt in co study Neverthe organizational 5 One Su Ch method 14 to subsume under it such forms of social inter- action as the exertion of influence, coopera- tion, social contagion or imitation, and leadership. Laboratory vs. "live organization" study. While the laboratory has made unique and significant contributions toward understanding the human communicative act in organizational settings, it lacks the ”reality" of an on-going, dynamic, open system. MacDonald (l970:6) echoed the plaint of scholars who attempt to synthesize research about communication in organizations when he stated that: There is a dearth of studies of live organiza- tions. Various rationales have been advanced, including the imprecision associated with field studies and experiments, cost factors involved in constructing experimental organizations for study, theoretical constraints, and others. Nevertheless, there are some ways of approaching a real-life organizational study and still maintaining the rigor demanded by science. One such method is that of sociometry. Blake and Mouton (in Moreno, 1960:318) stated that: Sociometric methods of assessing social rela- tions are shown to possess ample reliability and validity for extended use in systematic research and in social engineering. Summaries ...demonstrate that sociometric scores consti- tute a satisfactorily stable basis for measuring individual differences for a wide range of testing conditions, various forms of adminis- tration, different test formats, differences in population and a variety of criteria for judgments. Sociometry, according to Cartwright and Zander (1953) is one of three methodological gains contributing to the study of group dynamics. According to these authors, sociometry takes its place in social research along with controlled observation of social interaction and experiments on individual behavior in groups. An advant it provides. MOI are maps" by fol xii-viduals. In aimed networks 'rroug'n distinct . kitchens of publ; a: p o . 93% educate g atrks that 511999» and we may learn A networ‘ concept of a 63:0 aster of people nth establishec cal links among The str éitteIning of t L"matween {herb-erg Silanized inter be recognized 1 While 0“?" “10": . S, they ‘v «Rm ‘LE rods Case rial n MOI-631C f 0_ In of SOCial Tra The 15 An advantage of the sociometric method is the mapping function it provides. Moreno (1960:76) developed what he called "psychogeogra- phic maps" by following the lines of communication contact between individuals. In the development of such maps, he found that there existed networks of contact which cut across neighborhood, district and borough distinctions. Moreno (1960:78) defined such networks as "the kitchens of public Opinion. It is through these channels that peOple affect, educate or disintegrate one another. It is through these net- works that suggestion is transmitted....these networks are traceable and we may learn to control them." A network is considered to be analogous to the sociological concept of a group, yet distinct from it, in that the term refers to a number of peOple who persistently interact with one another in accord with established patterns. Communication or interactions are the criti- cal links among members of a network. The structure of the network as a social system consists in the patterning of the relations of the individuals. The communication links between members of the network allow the development and maintenance of organized interaction among the plurality of human individuals. It must be recognized that the social structure of the network is dynamic. While the networks formed by sociometric choice are not visually obvious, they do exist. Nehnevasja (1960:751) pointed out that, "The numerous case studies show undoubtedly that sociometric patterns are real." Moreno (1960:71) maintained that networks represent the oldest form of social communication. According to Moreno: Traces of them are already in subhuman societies. They are collective formations, the individual part 1‘ in Vi". aware indi? An if. as he works grOUP Walter ( large numbers CE is truly astronC-i vzrh each other and networks are amall fraction according to 'a‘al zation is batter Walter c initiation to pr. but Overlapping cated by the pr an maintained Mac Dona 16 participants are unconscious of all the networks in which they partake, although they may be aware of one or another link between some of the individuals, or realize that such networks exist. An individual cannot move out of networks, just as he cannot move outside of his skin. Net- works pre-exist him and pre-exist the official groups of which he is a part. - Walter (1964) observed that in actual organizations employing large numbers of people, the number of possible communication channels is truly astronomical, assuming that each person is free to communicate with each other person. But Walter also pointed out that some channels and networks are never used at all; some are used frequently; and only a small fraction of those possible are used at all heavily. Thus, according to Walter (l963:9), "the flow of communications in an organi- zation is patterned, and whatever is patterned can be mapped." Walter observed that as communications are traced from point of initiation to point of reception, they tend to describe two distinct but overlapping networks of channels: the hierarchical paths authenti- cated by the prescriptive organization chart, and the webbing established and maintained by tacit convention. MacDonald (1970:12) noted that "the sociometric research stream applied to organizational communication by Jacobson and Seashore (1951) permits roles to emerge from process, in terms of some set of operating functions rather than by fiat." In short, according to MacDonald, the sociometric organizational model assumes that an adequate description of communication relationships -- hence of organizational structure -- will not emerge when only formal relationships or positions are considered. It suggests defining "what is" by inquiring how peeple actually communi- cate or perceive that they communicate. In discus. Jacobson and Sea. AS thx tiona- clear of in the 0‘; conce; relat. fabric office It appear 1;: of organizat: tion, role relat: tfhuduals, witj appears that the Cation Pattern i 17 In discussing the analysis of sociometric data derived from the Jacobson and Seashore (1951) study, Weiss (1956:53) reported that: As the study developed, the concept of organiza- tional structure was further defined. It seemed clear that the working relationships between pairs of individuals would be the basis for describing the organization's structure, and the structure concept was therefore stated in terms of role relationships. The structure was now seen as a fabric of reliable role relationships among offices. It appears from previous research that an essential characteris- tic of organizational communication is an exchange, linking, reciproca- tion, role relationship or other human interaction between two or more individuals, within and between organizational sub-systems. It further appears that the sociometric method is capable of revealing such communi- cation pattern information within the context of an extant organizational structure . Research Dissemination and Utilization The search for and acquisition of new knowledge is guided by a set of procedures designed to increase the confidence society can place in the results of research. The procedures, under the general rubric of "scientific method," are commonly known and accepted by the research- oriented members of the scientific community. Less well known are the methods by which the results of research are interpreted and placed into practice by members of the larger society. There is growing concern for understanding the dissemination and utiliza- tion process, so that practical application of the rapidly growing body of knowledge may reach societal fruition. Dissemination and utilization of scientific research is not accidental. The process of interpretation and application of new hailedge must b aptimum returns. Info: be wa cerne into tion tion‘ A major if!“ Q.‘ mat-Y lies in t ‘1 he mental effor : Bridg gene: will into latte Simpl cannc Em fim diSSemi; .‘ F A but same gen8ral k~1 . fiI-(etlngn Of a “is 3106.“ t n is knc> it the ”gem-12a 18 knowledge must be consciously and deliberately undertaken to achieve optimum returns. Etzioni (1967) offered the generalization that: Information that has been processed might still be wasted as far as the societal unit is con- cerned if it is not systematically introduced into the unit's decision-making and implementa- tion overlayer where the main societal 'consump- tion' of information takes place. A major barrier in communicating research results to the larger society lies in the willingness of the scientist and the layman to make the mental efforts required by each. Selye (1958:146) observed that: Bridging the gap between the scientist and the general public will not be easy. The former will have to learn to translate his problems into a language meaningful to the layman; the latter will have to realize that, however simplified, the essence of basic research cannot be assimilated without mental effort. Organizational constraints. Organizations designed to facili- tate the dissemination and utilization of research results are subject to the same general constraints of human organizations dealing with the "marketing" of a "product." In the case of research dissemination, the "product” is knowledge, and the "consumer" is the receiver of knowledge. But the organizational processes themselves are similar to other organi- zations composed of individuals interacting with each other through organizational subsystems. ‘i‘Weiss (1956) pointed out that the organization, as a social institution which achieves its goals through the coordinated effort of individuals in offices, faces three basic problems: (1) The problem of allocation of responsibility for particular functional activities to particular members of the organization; (2) The problem of acceptance of reSponsibility by members of the organization (the problem of adaptation); and, ~39, members of fit fimameti as the orocesses flat "the problem, 0:5, and that an; Therefore, the or The orga the members to we 521:1 some people according to pres econstraint on 1 ‘ie problem of m. #5133 suggested 19k 1' «..cl" \\ baj'e that t‘ l9 (3) The problem of coordination of the functional activities of the members of the organization. The methods by which these problems are solved are characterized as the processes of organization. weiss (1956:6) made the assumption that "the problems of allocation, adaptation and coordination are continu- ous, and that any breakdown in the way they are met would be disastrous." Therefore, the organization must be constantly concerned with them. The organization avoids conflict among its members by requiring the members to work with some people and not with others, to take orders from some peOple and to give orders to others, and in general to behave according to prescribed roles. Since the organization is formulated as a constraint on the individual, "the social scientist is apt to consider the problem of making the organization more democratic" (Weiss 1956:2). Weiss suggested that when the problem concerns the organization itself (as it does in the present study), "then it is preferable to make the organization the figure and let the rest, including the individual, assume importance only as it contributes to the definition of the organization." Organizations as linkage systems. Linkage is 3138?? used to '“l-Aflit' indicate that two (or more) systems are connected by messages so as tow _ -..-.Powv—I ,v-h- ‘ dug-v: F‘s-...”. form a greater system. Havelock (1969:2-10) noted that "if the barriers \ ’M‘ 4......m,_.._,.w,__.w. ~r.,‘ between the two systems are permeable enough so that messages can flow out of each to the other and so that response messages can flow into each from the other (feedback) then a link or a state of linkage has been created between the two." Sussman (1969a) pointed out that linkage mechanisms and processes operate within a two-way funnel system between structures. His concern is the lirlage bet»; argazization as : “Lirlage mechani: acmonal relatio- Hiti‘in and betwe. amt involving 5: Literstructure rr. The pri: flash), is to r4 :0: and interacl 20 the linkage between a family as one social system and a bureaucratic organization as another social system. Sussman (l969a:62) observed that "linkage mechanisms involve communication between structures and inter- actional relationships of '1inkers' such as child, parent, or teacher within and between both structures." He further observed that "Rapproch- ment involving shared responsibilities...is a necessary condition of interstructure relationships." The principal function of linkage groups, according to Sussman (1969b), is to reduce the social distance between the family and bureau- cratic organizations through the establishment of effective communica- tion and interaction networks. Organizing for information exchange. Within the scientific community, there appears to be an impelling force to exchange information. Not all members of the scientific community, however, are equally moti- vated to participate in such exchange. Compton and Garvey (1967) noted that when presentations at a formal conference of an international meeting of scientists failed to provide sufficient information exchange, a few of the participants took it upon themselves to organize a small supplementary special interest session. Garvey and Griffith (1965) pointed out that there is a relative- ly small number of psychologists who are extremely active in scientific communication within psychology. The process of dissemination of scientific information in psycho- logy was viewed by Garvey and Compton (1967) as occurring in a large social system composed of a variety of formal and informal elements. These authors studied the production, transmission and storage, and use of scientific information exchange. I The COnC say, or reciproca- corsidered as the claim studied by ized the feedbac- dilezmas facing 3 scientific reseafi Researc} cmprehensive co: that with the ex ..ich have estab' erase respons ibi ‘h -'~€ producer and " The not ietwork of exte: 1., . LQ-Q‘grant 11!: ix” 21 The concept of exchange includes the notion of more-than-one- way, or reciprocal, transaction. Feedback of research findings was considered as the transmission-reception link in the research utilization chain studied by Chesler and Flanders (1967). These authors conceptual- ized the feedback process as a series of force fields representing the dilemmas facing practitioners in their postures toward scientists and scientific researchers, and vice versa. Research on dissemination systems. Havelock (1969) presented a comprehensive compendium of studies on research utilization. He observed that with the exception of agriculture, there are very few if any fields which have established formal dissemination and utilization systems, whose responsibility it is to serve as an interpretative link between the producer and consumer of information. 1’ The noteworthy dissemination system mentioned by Havelock is the network of extension offices, as local contact points for the nation's land-grant universities. Extension, as an integral educational unit of the state land-grant university, has been concerned with continuing adult education at points away from campus. The essence of the extension” ...-.0. . P’- ‘F' ‘~-...v'-“‘ _,__~'.'-"'-pt~a. system is information flow; basically that of interpreting research results‘ M'm'fl ""‘ - W‘Vy'é‘dla-HC . ..-.va ".k-r.’ 4‘ " ' ' N ' i ' to clients, and serving as the channel for clients to communicate needs . v V , - -«- Hymn-LID" ' «r J'l‘v- '- - ' J .. .. - h ‘5') i ‘ f". I ‘u 7.0:...“ “at. . back to the university's research section. ~H"“ Wilkening (1956) found that the county agent, as the local_ representative of the extension system, was a crucial figure in the trans- lating of innovations into practice and adapting them to the Personal use: of the clientele. } A Two fields which are apparently taking steps toward establishing dissemination systems, according to findings reported by Havelock (1969), are those of education and medicine. 0‘ in the I sic-.71 that much c aeiicine is dissa hospital system. have more Specia‘. OZ'ZEIS . ' ”a- E95931?“ Disse. i... \— The lite systems is scarcq 33Ey‘all-"5.8 few . useful . There E '- ACC0rd Y“. l‘b‘lS‘. ‘0“ and “it: 22 In the field of medicine, a recent study by Morris (1970) has shown that much of the available information about current advances in medicine is disseminated by those who are centrally involved in the hospital system. These key individuals spend more time in the hospital, have more Specialized skills, and have strong attitudes toward teaching others. Research Dissemination and Utilization: The Extension Model The literature on research within knowledge dissemination systems is scarce. Probably this is so because such formal systems are themselves few. As Havelock (1969) has observed, usually there is only a dim understanding of how new knowledge gets transformed into something useful. There exists a firm belief that somehow new information becomes interpreted and filters through the social system to its application. According to Havelock (1969:2-42), "Agricultural research, development and dissemination in the United States seems to follow an orderly process which most clearly exemplifies the research, dissemina— tion and utilization model." Havelock (1969) discussed the transforma- tion of knowledge from basic research to applied research and deve10p- ment which goes on in the agriculture-related departments of the land grant universities. The research and development process in Havelock's model is systematically linked with the C00perative Extension Service, which he described as ”an elaborate mechanism which diffuses the developed knowledge to the farmer." The Extension system, taken as a whole, appears to exemplify the orderly transition of knowledge from research to deve10pment to diffusion and finally to adoption by the consumer. Havelock (1969:2-42) noted that: 23 ...because this agricultural model appears to be so elegantly mapped out and so successful, it has been used as an exemplar of how know- ledge dissemination and utilization should take place in other fields, including indus- trial technology, medicine and education. The four stages in the transition of knowledge from discovery to application, viz., research, to development, to diffusion, to adoption suggests four comparable roles. Havelock (1969:2-32) prOposed that the knowledge flow system could be subdivided in a parallel fashion, i.e., basic researcher, researcher-developer, practitioner, and consumer. Havelock further proposed that in the society at large each of these role types is likely to be represented by separate organizational and institu- tional forms. The conceptual framework of the COOperative extension model would focus on the two center roles described above, i.e., the researcher- developgr who is a state extension specialist, and the_practitioner, who is a county agent. The basic researcher would be the university-based research scientist, and the consumer would be the out-state resident who is the client for new knowledge so developed and disseminated. Cooper (1966) offered the view that the activities of an institu- tional change agent are basically no different from those of an indivi- dual change agent. Such a simplistic view may be extreme in that it does not consider the many complexities of institutional organizations. Nevertheless, there may be enough similarity so that the successful acti- vities of countless county agents and their supporting state specialists in agricultural extension services should be worth the study of those interested in organizational impggvement. The conceptual model upon which extension is based assumes a movement of information through social systems. As Tully (1966) pointed ' as sat, extens ion "Hers . Amend ( 4 i'strment of cor. audience. The vr; aztmsion service I are: its cliente“. Speaking 3‘5 exploding tec’: 15 are more com +53 with their r 51' filer observed WA: n Q-H-enCe S . latter is to Dec. afferent sub- 5}.