r «4. <‘ 331‘» .‘“‘.‘.. . a. ‘f: ‘ .c‘tm! . wk- 1» “I “ .R‘A. 5:5 1:. I ' 3‘ “2.! ' .l'h. a! 3 i «a as»; 235‘ ~ :13; P'vrgiu . u "3?,- Wm” 1 . , :33: 1% ~. .. ‘2'?— RABIES ‘liliiiiliilil ll This is to certify that the thesis entitled Participation in Technical Updating Revisited: Individual, Attitudinal and Environmental Antecedents and Performance Outcomes presented by Joann Speer Sorra has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for M.A. degree in EgyChology A d % X? y [Major professor 4" Date 7 } 0-7639 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 3‘- Y _ N LIBRARY Michigan State University PLIKHEIIFfliflUfiDlEK»(uanunawnuilchodmnnflnmnyournuxxd. TO AVOID FINES mum on or baton dd. duo. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE MSU Is An Affimmivo Action/Equal Oppommiy intuition Wan-9.1 __ _. .__________— _,___‘ 1r 1.: an: at” iEieél an“? PARTICIPATION IN TECHNICAL UPDATING REVISITED: INDIVIDUAL, ATTITUDINAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANTECEDENTS AND PERFORMANCE OUTCOMES BY Joann Speer Sorra A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Psychology 1994 ABSTRACT PARTICIPATION IN TECHNICAL UPDATING REVISITED: INDIVIDUAL, ATTITUDINAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANTECEDENTS AND PERFORMANCE OUTCOMES BY Joann Speer Sorra The purpose of the present thesis was to examine the individual, attitudinal, and work environment antecedents of participation in technical updating activities, as well as knowledge/performance outcomes. Data were obtained from 171 engineers across 8 different organizations. Hierarchical multiple regression and LISREL analyses were conducted to test the hypotheses and propositions. Three individual characteristics variables-~adaptabi1ity to change, job involvement and technical interest--and group-level perceptions of the climate of support for updating were positively related to attitudes toward technical updating. Attitudes toward technical updating were positively related to participation in technical updating. However, the relationship between attitudes and participation in formal updating was moderated by work pressure. Finally, a positive relationship was found between participation in technical updating and ratings of technical knowledge/performance by supervisors. A proposition found that engineering function was related to participation in technical updating, but not attitudes toward technical updating. Thus, all five hypotheses were supported with at least one of the four participation measures (total hours of updating, formal, informal, or number of courses taken), and one of the two propositions was supported. For Rachel Ann ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many thanks go to my committee members, Georgia Chao, J. Kevin Ford, and Steve Kozlowski, for their continued support during my leave of absence. Special thanks to Steve for serving as my on-call, long- distance thesis consultant. And an especial note of gratitude to my chair, Kevin, for his caring guidance, generosity, and encouragement throughout the years. Finally, I am grateful to the University of Maryland faculty for being accepted into their Ph.D. program, thereby enabling me to complete the analyses for this thesis and continue the graduate work I started at Michigan State. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Previous Conceptualizations of Skills Obsolescence, Technical Updating & Development . . . . . . . . . Skills Obsolescence & Technical Updating . . Expectancy Theories . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Interactionist Perspective. The Environment & The Individual . . . . . . . .p. . . . . . Employee Development . . . . . . . . . . . Limitations of Previous Research . . . . . . . . . The Thesis Model & Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . Technical Knowledge/Performance . . . Participation in Technical Updating Activities Attitudes Toward Technical Updating . . . . . Relating attitudes to participation in updating Work Pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Work Environment . . . . . . . . . . . Organizational climate . . . . . . . . Organizational policies . . . . . . . . Supervisor support . . . . . . . . . . Individual Characteristics . . . . . . . . . Achievement orientation . . . . . . . . Adaptability to change . . . . . . . Job involvement . . . . . . . . . . Technical versus managerial interests . Background Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . Engineering function . . . . . . . Summary of Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . METHOD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Measures . . . . . . Technical knowledge/performance . . . . Work pressure . . . Participation in technical updating activities Attitudes toward technical updating . . Organizational climate . . . . . . Organizational policies . . . . . . . Supervisor support . . . . . . . . . Group updating climate . . . . Achievement orientation . . . . Adaptability to change . . . . . . Job involvement . . . . . . Technical vs. managerial interests Background information . . . . . . . Engineering function . . . . iv Page DUNN Additional Measure . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Effectiveness of updating activities . . . . . . . . . 42 Analyses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4S Hierarchical Regression Analyses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Hypothesis 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Hypothesis 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Hypothesis 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Hypothesis 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Hypothesis 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Propositions 1 & 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 Additional Analyses . . . . . . . . . . 54 Relationships with demographic variables . . . . . . . 54 Effectiveness of updating activities . . . . . . . . . 54 Differences between formal and informal updating . . . S7 A second look at the participation--performance relationship . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Summary of Hierarchical Regression Results for the Conceptual Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 Exploratory LISREL Analyses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 Summary of Overall Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Implications of Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Individual characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Work environment . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 Attitudes toward technical updating . . . . . . . . . . 71 Participation in technical updating . . . . . . . . . . 72 Work pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 TeChnical knowledge/performance . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Limitations of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 Directions for Future Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Appendix A. Engineers' Scales . . . . . . . . . . 81 Appendix B: Engineer Technical Updating Survey . . . . . . 90 Appendix C. Technical Updating Survey for Supervisors . . . . 101 LIST OF REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 Table IbbJNi-J 10. ll. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. LIST OF TABLES Means and Standard Deviations . . . . . . . . . . Zero- order Intercorrelations of Variables . . . . . . Means and Standard Deviations of Updating Activities Rotated Factor Loadings of Attitudes Toward Technical Updating Items . . . . . . Means and Standard Deviations of Effectiveness of Updating Activities . . . . . Hierarchical Regressions of Technical Knowledge/ Performance on Participation in Technical Updating Hierarchical Regression of Participation in Technical Updating on Attitudes Toward Technical Updating . Work Pressure Moderation of the Relationship Between Attitudes Toward Technical Updating and Participation in Technical Updating Activities Hierarchical Regression of Attitudes Toward Technical Updating on Group- level Perceptions of Work Environment Support . . . . . Hierarchical Regression of Attitudes Toward Technical Updating on Individual Characteristics . . Hierarchical Regression of Attitudes Toward Technical Updating and Participation in Technical Updating on Engineering Funcation . . . . . . Descriptive Statistics on Total Hours of Updating and Attitudes Toward Technical Updating by Engineering Function . . . . . Hierarchical Regressions With Age and Years of Education Scheffe Analyses of Significant Differences Between Activities on Effectiveness Toward Updating Engineers’ Technical Knowledge and Skills . . . Hierarchical Regressions of Technical Knowledge/ Performance on Total Updating Hours by Function . Goodness-of-Fit Summary for Initial LISREL Model . . Goodness-of—Fit Summary for Exploratory LISREL Model vi Page 29 3o 35 36 43 46 48 49 51 52 SS 56 56 58 59 66 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Conceptual Model for Thesis: Five Hypotheses and Two Propositions . . . . . . . ‘10 2. Interaction of Work Pressure .and Attitudes Toward Technical Updating . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 3. Summary of Beta Weights for Hypotheses: Total Updating Hours . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 4. Summary of Beta Weights for Hypotheses: Formal Updating Hours . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 5. Initial LISREL Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 6. Exploratory LISREL Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 vii 1 INTRODUCTION Rapid and pervasive technological changes and innovations in the workplace have had and continue to have an enormous impact on organizations. Not only are organizational outcomes like product quality and productivity changed, but equally affected are employees whose job descriptions and skill requirements evolve with these changes. Education and training are critical in ensuring that employees’ skills are up-to-date. A continuous learning process becomes necessary to enable employees to meet the demands of current jobs and potentially new jobs created as a result of change. Projections about the workplace by the year 2000 predict that skill requirements of jobs will only increase (Johnston & Packer, 1987). Therefore, it is important to study the process of employee skills updating to elucidate the factors that contribute to participation in such activity. Many studies of skills updating have focused on engineers and scientists due to the direct impact of technological change on knowledge and skill requirements in these fields. Zelikoff (1969) commented, "The critical role played by engineers is such that the value of having engineers up-to-date in their respective fields of science and technology can hardly be overestimated.” Kozlowski (1987) cited a report from the Office of Technology Assessment which projected that the demand for engineers, computer scientists, skilled technicians, and skilled mechanics will rise rapidly. If individuals in these fields do not take necessary actions to keep their skills and knowledge current with technological advances, their productivity, job performance, innovativeness, and competitiveness in the job market may decline. In addition, the productivity and competitiveness of organizations employing these professionals may be at stake in the midst of an increasingly more global economy. 2 Since participation in education and training activities all serve as means for engineers to become more up-to-date, stay current, or prevent obsolescence of technical knowledge and skills, it is important to look at engineer participation in such development activities. The purpose of this thesis is to examine the individual, attitudinal, and work environment antecedents of participation in technical updating activities as well as knowledge/performance outcomes. The remainder of the introduction will review the progression of literature and research that has focused on issues related to participation in technical updating. This review will be followed by a summary of the limitations of this body of research. The conceptual model used in the thesis will then be presented, with sections describing the model variables in an attempt to address previous shortfalls and expand understanding of the processes involved in technical updating. Previdps Cpnceptualizapions of Skills opsplesgepce. Technical Updating & Developmen; Skills stplescence & Teghnical Updating When confronted with rapidly changing technology and the need to retrain employees, early studies framed the problem in terms of skills obsolescence. Obsolescence was defined as an individual's inadequate knowledge of current technology within his or her profession and resulted from a failure to maintain knowledge of recent or ongoing developments in the discipline (Farr, Enscore, Steiner, and Kozlowski, 1984). The challenge was in precisely defining the "state of the art" in knowledge that needed to be attained. Attempts at quantifying the rate of change in knowledge documented the exponential growth in the number of scientists and engineers, scientific journals, research and development expenditures (Evan, 1963), changing engineering curricula (Zelikoff, 1969), and estimated the "half life" of professional 3 competence after graduation when half of what was learned in school becomes obsolete (Dubin, 1972). Later literature framed the problem in terms of skills updating. Instead of tracking ongoing developments and noting differences between an individual's knowledge and "state of the art" knowledge within a profession, literature on updating focuses on what individuals do to improve their knowledge and skills. Rather than examining what is related to obsolescence, updating focuses on what is related to increases in knowledge and skills--adequacy, not inadequacy. A number of early studies focused on age and obsolescence (Dalton & Thompson, 1971; Thompson, Dalton & Kopelman, 1974; and Kaufman, 1974). Other studies presented basic answers to eclectic survey questions on obsolescence and updating (Raudsepp, 1964; Margulies & Raia, 1967; Mali, 1969; Kaufman, 1973; Shearer & Steger, 1975). While this research led to elucidation of various components involved in obsolescence and updating processes, it failed to combine these components into any integrative theoretical framework. Expegtangy Theories Several researchers have proposed and attempted to test an expectancy theory framework in relation to the process of professional obsolescence (Arvey & Neel, 1974; Arvey & Neel, 1976; Kopelman, 1977; Harel & Conen, 1982; Possum, Arvey, Paradise & Robbins, 1986). Possum, Arvey, Paradise and Robbins (1986) and Harel and Conen (1982) address the utility of modeling obsolescence and updating processes using an expectancy theory framework. However, neither article empirically tests the model proposed. Farr, Enscore, Steiner, and Kozlowski (1984) also discuss expectancy theory as useful in predicting updating activity, but do not directly test motivation as an antecedent of updating activity. While expectancies and valences were obtained for various reward outcomes of updating, these motivational components were not combined and used within an expectancy theory approach. One of the only studies actually testing an expectancy approach 4 to updating was Hinrichs (1971) who found insignificant results using motivation to predict updating activity. Motivation to update may be identified as a crucial factor associated with engineers who remain up- to-date (Kaufman, 1973), but the difficulty of measuring this construct within the multiplicative expectancy theory framework diminishes the theory's utility. While even relatively recent literature by Dubin (1990) and Farr and Middlebrooks (1990) continues to advocate the expectancy theory approach, there is still no empirical evidence to support it as a viable approach to updating. Thus far, one can only conclude that the process of updating has not yet been explained through expectancy theory. WW Interactionist perspectives began to frame the process of updating in terms of the dual influences of the environment and the individual. Kaufman (1978b) took this more systematic approach to updating research by looking at the relationships among the variables of environmental change, organizational climate, work characteristics, and individual characteristics. Kozlowski and Hults (1987) improved upon this line of research by more adequately testing the concept of updating climate. Kozlowski and Hults (1987) assessed the efficacy of updating climate as a construct within a comprehensive framework incorporating organizational contextual features, individual affective responses, updating activities, and job performance. They found updating climate to be a meaningful feature reflective of an organization’s promotion or inhibition of updating behavior. Kozlowski and Farr (1988) noted a lack of systematic, theoretically-based research on updating because previous research had taken a narrow person-job focus. Their study incorporated the climate construct in an integrative model of updating and performance. The findings supported updating climate perceptions as mediating the influence of individual characteristics and the organization subunit 5 context (specialization, standardization, and centralization of procedures and decision making) on performance and updating activity. This study also found that job or task factors such as variety and uncertainty were significantly related to the degree of updating. The job itself was found to be an important method of updating outside of formal continuing education activities. The studies by Kozlowski and Hults (1987) and Kozlowski and Farr (1988) are both comprehensive models of the antecedent and outcome factors related to updating. However, by focusing on the construct of climate, these studies take a more environmental perspective toward updating. That is, the studies illustrate the importance of job characteristics and organizational/work environment factors influencing updating and performance in engineers, but the individual characteristics measured in both studies were basically demographic variables. In fact, Kozlowski and Farr (1988) mentioned the limited usefulness of demographic variables as surrogates for more meaningful psychological constructs, and recommended that future research emphasize the cognitive and personality variables associated with these demographics in relation to updating. Epplgyee Develgpmen; Recent research related to skills updating examines participation in all types of development training--from technical, job skills training to interpersonal skills and time management training. Noe and Wilk (1993) and Maurer and Tarulli (1994) focus on individual and environmental antecedents of participation in voluntary development activities. These studies examine technical occupations, but expand to sample clerical, health, and financial services occupations as well. These studies present much improvement in measuring individual characteristics variables like motivation to learn, self-efficacy, perceptions of development needs, career insight and job involvement. By more completely measuring individual characteristics than previous research, both studies found these individual variables predicted more 6 variance in participation in development activity than work environment measures. However, by only examining participation in voluntary, formal development activities, the studies still do not capture the entire range of development which includes informal activities. The other major limitation of the studies is that they do not relate participation in development activity to any further criterion variable. While participation in all types of development activity may be one end in itself, it is difficult to conceptualize what outcomes are related to participation in these various activities. The major question becomes: Why is it meaningful that an individual participates in many different topic areas of training, and what is that participation related to? In the case of technical updating activities, it is reasonable to predict that participation will lead to improvements in technical knowledge and performance. This prediction is tested in the present study. Limitatipns of Previpus Resegrgh While previous research on obsolescence and updating has greatly elucidated the factors involved in these processes, there are several critical areas that need further research and development which the proposed thesis addresses. Numerous studies have examined the issue of updating in engineers (Hinrichs, 1971; Kaufman, 1975; Kaufman, 1978a; Farr, Enscore, Steiner, & Kozlowski, 1984; Steiner & Farr, 1986; and Kozlowski & Hults, 1987). However, virtually all of these studies operationalized participation in updating activities as the number of hours spent in formal continuing education courses, in-house seminars, or other formal coursework. While coursework may be the most easily quantifiable and measurable, evidence suggests that the realm of updating activities encompasses much more than simply participation in courses. Perhaps as a consequence, those studies attempting to predict participation in coursework alone did not find significant relationships. Several early surveys addressing obsolescence in engineers 7 provide possible explanations for this apparent inability to predict participation in updating activities. In a survey of 1,000 engineers (Raudsepp, 1964), the largest group (28%) said their method of keeping up-to-date was reading technical articles, papers and special textbooks. Margulies and Raia (1967) asked R & D engineers what their most fruitful learning experience had been in the past year or two and the most frequent response (42%) was on-the—job problem solving, followed by on-the-job colleague interaction (20%), publishing and independent reading (16%), formal courses--in-house and off-site (14%), and outside professional activities (4%). Of the 290 scientists and engineers they surveyed, a combined 82% found their most valuable learning experiences in activities which can be categorized as more informal