- 39 to Roger s V“: .3323“: ven t“ or n- r N. Cd; lin kages. With re Sic-systems, thé such like the o: researcl‘rs r“ cation As We'l i. 24 out, extension assumes the diffusion of information from innovators to others. Amend (l968b:12) observed that cooperative extension, as an instrument of continuing adult education, is concerned with a voluntary audience. The very nature of the dissemination organization which is the extension service, consists of education without compulsion or control over its clientele. Speaking on the decline of local community and the consequences of exploding technology, Ratchford (l969:3) pointed out that "profession- als are more concerned about their colleagues elsewhere in the country than with their neighbors in the local community." Ratchford (l969:9) further observed that "often, subject matter Specialists are so engrossed in their areas of expertise that they neglect to consider their potential audiences." Ratchford's observations suggest that if diffusion of subject- matter is to occur, there must be free interaction between members of different sub-systems, who exchange information. Change agents, accord- ing to Rogers with Svenning (1969:174), "...serve as a linkage or liaison between two or more social systems: (1) the client social system, and (2) the primary innovation source." The liaison notion implies recipro- cal linkages. With respect to the free flow of information within and across sub-systems, the extension model which has been discussed appears to be much like the organization Weiss (1956) analyzed. That organization was a research-Sponsoring agency, which had great freedom of internal communi- cation. As Weiss (l956:9) noted, "...the scientists in the Bureau place great value on free internal communication. When a problem must be talked over, channels become of secondary importance." — fl——J v '—:w ! an \ AC“! v ”o- 108 b. . :A‘ g. ~A_l 25 Data Collection Data collection using the sociometric method, as Jacobson and Seashore (1951) did, is straightforward. Subjects are asked to respond to a question, naming others with whom they interact on a given topic. The nature of the sociometric questioning technique provides a very flexible method of social inquiry. Guimaraes (1970:15) observed that: Questions may vary as regards topic, frequency of communication, etc., and may be either open or closed, but no matter its form, a sociometric question always retains its interpersonal charac- ter. This factor makes the sociometric question an excellent measurement device for communica- tion network studies. The sociometric method is not without its problems, however. Sociometric investigations have historically implied a census, or case study approach. In order for the results to be meaningful, the socio- metric method imposes limitations on its use. As Massarik, Tannenbaum, Kahane and Weschler (1960:159) noted, "The need for a virtually complete return of replies in a sociometric investigation is apparent. High nonresponse would leave such gaps in the matrix as to diminish greatly the value of the data." Additionally, the method is limited in generalizability. Infor- mation derived from a census or case study approach does not lend itself to analysis by inferential statistics. Hence, in terms of generalizar bility to a larger p0pulation, the method is not as strong as sampling methods which allow mathematical inference to a larger universe. The sociometric method has some other strengths, however. It has been successfully used as a technique for identifying the power structure of communities in the United States (Hunter l953),for locating village leaders in Nigeria (Keith 1968), and to determine organizational C device {7 F‘VVw glow... . M: .l 5?»; v. w: ‘ o 2N C. ‘6. u» a S .. S :u L... a» .W en 4‘ 26 interaction in Michigan's Upper Peninsula (Anderson 1969). Data Analysis and Display While sociometric measurement has been one of the most pepular and easy to use devices in the field of social psychology, analysis of the resulting data has not been so easy. Writing in 1949, Festinger (1949:153) stated that "...there is, at present, no adequate analytical device for handling (sociometric) data..." Festinger went on to point out that "...without any adequate representational techniques for handling such data, the analysis of the exact patterns of interconnec- tions among members of a group is virtually impossible, unless the group is very small." Fortunately for social scientists interested in using the socio- metric technique, Festinger and other researchers have made great strides in the development of analytical techniques for such data. Festinger (1949:154) noted that "a large step forward was taken by Forsyth and Katz in suggesting the use of a matrix and some of the manipulations of matrix algebra for the analysis of sociometric patterns." Forsyth and Katz (1946) proposed a method of presenting socio- metric data in which a complete matrix of positive and negative choices was utilized. Within the matrix, the choices were then arranged to show reciprocation occurring in clusters. Forsyth and Katz (1949:341) described their method: ’ In essence the method of manipulating the matrix consists of re-arranging the rows and columns in a systematic manner to produce a new matrix which exhibits the group structure graphically in a standard form. From the standpoints of construction and of interpretation this form of presentation of sociometric data is superior to the sociogram. -‘J' “W‘J 0": 94" ‘V’I Sa‘vc OISE .3». . . N:j.u "v I. 4 1-4; ....m 27 Enlarging upon the Forsyth and Katz method, Festinger (1949) applied matrix algebra to sociometric data for further clarification of contact groups within the matrix. Rogers and Jain (1968:?) observed that ”matrix multiplication locates (on the diagonal of the matrix with successive self-multiplication) the 'liaison' individuals who link two or more cliques (if such linkage occurs in a system)". The sociogram is still perhaps the most pepular and useful method of displaying sociometric data.* Nehnevasja (1960:737) stated that "the sociogram is, of course, the most famous sociometric chart. In existence since the early days of sociometry as a method of portray- ing data, the sociogram is, indeed, a widely used instrument." The sociogram, noted Guimaraes (1960:32L "is a representational device used to illustrate certain types of relations between pairs of individuals in a social system. Often, however, these diagrams become confusing to the reader." In fact, a major problem with the use of the sociogram is that there are no rules for ordering the presentation of data. The researcher arranges the diagram so it appears to make visual sense. Obviously, he must faithfully represent the reciprocated con- tacts between respondents. Equally obviously, lines between symbols representing contacts between individuals, can deve10p into such a tangle as to be unintelligible. This limitation of the sociogram prompted work on matrix presentation of sociometric data. The develop- ment of matrix techniques has expedited sociometric analysis, but the sociogram still finds application as a method of visually displaying analyzed data. *For details on the construction of sociograms, see Zerka (1948). ",. a.. «a -.ie :- E..CC uni“I ' 1 ‘5‘ ‘ tax] ’1. l' LE. ‘t A; "~V. .‘n b5; ,- .3 '48 _: PA . n ... Pu . 1: C\ r 4. ~ < t\ \- sN.‘ .. nit . Q “Q 4% Q. .5 n ~ ~ ‘ . c» \_ c. a ...; t . ‘3 DR. 5 28 Another problem with the analysis of sociometric data is the detailed, time-consuming and potentially error-laden handling of infor- mation. If computerized techniques can be developed for data analysis, they will greatly simplify the problem. This is especially true where research is done in complex organizations, with a large number of respondents.* Mitchell (1970) used a computerized technique of sociometric data manipulation to perform a communication network analysis. Most of the literature on sociometric data analysis, however, gives little encouragement toward immediate computerization of such analyses. Regardless of whether data are manually or machine manipulated, the essence of sociometric analysis consists of network identification, followed by network analysis. MacKenzie (1967) demonstrated with graph theory how networks can be decomposed into subnetworks. The decomposi- tion of networks led Jacobson and Seashore (1951) to the discovery of the liaison role concept. Weiss (l956:viii), in develOping a refined method of sociometric analysis of the Jacobson and Seashore data, , further developed the concept of the liaison as a key linking person in the organization. Sociometric Networks and the Liaison Role A variety of methods have been proposed as ways to look at communication networks and their interrelationships. Common to the *At present, work is being done to computerize sociometric data analysis for identifying the liaison role (Jacobson and Seashore, 1951: weiss and Jacobson, 1955; Weiss, 1956; Schwartz, 1968; MacDonald, 1970; Amend, 1971). The computer program is being developed by Bill Richards, a student in the Department of Communication, Michigan State University, under the guidance of Dr. R. V. Farace. Detailed instructions for another computerized method of proces- sing sociometric data are available from Alexander (1963). Dr. Alexander is now with the Department of Sociology at Stanford University. e ' item . 29 literature on networks is the notion that communication within networks resolves to dyadic, interpersonal contact, and that communication between networks reduces to dyadic interpersonal contact at the inter- face of the two subsystems. With the notion of dyadic interaction as the dominant characteristic of communication networks, researchers have looked for personal characteristics and other determinants which embody predictive power regarding network formation. Barnlund and Harland (1963:478) showed that physical setting and prestige are both important in the formation of networks. In the early stages of social acquaintance, physical prOpinquity plays a very important role, which reduces as acquaintances strengthen and high status figures emerge. The present author wonders whether mobility, both social and physical, may not be closely related to prOpinquity. That is, when people are not free to move, either socially or physically, prOpinquity may play a greater part in communication interactions. Beal and others (1967:25) concluded that "a relatively small number of persons could account for a major proportion of the membership linkages in a community." These researchers found that leaders of lower status organizations are likely to possess memberships in higher status organizations also, while the leaders of higher status organiza- tions are likely to possess memberships only in other higher status organizations. The important point to note here is that the leadership elements, in both cases, were those who also performed the liaison function among the organizations studied in the community. Guimaraes (1970:26) observed that: The number of possible roles an individual may perform...is limited by his own values, needs, skills, etc., as he moves from one system to v 11.5 L .7-..“ bdDV: CELT: l? he 1: tic ( 5:33", Paw-b. HF< Ll we. I.) H t L) Fl] . Ira: 30 another. The role he assumes in any given system is determined also by the nature of the signal inputs, i.e., in one system an indivi- dual may be a receiver and execute direction, but in another he may be the originator of directions. Guimaraes' observation suggests the possibility of an indivi- dual playing different roles, depending upon the system he is in. If the individual is part of two interacting systems, he becomes a liaison person between systems. Walton (1963:46) contended that the dynamics of the organization can be best understood by understanding its system of communication. Walton hypothesized that a communication system is dominated by "magne- tic centers" which tend to draw messages unto them. His research showed that "centrals," or individuals who occupied the "magnetic centers" did feel that they had a greater voice in the affairs of the organization than did the "peripherals," or individuals farther removed from the communication magnetic center. Weiss (1956) identified liaisons as being persons who were important in the over-all Operation of the organization. Discussing the coordination and structure of an organization, Weiss (1956:53) reported that: Two offices whose occupants customarily worked together were thought of as forming a coordina- tive link and this link, taken together with all the others in the organization, as forming the structure. A ...coordinative link ...was identified ... with a mutually reported close working relationship. Further describing the liaison, Weiss (1956:54) stated: The coordinators of the separate work groups, important pe0ple in the over-all operation of the organization, are termed liaison individuals. Many of them have group membership, i.e., even though they coordinate their activities with p-A ..C. \ ~ 31 the members of many groups, their closest rela- tionships are all with the members of a single group, and they may be thought of as liaison members of this group. Other liaison individuals work very closely with each other, and so form a work group of their own, except that their group cannot be separated from other groups. This situation is resolved by considering that they belong to a liaison set, i.e., a kind of work ‘ group where members work closely with members of other work groups. While the focus of interest has been on the liaison person, who has many contacts both within and between systems, there also exists another type, viz., the person who has very few or no contacts within the system. Study of this type of individual may be equally fruitful in terms of understanding the organization. Katz (1960:245) stated that "in the context of the group and the specified activity, an indivi- dual is said to be an isolate if he is chosen by none of his fellow group members." Jennings (1960:92) commented: Both leadership and isolation in official groups appear as phenomena which arise out of individual differences 1J1 interpersonal capacity for parti- cipation as phenomena which are indigenous to the specific milieu in which they are produced. Comparison of the liaison and isolate type might be revealing. Criswell (1960) noted that the typical sociometric experiment which is aimed at two-way reciprocable interpersonal relations commonly fails to fully explore the data obtained. She observed (1960:142) that: The group structure is either not plotted or is plotted and then largely ignored, little atten- tion being paid to specific connections existing between overchosen individuals, overchosen and underchosen, between members of different cliques, etc. Opportunities to enlarge the experiment by obtaining group morale indices or production records are frequently passed up. 32 A problem with such enlarged studies is assigning value to sociometric choices. Campbell (1960:137) suggested a rationale for assigning score values to sociometric nominees. He pointed out that a recurring problem is "the differential weighting of the first, second, and third choices in a sociometric or nominations setup. Good standard procedure is to disregard the order of choice and use the total of all mentions." Furthermore, according to Campbell (1960:137): A more consistent rationale can be developed by assuming that what a nominations ballot or socio- metric questionnaire asks for is the first few rankings of a potential ranking of all personnel aboard. The best guess as to the value assigned a nonmentioned person is the average of the unused ranks. (Italics in original). MacDonald (1970) and Mitchell (1970) each used the number of sociometric contacts as the Operationalization of the liaison concept. MacDonald (1970:114) pointed out that "while the definition of the liaison role demands sociometrically diverse contacts, it does not specify that liaison persons will contact more other peeple." To MacDonald, as to other researchers on the liaison role, the strategic location of the communication contact is important to the liaison con- cept. To arrive at the reciprocated dyads used in his study, MacDonald (1970:71) operationalized reciprocation as "mutual listing on the Check- lists, regardless of reported contact frequency or of discrepancy between reported contact frequencies." Mitchell (1970:123) noted that "persons with links to a number of groups are thus liaison persons. Those having the most links are the most important as group liaisons, since each link connects with a totally communicant group." In the Mitchell study (1970:129): 33 Liaison role individuals were selected as indi- cated by the number of contacts these persons had between groups. Liaison persons are defined, for this purpose, as those with three or more reciprocated contacts between groups after the groups were collapsed by the method discussed above. Persons with one or two between-groups contacts were ignored in this determination, as suggested by Weiss (1956) as being 'bridge persons.‘ They are important in the total communication structure, but are not considered to hold a true liaison role. Research Foundations: Selected References I . . . Guimaraes (1970) pOinted out that the bulk of the literature on communication network studies is derived from laboratory conditions which usually do not reflect real life situations. The present research is a departure from laboratory study in an attempt to examine communica- tion patterns and participant behavior in a "real world" setting. Couch and Bebermeyer (l964:4) suggested that "at the present time one of the major problems of our society is the difficulty of transmitting innovations to potential adepters." The lack of knowledge about the research dissemination and utilization process was cited as one reason for the difficulty. Couch and Bebermeyer (l964:4) stated that "There have been relatively few research endeavors to document the relevance of different forms of communicative relationships and varia- tion in inventiveness." They claimed that research on communication and change has failed to give enough attention to interpersonal communication within "patterned and institutionalized systems." They argued for a systematic examination by research of patterned and institutionalized communicative contacts. "Patterned" and "institutionalized" suggest structural arrange- ments of some kind. If such structures exist, it is logical to assume that there is a bridge of some sort between them to allow messages to pa , l- ..0‘ A I ‘ ‘ 31:5 1 . . sbaer ‘le 5‘ ts.- 34 flow between the structure, or subsystems. Since we are concerned here with functions of individuals within organizations, it is logical to con- sider the individual as providing the communication bridge, or linking the subsystems together in communication networks. A social actor in the communication linking role might then be viewed either as a bridge (facilitating link) or as a barrier to inter- system communication. Havelock (1969:2-23) commented that individuals functioning as barriers are observed in the relations between (1) research, (2) practice organizations, and (3) professions. He stated that: Researchers can dismiss practice information on the basis that practitioners do not understand what it means to collect yalig and reliable information. The practitioner likewise may reject research sources because 'they don't care about practical problems.‘ Real or imagined, these value differences probably constitute the major barrier to inter-system know- ledge linkage. Regardless whether the intersystem links function as "bridges," or as "barriers," it is generally assumed that such links do exist. Group theory suggests that the structure of a group consists not only of differentiated parts, but also of relations between the parts. Cartwright and Zander (1953) pointed out that the relationship, commonly referred to as "links" or as "bonds," exists between any two parts of the structure. For any specific pair of parts, this relationship may be symmetri- cal, asymmetrical, or absent. Message content, frequency of contact, personal satisfaction with contacts, status and other variables may affect the relationship between parts, according to Berkowitz and Bennis (1961). There appears to be general agreement that linkages between parts exist as a function of interpersonal contact. Boyd (1965:33) pointed out that "an analysis of inter-departmental communication immediately reveals nun l mu. Hz" 1‘ ‘E‘E'u u liais ~..;& I ‘~ ‘lC p 01“ («l L}. 2 35 that it is an inter-personal problem. No setting down of rules or tech- niques can be of much value to an individual until he recognizes the need for good communication." "Good" communication, according to Boyd (1965), revolves around personal contact. Personal contact apparently feeds information back and forth between systems. The person making the inter-system contact plays different roles, depending upon the system (or subsystem). An individual can become a 'k - I ‘ * c a liaison person* between two or more systems or cliques. The liaison function may be illustrated as shown in Figure 1. In the paradigm shown as Figure l, the subgroups are formed as the result of sociometric choices. The direction of the arrow indicates who chooses whom. For example, in the paradigm, A chooses C; B chooses C; C chooses A, B, and D; D chooses C and D has been chosen by L. Thus, A, B, C, and D form a subgroup. Persons E, F, G, H and L constitute a subgroup, as do I, J, K and L. The unique characteristic of the liaison person, L, is the linking function he performs among subgroups. If L were removed from the communication system, the result would appear as shown in Figure 2. Now, in the absence of "liaison" L, we see subgroups ABCD and IJK. Individuals E, F, G, and H are left as communi- cation "isolates" who have no means of contact with others in the organi- zation except through L. m *A liaison is a person who interconnects two or more subsystems (e.g. cliques) in the communication system and serves as a channel be- tween them (Jacobson and Seashore 1951; Weiss and Jacobson 1955: Schwartz 1968; MacDonald 1970; Mitchell 1970). **Clique is defined as a subsystem of three or more elements in rnutual interaction with each other (Festinger and others 1950). 36 \ _ \/ o .\ Figure l. The linking function performed by L, the liaison person. Figures 1 and 2 show how a member of more than one subsystem may function as a liaison person between the subsystems. A person may also perform the liaison role without being a member of a subgroup or clique. Not every person, however, plays the liaison role to the same degree. Nor does a liaison person between a specific pair of subsystems automati- cally function also as a liaison person between other pairs of subsystems, according to Jacobson and Seashore (1951). 