types, not formal coursework. Kaufman (1974) also notes that less than 25% of engineers engage in formal updating, but they tend to participate in other, less formal activities. The first limitation addressed by this thesis is this measurement issue. Updating activity must be expanded to include more informal modes of updating which can occur through the job itself, independent reading and self-study, as well as conversation and dialogue with other engineers. Only by expanding the measurement of updating activities will the true influence of antecedent variables leading to participation in updating be realized. The present thesis addresses this shortfall by including measurement of informal activities as well as formal coursework in an attempt to capture what appears to be a significant portion of engineer updating behavior. By doing so, it is hoped that the antecedent variables will yield significant associations with updating activity. Secondly, although recent research has identified several antecedents of participation in updating activities--the proposed thesis presents a new variable, attitudes toward technical updating, which is posited to be directly associated with participation in technical updating activity. This attitudinal construct measures the 8 affective, cognitive and predispositional/intentional responses of individuals to the issue of updating. With items targeting these three components, the attitudes toward technical updating measure incorporates the separate constructs of motivation to learn, perceptions of development needs, and intentions to participate in the future into a single, more comprehensive construct. Third, as previously mentioned, the area of individual characteristics associated with updating has received little attention until the recent studies by Noe and Wilk (1993) and Maurer and Tarulli (1994). Fossum et al. (1986) mention several personality variables proposed as being linked to obsolescence, but remark that, “there is essentially no empirical literature that tests these hypothesized relationships.” The proposed thesis expands the measurement of individual characteristics by including two personality measures and two interest variables in an attempt to further examine individual constructs associated with updating activity. Fourth, the criterion variable which is predicted to be related to participation in technical updating is technical knowledge/performance. The primary outcome of participation in technical updating should be increased technical knowledge and performance. If the focus were on participation in g1; types of training or development, it would be more difficult to identify a single individually-oriented criterion, like performance. In terms of measurement issues, the present thesis attempts to minimize method variance by obtaining data from both engineers and supervisors. Perceptions of the work environment aggregated at the group level also help minimize method variance. Finally, most previous research has examined activities recalled during the previous year. This study examines participation recalled over the past 329 years to capture a greater range of participation. Individuals may participate in less updating one year because they participated in more activities during a previous year. Th Th 1 M H othese The purpose of this thesis is to examine the individual, attitudinal, and work environment antecedents of participation in technical updating activities as well as technical knowledge/performance outcomes. The conceptual model for the thesis is depicted in Figure 1. The model incorporates and expands upon previous updating literature and introduces the variable of attitudes toward updating as the direct antecedent of participation in technical updating. It was posited that participation in formal and informal updating activities is related to technical knowledge/performance. Attitudes toward updating were expected to be directly associated with participation in technical updating activities, but this relationship was predicted to be moderated by work pressures such as overtime and changing work schedules. Individual characteristics and group-level work environment perceptions were expected to be directly associated with attitudes toward technical updating. The following discussion provides greater detail of the various model components and background literature supporting their inclusion in the model. Hypotheses relating the model's variables are presented as well. T hni l Knowled P rform c There is typically an assumption that engineer participation in technical updating activities contributes to increases in technical knowledge and skills and/or improves performance on the job. Previous research by Farr, Enscore, Dubin, Cleveland, and Kozlowski (1980) identified several major areas of engineer performance and created behaviorally anchored rating scales to measure engineer performance in these areas. Kozlowski and Farr (1988) used these BARS to create a composite performance measure of an engineer's scientific and technical knowledge, development of alternative solutions, and problem recognition and definition. These three scales correlated .56, .67, and .68 respectively with overall ratings of job performance 10 mnoEmomonm can. can momofionmm 2mm 5323. now E52 12538ng .H gamma 3:02:38.— Euro—305. _ou_:;uoh 2.. .3225“. 55.82.55 2 E 2253:: .083: 3... tonnom comtconam . 36:0.— _oco=ou_com._0 . 208:0 3:335:0ch . Eoficog>cm Sta; 2:. 950: unto—on: .20.. . 0:20.25 .035.qu :_ cozonmxtom > «I 0:25pm: 33:535. .3025.— mop3=2< MI m... #9539; v.33 322:. _o_.omoco<< .m> .3353 . 2550202.. 30.. . emcee—U o. b25053}. . 20222010 EoEo>oEu< . muzxcotocosu .0333“...— 11 (Kozlowski, 1981). A second composite of BARS was created to assess updating orientation which consisted of participation in professional activities, continuing education courses, work assignments sought, and technical interest and curiosity. This composite measure of updating orientation is the most complete in terms of measuring participation in less formal updating activities so far in the literature (even though it is completed by supervisors and includes technical interest which is not precisely an activity). The correlation between technical performance and updating orientation was found to be .67 (p<.01) in a thesis by Hults (1986). In addition, Farr et a1. (1980) found the correlation between ratings of continuing education attempts and technical knowledge to be .46. A This research also tests the assumption that participation in updating activities is associated with better performance and greater knowledge to the extent that knowledge was a component of the performance composite. Thus, the first hypothesis of this thesis is as follows: Hypothesis 1: Participation in technical updating activities will be positively related to engineer technical knowledge/ performance. nggicipapiop in Teghnical Updgging Aptivipies By narrowly measuring updating activity as participation in various types of formal courses, previous research has restricted the range of updating activities it addresses. Additionally, the dependent variable of coursework itself tends to suffer from range restriction because frequently within the course of a year, little difference is found in the number of courses taken by engineers (Thompson, Dalton & Kopelman, 1974). Kozlowski and Hults (1987) found 28% of engineers engaged in no formal