37 .\ Q. 0 .0 Q o. g 0 .. 9. .... .0 0‘ .... Q o O . O I l ' — - - .- I. O .0... O ' g i Q. 0 I . o 0 u I o O o I | '0 ' o o '9 ‘o O Q O O Q 0 \ Q Q 0 C Figure 2. The communication system, with "liaison" L removed. The liaison person does apparently play a key role in the communi- cation patterns of organizations, because he may significantly influence or control communications to and from different groups. Jacobson and Seashore (1951:37) pointed out that the liaisons "characteristically have many, frequent, reciprocated, and important contacts which cut a- cross the contact group structure." 38 Ross and Harary (1955:253) observed that the liaison person, or articulation point* has special static and dynamic preperties. They stated: From the static point of view, the liaison is crucial, because his loss destroys the connect- ed unity of the organization. From the dynamic view, his non-substitutability in paths influ- ences the flow functions of an organization. Curiously, the individuals who become liaison persons constitute only a small percentage of a total group. Others in the group who re- ceive information do not pass it on, but act instead merely as passive receivers. Davis (l953a:45) reported that "those liaison individuals who told the news to more than one other person amounted to less than 10 percent of the 67 executives in each case." Why? What is character- istic about those few by which they differ from their work associates? Davis (l953a) found no evidence that any one group of peeple consistently acted as liaison persons; instead, different types of in- formation passed through different liaison persons. However, some indi- viduals were invariably communication "isolates" who received and trans- mitted information poorly or not at all. Again, why? What is different about the key liaison person as compared with the communication isolate? Are there identifiable or predictable characteristics between individuals by which the differences may be explained? More knowledge about the behaviors of persons in such roles would help in understanding the behavior of the larger group. Study of the "overlapping" positions or communication integration** between ‘ihArticulation point" is a graph theory term. Removing an articu- lation point of a connected graph results in a disconnected graph. **Guimaraes (1970:68) defined "communication integration" as "the degree to which interpersonal contacts permeate a social system." 39 network subsystems might provide some clues for the improvement of system Operations. Rogers and Jain (l969:7) pleaded for even more comprehensive information for understanding the process of research dissemination and utilization. They said, "We need studies in which the entire cycle of utilization is described, by tracing a specific innovation or innova- tions from clients' needs, to research, through linkers* to clients." The linking system** was perceived by Jain and Amend (1969) to be of major significance in comprehending message flow between a research system and a client system. Liaison roles become especially crucial when the subsystems under consideration are not bound by organizational structure. For example, in the conduct of continuing adult education through the c00p- erative extension service of a university, the client system is com- posed of voluntary individuals and organizations (Amend, 1968b; Beal and others, 1967). In such a situation, where the clientele are not bound to the organization and where the "product" or "output" of the institu- tion and its representatives consists essentially of information, com- munication and communication processes are even more important in under- standing the function and interrelationships between the systems. A serendipitous finding which emerged from the analysis was the identification of the liaison role (Jacobson 1970). While Jacobson and *Linkers are individuals performing communication linking roles within the linking system. **Linking system is defined by Jain (l970:2) as "a social system speCifically designed to facilitate effective communication between researchers and clients in a given field." q I»! 40 Seashore (1951) were looking primarily for indicants of groupness,* their additional finding of the liaison role has made it possible to trace differential influences through an organization, via the linking role individuals. In further analysis of the same data, Weiss and Jacobson (1955) developed a method for the analysis of the structure of complex organi- zations.** They assumed that a complex organization has a fabric of roles which constitutes the structure of the organization. Organization- al structure is assumed to remain relatively stable, regardless of per- sonnel changes. Reducing their sociometric data to graphic form, Weiss and Jacobson (1955) were able to break the original matrix into its struc- tural components. Having identified work groups, they were then able to isolate the separate work groups by removing liaison persons from the matrix and omitting contacts between groups. In this manner, they showed how the organization co-ordination structure was established through the activities of liaison persons and the existence of the con- tacts between groups. The analysis allowed Weiss and Jacobson (1955: 667) not only to describe the organizational structure, but also to look for relationships such as: *"Groupness" means the clustering of individuals into sets, each set having some specified high degree of internal communication and some specified low degree of external communication (Jacobson and Seashore (1951:36). **Weiss and Jacobson (1955:661) suggested that complex organiza- tions are bodies such as a government agency, a labor union, a church, a military unit, a school, or an industrial plant. Individual members of complex organizations contribute in accordance with the prescriptions of the roles they perform and co-ordinate their activities with each other in accordance with the relationships of their roles to other roles in the structure. 41 (a) The relationship between the position of an individual in the organization and the or- ganization's goals; (b) the relationship between the goals and methods of operation of a work group or larger segment of the organization, on the one hand, and the structure of that work group or segment. According to Davis (l953a:46) liaison individuals tend to act in predictable ways. For example: If an individual's unit of information concerns a job function in which he is interested he is likely to tell others. If his information is about a person with whom he is associated socially, he is likely to tell others. Further- more, the sooner he knows of an event after it happens, the more likely he is to tell others. Davis also suggested that if a liaison individual happens to receive information relatively late, he is not likely to tell others, in order not to reveal his late receipt of news. Schwartz (1968:102) analyzed liaison communication roles among faculty members of a university college. Using sociometric measures and analysis, he separated from a 142 X 142 matrix 29 work groups and a tentative list of 27 liaison persons. Through a tepological analysis, he identified "22 liaison persons (15.49 percent of the study population), 18 isolates (12.68 percent) and 102 non-liaison persons (71.83 percent), 100 of whom were members of 29 separate groups of varying size." One interesting finding which Schwartz did not comment further upon, was with respect to publication* as a common professional evalua- tive measure: he found that there were only slight publication differ- ences among the three types of resPondents, with non-liaisons having the *Information output in the form of publication is viewed with favor in the scientific community as an indicant of effectiveness. Publication appears to be a measure of prestige among scientific peers. 42 highest book and article publication average and isolates the smallest average. Schwartz (1969) further found that: (a) liaison persons were per- ceived as having more structurally diverse contacts and a greater number of communication contacts than do non-liaison persons; (b) liaison per- sons are more likely to serve as first sources of organization-related information than are non-liaison persons; and (c) liaison persons are perceived to have more important secondary contacts in the organization than are non-liaison persons. In the discussion of his study, Schwartz (1969) called for addi- tional comparative studies to validate the generalizability of his find- ings, to extend those findings, and to compare findings across different types and sizes of organizations. In a study of professional subject matter specialists in an educational organization, Jain (1970) found no relationship between peer-evaluated effectiveness and the individual's (a) information input amount; (b) information input diversity; (c) amount Of peer communica- tion; or (d) amount of information output. His data did, however, sup- port four of his hypotheses, showing that there is a significant positive relationship between peer-evaluated effectiveness and (a) peer-communica- tion diversity; (b) network centrality; (c) Opinion leadership; and (d) information output diversity. These findings cause one to speculate on the communication char- acteristics Of the individuals in Jain's study as they relate to subsys- tem contacts. Jain's (1970)findings suggest that individuals rated high by their peers would likely display some of the behaviors characteristic 43 of liaison individuals, while the lower-rated individuals would tend to behave more like non-liaison or isolate individuals. Jain's (1970) analysis did not attempt to identify sociometric choices, create sociograms or sociomatrices, or identify liaison or other types of roles. However, the data gathered by Jain and his asso- ciates, including the present author, contain questions which lend them- selves to sociometric analysis. In the present study, sociometric questions (Jacobson and Sea- shore, 1951; Hunter, 1953; weiss and Jacobson, 1955; Moreno, 1960; Couch and Bebermeyer, 1964; Kerlinger, 1966; Oppenheim, 1966; Schwartz, 1969; Guimaraes, 1970) and peer-rating questions (Jain, 1970) provide the basic data. From these data, the communication behaviors Of respondents will be mapped in sociometric form to provide a picture of the extant communi- cation structure. The "map" will then be differentiated to identify characteristics of the respondents. Following the mapping and differen- tiation processes, an attempt will be made to relate communication roles with pattern variables. Hypotheses In the present study, it is assumed that the liaison role will emerge, as it has in previous studies of complex organization. It will then be tested with other variables in six formal hypotheses. The variables Of primary interest are liaisonness, peer-evaluated effectiveness, information input diversity, peer-communication diversity, linker network centrality, opinion leadership, and information output diversity. Each variable will be constitutively defined as it appears 44 in a statement of hypothesis, and Operationally defined in the discus- sion of research methodology, Chapter III. Liaisonness. It is anticipated that the present research will succeed in the identification, mapping, and quantification of the liaison role. A major limitation in the attempt to derive meaningful, descriptive hypotheses concerning the communication liaison role is the dearth Of previous research using the liaison role as a structural concept. Schwartz (1968:33) pointed out that there was "no exact analogue in previous research to this structural concept." Identified in a study of a complex organization by Jacobson and Seashore (1951), the liaison concept was further explored by Weiss and Jacobson (1955). A method of data analysis for seeking the liaison role was devised by Weiss (1956). The concept lay dormant as a research variable until it was revived in a series of studies by Schwartz (1968), Mitchell (1970), MacDonald (1970), and the present author. The definition of a liaison is consistent with the definition used by the previously named research- ers: a liaison is a person who interconnects two or more subsystems in the communication system and serves as a channel between them. In the present study, the liaison concept is quantified to yield varying degrees Of liaisonness. In the hypotheses which follow, liaisonness appears as the dependent variable. Liaisonness is defined as the condition or quality Of functioning like a liaison. Peer-evaluated effectiveness. Peer-evaluated effectiveness is the performance rating of an individual as judged by his peers* in the *A peer is defined as a person of the same rank or ability. As used in the present paper, the term "peer" means that general collectivity of professional persons who are members of the scientific community. 45 same organization. The peer evaluation method Of rating individuals is a comprehensive measure of the effectiveness of individuals within an organization. Liaison individuals have high communication contact with their fellows within and between subsystems of the organization. It is expect- ed that high communication contact and high information handling are closely associated. Small group network research (Shaw 1954) has shown that high information handling is related to emergent leadership. It is expected that the liaison person, who makes frequent interpersonal con- tacts and handles a great deal Of information, will be seen by his peers as having leadership qualities and as being an effective person. It is therefore hypothesized that: H1: Peer-evaluated effectiveness is positively related to liaisonness. Information input diversity. Information input diversity is the extent to which a liaison person uses different information sources and channels in acquiring the needed information for performing his role. Information input is a very important communication function performed by a specialist in a linking role (Jain 1970:42). A specialist, in performing his role of linking researchers with clients, must acquire a variety of information from different sources and channels. In order to acquire information, his pattern Of input should extend beyond narrow limits. Schwartz (1968) found that liaison persons are perceived to have more structurally diverse communication contacts in the organization than do non-liaison persons. It is reasonable to assume that a special- ist would have structurally diverse patterns of input from both within and outside the organization. we therefore hypothesize that: 46 H2: Information input diversity is positively related to liaisonness. Peer communication diversity. Peer communication diversity is the extent to which an individual communicates with different peers. A specialist might spend most of his available time with a very few of his peers, or he might "spread out" what time he has over a variety of peer contacts. The peer concept is larger than just the employment system or subsystem of which the specialist is a member. Jain (1970) found that peer-communication diversity and peer- rated effectiveness are positively correlated. Pelz (1956) reported that a diversity Of professional contacts was associated with higher productivity among medical scientists working in a governmental research context. It is therefore hypothesized that: H3: Peer communication diversity is positively related to liaisonness. Linker network centrality. Linker network centrality is the degree to which an individual occupies the center position in the com- munication network of linkers working within an organization. The concept of communication network centrality focuses on the number of individuals who communicate with a specialist (or ”linker" as previously defined). Centrality, as construed in the present hypothesis, is a centrality in the network of specialists. The concept Of centrality is not as broad as the concept of peer association discussed in hypothesis 3. Shaw's (1954) experimental studies with small group networks* showed that individual morale, number of items transmitted by an *For a summary of small group communication network studies, see Amend (1970), Glanzer and Glaser (1961), Hare (1962), Golembiewski (1962), Guetzkow (1965). 47 individual in a position, and the probability that an individual in that position will be chosen as a leader vary directly with individual centrality. It is therefore hypothesized that: H4: Network centrality is positively related to liaisonness. Opinion leadership. Opinion leadership was defined by Rogers with Svenning (1969) as the ability to influence others' Opinions consistently in a desired way. General findings from diffusion research (Katz and Lazarsfeld 1955; Rogers 1962; Rogers with Svenning 1969) have consistently shown Opinion leaders to be mobile, relatively early adopters of innovations, and cosmopolite in activity and contacts. The liaison individual in an organization is mobile, cosmOpolite in his contacts, and high in activity. Because of wide contact and information handling, the liaison may also be a relatively early adopter of innova- tions. Jacobson and Seashore (1951) note that because Of the strategic position Of the liaison individual he has a high potential to influence communication to and from groups. It is therefore hypothesized that: H5: Opinion leadership is positively related to liaisonness. Information output diversity. Information output diversity is the degree to which an individual makes use Of different communication channels in transmitting information to his clients. In the organizar tion under study, specialists have access to a great variety of media and communication channels. The way in which they use the channels can influence their effectiveness as professional educators. Jain (1970) found a positive correlation between the information output diversity of a specialized linker and the linker's peer-evaluated effectiveness. 48 There are no previous studies on the relationship between liaisonness and information output diversity. However, diffusion research (Rogers 1962; Rogers with Svenning 1969) has shown that clients obtain research results through a variety of communication channels. It is assumed that the specialists in the linking system have served as the sources for much Of the information put into the channels. Intuitive- 1y, it is expected that the greater the degree Of interpersonal contact a specialist has within a social system, the more likely he is to use the available contacts to dispense information. It is therefore hypothesized that: H6: Information output diversity is positively related to liaisonness. CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY This chapter provides a general outline of research procedures to be followed. Included are a statement of the approach to the study, a model of a research dissemination organization, and a description of the actual research dissemination organization under study. Sampling procedure, data analysis and data collection are described, along with a discussion of the communimatrix and sociogram as methods of sociome- tric data diSplay. The chapter defines the liaisonness roles being measured, gives the Operationalization of variables, and closes with a discussion of hypothesis testing. Approach to the Present Study The research reported here is a field study utilizing an ex post facto, after-only design.* The field study was chosen as a way to explore the nature of existing communication patterns among specialists in an on-going organization. The researcher wanted to first describe the communication structure and the flow of communication along certain dimensions. To accomplish this purpose, it seemed more fruitful to examine a real-life organization through a field study than to artifi- cially structure a simulated organization using an experimental design. The experimental method of studying communication patterns and networks has been widely utilized in laboratory research (Bavelas and *For a discussion of types Of research and comparison of research designs, see Kerlinger (1966). 49 50 Barrett 1951; Cartwright and Zander 1953; Carzo 1963; Glanzer and Glazer 1961; Guetzkow 1965; Shaw 1954). In addition to experimental methods of study, there are at least five ways* to perform field study of communication patterns and networks in organizations (Davis, 1953b). The method proposed for the present research is described by Davis (l953b) as "indirect analysis,"** which is the type of analysis used by Jacobson and Seashore (1951), Schwartz (1968), Mitchell (1970), and MacDonald (1970). The present field study will focus on one system of a research dissemination organization. A research dissemination organization, and the process of research utilization,*** may be pictured as being circu- lar or cyclical in nature. Research utilization is not simply a one- way flow of research results from researchers to clients, but also entails a flow of client needs to researchers. In order to examine the dynamic, cyclical process of research dissemination and utilization, it is useful to momentarily "freeze" or stop the dynamic, thus presenting a static picture. In addition, the cyclical nature of the process may momentarily be viewed as a linear or *Davis (1953b) suggested that the experimental method in pure form is probably confined to the laboratory. The five field methods Davis listed are (1) "living in," or Observing over time, (2) "indirect analysis," (3) "duty study," (4) "cross-section analysis," and (5) "ecco analysis." **Davis (l953b:303) gave an example of indirect analysis: "...determine with what other executive each member of the organization Spent the most time. The Obvious assumption can be made that the member also communicated most with the executive with whom he spent the most time . " ***Research utilization was defined by Jain (1970:12) as "the process by which research results are communicated to, and adopted by, clients. Thus, research utilization includes both (1) the communica- tion Of research results from researchers to clients, and (2) adoption of these results by clients. 51 sequential process. By imposing these conditions upon the organization under study, we may better analyze the process. We now turn our atten- tion to the "frozen" process, in order to deve10p a theoretic model of the dynamic organization under study. Much of the discussion Of the research dissemination organization is after Jain and Amend (1968). The Research Dissemination Organization: A Theoretic Model In the process of research dissemination and utilization, (as we have temporarily stopped the process), it is possible to conceptu- ally identify three social systems: the research system, the linking system, and the client system. The research systems are composed of research roles which perform the function of producing research know- ledge that could be used by the client system. The client system is composed of client roles or potential users Of research knowledge in a given field. Interposed between the research and client system is the linking system, composed of linking roles. The linking roles per- form the function of information exchange between the research and client systems. The linking system serves as a communication link between the research system and the client system. It has to communicate with both the research and client systems. From a communication viewpoint, then, the problem is to understand various communication behaviors, communi- cation transactions, and communication processes that are involved in these three interrelated social systems. In order to understand the nature and interrelationships of communication patterns occurring in the three social systems involved in research utilization, we need to consider two factors with respect to each of the three systems: (1) functions in the research utilization 52 process, and (2) the nature of information handling processes involved. Functions in the research utilizationjprocess. From the view- point of the research utilization process, each of the three previously discussed systems performs different but interrelated functions. The researchers have to produce and develop knowledge that could be utilized by the client system. The individuals within the linking system have to disseminate or diffuse such research knowledge to the clients in a way that it could be effectively utilized. Finally, the members Of the client system have to adng or utilize the research findings in their problem-solving behavior. Thus, there are three major functions or phases* in the overall process of research dissemination and utilization: (1) Research and development, which includes activities dealing the production of research knowledge that could be utilized for solving practical problems. This function is performed by the research system. “”6 (2) Dissemination, or diffusion, which is performed by the link- ing system. It includes activities which facilitate the flow of re- search-based information to and its utilization by the clients. (3) UtilizationLyor adoption, which is concerned with the application Of research-based information to problem-solving behavior. This function is performed by the client system. Information handling. The second factor to be considered is the nature of information handling processes involved in performing a given function. Information handling refers to an individual's communication behavior dealing with the acquisition, processing, and transmission Of information. Information handling is a way of looking *For a detailed discussion of the phases in research dissemina- tion and utilization, see Guba (1968). 53 at the role an individual plays in the communication process. The concept of information handling takes the viewpoint that individuals have considerable initiative in the communication process. Rather than merely reSponding, they acquire, process, and transmit information in an attempt to satisfy their information needs. The three main processes involved in information handling are (1) information input, (2) information processing, and (3) information output. Information input deals with the acquisition Of information. What kinds of information does the individual acquire? From what sources? More importantly, what are the factors influencing the nature and sources of information? Our interest in information input is in examining what kinds of information individuals working in three different social systems need to input for performing their roles, and from what sources they obtain such information. Information processing deals with the evaluation, utilization, storage and transformation of the information. Whether information is input voluntarily or involuntarily, peeple take the initiative in pro- cessing information. In some way they evaluate information they have acquired, decide what information to utilize, what information not to use, what information to store in their memory and what to forget. Information output deals with the transmission of information. PeOple don't always keep to themselves the information they have input and processed. They Often share it with others through various communi- cation channels. Our interest in information output is in examining the nature and audiences of the information transmitted by individuals working in the three social systems. 54 These three information handling processes provide a useful approach for examining the nature Of communication patterns in the three social systems. All communication behaviors and situations involve one or more of these three processes. They may not be easily discernible in given communication situations, but it should be remembered that they are three conceptually distinct, yet interrelated processes. They consti- tute useful tools for analyzing communication patterns Of individuals working in the three social systems. These three processes are espe- cially applicable to the study Of communication behavior at the indivi- dual or dyadic level of analysis. The present study is focussed at the individual level of analysis, with particular emphasis on the re- ciprocated, or dyadic, interaction communication processes. We have seen that there are three social systems, each perform- ing a distinct function, in the research utilization process. In order to perform his function or a given role in the system, an individual has to input, process, and output various kinds Of information. Individualsin each of the three systems have to handle various kinds of information. The three categories of information handling processes are equally relevant for examining communication patterns of a research role, a linking role, or a client role. Thus, there are three categories of communication patterns within each social system: (1) communication patterns dealing with information input, (2) communication patterns dealing with information processing, and (3) communication patterns dealing with information output. 55 These three categories Of communication patterns, parallel across the three social systems, are distinct but interrelated. Figure 3 is a representation of the three systems and the three categories of communication patterns. Now let us see how these different categories interrelate. As illustrated in Figure 3, a researcher's information output (R0) about research results may serve as an input (Li) for the linking role. Looking at a researcher's output (R0) behavior in conjunction with the linking role's input (Li) behavior is a case of a communication trans- action between a researcher and a linker, involving the flow Of informa- tion from a researcher to the linker. The linking role processes research-based information so as to make it relevant, understandable and suited to the needs Of the clients. The information output from the linking role (Lo) serves as the informa- tion input (Ci) for the client. The client evaluates and (if the infor- mat on is acceptable) utilizes the information in his problem-solving behavior. Like any other communication process, research utilization also involves a two-way flow of information. The client may output (Co) information, e.g. client needs or feedback, which may become input (Li) to the linking role. The linking role may transmit such information as an output (Lo), which may become an input to the researcher (R1). This discussion does not imply that output R0 and input L1, or output Lo and input Ci, etc., are equivalent. At every transaction point, there may be some distortion or loss of information. 56 .Amaumoma .ocosm can name sowmv nowmwmmm SH msmpmmm HmHUOm conga may cw monouumm coaumowcsssoo mo mmflsmcofiumaowwoucH one oudumz .mmooonm cowumuflawuo an unease ucmnao u 00 usauso «Ham ocexcnq n on usncH unweao u HO usmcH whom snagged u HA 00 an l rllul'v U' usnpso usnnH \ coaumEH0mcH m \ soapMEHOHCH o a _ m T u . 1 I. O mcwmmooowm m. l mcflmmooonm n” cowumsnomcH m. cowuoswomcH .. V 5 r u .... _ ... 1 I usqu % unease cowumsuomcH coflumsnomcH ‘fl no on mean uqonao « maom nuanced a ADV zmhmww BZNHAU Adv zmemwm ozHMqu |'l .m ousmflm usmuso sonmomom usmcH noncommm :2 am em ugmuso coaumsuomcH . mcwmmoooym cowumsuomcH . ‘ usmcH compeswomcH Hem noncommm ’lgr’ sxaqoxeesau zaqio \‘\\ Amy zmamwm mumflflmmm 57 The Linking System of a Research Dissemination Organization The foregoing discussion of a research dissemination and utili- zation model included the three major systems Of the total conceptual organization. For the purposes of the present study, we are limiting our investigation to the center segment of the model, or the linking system. Figure 4 is a simplified paradigm showing the systems of a research dissemination organization and the major functions Of the respective systems. RESEARCH SYSTEM Function: Research and DevelOpment LINKING SYSTEM Function: Dissemination or Diffusion CLIENT SYSTEM Function: Utilization or Adeption Figure 4. The systems and the functions they perform in a research dissemination organization. The present study will focus on the linking system portion of the research dissemination organization, shown as the center segment of figure 4. Thus, the communication contacts and flow in the present study may be thought of as occurring horizontally, within and between departments Of the linking system. rents. linking he sch within i amet 1 ~.». /n..... if. the It is "he IESea 58 We now turn our attention to the linking system and its compo- nents. It may be schematically represented as shown in Figure 5. The linking system in the present study is described in the next few pages. The schematic representation (Figure 5) shows nine academic departments within a College of a University. Two of the departments were used as a pre-test, and the remaining seven were included in the main study. __e_§sllese_is_e_yeirsr§isr___ / /--§E§IE§§E_/ / .................... ¥§29_§EBQY ____________________ / :J 3 Figure 5. Schematic representation Of the linking system under study. Departments within the College Analysis Of the communication patterns among individuals with- in the linking system is expected tO yield a measure of "liaisonness."* It is suggested that there may be different types or patterns of "liaisonness" between the "vertical information flow" in the overall . . . . . . ** research dissemination organization and the "horizontal flow" as *"Liaisonness" will be measured by a numerical index. The index and the Operationalization of liaisonness as the dependent vari- able Of the study are explicated later in Chapter III, in the section on "Operationalization of variables." **We must remember that the communication system under study is a dynamic, n-dimensional process. We have temporarily "frozen" the action, and imposed structure on the process for the sake of analysis. "Vertical" information flow is represented as being that which flows across the major systems in the conceptual model, while "horizontal" information flow is that which flows within the center segment, or linking system, of the model. The imposition of "direction" on infor- mation flow is an arbitrary Operation in two planes, for the purpose of apprehending the complex, dynamic process. "Direction" of information flow could just as well be represented in another way. a-Iv under $6595 have 01' ts (9 I41 59 represented in one Single system of the organization. The Actual Research Setting The study reported here was part of a larger research project undertaken by the present author in collaboration with other graduate researchers at Michigan State University. Portions of the larger study have been reported earlier, with other portions yet to follow. In any case, the overall setting for the study is the same. It is discussed here, as previously reported by Jain (1970). The study was conducted in a large, complex organization, the Michigan Cooperative Extension Service (MCES). The basic function of the Extension Service is to facilitate the dissemination and utiliza- tion Of useful research results and other innovations to the pe0ple of the state of Michigan. The Michigan COOperative Extension Service is an integral part of Michigan State University. The Extension branch of the University was organized in 1914 with the passage of the Smith- Lever Act, a law which created the foundation for extension services in the State Land Grant Universities of the United States.* The Michigan Cooperative Extension Service is a statewide organization of over 400 employees, with an annual budget Of more than ten million dollars. MCES maintains relationships with the federal, state, and county governments. The service is administered by a Direc- tor Of Extension, who is responsible to both the United States Secretary of Agriculture and to Michigan State University.** *For a detailed discussion of the Smith-Lever Act and creation of the Cooperative Extension Services, see Kelsey and Hearne (1963) and Sanders (1967). **An organizational chart of the Michigan Cooperative Extension Service is provided in Appendix A. 60 From the vieWpoint of the present research, the two main roles in the extension service are: (l) specialized linkers, called "subject- matter specialists" or Extension Specialists, and (2) generalized linkers, called County Extension Agents or simply "County Agents". In MCES, the Specialists are full-time or part-time faculty members be- longing to their respective academic departments in the University. Within each department, one specialist is formally designated as the project leader for coordinating the activities of all the specialists working in that department. The major role of specialists is to serve as liaison and resource persons (within their respective fields Of specialty) between researchers and the County Agents. Sometimes specialists also communicate directly with clients on technical matters. Unlike the Specialists, the County Agents belong to Specific counties and have their offices there. The agents are not administra- tively responsible to the specialists, but are responsible to the Director of Extension. Thus, the relationship between a specialist and a County Agent is of a supporting and advisory nature, rather than of an administrative nature. A specialist is directly reSponsible to his Department Chairman rather than to the Director of Extension. There are five divisions or program areas within the Michigan Cooperative Extension Service: (1) agriculture, (2) natural resources, (3) marketing, (4) 4-H youth programs, and (5) family living education. Each of these divisions is reSponsible for research dissemination activities of their own subject matter in the whole state. Agriculture :represents the largest division in terms of the number of specialists and agents working in the program area. Each division or area has its «own administrative staff, budget, and plan Of activities. Also, each 61 area has its own set Of specialists working in-the academic departments related to that program area. At the county level, the distinction between these five program areas is not so clear-cut. A county agent might be working in several Of these five areas depending on the gen- eralized ability of the agent and needs of the county. In the present study, the program area of agriculture was selected because it was the biggest single area with a large sample of specialists. The study was thus limited to the communication patterns of extension Specialists working in the academic departments dealing with the agriculture program area of the Michigan COOperative Extension Service. Sample The study pOpulation from which the sample was drawn consisted of extension specialists working within the Michigan Cooperative Exten- sion Service. The sampling frame was the Administrative and Specialist Staff Directory, MSU Extension Service, (November 1968). The sample unit in the study was the individual specialist. The sample consisted of 50 Specialists assigned to seven dif- ferent academic departments of Michigan State University. The two criteria used in selecting the sample were: (1) Only those specialists who worked in departments having four or more Specialists were selected. This first criterion was the basis for selecting the departments rather than the specialists. The criterion was used because sociometric questions were desired in order to determine communication networks. About four or five individuals are required for meaningful analysis of sociometric network questions. (2) A specialist should have been working for one year or more at the time of data-gathering. It was 62 felt that the research would be more representative of a complex organi- zation if the reSpondents had been members of the organization long enough to become active in organizational affairs. SamplingyProcedure The procedure used in drawing the sample consisted of the following three steps: 1. Of the five main program areas in the Michigan COOperative Extension Service, the program area Of agriculture was selected for study. The reason for selecting only one area was to keep the sample homogeneous with reSpect to the subject-matter area and to administra- tive matters, and thus avoid the effect these extraneous factors might have on the hypothesized relationships under study. The agriculture program is the largest area, and had enough specialists to provide a sample of 50 individuals for the present study. 2. Within the program area of agriculture, there are 11 differ- ent academic departments in which specialists work. The number of Specialists varies from department to department. We wanted to select those departments which had at least four specialists, who have been working for at least one year at the time of sampling. There were nine departments which had four or more specialists. Of these nine depart- ments, two were selected for pretesting the instrument and the remain- ing seven were used for the main study. 3. From the seven departments included in the study, all the specialists who had been working for at least one year were included in the sample. This procedure provided a sample of 50 specialists.* *The method of sample selection lends itself well to sociometric analysis or a "case study" approach to research. It does not lend itself to data analysis by inferential statistics. 