activity at all in the course of a year and only 12 51% of engineers engaged in more than 20 hours of formal continuing education. With very little variance in the dependent variable, it becomes difficult to find significance in its prediction. Ovesen (1980) mentions self—study as an important method for acquiring knowledge which engineers use. Kaufman (1978b) found the most important ways engineers believe they can develop their knowledge and skills are by moving to a new job in their organization (job challenge/assignment) and through self-study. These were followed in importance by formal courses and job redesign (which can be grouped with job challenge/assignment). Farr et al. (1984) asked engineers to rank the likelihood of an engineer becoming more up-to-date by participating in various activities (essentially the value of the activity). On two occasions, pursuing an advanced engineering degree and receiving challenging technical job assignments were ranked highest, followed by taking an occasional technical course at a college or university, attending non- company technical seminars and short courses and working with interdisciplinary project teams. These top five valuable methods of updating can be collapsed into two, challenging job assignments and coursework, if formal coursework is combined into a single "type" of activity and project teams are considered part of the engineer’s job assignment. By expanding the dependent variable to include informal activities such as working on challenging job assignments, the value of formal coursework is not disregarded, but considered as merely another updating strategy. The ten updating activities listed below are used in the present thesis to attempt to measure the full range of updating activities mentioned by engineers in the literature. 1) attended a professional society meeting or conference seminars 2) prepared a paper for publication or presentation at a meeting or conference 3) studied to obtain professional registration 13 4) taken a technical course offered by a university or college 5) taken an in-house or non-company technical seminar, workshop, training program, or short course 6) taught or led a technical course, seminar, workshop, training program or short course 7) discussed technologies/procedures/developments with other engineers in my organization or other organizations 8) worked on parts of job tasks/assignments/projects that required learning technologies/procedures/developments 9) read trade journals, magazines, books, etc. about technologies/procedures/developments (outside of reading associated with activities already listed) 10) participated in a self-study program involving workbooks, tutorials, audio or video tapes, or televised instruction (outside of studying associated with activities already listed) Ovesen (1980) estimates that only 15% of the 1.86 million engineers in the U.S. in 1976 participated in continuing education activities offered by universities and professional/technical associations during a given year (1976/77). However, many of these engineers probably participated in other years. The present thesis examined participation in various updating activities from the previous pgp years in an attempt to deal with fluctuations in activity from year to year, while recognizing the limitations of memory in self-reports of past activity. Attitudes Toward Technical Updating The thesis posited that attitudes toward technical updating would be directly related to engineer participation in updating activities. As Zelikoff (1969) noted, "It is the individual himself who has the greatest stake in curtailing the erosion of his technical skills." Since it is the individual who must decide to expend effort to participate in updating, the thesis model suggests that individual 14 characteristics and external work environment factors are likely to be integrated within the individual to form some type of attitude toward participation in updating. An attitude is a disposition to respond favorably or unfavorably to an object, person, institution, or event (Ajzen, 1988). There are generally thought to be three types of responses from which attitudes can be inferred: cognitive, affective, and intentional (or conative) responses. Cognitive responses reflect beliefs, characteristics, perceptions, and information held about the object. A negative attitude toward updating would be implied by the belief that it is primarily the organization's responsibility to make sure engineers stay up-to-date. Affective responses reflect the feelings and evaluations of an individual toward the attitude object. A positive attitude toward updating could be reflected in an affective response of an individual feeling that participation in updating activities is worthwhile. Finally, intentional responses are the behavioral intentions, inclinations, commitments and actions with respect to the attitude object. Intentions indicate how hard people are willing to try and how much effort they are willing to exert to perform a particular behavior. A positive attitude toward updating activities would be reflected in an engineer planning to spend a lot of time learning new information about technologies and procedures in the coming year. This three-component model of attitudes is presented as the framework used to develop the content of the items in the attitudinal scale. The actual attitude measure consists of items which target each of these components, but is not concerned with specifically measuring each component. Attitudes toward technical updating measures the individual's general--not organization specific--beliefs, affective evaluations, and intentions related to participation in technical updating. The attitudes construct addresses the importance of updating for the engineer, whether opportunities are taken, motivation and effort put 15 forth, and intentions to participate in future updating. Wm Fishbein and Ajzen (1975) believe attitudes are a central device for explaining and predicting behavior. In a review of attitudinal research, Ajzen and Fishbein (1977) found that studies with strong attitude-behavior relations were obtained only under a high correspondence between the target and action elements of the attitudinal and behavioral entities. In other words, to predict a particular action, the most appropriate attitude to measure would be the attitude toward the action. Perhaps one of the reasons previous research has failed to identify a direct antecedent related to participation in updating is that the antecedent variables studied were more global-type measures such as climate, rewards, and job characteristics. Attitudes toward technical updating is a more specific variable which addresses the engineer's beliefs, affective evaluations, intentions and predispositions associated with technical updating. It was hypothesized that this attitudinal variable would be significantly related to engineer participation in technical updating. While this relationship was retroactively determined since updating behavior occurred within the two years prior to completion of the attitude measure, there is evidence showing consistency in job attitudes over time. Schneider and Dachler (1978) found strong consistency in JDI measures of job satisfaction over a 16—month time period with correlations ranging from .56 to .58. Staw and Ross (1985) found job satisfaction to show significant cross-situational