63 Data Collection The data for the present study were gathered through personal interviews with members of the state extension specialist staff Of the Michigan State University Cooperative Extension Service. The inter- views, requiring an hour to an hour and a half each, were conducted in the respective offices of the respondents, by appointment. A complete interview packet was prepared for each respondent, containing inter- viewer instructions, questionnaire, and ancillary forms. The question- naire was pre-tested on a sample of nine specialists selected from two different departments at Michigan State University. The pre-test sample was comparable to the sample of the main study. The pretesting of measuring instruments took place in the first two weeks of May, 1969. The instruments were modified and improved, based on the experiences Of the pre-test interviews. Approximately one month before the data collection for the main study began, a letter from a high prestige source in the university was distributed to the chairmen of all the academic departments included in the study. The letter briefly introduced the study and the investi- gator, and requested the cooperation of the individual specialists included in the sample. Two weeks after the letter was distributed, personal telephone calls were made to each member of the study sample to enlist their cooperation and make an appointment for conducting a personal interview. Personal interviews were conducted during the period of May 20, 1969 to July 8, 1969. All interviews were conducted in the offices of the Specialists, with no other Office personnel present. At the be- ginning Of the interview, each respondent was assured that the data 64 would be kept strictly confidential to the researcher and would be used only in aggregate form. The interviews were conducted by four trained graduate students, including the author, who have Similar academic interests and experi- ence. All interviews were conducted according to the prepared inter- view schedule. Following the interviews, the schedules were checked for completeness, and in a few cases, missing information was obtained by telephone. Respondents' cooperation was exceptionally good. In order to save time during the interview, and avoid recall bias, some data were collected from organizational records. The data collected from records were of two types: (1) biographical information about the specialists, and (2) information output (or extension teach- ing) activities of the specialists. The biographical information of each faculty member of the university is maintained by the Information Service of the University, with provisions for its updating. Biographi- cal information sheets were obtained from the Information Service, and were updated by the respondents during the personal interview. The information output data were collected from the administra- tive records of the extension service. Each specialist keeps a monthly record of his extension activities and periodically reports this infor- mation to the extension administrators. Specialists also compile their extension activities report for each academic year and submit the com- pilation to administration. Information was gathered about extension teaching activities of the Specialists for the three calendar years of 1966, 1967 and 1968. A test-retest reliability check was conducted approximately two months after the main study, to validate the instruments. The reliabili- ty coefficients were significantly different from zero, and were high 65 enough to establish general confidence in the reliability of the measur- ing instruments. Data Analysis and Display Data analysis and diSplay will be accomplished through a com- munimatrix* and a sociogram.** A communimatrix is a special case of . . *** . . . . SOCiomatrix, SpeCific to the study of communication contact. The Communimatrix In a communimatrix, the persons in the system are listed along the rows and the columns of the matrix in the same order. The rows correspond to the persons making the nominations or communication choices, and the columns correSpond to the persons receiving the nomina- tions. The choices made by any of the system members are then entered in the appropriate matrix cells, e.g., 1 equals a positive choice, 0 equals a negative choice or no choice, all from the Chooser's point of view. An example of a communimatrix is shown in Figure 6 (after Guimaraes, 1970:35). In its simplest form, the interconnections within *A communimatrix, as conceived by the present author, is a method of graphically displaying relational data derived from communi- metric questions. Schwartz (1968:161) coined the term "communimetric," defining it to mean "that branch Of sociometry which utilizes only a criterion of communication contact for operationalizing social system typologies, followed by analysis of structural and/or process charac- teristics of the system." **The results Of sociometric testing are usually presented by a graph or diagram called a sociogram. Subgroups, leaders, linking persons, cliques, isolates, etc. are symbolically represented, and the contact between the various individuals is shown by lines connecting the symbols. The resulting sociogram is a representation of the struc- ture of the group. ***For a discussion of the sociomatrix, see Forsyth and Katz (1946:340-347); Festinger (1949:153-158); Guimaraes (1970:33). 66 a network would be represented by a 0-1 matrix, that is, a matrix with aij=l or 0 (the subscripts i and 1 represent the row and column, respec- tively, of the cell entry). For example, if in a five-member communica- tion network it is found that a, b, and g speak to each other, g speaks to a; and g does not speak to any of the other members, the binary com- munimatrix for such a network would appear as in Figure 6. A common use of the sociomatrix has been to show the "connected- ness" or "integration" of an individual within the group (Coleman, 1964; Forsyth and Katz, 1946; Guimaraes 1970). Sociometric prestige scores have been used to measure the number and closeness, in terms Of communi- cation linkage steps, of sociometric choices. Receiver a b c d e a 0 l 0 0 l Sender c l 0 O O 0 d 0 0 0 0 0 e l l 0 0 0 Figure 6. Example of a binary matrix representing a five-member hypothetical communication network. Weiss and Jacobson (1955) showed that after a sociomatrix has been arranged to Show the various cliques or subgroups, it can be seen that the subgroups are linked together by key individuals. When the key individuals (liaisons) are "pulled out" of the matrix, it tends to "fall apart" into its component sub-groups. Thus the sociomatrix (in the present study, the "communimatrix") may be used to determine 67 "disconnectedness" as well as "groupness" of an organization. Another example of a reciprocated communimatrix for the analysis of sociometric data is given in Figure 7. In this example,* the res- pondents are listed according to their assigned respondent numbers down the side and across the top of the matrix. In this example of the com- munimatrix, we are working with reciprocated choices between reSpondents, on some dimension of communication behavior. For example, the respon- dents may be asked a sociometric question such as, "Who do you talk with about technical subject matter?" Mutual, or reciprocated choices are -17; verified by examining the responses to the question on each question- naire. When such reciprocated choice occurs, a mark is made in the communimatrix on the lines where the two respondents' numbers intersect. In Figure 7, the communimatrix is subdivided into segments or workgroups, represented by shaded areas. The unshaded area is the region of "outside contacts." The points "a," "b," and "e," have been chosen as placed to segmentalize the larger matrix. To segment the large matrix without having too many outside contacts it is necessary that there be some ordering in the matrix to begin with.** The matrix in Figure 7 already Shows clustering of contacts. The initial clustering of contacts may logically be expected as a result of work proximity. That is to say, those respondents who work in close contact with others will tend to cluster with those others in groups along the diagonal Of the matrix, from upper left to lower right. *The example in Figure 7 is after weiss (1956). For complete directions for the analysis of sociometric information using the matrix technique, see Weiss' (1956) Appendix D. **In the present study, initial ordering Of the workgroups in the matrix was accomplished by use of the personnel roster, which listed reSpondents in their respective departments of the college. 68 b c 12335-- Region of Outside Contacts segment l segment segment Region of Outside Contacts 1 L._._ ; _ F” 1.. ' i l +—+—— l i I s—~e—e I l l i ._1__ Lil“, ..- I Figure 7. communimatrix showing segments, e.g. cliques or workgroups, and region of outside contacts. 69 These individuals who have frequent reciprocated contacts out- side their immediate work groups will first appear in their own work groups. In addition, they will have marks in the matrix in the region of outside contacts. Such individuals are providing the liaison role, or inter-group contact within the total organization under study. Non- liaisons have no reciprocated contacts outside their own segments. The Sociogram Following the identification of work groups and their contacts, .4! as analyzed in the communimatrix, the data will be displayed in the form Of a sociogram. A sociogram* consists essentially of symbols representing respondents, connected by lines representing communication contact between respondents. The contacts may or may not be recipro- cated, depending upon the nature of the study. In the present research, all analyses were made on the basis of reciprocated contacts. An example of a sociogram is given in Figure 8. In this illus- tration, all contacts are considered reciprocal. A single line connec- ting individuals is considered to be going in both directions. It is possible to construct a sociogram and indicate direction of one—way contacts with arrows on the contact lines. The dotted lines in Figure 8 indicate boundaries of work groups. It may readily be seen that reciprocated contacts may exist both within and between work groups. The work groups represented in the sociogram in Figure 8 would be analogous to the segments previously displayed in Figure 7. The sociometric contacts within work groups would be 3FFor a discussion Of the technique of sociogram construction, :see Toeman (1948-9). For comprehensive information about sociometry as 23 method, see Moreno, J. L. (1934, 2nd edition 1953) and Moreno, J. L. (1960). 70 Division of , - I \ Vocational / Education . ‘ \ \n 3 Bureau of ‘ a Higher Education Executive Offices / - ‘ / Bureau Of Research Curriculum Division Figure 8. Example of a reciprocated-choice sociogram. (Adapted from Brownlee 1969:80). .... "'- 71 analogous to contacts within the shaded areas of the communimatrix in Figure 7. Contacts between work groups would be analogous to the "region Of outside contacts" in the Figure 7 communimatrix. Comparison of Figure 7 and Figure 8 should make it clear that the communimatrix has an advantage in initially displaying data for purposes of contact analysis, while the sociogram is a useful visual representation after initial identification of contacts. A sociogram used alone, especially in analyzing a large body of sociometric data, may become such a maze Of lines as to be practically unintelligible. Types of Liaison Roles It is anticipated that the communimatrix analysis, when dis- played in sociogram form, will aid in the visual identification of types of liaison communication roles in the linking system. These roles include the isolate, the non-liaison group member, the bridge, the liaison individual, the liaison group member, and the liaison set member. These six roles are similar in concept to the roles identified and discussed by Jacobson and Seashore (1951), Weiss and Jacobson (1955), Weiss (1956), Schwartz (1968) and MacDonald (1970). The conceptual base for the liaison role concept is provided by Jacobson and Seashore (1951), who noted the existence of work groups ‘which were connected by a few key individuals. Jacobson and Seashore (1951:37) Observed that: ...some individuals have frequent, reciprocated and important contacts with a limited number of other individuals who in turn are closely inter- related, and have few, non-reciprocated and un- important contacts outside Of this group. 72 The separation of work groups into independent entities is basically accomplished by removing the liaisonjpersons and contacts between_groups from the sociomatrix (Schwartz 1968:23). The liaison person is a communicative link between work groups. Liaisons "charac- teristically have many, frequent, reciprocated and important contacts which cut across the contact group structure,"according to Jacobson and Seashore (1951:37). Weiss and Jacobson (1955:663) Offered formal definitions of work groups, liaison persons and contact between groups: (1) WOrk group was defined as a set of indivi- duals whose relationships were with each other and not with members of other work groups, except for contacts with liaison persons or between groups. (2) A liaison person was described as an in- dividual who worked with at least two indivi- duals who were members Of work groups other than his own. (3) Contact between groups was defined as a single working relationship between members Of sets of individuals who would otherwise be classified as separate work groups. Schwartz (1968:23) noted that "the special criterion for the liaison person is that he must have contacts with at least two other persons in work groups other than his own." A single contact between two mem- bers of two separate work groups is defined simply as a contact between work groups, not as a liaison. In graph theory, as explicated by Weiss (1956), the liaison person is an analogue to the articulation point and the contact between groups is analogous to the bridge. These analogues are illustrated in Figure 9. 73 I Bridge FOurfiperson ‘— connected SIOUE Articulation point Figure 9. Graph theory representation of articulation point and bridge. (Adapted from Weiss 1956:88). In their analysis of communication patterns in complex organi- zations, Schwartz (1968), and MacDonald (1970) applied the procedures devised by weiss (1956), adOpting Weiss' criteria for identification of work groups and types of communication roles. The present author has adopted the criteria and constitutive definitions insofar as they have been explicated by the previously named researchers. In addition, the present researcher has expanded or clarified the definition of the roles, and has suggested a hierar- chical value for the roles in terms of the concept Of "liaisonness." Liaisonness as a Role Concept It is suggested by the present author that liaisonness is a continuous variable, and that different individuals may possess "more" or "less" of the liaison characteristic. Previous researchers have dichotomized the role, characterizing individuals as being "liaison" or'"non-1iaison" types. The liaison characteristic has also been tri- chotomized into "liaison," "bridge," and "non-liaison" types. 74 The present researcher proposes that the various types of liaison roles which appear in previous research literature are actually roles which lie along a continuum of "liaisonness." The role hierarchy as conceived by the present author is presented in order, from the least to the most "value" or degree Of liaisonness. The six roles embodied in the liaison concept are ideal types, and they apply with respect to any one given topic or stimulus. Any individual probably will display a variety of types of roles as the stimulus topic is changed. Following are constitutive definitions of the six types of liaison roles as the terms have been used by Jacobson and Seashore (1951), Weiss (1956), Schwartz (1968:99-102), MacDonald (1970:85), and somewhat modified by the present author. The isolate is the individual who is a member of the organiza- tion, but has no communication contact with other members Of his work group or organization with respect to a given subject or stimulus tOpic. The non-liaison group member (henceforth called simply ggpgp .member)* has contact with his immediate work group, but may have no more than one contact outside of his own group, except with liaison persons, and must have a majority of his contacts within his own group. The bridge is a single contact outside the immediate work group, and is a contact with a person other than a liaison person. The bridge person may or may not have other contacts within his own primary work group . *The designation non-liaison group member is a term used by lorevious researchers. The present author considers the term group nuanber as adequately describing the role type. The criteria for speci- iiication of the role are preserved, and are consistent with the criteria used by previous researchers. 75 The liaison individual does not have a majority Of contacts in any one group, but has contacts with members of two or more groups. These contacts may be with other liaison persons only where those per- sons are themselves members of groups. If there is a liaison set its members qualify as a group for this purpose. The liaison group member is a member of a communication group with a majority of his contacts, not including contacts with other liai- son persons, within the group. The 1iaisonyperson must have at least two contacts outside his group,not counting other liaison persons. An exception occurs if he has contact with two or more liaison persons outside his group. The liaison set consists of respondents who have half or more* of their contacts with other liaison persons, at least two of whom must be members of more than one group, i.e., liaison individuals. If a person is not a liaison individual by these criteria, but also is not a member Of any group, and if such a person has half or more of his contacts with the members of a liaison set, he should be classed as a liaison individual. Operationalization of Variables In Chapter II, liaisonness was shown as the common dependent variable in the six hypotheses being tested in the present study. Each of the six hypotheses has a different independent variable. Based on the hypotheses listed in the previous chapter, the variables of primary interest are: *Weiss, Schwartz, and MacDonald define the liaison set criterion as being respondents who have "all or nearly all" Of their contacts ‘with other liaison persons. The present author suggests "half or more" of the contacts as being more specific, and a more useful Operationali- zation of the term. 76 l. Liaisonness 2. Peer-evaluated effectiveness 3. Information input diversity 4. Peer-communication diversity 5. Network centrality 6. Opinion leadership 7. Information output diversity Following is the Operationalization of each of the above listed seven variables. The methods used to operationalize the independent variables are the same as those reported by Jain (1970:63). For each of the seven variables under consideration, an index was constructed. Liaisonness. The foregoing discussion of the liaison role con- cept identifies liaisonness as a continuous variable, composed Of Six main role types. Liaisonness is predicated on the existence of reci- procated contacts between respondents. In order to determine recipro- cated contacts, each reSpondent was asked to name about five indivi- duals in his department with whom he communicated most frequently about technical matters related to Extension work. The respondent was then asked to indicate, for each person named, the frequency of communica- tion contact with that individual. The frequency Of communication contact could vary from "about once per term or less Often" to "at least once a day." (See questionnaire item no. 17, Appendix C). Each respondent was then asked to name five to ten people in other departments at MSU with whom he communicated most frequently about technical matters related to extension work. For each individual named by the reSpondent, the reSpondent was asked to indicate (a) how frequently the respondent communicated with the individual, and (b) the 77 amount of time spent communicating with that individual in a month. The frequency Of contact could vary from "about once per term or less often" to "at least once a day." The hours of contact per month were to be specified by the respondent. (See questionnaire item no. 18, appendix C). Based on reciprocated nominations received from fellow special- ists in the study, each reSpondent was assigned contact values accord- ing to the six previously identified types of liaison contact role. The Six types lie along a continuum of liaisonness, in a hierarchical order. Under these assumptions, numerical values were assigned to each of the types of liaison contact, to produce an index of liaisonness. The unit Of analysis is the individual. Each isolate was assigned a value of "0" since the definition of the type states that no contact is made. In the present study, three individuals were identified as isolates with respect to the tOpic under consideration. Each group member was assigned a contact value of "l". Twenty- eight of the respondents were classified as group members. Each bridgejperson was assigned a value of "2". Ten of the respondents had single contacts outside their groups, in addition to their group contacts, and thus were classified as bridge persons. The liaison individual was assigned a contact value of ”3". There was only one reSpondent who emerged as a liaison individual. The liaison group member was assigned a contact value of "4". There were four reSpondents who were classified as liaison group members. The liaison set member was assigned a contact value of "5". There were four respondents whose contacts classified them as liaison set members. 78 Thus it was possible to classify each of the respondents into one of the six categories, or degrees, of liaisonness. Based on con- tact frequency within and between work groups, it was possible to assign to each respondent a numerical index value Of liaisonness. Using the "contact values" assigned to each Of the six role types previously explicated, it is possible to sum the values Of contacts so that each respondent earns a cumulative score for his total contacts. Since N = 50 in the present study, and the index score is based on numbers of reciprocated contacts, it is theoretically possible for the liaisonness index to run from 0 to 49. The actual range of the liaisonness index was from 0 through 22. The liaisonness index -- showing contact values for each of the six role types, the range of index scores and the frequency distribution of reSpondents across the index -- is shown as Appendix G. Peer-evaluated effectiveness. Peer-evaluated effectiveness is defined as the performance rating of an individual as judged by his peers in the same organization. In order to measure peer-evaluated effectiveness of Specialists in our study, each respondent was given an alphabetically arranged list of all the Specialists included in the study, and was asked to check the names of about five individuals whom he considered outstanding specialists.* The actual question was: In all groups of people, some gain a reputation for superior performance. Who are some, that in your Opinion, most deserve the reputation Of an outstanding specialist? I'd appreciate getting approximately five names. . *The present procedure of measuring peer-evaluated effectiveness 15 adapted from Murray (1965). 79 Based on the nomination received from fellow specialists included in the present study, scores for peer-evaluated effectiveness were assigned to each respondent. For each individual naming the respondent as an outstanding specialist, a score of "l" was assigned to the respondent. For instance, if a respondent were named by 10 other specialists as being outstanding, a score of 10 was assigned to him. The higher the score, the higher the peer-evaluated effectiveness. Since N = 50, a respondent could be nominated by as many as 49 other respondents. If a respondent was not nominated by any other respondent, he received a score of "0". Thus, the peer-evaluated effectiveness score could range from "O" to "49".* Information input diversity. Information input diversity refers to the extent that different information sources and channels are used by an individual in acquiring the information needed for performing his role. The index for information input diversity was constructed from the eight items described in Table 1. The procedure for constructing the information input diversity index consisted of the following two steps: (1) The numerical scores for each of the eight items listed in Table 1 were arranged in descending order and the median was located in the range of scores on each item. A value of "l" was assigned for an above-median score on each of the eight information input items. For instance, if a specialist read an above-median number Of profession- al journals, he was given a score of 1 for that item. But if he read *The actual range Of scores on peer-evaluated effectiveness in the present study is 0-23. The mean and standard deviation Of peer- evaluated effectiveness scores are 4.70 and 5.14, respectively. 80 Table 1. Items Included in Constructing Information Input Indices Items Question or Procedure Used to Obtain Data About the Item No. of professional periodicals read No. of non-profes- sional periodicals read Time spent in read- ing non-professional journals Time spent in read- ing professional journals No. of research publications received No. of extension publications received No. of telephone conversations per month No. of professional meetings attended What professional journals or scientific periodicals do you read or scan regular- ly? (Periodicals listed were counted). What non-professional periodicals (such as farm magazines, trade magazines, extension magazines, etc.) do you read or scan regularly? (Periodicals listed were counted). On an average, how many hours per week do you spend in reading non-profession- al periodicals? On an average, how many hours per week do you spend in reading professional journals or periodicals? How many research papers (including preprints, reprints, and unpublished papers) have you received from outside your department in the past month? How many extension publications (such as extension bulletins, extension news- letters, etc.) have you received from outside your department in the past month? For this item, the data were collected from organizational records. Each specialist reports the number Of tele- phone conversations he had on a month- ly basis. An average was taken from the record of past months. On an average, how many professional meetings (such as conventions, confer- ences, symposia, etc.) do you attend a year? ./ 81 the median number, or a below-median number, of professional journals, he was given a score of "0" on that item. Scores were assigned on all eight items on a similar basis. (2) The scores Of "O" or "1" assigned in the previous step were summed across all the eight items given in Table 1. This summed score was used as an index of information input diversity.* The index could range from 0 to 8.** Peer-communication diversity. Peer-communication diversity is defined as the extent to which an individual communicates with differ- pp; peers within and outside of his organization. The index for peer- communication diversity of a specialist was constructed from the eight items described in Table 2. The procedure for constructing the peer- communication diversity index consisted of the following two steps. (1) The numerical scores for each of the eight items listed in Table 2 were arranged in descending order and the median score was determined for each item. A value of "1" was assigned to above-median scores and a value of "O" to the median or below-median score on each of the eight items. (2) The scores of "O" and "l" assigned in the previous step were summed across all the eight items given in Table 2. This summed *The procedure for constructing an information input diversity index is adapted from Parker and others (1968). The procedure used gives a measure of information input from a wide variety of information sources and channels such as professional versus non-professional journals, research versus extension publication, professional meetings as a source Of information, and telephone conversations as an informa- tion input channel. **The correlations between the information input diversity index and the items included in constructing the index are given in Appendix F (Tables 11 and 12). Table 2. 82 Items Included in Constructing Peer-Communication Indices Items Question and or Procedure Used to Obtain Data About the Item No. of intra-dept. contacts No. of inter-dept. contacts Frequency of com- munication with intra-dept. peers Frequency of com- munication with inter-department peers Time spent in communicating with intra- dept. peers Time Spent in communicating with inter- dept. peers Who are the individuals in your department with whom you communicate most frequently about technical matters related to exten- sion work? Would you name about five peo- ple you communicate with most Often? The number of individuals listed by the respon- dent was counted. The same procedure described in item 1 was used; the question was concerned with indi- viduals in other departments at Michigan State University. For each individual named in response to the question in item 1, the reSpondent was asked to indicate the frequency of communication by checking the most apprOpriate category out Of the following: At least once a day; 2 or 3 times per week; about once per week; 2 or 3 times per month; about once per month; about once per term or less often. These categories were given a score from 6 to 1, respectively. An average frequency was then computed for each respondent. The same procedure described in item 3 was used except the question was concerned with peers in other departments at Michigan State University. For each individual named in response to the question in item 1, the respondent was asked: In a typical month, about how much time do you Spend communicating with this person? (Estimate number of hours). A total score was computed by adding the number Of hours across all the individuals listed in response to the question used in item 1. A procedure similar to the one described in item 5 was used, except that it was concerned with peers in other departments at Michigan State University. 83 Table 2 (con'd.) Items Question and or Procedure Used to Obtain Data About the Item 7. Number of extra- With about how many professional people organizational outside of Michigan State University do contacts you have frequent communication about technical matters related to extension work?...that is, people you communicate with at least 2 or 3 times per year. 8. Time spent communi- In a typical month, about how many hours eating with extra- do you spend communicating with profes- organizational sional peeple outside of Michigan State peers University? score was used as an index Of peer-communication diversity.* Like the input diversity index, the peer-communication diversity score could range from 0 to 8. Constructing a peer-communication diversity index as described yields a measure of an individual's diversity Of communication with intra-departmental peers, as well as his communication with peers within and outside of his organization. Communication network centrality. Communication network cen- trality is defined as the degree to which an individual Specialist occupies the center position in the communication network Of specialists working within the organization. Network centrality was measured by a sociometric technique based on the following two questions: (1) Who are the individuals in your department *The correlations between the peer-communication diversity index and the items included in constructing the index are given in appendix F (Tables 13 and 14). 84 with whom you communicate most frequently about technical matters related to extension work? WOuld you name about five people you communi- cate with most often? (2) Who are the individuals in other depart- ments at Michigan State University with whom you communicate most frequently about technical matters related to extension work? WOuld you name five to ten peeple you communicate with most often? The above two questions were asked of all 50 respondents in the study. The responses to these two questions were examined for the mention of each respondent in our study. Some respondents were men- tioned more Often than others. We counted the number of individuals who mentioned the name of a respondent in response to the above two questions. The number of nominations received by a Specialist from fellow specialists reflects the individual's centrality in the communi- cation network. Based on the nominations received by a respondent from his fellow specialists, we assigned numerical values, giving a score of "l" for each nomination received. For instance, if a person was men- tioned by six others in response to the questions mentioned earlier, he was assigned a network centrality score of 6. The network centrality index ranged from 0 to 14. Opinion leadership. Opinion leadership is defined as the degree to which an individual informally influences others' attitudes or overt behavior in a desired way with relative frequency. Opinion leadership ‘was measured by a sociometric technique based on the following question: Whom do you most frequently seek for informa- tion and advice on technical matters about extension work? WOuld you name about three people you seek out most Often? The question was asked of all respondents. The responses to the question were examined for the mention of each respondent in the study. 85 Some respondents were mentioned more Often than others. We counted the number of times each respondent was mentioned by other fellow special- ists. Based on the nominations received by a respondent from his fellow Specialists, we assigned numerical values, giving a score of "l" for each nomination received. The total number of nominations received by an individual was the Opinion leadership score for him. The Opinion leadership scores ranged from 0 to 4. Information output diversity. Information output diversity is defined as the extent to which an individual makes use of different communication channels in transmitting information to his clients. The information output diversity index was constructed from the thirteen items described in Table 3. For each Of the thirteen information out- put items, the median score was located. An above-median score on each item was assigned a value of "1", and a below-median or median score was assigned a value of "0". Then the scores across all 13 items were summed to obtain an index of information output diversity.* The value of the index could range from 0 to l3.** Hypothesis Testing The hypotheses were tested by submitting the respective indices for the variables to correlation analysis by computer. The computer *The procedure used in constructing the information output diversity index is similar to the procedures described earlier for con- structing the information input diversity index and the peer-communica- tion diversity index. **The correlations between the output diversity index and each of the thirteen items included in constructing the index are given in .Appendix F (Tables 15 and 16). 86 Table 3. Items Included in Constructing Information Output Indices Items Description of the Item* 1. Farm and home visits Number of farm, home, and other out-Of- office visits per month. 2. Office calls Number of Office calls per month. 3. Telephone calls NUmber of telephone calls received or made per month. 4. Consultations Number of consultations providing infor- mation, guidance, and advice on problems of organizations and agencies. 5. Extension committee Number of meetings of extension commit- meetings tees in which the respondent participated. 6. Leader training Number Of meetings conducted to train meetings leaders. 7. Other extension Number of other meetings at which the meetings respondent presented information. 8. News stories Number Of news stories released directly to newspapers or magazines. 9. Publications Number of publications distributed to the public. 10. Direct-mail distri- Number of direct-mail pieces distributed buted to the public. 11. Directrmail prepared Number of direct-mail pieces prepared. 12. Radio broadcasts number of broadcasts in which the respon- dent participated. 13. Television broadcasts NUmber of television broadcasts in which the respondent participated. ”The detailed description of these items is given in Appendix E. 87 program used was the routine titled "Rank Correlation Coefficients."* This particular program calculates and prints the following measures of correlation: Kendall Rank Correlation Coefficient (Tau) Spearman Rank Correlation Coefficient (Rho) Kendall Partial Coefficient Kendall Coefficient Of Concordance (W) Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient (r) The statistical tests which were most appropriate for the pre- sent study are the Spearman Rho and the Pearson r. The Spearman Rho is suited to the analysis of indices which have been prepared through a rank-ordering procedure. It could be argued that the use of Pearson r would be forcing the data, since the Pearson r assumes intervality of data.** In the present analysis, primary use was made Of Spearman Rho to test the hypotheses. At the same time, since the computer program produced both analyses, Pearson r was run on the data for comparative purposes. It should be observed that both measures are correlative. Cor- relational analysis does not prove causality (cause and effect), which assumes a time-order relationship. Correlation does provide a measure of association between the variables being considered. *For a discussion of the computer routine and instructions for programming the routine, see Morris, John, Rank Correlation Coefficients, Michigan State University Computer Institute for Social Science Research Technical Report no. 47. **When r is used to determine relationship between two varia— bles, and not to infer, there is no need to assume normality in the data. See Kerlinger (1966:261); McNemar (1962:136-137). CHAPTER IV RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION The present chapter contains a summary and a discussion of the findings Of the study. Included is a discussion of the survey reSponse and the characteristics of the respondents, data collection procedures, data analysis and diSplay using the communimatrix and sociogram, emer- gence and identification of the liaison role, and hypothesis testing. Interviewee Response Response by Specialists who were interviewed in the present study was unusually good. The research team experienced no difficulty in scheduling interviews. In only a few cases did a reSpondent post- pone the appointment or allow interruptions to disturb the interview. As previously mentioned, the research reported here is part of a larger study. On all phases and questions Of the present part of the research there was a 100% response from the specialists. In the present study, which is based on reciprocated sociometric choice, com- pleteness Of response is especially important so that all possible re- ciprocations may be measured. Response rate may be more critical with the sociometric tech- nique than it is with some other data-gathering techniques in which over-sampling or reserve sampling may be included in the research design in case of nonresponses or missing data. 88 89 In the present study, there is no problem of missing data or nonresponse. The total sample N was 50, and all analyses reported in the following pages are based on N = 50. A Characteristics Of the Respondents A summary of selected characteristics of the respondents in the study is present in Table 4. This information is based on the data collected from personal interviews with the respondents and from Organi-_ zational records. Table 4. Characteristics of the ReSpondents (N = 50) Variable Description of the Variable* 1. Age (No. of years) Range 27-65 years Mean 45 Standard Deviation 10 2. Education No. of individuals holding: a) Master's Degree 12 (or 24%) b) Ph. D. Degree 38 (or 76%) 3. Academic Rank Instructor 2 (or 4%) Assistant Professor 9 (or 18%) Associate Professor 17 (or 34%) Professor 22 (or 44%) 4. Professional experience Range 1.5-33 years as an Extension Special- Mean 11 ist at Michigan State Standard Deviation 8 University (No. of years) 5. Role commitment to Range 20-100% Extension work (% Of Mean 65 time spent in perform- Standard Deviation 28 ing linking role) *The values of percentages, means, and standard deviations are rounded to the nearest whole number. tQ‘; ' o '( 90 The age of the respondents ranged from 27-65 years with a mean of forty-five years. All fifty respondents in the Study had postgra- duate education. Seventy-six percent of the sample held Ph. D. degrees. Academic rank Of the reSpondents ranged from instructor to professor. Of the fifty reSpondents in the study, two were instructors. The re- maining forty-eight reSpondents held various professorial ranks. The length of respondents' professional experience as extension specialists at Michigan State University ranged from 1.5 to 33 years, with a mean of approximately 11 years. There were both part-time and full-time specialists in the present study. Respondents were asked to indicate the actual amount of time they Spent in doing extension work. Responses which were computed showed that the time spent in extension work ranged from 20 to 100 percent. Data Collection Using the Sociometric Technique Data collection in the research reported here presented no unusual problems. The researchers who collected the data, including the present author, were trained in the use of the interview schedule and ancillary forms. In addition, we kept in touch with each other from the inception of the project through the final collection Of inter- view responses. None Of the researchers reported any reSpondent difficulty in understanding the sociometric questions used. NOr was there any reported hesitation on the part of the reSpondents in replying to the sociometric questions. When respondents were asked for information about peOple with whom they interact frequently, recall was quick and apparently was no 91 problem. When asked a question which concerned a larger group, the respondents found the staff list, containing the names of all potential nominees, to be useful. (The alphabetical listing of all state staff specialists was provided at the time respondents were asked for nomina- tions of fellow workers as "outstanding specialists." See schedule item no. 29, Appendix C). Data Analysis and Display In the sociometric search for the liaison role, data were analyzed along three dimensions Of communication contact: (1) technical matters pertaining to extension work; (2) peer-evaluated effectiveness; and (3) Opinion leadership. Data analysis shows a high degree of both intra-group and inter- group communication about technical matters. The very nature of the extension Specialists' jobs pertains to the dissemination Of technical information. It is not surprising that the specialists would talk about technical matters with their fellow specialists in other depart- ments, as well as with their work peers in immediate proximity. The second question, on peer-evaluated effectiveness, also served to discriminate well among the respondents. There was much less reciprocatedschoice communication on the topic of peer effectiveness than on the tOpic of technical matters. The third question, on ppinion leadership, discriminated well between the reSpondentS. The total reciprocated-choice within and between work groups was less on Opinion leadership than it was on either of the other two topics. The three sociometric questions were analyzed independently, using the communimatrix as the preliminary method Of data display. 