consistency over as long as a five-year time period providing support for a dispositional approach to job attitudes. While both of these studies examined job satisfaction, it is not unreasonable to posit that attitudes--beliefs, feelings, and predispositions--associated with updating could also exhibit consistency over time. It is upon this assumption, that current updating attitudes reflect the attitudes of previous years, that the attitude-behavior relationship in the present 16 thesis is examined. Since there is no previous research which has focused specifically on attitudes toward updating, this thesis presents a new measure consisting of scale items reflecting the three basic components of attitudes. The reliability and theoretical efficacy of the construct is examined in the Method section. Thus, the second hypothesis is as follows: Hypothesis 2: Attitudes toward technical updating will be positively related to participation in technical updating activities. Work Pressgre Several surveys note the problem of work pressure in preventing participation in updating activities. In a Machine Desigp survey (Raudsepp, 1964), engineers who had not taken action to bring themselves up-to-date commented that work pressures required them to put in extra hours leaving them little time for participating in outside updating activities. Landis (1969) found that 27% of those surveyed felt that too much work or irregular hours were the greatest obstacles to taking continuing education courses. Fossum et al. (1986) write, "When individuals participate in training workshops (2-3 days), a good deal of work may accumulate during this absence. It may actually be punishing for individuals to update due to the increased workload." Under conditions of high work pressure-~fast work pace, work overload, irregular and long working hours-~little formal updating will occur, and perhaps little informal updating as well. While an individual may have positive attitudes toward updating, conditions of high work pressure could make it impossible for the individual to take time to devote to updating. The moderating effect of work pressure on the attitudes toward updating--participation in updating relationship 17 is predicted to be reflected in low degrees of updating activity under high work pressure conditions, even if attitudes toward updating are positive. Low work pressure and positive attitudes toward updating would be associated with high degrees of updating activity, while high work pressure and negative attitudes would be associated with the lowest levels of updating. Thus, the third hypothesis is as follows: Hypothesis 3: The relationship between attitudes toward technical updating and participation in technical updating activities will be moderated by work pressures. The Wprk Envirgnmen; Farr et a1. (1984) developed and tested a comprehensive measure of the work environment factors associated with engineers and updating. Kozlowski and Hults (1987) revised and refined these measures arriving at seven scales measuring various aspects of the climate for technical updating. At the organizational level of analysis, they found that several factors discriminated between organizations with different climates for updating. Two key factors were management policies to support updating and supervisory support for implementing those policies. High agreement at the organizational level was found for the updating climate measure. Therefore, the following three climate scales from Kozlowski and Hults (1987) in slightly modified form were used to measure work environment factors expected to influence engineer's attitudes toward technical updating: perceptions of the organizational climate supporting updating (previously titled updating support), organizational policies supporting updating, and supervisor support for updating. Agreement about the work environment among engineers at the group level (engineers under an individual supervisor) is examined in the thesis model instead of the organizational level because there may be different levels of supervisor support within an organization. 18 nggpipapippgl_glppgpeg Several studies discuss the importance of organizational climate in supporting and facilitating or inhibiting participation in updating activities (Margulies & Raia, 1967; Kaufman, 1978; Kozlowski & Farr, 1988; Maurer & Tarulli, 1994). Kozlowski and Hults (1987) found that organizations with a generally positive updating climate are associated with mechanisms to support updating within the organization. An organization with a climate supporting updating values the development and professional growth of its engineers, has a progressive atmosphere, stresses high professional standards, encourages technological innovation and excellence, and attempts to be better technically than its competition. Organizgpional ppligies. Kozlowski and Hults (1987) found innovation policy and updating support scales correlated .57 (p < .05) and .50 (p < .10) with internal rewards in organizations. Organizations with policies supporting updating reward engineers who are technically proficient, have tuition refund policies, pay for subscriptions to journals, provide funds for internal R a D and training, and have performance appraisal systems that tie financial gain to technical competence. Supervisor supporg. Landis (1969) reported that even though upper level management may express a real interest in continuing education, it is the immediate supervisor who counts. Peters and O'Connor (1980) have identified "required services and help from others" as a situational resource variable which, if not present, serves to constrain work outcomes. A supportive supervisor is critical to updating because he or she will most directly control the time and resources available to engineers for updating purposes. Supportive supervisors are concerned with the professional development of engineers, encourage engineers to stay current and participate in updating activities, point out developmental weaknesses and offer suggestions for improvement. Having described the importance of the work environment, the 19 fourth hypothesis is as follows: Hypothesis 4: Group-level perceptions of work environment support for updating (climate, policies, and supervisor support) will be positively related to individual attitudes toward updating. Individual Characteristics While work environment factors associated with engineers and updating have been thoroughly investigated, the literature on individual or personality characteristics and updating has been scarce (Fossum et al., 1986). Noe and Wilk (1993) examine self-efficacy, motivation to learn, and perceptions of development needs. Maurer and Tarulli (1994) examine job involvement, career insight, and need for skill improvement. In light of recent revived interest in the study of personality constructs, research measuring more stable personality variables related to updating is needed. A monograph by Hough, Eaton, Dunnette, Kamp, and McCloy (1990) comments, "Recent reviews of criterion-related validity studies show that personality scales, when organized according to predictor construct, correlate significantly with a number of important job- related criteria in both concurrent and predictive validity studies." Given the increased use of personality assessment in the context of selection, it is becoming more necessary to identify the specific personality