92 The use of the communimatrix as an analysis tool was discussed in Chapter III. All subsequent analyses, including the development of the Liaisonness Index and hypothesis testing, are based on reciprocated choice on the dimension of technical matters. Additional data analysis and display on the topics Of peer- evaluated effectiveness and Opinion leadership are provided in Appen- dix D. Appendix D includes a discussion and comparison of the communi- matrices and sociograms resulting from data analysis on these two dimensions Of communication contact. Communimatrix Analysis: Reciprocation on Technical Matters A pilot communimatrix was built according to the reSpondents' replies on the dimension of technical matters. Respondents were asked to name about five people in their department with whom they communi- cated most frequently about technical matters related to extension work. They were also asked to name five to ten people in other depart- .pppps with whom they communicated most frequently about technical matters related to extension work. Following the instructions given by Weiss (1956) which were previously outlined in Chapter III, the author constructed the pilot communimatrix without any reference to organizational charts or depart- mental listing of personnel. This was done as an informal test Of the method, to see how nearly the results would approximate the actual or- ganization Of work groups according to departmental affiliation. The respondents had previously been numbered serially, begin- ning in one department and continuing to the end of the last department. (They were not randomly assigned numbers.) Thus, the serial 93 arrangement would provide an initial ordering of reSpondents, so that they Should fall into an approximation of work groups along the diagon- al of the matrix. However, this ordering alone was not sufficient to positively identify each respondent with a certain matrix segment or work group. After initial listing of respondents down the left column of the matrix and across the top of the matrix, reciprocated choices were entered into the apprOpriate squares within the body of the matrix. Visual inspection was then made, and work groups were identified on the basis of cluster appearance alone. The resulting inspection led the researcher to identify Six work groups. The results of the pilgp communhmatrix are shown in Figure 10. It may be seen in the pilot communimatrix (Figure 10) that respondents number 15, 27, and 28 are not clearly identified with work groups, and could conceivably be asssigned to one or another work group according to the researcher's interpretation. After completing the pilot communimatrix without reference to organizational tables or assignments, the researcher prepared the first analytical communimatrix, which is shown as Figure 11. Again, (and in every case of communimatrix construction) instructions provided by Weiss (1956) were followed. The analytical communimatrix was segmented into primary work groups by reference to the departmental assignments of reSpondents. Since the reSpondents were serially numbered, beginning with Depart- ment A and continuing through Department G, it was a simple matter to identify expected work groups, or segments, by department. Reference to the sampling frame gave the researcher the respondent numbers for 94 Subjects Subjects Chosen N = 50 Choosing by Others Reciprocated Choices = 71 Others i” :Segment 2 f , 1 Figure 10. Pilot communimatrix: Reciprocated choices on technical matters without reference to departmental assignment. 95 each work group as follows: Department Se ent Respondent Numbers A 1 1-6 B 2 7-15 C 3 16-20 D 4 21-26 E 5 27-35 F 6 36-46 G 7 47-50 From Figure 11 it may be seen that there are actually sgygp work groups (segments) Of the overall matrix, rather than the six which emerged strictly by visual inspection in the pilot communimatrix. Comparison of the pilot communimatrix (Figure 10) with the first analytical communimatrix (Figure 11) shows marked concordance between the two. Thus it may be seen that Weiss' (1956) method Of inatrjx analysis appears to work satisfactorily with only a sequential ordering of respondents initially provided. Ckxmnunimatrix Decomposition: Technical Matters Following the identification of work groups, the analytical cxxmnunimatrix was decomposed in the search for the liaison role. The step-by-step instructions on matrix analysis provided by Weiss (1956: 99-]LH3) were followed. Original segments were analyzed for communica- ‘tion.cxontact both within and outside Of the segment. In this manner, recirnxmzated contacts outside the segments were identified, thus provi- four "group members" and two "bridge persons," his total liaisonness iJuiex score would be 8. Using this method of scoring, all from the crmxoser's point of view, each respondent was assigned a numerical \nalue representing his total score on the liaisonness index. Table 5 gives a listing of reSpondents by code number, each respondent's classification into one of the six categories, and the jJuiex value he has earned by his communication activity on technical matters. 105 Table 5. Respondent Categories and Liaisonness Index Scores Respondent Category Liaisonness Number Index Score 1 Group Member 10 2 Group Member 9 3 Group Member 8 4 Bridge Person 9 5 Liaison Group Member 16 6 Group Member 7 7 Group Member 8 8 Group Member 8 9 Liaison Individual 3 10 Bridge Person 4 11 Group Member 4 12 Group Member 8 13 Group Member 1 14 Group Member 1 15 Liaison Set Member 18 16 Group Member 1 17 Group Member 1 18 Isolate O 19 Liaison Set Member 13 20 Bridge Person 2 21 Group Member 9 22 Group Member 4 23 Liaison Set Member 22 24 Bridge Person l8 Table 5 (cont'd.) 106 Respondent Category Liaisonness NUmber Index Score 25 Bridge Person 14 26 Liaison Group Member 22 27 Group Member 1 28 Bridge Person 6 29 Group Member 2 30 Group Member 5 31 Group Member 5 32 Group Member 4 33 Liaison Group Member 6 34 Group Member 3 35 Group Member 2 36 Bridge Person 4 37 Isolate O 38 Group Member 2 39 Group Member 1 40 Group Member 7 41 Group Member 5 42 Bridge Person 3 43 Group Member 2 44 Group Member 6 45 Bridge Person 5 46 Isolate O 47 Bridge Person 2 48 Liaison Group Member 18 49 Liaison Set Member 19 50 Group Member 9 107 The liaisonness index as applied was successful in discrimina- ting among the various types of respondents according to their communi- cation contact. It was found that individuals could readily be assigned to categories, or role types. The results of the application of the liaisonness index as it was developed in the present study appear to lend support to the notion that liaisonness is a continuous variable. The liaisonness index appears to function as a useful tool in describing the communication activities of respondents within and between organizational departments. It was also found that the liaisonness index lent itself to mathematical comparison with other indices. It was thus possible to test the hypotheses in the study. Bypothesis Testing In each of the six hypotheses posited in the study, liaisonness appears as the dependent variable. The six independent variables are: peer-evaluated effectiveness, information input diversity, peer-communi- cation diversity, network centrality, Opinion leadership, and informa- tion output diversity. The author hypothesized a positive relationship between each independent variable and the dependent variable.* The hypotheses were tested by submitting the respective index for each independent varia- ble to computerized correlational analysis with the index of the aA mflnmcowumHon MHOmH>p¢ marmcoflumamu muwuosus¢ s '. — hucsoo 0p oocmflmmfl mucomm fill _Iwmucom¢ hucsoolfluasz a II _ 1 _ _ /r L 4 — uouowuflo coflmsouxm mucsoo — All / I, l I, l/ / — mucmmm coflmcmufim uoauumHn—T III / / ll, // / Emma H0mfl>ummsm Emma “Omfl>uomsm IIIIHUI cmmflzofiz Momma cmmflsoflz Ho3oq m ummcnm a» e _ m ucmfimoam>mo Coflmfl>flo H HOCGOmHom m:fl>aq conH>HQ mOOHSOwom A :oncouxm SHHEMM sync» mlv HMHSumz mcfluoxnmz OHSHHSOHHmm d How musuflumcH H COHmH>HQ O _ HOCCOmHmm+II. coflmfi>uwmsm tamfim m | m HouomHHQ _Houmcfltnooo Emumoumwllnullnl m oofl>uwm amazemnmm mu All! / confiflmnu ucmspuwmmo _concouxmmo Houowuflofl fl _ mOOHSOmom amusumz tam onsuHSOHHm¢ mo ommaaou I ammo a: — weHmmm>st madam zaonOHZIQ AHhmH Hflumfiv WUH>mmm ZOHwZHme m>HE¢mmmOOO ZflUHmUHZ m0 Bm¢mU A¢ZOHB¢NHZ¢Q¢O < XHDZWAQG APPENDIX B ENTRY LETTER April 8, 1969 MEMORANDUM To: Chairmen, Departments of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural Engineering, Animal Husbandry, Botany and Plant Pathology, Crop Science, Dairy, Entomology, Horticulture, Soil Science From: Mason E. Miller and Everett M. Rogers Subject: Study of Communication of Research Findings Nemi Jain, a Graduate Student in the Department of Communication, is carrying out a study of Extension specialists under our guidance. The study is concerned mainly with specialists' communication behavior as they deal with research findings and other new ideas in their field of specialty. Mr. Jain will be contacting specialists working in the agricultural program area of Extension in your department. He will make appointments with them for interviews during the next month or so. He will be inter- viewing both part- and full-time Extension specialists who have been working on Extension ag programs for at least a year. All data will be confidential. Reports will not deal with individual cases, but rather with grouped data and characteristics. We think this will be a valuable study for Extension. We have cleared the idea with Director McIntyre and Richard Bell of Extension adminis- tration. We wanted you to know about the study in case any questions came up. If you should have questions, please contact one of us. Thank you for your help. Mason E. Miller, Director Everett M. Rogers, Professor Institute for Extension Personnel Department of Communication Development 146 APPENDIX C INTERVIEW SCHEDULE INCLUDING SELF‘ADMINISTERED INSTRUMENTS Interview Schedule Specialist Communication Study Department of Communication Name and Number of the Department Name and Number of Respondent Location Date of Interview Time: From to What is your subject matter specialty? How many years have you worked as an Extension Specialist here at MSU? years. Of the following four activities, approximately what percentage of your time do you actually spend on each: 1. Extension work % 2. Classroom teaching % 3. Research % 4. Administration % NOw we would like to know about your membership and participation in professional associations or societies. Here are the questions I would like you to answer . . . SUPPLY ANSWERS IN THE SPACES PROVIDED. HAND QUESTIONS FOUR TO SIX TO THE RESPONDENT. ASK HIM T0 | 147 148 Appendix C (cont'd.) Q 4. What professional associations or societies do you belong to? Q 5. On an average, how many professional meetings (such as conven- tions, conferences, symposia, etc.) do you attend in a year? Q 6. What professional meetings did you attend in 1968? (Please list.) Now we would like to know about reading preferences for professional and non-professional periodicals. Here are the questions I would like you to answer . . . HAND QUESTIONS 7 TO 12 TO THE RESPONDENT. ASK HIM TO SUPPLY ANSWERS IN THE SPACES PROVIDED. Q 7. What_professiona1 journals or periodicals do you read or scan regularly (that is, read almost every issue)? Q 8. What non-professional periodicals (such as farm magazines, trade magazines, extension magazines, etc.) do you read or scan regularly (that is, almost every issue)? Q 9. On an average, how many hours per week do you Spend in reading non-professional periodicals? HOurs per week. Q 10. On an average, how many hours per week do you spend in reading professional journals or periodicals? (Estimate if necessary) Hours per week. Q 11. HOW many research papers (including preprints, reprints, and unpublished papers) have you received from outside your depart- ment in the past month? (Estimate if necessary) . 149 Appendix C (cont'd.) Q 12. How many extensionypublications (such as extension bulletins, extension newsletters, etc.) have you received from outside your department in the past month? . The next few questions are concerned with the sources that are important to you for becoming aware of new ideas and providing information neces- sary for evaluating the new ideas in your field of specialty. . . Q 13. Q 13a. Q 13b. Q 14. Q 15. Q 16. Where or from whom do you usually first hear about new ideas in in your field? Which one of these sources would you say is the most important? Which one is the next most important? After you have first heard about an idea, what sources do you generally seek for further information about it? Whom do you most frequently seek for information and advice on technical matters about extension work? Would you name about three peOple you seek out most often. Generally, where or from whom do you get information that helps you make up your mind about the usefulness of a new idea? In other words, who tells you about, or where do you go to get information that helps you decide on the usefulness of a new idea? 150 Now let's discuss the peOple that you usually talk with about research findings, new ideas, and other technical matters related to extension work. Over the past three or four months, think of the faculty people at MSU that you have communicated with most frequently about technical matters related to extension work. (By "faculty peOple" we mean indivi- duals with academic rank of instructor or higher and/or administrator). First, let's consider your communication with persons in your department... HAND QUESTION SEVENTEEN AND ACCOMPANYING "INTRA‘DEPT. CONTACT FORM" (BLUE SHEET) TO RESPONDENT. ASK HIM TO LIST THE NAMES OF INDIVIDUALS AND CHECK THE FREQUENCY OF COMMUNICATION. TAKE THE FORM WHEN COMPLETED] Now let's consider your communication with peOple in other departments at MSU... HAND QUESTION EIGHTEEN AND ACCOMPANYING "INTERfDEPT. CONTACT FORM" TO RESPONDENT. ASK HIM TO SUPPLY ANSWERS IN THE SPACES PROVIDED. WHILE THE RESPONDENT IS ANSWERING QUESTION EIGHTEEN, DO THE FOLLOWING: (1) INSPECT BLUE SHEET OR INTRA-DEPT. CONTACT FORM THAT HAS BEEN JUST COMPLETED BY RE- SPONDENT. (2) WRITE THE NAME OF EACH INDIVIDUAL LISTED ON THE BLUE SHEET ON SEPARATE "IMMEDIATE OTHER SHEETS". 151 Now I would like you to answer the following questions concerning those individuals with whom you communicate frequently. Here are the questions: Q 17. FIRST, HAND "IMMEDIATE OTHER SHEET" TO RESPONDENT. TAKE IT BACK WHEN COMPLETED AND HAND SECOND SHEET TO HIM, AND SO ON UNTIL ALL IMMEDIATE OTHER SHEETS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED. Who are the individuals in your department with whom you communi- cate most frequently about technical matters related to extension work? Would you name about five peOple you communicate with most often. For each individual named, please indicate the frequency of communication by checking the most appropriate column in the following table: FREQUENCY OF COMMUNICATION NAME OF INDIVIDUAL IAt least 2 or 3 About 2 or 3 About About once a times once times once once day per per per per per term week week month month or less often Q 18. Who are the individuals in other departments at MSU with whom you communicate most frequently about technical matters related to extension work? Would you name five to ten people you communicate with most often. For each individual named, please indicate: (a) how frequently do you communicate with him, and (b) the amount of time you Spend communicating with him in a month (estimate number of hours). Name of Department Frequency of Communication Number Individual * of hours (Same six categories as in you spend the table accompanying communi- Question 14) cating with him in a month 152 Please complete the following items in terms of your communication with (Name) a. In a typical month, about how much time do you spend communicating with this person? (Estimate number of hours) b. How does the communication with this person usually originate? Estimate the percent occuring in the following ways, to the nearest ten percent. 1. I visit or contact him %. . He visits or contacts me %. . We both attend a meeting or seminar %. . Conversation arises spontaneously when we see each other %. . Other ways %. mpww c. Please evaluate this person as a source of information in terms of the adjective pairs listed in the following table. Check one and only one of the seven points in each item. FOR EXAMPLE: Happy X Unhappy extremely quite somewhat not somewhat quite extremely happy happy happy sure unhappy unhappy unhappy >3 >1 '53 E B 13’ '3') 5 S D S 5 w 3 m 3 O H U 0 o P H “ '3 8 “ 8 '3 4’ a (m U) E m 0! é Informed Uninformed Close-minded Open-minded Reliable Unreliable Friendly, Unfriendly Out-of-date Up-to-date Frank Reserved Untrustworthy Trustworthy Unsociable Sociable Aggressive Meek Incompetent Competent Safe Dangerous 153 Now let's consider for a moment your communication with field extension agents working in our extension service. Q 19. Q 20. With how many county agents (including multi-county agents) did you have frequent communication during the past eight or nine months? That is, county agents that you communicated with at least once a month. Number of agents HAND QUESTION TWENTY TO RESPONDENT ALONG WITH THE LIST OF COUNTY AGENTS. ASK HIM TO CHECK THE NAMES OF AGENTS. With which county agents did you have the most frequent communi- cation during the past eight or nine months? I'd appreciate your going through the list given below and checking the names of five to ten agents with whom you had most frequent communi- cation during the past eight or nine months. Now let's consider your social contacts with peOple here at MSU... HAND QUESTION TWENTY-ONE TO RESPONDENT. ASK HIM TO SUPPLY ANSWERS IN THE SPACES PROVIDED. Now let's consider your communication with professional peOple outside MSU. I'd like you to answer the following questions concerning your communication with people outside MSU. Here are the questions... Q 20a. Q 21. Q 21a. HAND QUESTION TWENTY-TWO TO THE RESPONDENT. ASK HIM TO SUPPLY ANSWERS IN THE SPACES PROVIDED. If you have contacts with district extension agents, please indicate the names of those agents with whom you communicate at least once a month about technical matters. Who are the individuals in your department and/or in other departments with whom you or your family meet socially? I'd appreciate getting five to ten names of those who you meet most often. Name Department Which one of these peOple is your closest friend? Q 21b. Q 22. Q 23. 154 What are some of your common interests with this person in extra-academic areas? With about how many professional peOple outside MSU do you have frequent communication about technical matters related to extension work? That is, peOple you communicate with at least two or three times in a year. number of people Who are the individuals outside MSU with whom you have had your most frequent communication about technical matters related to extension work during the past five or six months? WOuld you name approximately five peOple outside MSU you communicated with most often during the past five or six months. For each individual named, please indicate his title and the organiza- tion he works for. Name of Organization he Name of Individual His Title WOrks For Q 24. In a typical month, about how many hours do you spend communi- cating with professional people outside MSU? Hours Now let's talk about some specific research findings and new ideas within your field of specialization. We would like to know the main technical ideas or practices that you have been disseminating to the field extension agents during the past eight or nine months....and a little bit about those ideas.... Q 25. What are the main technical ideas or practices (within your field of specialization) that you have been disseminatflu; to the agents during the past eight or nine months? Q 25a. Which two of these, would you say, have you started dissemina- ting most recently? (INTERVIEWER: WRITE DOWN THE NAMES OF THESE TWO INNOVATIONS IN THE SPACES PROVIDED BELOW) 1. (NAME OF INNOVATION #1) 2. (NAME OF INNOVATION #2) 155 4 WRITE THE NAME OF EACH OF THESE TWO INNOVATIONS ON SEPARATE "SPECIFIC INNOVATION SHEETS". Now we would like you to tell us more about each of these two ideas... We would like to know certain aspects such as how you became aware of it, how did you go about evaluating it, and how are you disseminating it, etc... First, let's talk about (READ THE NAME OF INNOVATION #lLISTED ABOVE) TAKE THE FIRST SPECIFIC INNOVATION SHEET AND ASK ALL PARTS OF QUESTION TWENTY-SIX. Now let's talk about (READ THE NAME OF INNOVATION #2 LISTED ABOVE) TAKE THE SECOND SPECIFIC INNOVATION SHEET AND ASK ALL PARTS OF QUESTION TWENTY-SIX AGAIN. 156 SPECIFIC INNOVATION SHEET (Two provided in questionnaire) 26a. 26b. 26c. 26d. 26e. 26f. 26g. 26h. (NAME OF THE INNOVATION) Where or from whom did you first hear about it? When was this? In other words, when did you first hear about this idea? After you first heard about it, what sources did you seek for further information about it? Whom did you seek most for information and advice about this idea? In other words, whom did you consult most in evaluating this idea? Where or from whom did you get information that convinced you that this idea should be disseminated to the agents? When did you start disseminating this idea to the agents? How are you disseminating this idea to the agents? In other words, what methods or techniques are you using to disseminate this idea to the agents? Which one of these methods you just named, would you say, has been most effective in disseminating this idea to the agents? 