constructs which are relevant and predictive in various jobs. Barrick and Mount (1991) investigated the relationship of the "Big Five" personality dimensions (Extraversion, Emotional Stability, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Openness to Experience) to job performance criteria. They found Conscientiousness to consistently predict job performance and Openness to Experience to validly predict training proficiency. McCrae and Costa (1987) also found support for 20 the five-factor structure of personality. The present thesis examines adaptability to change [using the 16PF categorized under Openness to Experience by Barrick & Mount (1991)] and achievement orientation [using the CPI Ai scale categorized under Conscientiousness] as personality variables related to attitudes toward technical updating in engineers. Other individual characteristics relevant to updating, job involvement and technical interest, are also examined. If individuals are high on these characteristics, it is likely that they will have positive attitudes toward technical updating for personal reasons and find ways to update themselves to a certain extent regardless of support from the work environment. Aphievement prientation. Hough et al. (1990) reviewed the criterion-related validities of personality constructs used in 12 widely—used personality inventories and identified achievement as one of six constructs which appears to be useful as a predictor of important job-related criteria. Dubin and Cohen (1970), Kaufman (1974), and Kaufman (1978) mention achievement motivation, need for achievement, and need for growth and challenge as factors important in the process of updating. Shearer and Steger (1975) found that the lower a person’s need for achievement, the more obsolescent he or she was likely to be (p = .22, p < .0001 for 451 professionals) and (L = .25, p = .006 for 165 managers). As an indicator of Conscientiousness, high achievement-oriented individuals are more likely to have positive attitudes toward achievement-oriented activities such as updating. Such individuals are also more likely to participate in updating activities which will lead to further achievement. Adaptability t9 change. Fossum et al. (1986) mention the lack of empirical literature testing personality variables such as flexibility in responding to change in relation to obsolescence. Dubin (1972) cites a study by Malmros (1963) which identified the desire to maintain 21 the status quo as a condition conducive to managerial obsolescence. Kaufman (1978b) mentions rigidity as a factor contributing to obsolescence. Shearer and Steger (1975) studied personal factors related to professional and managerial obsolescence and found that the lower an individual's adaptability to change, the greater the degree of self-rated obsolescence (p = .13, p = .0026). As an indicator of Openness to Experience, highly adaptable-to- change individuals are more likely to have positive attitudes toward participation in activities which require learning new skills. Such individuals would also be likely to take the necessary steps to keep themselves up-to-date with changes in their field or job. They would be less resistant to changes in assignments or technology. Job involvement. Job involvement has been defined as the degree to which a person psychologically identifies himself or herself with work or the importance of work in a person's self-image (Lodahl & Kejner, 1965). In a review of the literature on job involvement. Rabinowitz and Hall (1977) conclude that it shows remarkable stability when it has been studied over time and that it seems to be a key feature of a person's self-definition. Kozlowski and Hults (1987) found job involvement to be somewhat related to perceptions of updating climate. Innovation policy was correlated .16 (p < .01) and job assignments were correlated .15 (p < .01) with job involvement. It appears that job-involved individuals perceive their organizations as more innovative and receive more challenging job assignments to some degree. However, the relationship between job involvement and participation in updating was not examined. Since job involvement is characteristic of individuals who identify themselves with their work and feel work to be important in their lives, it should therefore be associated with positive attitudes toward updating and keeping job skills current. Job-involved individuals would be expected have more positive attitudes toward technical updating and participate in more technical updating 22 activities compared to individuals not job-involved. WW Kaufman (1973) reported that engineering interest and drive were mentioned most frequently as being characteristic of engineers who stay current in their field. The present thesis defines this variable as the career orientation of an engineer toward achieving technical goals and competence versus managerial goals. Ritti (1968) defined various work goals of engineers and scientists, among which were technical goals and managerial goals. Technical goals stress the importance of having opportunities to explore new ideas about technology, work on challenging technical problems, and advance to positions with more technical duties than managerial. Managerial goals stress advancement into managerial positions, learning how the company is set up, and learning managerial/administrative procedures and skills. Steiner and Farr (1986) did not find that engineers oriented toward administrative careers took fewer technical courses than technically oriented people. However, the measure of updating activity here, again, was simply coursework. Perhaps taking any type of course is difficult for an engineer due to time taken away from the job or outside of the job. Steiner and Farr (1986) did find that engineers who preferred and expected to change to managerial jobs had taken significantly more management-related courses. Engineers with stronger technical interests will more likely have positive attitudes toward technical updating and participate in more technical updating activities than engineers with managerial career interests. Engineers with managerial interests would be expected to participate in activities to learn more managerial than technical skills. The foregoing discussion of the individual characteristics variables of achievement orientation, adaptability to change, job involvement, and technical vs. managerial interests leads to the fifth 23 hypothesis: Hypothesis 5: Individual characteristics of achievement orientation, adaptability to change, job involvement, and technical vs. managerial interest will be positively related to attitudes toward technical updating. Background Varigples Several background variables were included in the thesis and used to further examine results from the five hypotheses listed. The variables are: engineering area, education, age, experience, and engineering function. Demographic effects due to age or education may be associated with attitudes toward technical updating and updating activity through the individual personality and interest variables measured. Studies of workforce demographics predict an aging of the workforce between 1986 and the year 2000 accompanied by a decline in the number of younger people and new entrants to the labor force (Johnston & Packer, 1987). These estimations translate into the probability that organizations will have to begin keeping older