157 The next questions concern your participation in faculty and adminis- trative committees here at MSU....Here are the questions I would like you to answer... HAND QUESTION TWENTY-SEVEN TO THE RESPONDENT. ASK HIM TO ANSWER ALL THREE PARTS OF THE QUESTION. TAKE THE SHEET WHEN COMPLETED. Some people's Opinions of "us" are important while the opinions of other people are not. In other words, we care what some people think of "us", while the opinions of some others don't matter much. I'd like to know the kinds of people whose Opinions of you as an extension Specialist are important to you. Here is the question I would like you to answer... Q 29. Q 27. HAND QUESTION TWENTY-EIGHT TO THE RESPONDENT. ASK HIM TO ANSWER BOTH PARTS OF THE QUESTION. TAKE THE SHEET WHEN COMPLETED. In all groups of people, some gain a reputation for superior performance. Who are some, that in your Opinion, most deserve the reputation of an outstanding specialist? I'd appreciate getting approximately five names... Here is an alphabetically arranged list of some extension specialists working with the agricultural programs of our extension service... HAND LIST OF EXTENSION SPECIALISTS TO THE RESPONDENT Please go through the list and circle the names of about five individuals, who in your opinion, most deserve the reputation of an outstanding specialist... What faculty and administrative committees (including both standing and ad hoc committees) do you belong to? Please indicate the names of extension committees, department-wide committees, college-wide committees, university-wide committees and other committees, of which you are now a member. Q 27a. Q 27b. Q 28. Q 28a. Q 30. 158 a. Extension committees: b. Department-wide committees: c. College-wide committees: d. University-wide committees: e. Other committees: Generally, about how many committee meetings all together do you attend in a month? On an average, in a month about how many hours all together do you spend in committee meetings? Hours Some people's Opinions of "us" are important while the Opinions of other peOple are not. Whose Opinions of you as an extension Specialist are important to you? Now consider that the amount of importance of the opinions of these people toward you as a Specialist is equivalent to 100 points. Please distribute the 100 points among these peOple according to the relative importance of their Opinions. In your opinion, what are the main communication problems faced by extension Specialists? Finally, we are interested in obtaining some biographical information about you. We have obtained some biographical data about you from the MSU Department of Information Services. Will you please look through this biographical information sheet and make appropriate corrections or additions where necessary... HAND BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION SHEET TO THE RESPONDENT. ASK HIM TO UP-DATE THE CORRECTNESS OF HIS PERSONAL DATA. Is there anything else you would like to add to our discussion? Many thanks for your time and cooperation. APPENDIX D ADDITIONAL DATA ANALYSIS AND DISPLAY The present study is based on reciprocated sociometric choice on the tOpic of technical matters pertaining to Extension work. The dis- cussion of main findings, illustrated with communimatrices and socio- grams, is contained in Chapter IV. Appendix D consists of additional data analysis. It includes a discussion and comparison of the communimatrices and sociograms on the topics of_peer-evaluated effectiveness and opinion leadership. Communimatrix Analysis: Peer-Evaluated Effectiveness The second dimension of communication contact measured was that of peer-evaluated effectiveness. Following the same procedure which was given in detail (see Chapter IV) for the analysis of communication on technical matters, the researcher prepared the second communimatrix. The second communimatrix, displaying the reciprocated choices on peer-evalu- ated effectiveness, is shown in Figure 14. The segments remain the same as those previously identified, i.e., work groups identified by depart- ments. Inspection of the second communimatrix (Figure 14) shows less interpersonal contact on the dimension of peer-evaluated effectiveness than existed on the dimension of technical matters. Communimatrix Analysis: Opinion Leadership Following the same procedures previously outlined, the researcher prepared the third communimatrix to Show interpersonal communication on the dimension of ppinion leadership. As in the preceding matrices, the 159 160 N = 50 Reciprocated Choices = 21 Figure 14. Second communimatrix: Reciprocated choices on peer-evaluated effectiveness. 161 segments are primary work groups according to departmental affiliation of the respondents. The third communimatrix is shown in Figure 15. It is obvious even from a cursory inspection of Figure 15 that there was much less interaction on the tOpic of opinion leadership than there was on the preceding two tOpics. Comparison of the communimatrices in Figure 11, Figure 14, and Figure 15 graphically illustrates the different degrees of intra-organi- zational reciprocated choice across the three dimensions of communica- tion contact measured in the present study. The analysis of the matrices on peer-evaluated effectiveness and opinion leadership did not identify any liaison roles not previously identified in the analysis of the communimatrix on technical matters. Therefore, in the assignment of liaisonness index values in order to test hypotheses, the researcher used the liaison types identified and categorized in the communimatrix on technical matters (Figure 11). After the communimatrices were utilized for the analysis of data, the data were displayed in the form of sociograms. Sociogram: Liaisons and Peer-Evaluated Effectiveness The sociogram presented in Figure 16 is constructed from the communimatrix on peer-evaluated effectiveness (Figure 14). The tOpic of peer-evaluated effectiveness produced fewer reciprocated choices among our respondents. Comparison of the sociogram on technical matters with the sociogram on peer-evaluated effectiveness makes the difference in responses apparent. Nevertheless, in spite of the lower level of reciprocated choice on the dimension of peer-evaluated effectiveness, the key role of the 162 N = 50 Reciprocated Choices = 8 Figure 15. Third communimatrix: Reciprocated choices on opinion leadership. 163 / ’— - ‘ \ ’ 0" ” ’ \\ / ‘\- .’ / \ / \ / \\ / n 2“ /’ l 25 / \\ " " \\ 21 / \ ’ ’ \\ ” ,r Figure 16. Sociogram representing intra- organizational communication on the topic of_peer-eva1uated effectiveness. Legend: Isolates, Group Members and Bridge Persons =0 Liaison Individual =- Liaison Group Members = Liaison Set Members =ZQS 164 liaison may still be seen in the sociogram. As before, the liaisons are shown as the individuals who have communication contacts which cut across the organizational structure. When the liaisons are removed from the sociogram, as in Figure 17, the already-limited inter-group communication drops out almost completely. As previously illustrated, the positions of the liaisons before their removal is indicated by the dotted squares and triangles. Sociogram: Liaisons and Opinion Leadership The sociogram presented in Figure 18 was constructed from the communimatrix on ppinion leadership (Figure 15). The method of construc- tion and the symbols used are identical with the preceding sociograms. So little interaction occurred on the gpinion leadership dimen- sion of communication contact, there is no difficulty in interpreting the sociogram. Still, even with very little interaction, the liaisons are seen to be involved. Since there was so little inter-group communication on the Opinion leadership dimension, it is not readily apparent what role the liaisons play in this instance. Deletion of the liaisons from the Opinion leadership sociogram as shown in Figure 19, reduces both the intra-group and inter-group contact on that dimension. Deleted liaisons are indicated in Figure 19 with dotted squares and triangles. ll‘li‘l'li‘li 165 // _ \ / ’ I. ‘ \ / 1- I A \ / \ \ L-.. 1 _\ \ / \ I I I \ \ \“ \ 3 \ // \ \I’ \ / \ \x—x \ O \ ® / \ ‘ / ~~~~~ // Figure 17. Sociogram representing intra- organizational communication on the topic of peer-evaluated effectiveness, with liaisons removed. Legend: Isolates, Group Members, and Bridge Persons =0 Liaison Individual = 'O‘ LA Liaison Group Members = Liaison Set Members =22: 166 fl..." \ //"' \ (x \ / \ ,/ \ _,...—--“ \ / \ \ /// //'—'\\ ’_\ \ / \ // \ / \\ I \ / \\ I I ’ “\ \ ’ l \ ,’ \ \ / \ \ / \\ / _____ / Figure 18. Sociogram representing intra- organizational communication on the tOpic of opinion leadership. Legend: Isolates, Group Members and Bridge Persons =0 Liaison Individual =0 Liaison Group Members =0 Liaison Set Members =A 167 / \ ..- z’ \\ l’z’ '\ // \ / 0 . \ I \ / I \ \ / 25 / \ I \ ‘_,r \\ / \ ,/ \ ‘ - ___ __ _. / ,-'_'~\ / \ / \ / \ / \ ’I T \ \ / I 4M3 ‘I’ ‘l’ I / '\ I / 3" ‘I \ / 1--.! \ 1 ‘5’ / l \ \ / \ II \ / \ / \ / \ / \\ __.z- \| / \ \ ‘ __. / / / I _ \ \ / \ / ’ ~ \ \ y/ ‘\ / \\ / \ ‘ , l \ \ / \ i \\ / \ I \ __ L ’ \ / \\ 1/ \4 1’ \ § — .——- / Figure 19. Sociogram representing intra- organizational communication on the topic of ppinion leadership, with liaisons removed. Legend: Isolates, Group Members and Bridge Persons = O Liaison Individual —-’.} Liaison Group Members =L—J liaison Set Members =1: APPENDIX E PRESCRIBED FORMS FOR REPORTING EXTENSION TEACHING ACTIVITIES AND INSTRUCTIONS (a) Form for individual monthly statistical report including summary of extension teaching activities. (b) Instructions for completing the individual monthly statistical report including summary of extension teaching activities. 168 169 Appendix E (a) PRESCRIBED FORM FOR INDIVIDUAL MONTHLY STATISTICAL REPORT INCLUDING SUMMARY OF EXTENSION TEACHING ACTIVITIES INDIVIDUAL MONTHLY STATISTICAL REPORT State, District, Area, and County Extension Workers NAME TITLE DEPARTMENT, COUNTY, DISTRICT AND AREA REPORT MONTH ADMINISTRATIVE PROGRAM AREA SUMMARY OF EXTENSION TEACHING ACTIVITIES Number, by Project Areas ACTIVITIES Agri- Market- Family- Natural culhue ing Living Youth Re- Total III IV V VI sources No. Studies of problems and opportunities Field trials, tests, and demonstrations Consultations providing # information and guidance on problems of indivi- duals, families, and operators. A. Farm, home, other out-of-office visits 61. B. Office calls 62. C. Telephone calls - received or made 63. Consultations providing information, guidance,ad- vice on problems of organ- izations and agencies Appendix E (a) (Cont'd.) 170 NUmber, by Project Areas Agri- ulhne III ACTIVITIES Natural Re- sources Market- Family- ing Living IV V Youth VI Total No. 64. Meetings of Extension Planning, DevelOpment & other committees 65. Leader Training: A. Meetings to train local leaders 66. B. Number of different leaders trained 67. Other meetings at which Extension workers pre- sented information 68. News stories released directly to newspapers or magazines 69. Publications distributed togpublic 70. Direct Mail: A. Number of different .pieces prepared 71. B. Number of pieces distributed 72. Radio broadcasts parti- cipated in 73. Television broadcasts gpagticipated in 171 Appendix E (b) INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THE INDIVIDUAL MONTHLY STATISTICAL REPORT INCLUDING SUMMARY OF EXTENSION TEACHING ACTIVITIES Instructions and Interpretations for Completing The Monthly Statistical Report. A. This report is to determine quantitatively some of the more impor- tant teaching techniques used to reach Extension's clientele. NO attempt is made in this report to get a total picture of how a staff member does his extension work or to measure the efficiency of individual workers. When two or more state, district, area, or county staff members participate in the same activity, the person having major reSpon- sibility for planning the activity should report it. When equal responsibility is shared, the persons involved should mutually decide which one will report it. Extension employees with less than 100% Extension appointment should report only total days devoted to Extension work. Organization of Report: Page 1 - Identification Page 2523- Total days worked are to be accounted for in the five program areas. The three sections on page 4 are for additional information. They up_upu cross check with any previous figures except Total Days Worked, (Sl-A) Days in Office, and (52-8) Days in Field which should correSpond with the grand total at bottom of page 3 (50). At the end of each month each Staff member completes a monthly Statistical Report and sends the original to his Program Director. The Report must reach the Program Director no later than the 15th of the following month. A six month summary of the monthly statistical Reports will be required at the end of June. Area Extension Agents will provide their County Extension Agriculture or Natural Resource Agent with a c0py of the monthly Statistical Report for each county they serve. Instructions for Summary of Extension Teaching Activities. 58. Include the number of Special studies or surveys made in each project area to aid in identifying and solving problems of peOple or present new Opportunities for Extension work. Place the number of special studies or surveys in the appropriate project area column. 59. 60. 63. 64. 65. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 172 Report the number of field trials, tests, and demonstrations in the appropriate project area column. Include all individual staff efforts to provide individuals, families, and farm operators with guidance, advice, and informa- tion. Report the number in the appropriate project area column. Include all individual staff efforts that provide advice, guidance, and information to organizations and agencies, both public and private. Report the number in the appropriate project area column. Report the number of all Extension planning, development and other committee meetings, including sub-committee meetings, in the apprOpriate project area columns, i.e., Agricultural Production Committee meetings in Column III, Marketing Committees in Column IV, Family Living Education in Column V, 4-H Youth Development in Column VI, and Natural Resource Committees in Column VII. Include all meetings to train local leaders, and the number of different leaders trained. Use apprOpriate project area columns. Report all other meetings at which you participated as a profes- sional Extension worker. Report each news story, feature article, and personal column released by you directly to a newspaper or magazine as one item. This includes suggested stories prepared by the state office and released by agents to news media if adapted to the local situation. The same story sent to several outlets should be reported only once. Information given to reporters or writers as the basis for a story should also be reported. News stories prepared by local leaders should not be reported. The State Office of Information should report stories released directly to news outlets from that office. County or area offices also count them only if they were adapted to local Situations and released from the county or area office. Report the number of COpies of bulletins, circulars, leaflets, and other materials related to subject-matter and organization aspects of Extension work. Include such materials prepared in the county or area office, as well as those of state and federal origin. Commercial publications are not to be counted unless they are recommended by the state office. (see Item #70) Include commodity letters, newsletters, postcards, self-mailers, envelope stuffers and all messages sent by mail to specific audien- ces for a specific purpose. Do not include letters to individuals. Report total number of pieces mailed. 72. 73. 173 A broadcast is a single presentation on the air. It may be given in person or by transcription. An Extension worker does not have to appear on the program so long as he is responsible for its preparation. Information given to station announcers or writers and used as the basis for a broadcast is also to be reported. Broadcasts, including tapes, prepared with the Office of Informa- tion should be counted only by that office. Same as above. (a) (b) (C) (d) (e) (f) APPENDIX F INTERTITEM CORRELATION MATRICES Correlation between the items included in constructing information input indices (Table 11) Correlation between information input indices and the items included in constructing the indices (Table 12) Correlations between the items included in constructing peer-communication indices (Table 13) Correlations between peer-communication indices and the items included in constructing the indices (Table 14) Correlations between the items included in constructing information output indices (Table 15) Correlations between information output indices and the items included in constructing the indices (Table 16) 174 175 mo.l 0H. mo. mo.l HH.I ON. mo. OH. mo. no. NH. Nm. ma.l hm. NN. ow. NH. mo. vv. no. mH.I mm. mm. HN.I Nm. 00. MA. NN.I popcouum mmcauwme Hmc0ammomoum mo .oz mcofiummuo>coo mconmmawu mo .oz Uo>flmoou mGOAu IUUHHQDQ cofimcmuxo mo .02 po>amoom mcoaumo Iaabsm nonmmmou mo .02 mamcusoh Hmcoflmmmmoum mcflpmmn ca pcwmm mafia masonson HMGOflmmowoum loo: mcflpmou CH pcwmm TEHB town MHUOHUOAHOQ Hmcoflmmwmoumlcoc mo .02 pmmu mamoaooauom HMGOHmmomon mo .02 mmUHUCH mcfluosuumooo CH UTOTHUCH meuH MOOHUCH HSQCH coflpmsnomcH mafiposupmcoo ca OOOSHUCH mepH on» cmwBuom mcoeumHOHHoo .HH manna Table 12. 176 Correlations Between Information Input Indices and the Items Included in Constructing the Indices Items Included in Constructing the Indices Correlation Between Input Amount Index and the Item Correlation Between Input Diversity Index and the Item l 2 3 1. No. of professional periodicals read .46 .43 2. No. of non-professional periodicals read .28 .24 3. Time Spent in reading non-professional jOurnals .54 .44 4. Time spent in reading professional journals .61 .55 5. No. of research publi- cations received .55 .42 6. No. of extension publi- cations received .64 .56 7. No. of telephone conversations .38 .17 8. No. of professional meetings attended .34 .32 177 x x x x x x x mnoom HUCOHumqummHOIMpro Squ mcHumoHCSEEOU SH pcmmm TEHB .m mm. x x x x x x muomucoo HmcoHu IMNHQmmHOImexo mo Honssz .5 mH. NH. x x x x x mewQ .HQOUIHOHCH SUHB mCHpmoHosEEoo CH uqmmm TEHB .w mH. 5H. om. x x x x mnmwm .ummUIMHHCH QUH3 NCHumoHCSEEOO CH “comm UEHB .m MN. NN. Hm. NO.I x x x memm .UQOUIHOUCH SuH3 coHumoHCSEEoo mo mocosvmnm .v mH. om. om. mm. Hm. x x muomm .pmmplmHUCH nqu coHumoHCDEEoo mo mucosgmum .m om. mm. «m. «0.- mm. Hm. x muomucoo .ummuunmucH mo .02 .m ma. ma. ma. Hm. RH. mm. Hm. muomucoo .ummwumupaH mo .02 .H m H O m w m m mQOchH msHuosuuwcou 2H wmusaocH memuH .mTOHUEH coHuMOHCSEEouunmmm mcHHODHuchU CH UOUDHUCH mEouH may cwo3umm mcoHumHoHHOO .mH UHQMB Table 14. 178 Correlations Between Peer-Communication Indices and the Items Included in Constructing the Indices Items Included in Constructing the Indices Correlation Between Peer- Communication Amount Index and the Item 2 Correlation Between Peer- Communication Diversity Index and the Item 3 No. of intra-dept. contacts No. of inter-dept. contacts Frequency of communi- cation with intra-dept. peers Frequency of communi- cation with inter-dept. peers Time spent in communi- cating with intra-dept. peers Time Spent in communi- cating with inter-dept. peers NUmber of extra-organi- zational contacts Time Spent in communi- cating with extra-organi- zational peers .37 .42 .48 .43 .33 .34 .94 .39 .70 .54 .74 .31 .59 .49 .51 179 00. mm. mo. mm. mm. NN. mm. mo. NH. VH. oH. mH. MH x x x x x x x x x x or mummoomoun :onH>mHme .mH x x x x x x x x x x x mummonmoun 0H6mm .NH so. x x x x x x x x x x Omummmnm HHmz .HH cmpannumHO no. mo. x x x x x x x x x HHmsuuomuHo .OH OH. mm. HH.3 x x x x x x x x mcoHumoHHnsm .m mo. em. me. as. x x x x x x x mmHHoum mamz .m hH. mm. NH. av. mm. x x x x x x mmCHumos concmuxw HUQHO .5 mo. mm. Ho. mm. mm. mm. x x x x x . mmcHumms NCHCHmHu HOEMOA .o «a. ma. mm. mm. «a. mm. mm. x x x x mmcHumws mm» IuHEEoo concopxm .m HH.3 om. ma. mo. ma. ma. NH. mo. x x x mcoHumuHSmcoo .w mo.u 0H. 6H. Na. mm. mm. AH. ma. mm. x x \ mHHmo mcormmame .m mo.u ma. «0. me. mm. mm. ma. 6H. mm. mm. x mHHmo moHumO .m Ha. mm. 00. mm. ma. om. mm. as. so. mm. av. muHmH> wear can swam .H NH AH 0H m m H O m v m m mmochH mCHuUDHumcou :H UUUDHOCH mswuH MOOHOCH usmuso coHumshomcH OSHpoouumcoo CH OOOSHUCH mEouH mnu coo3uom MCOHumHmHHOU .mH THQUB Table 16. 180 Correlations Between Information Output Indices and the Items Included in Constructing the Indices Items Included in Constructing the Indices Correlation Between Output Amount Index and the Item Correlation Between Output Diversity Index and the Item l 2 3 1. Farm and home visits .61 :64 2. Office calls .58 .55 3. Telephone calls .56 .61 4. Consultations .38 .33 5. Extension committee meetings .54 .51 6. Leader training meetings .62 .49 7. Other extension meetings .75 .71 8. News stories .81 .67 9. Publications .65 .61 10. Direct-mail distributed .28 .21 ll. Direct-mail prepared .61 .38 12. Radio broadcasts .20 .09 13. Television broadcasts .58 .39 APPENDIX G LIAISONNESS INDEX Respondent Index Respondent Index Number Value NUmber Value 23 22 41 5 26 22 45 5 49 19 10 4 48 18 ll 4 24 18 22 4 15 18 32 4 5 16 36 4 25 14 9 3 19 13 34 3 l 10 42 J 3 2 9 20 2 4 9 29 2 21 9 35 2 50 9 38 2 3 8 43 2 7 8 47 2 8 8 13 l 12 8 l4 1 6 7 16 l 40 7 l7 1 28 6 27 l 33 6 39 l 44 6 l8 0 30 5 37 0 31 5 46 0 Unit of Analysis is the Individual N = 50 Liaisonness Range = 0 through 22 Contact values for typologies of individuals: Each Isolate Each Group Member Contact Each Bridge Person Contact Each Liaison Individual Contact Each Liaison Group Member Contact Each Liaison Set Member Contact U'InbUJNP-‘O 181 III. .Iillli .l. I "I1111111111111111