workers and updating them as opposed to looking toward new, younger workers. ReSearch findings provide mixed results on the relationship between age and performance (Rhodes, 1983). McEnvoy and Cascio (1989) found job performance and age to be unrelated in a meta-analysis of 96 independent studies. Studies focusing on age and obsolescence (Dalton & Thompson, 1971; Thompson, Dalton & Kopelman, 1974; and Kaufman, 1975) find prejudices and stereotypes against older workers, but the research has failed to focus on the underlying causes of differences when looking at older versus younger workers. The present thesis examines the relationship of age with the individual characteristics being studied-~adaptability to change, achievement orientation, job involvement, and technical vs. managerial 24 interests. These underlying individual characteristics variables could explain possible age or education differences in attitudes toward technical updating or participation in technical updating activities. There is evidence that caution increases with age (Wallach & Kogan, 1961) and that older people see themselves as less willing to experience change (Chown, 1960 as cited in Birren & Schaie, 1977). Most studies on job involvement consistently find a positive relationship: the older the worker, the greater the job involvement (Rhodes, 1983). Kaufman (1975) found engineers who take graduate courses do so earlier in their careers, primarily within the first eight years. Farr et al. (1984) found older and more tenured engineers placed less value on the pursuit of an advanced engineering degree and taking occasional university courses as modes of updating. Thus, individual personality and interest variables may provide explanations for any demographic differences in some of the variables. However, no specific hypotheses regarding these demographic variables were posited. Engineering function. Another important background variable measured was engineering function. Hults (1986) did not find engineering function (R a D vs. staff) to moderate the relationship between engineer participation in continuing education and performance. Mali (1969) found the mean obsolescence index for 10 different engineering functions to differ by function; the pure research function had the highest obsolescence index, and the production function had the lowest index. Logically it would appear that engineering functions do differ in terms of the degree of up-to-dateness required or the degree to which technology or skills on the job change. Dunnette, Wernimont, and Abrahams (1964) found engineers interested in research and development functions to be high on the California Psychological Inventory (CPI) flexibility scale (Fx), a construct measuring adaptability to change. Correlations were .25, .36, and .32 (p < .10) indicating that R & D engineers are more 25 adaptable to change than production or sales engineers who had negative correlations with Fx of -.43, -.27, -.34, and -.52 (p < .10) for four different samples. Dunnette et al. (1964) also used the CPI to measure achievement through independence (Ai) which is used in the present thesis. Correlations of engineers with R & D interests with A1 were .33, .38, and .29 (p < .10). Engineers interested in production or sales, however, had negative correlations with Ai of -.30, -.30, and -.44 (p < .10). This research provides support for the notion that engineers in different functions have different attitudes toward technical updating (Proposition 1), and differing participation in updating activities (Proposition 2). The two propositions regarding differences by engineering function are provided below: Proposition 1: Engineers in different engineering functions will exhibit differences in attitudes toward technical updating. Proposition 2: Engineers in different engineering functions will exhibit differences in participation in technical updating activities. A summary of the five hypotheses and two propositions is presented next, followed by the Method section. H1: H2 H3 H4: H5: P1 P2 26 mma of heses Participation in technical updating activities will be positively related to engineer technical knowledge/performance. Attitudes toward technical updating will be positively related to participation in technical updating activities. The relationship between attitudes toward technical updating and participation in technical updating activities will be moderated by work pressures. Group-level perceptions of work environment support for updating (climate, policies, supervisor support) will be positively related to individual attitudes toward updating. Individual characteristics of achievement orientation, adaptability to change, job involvement, and technical vs. managerial interest will be positively related to attitudes toward technical updating. Engineers in different engineering functions will exhibit differences in attitudes toward technical updating. Engineers in different engineering functions will exhibit differences in participation in technical updating activities. 27 METHOD Prpcedure Data were obtained from both engineers and their supervisors to test the hypotheses and propositions. However, the major focus of the study was on engineers in non-supervisory/non-managerial positions. Data on work pressure and technical knowledge/performance were obtained from supervisors; all other data were obtained from engineers. Engineers were surveyed first. If an engineer returned his or her survey, then the supervisor of that engineer was surveyed. Confidentially coded surveys were sent to each engineer via internal organizational mail and returned to a contact person within the organization. As an incentive, engineers who returned their surveys were entered into a raffle to win one of three prizes: a VCR, or one of two $50 gift certificates to an electronics appliance store. Organizations were given feedback regarding their engineers’ descriptive statistics on various scales as well as the overall results of the study. Pgrpigipanpp Engineer and supervisor participants were obtained from various departments within eight organizations located in the Baltimore/ WashingtOn metropolitan area. There were three federal, two city government, and three private organizations. The response rates for the surveys were acceptable; out of 491 engineer surveys, 223 were returned (45%). Since there were several engineers to each supervisor, fewer supervisor surveys needed to be sent out. Out of 72 supervisor surveys, 66 were returned (92%). For consistency across all analyses conducted, only engineers with complete data (including supervisory data) were included. Thirty- one engineers (14%) were eliminated due to one or more pieces of missing data. In addition, since the work environment variable was examined at the group level, a minimal cutoff level of agreement on 28 James, Demaree, and Wolf's (1984) 1mg index was used to allow aggregation of group data. A cutoff of rug = .60 was used because it was a clear dividing point on agreement; the next two lower 113's were .22 and .00; the next two higher rvg's were .75 and .80. Four groups, totalling 12 engineers (5%), were eliminated due to low levels of group agreement. An additional nine were eliminated because they were single respondents and "agreement" could not be calculated. Thus, 58 groups of engineers were included in the analyses with a mean group size of 3.33 (SD = 2.06, Range = 1 - 10). Kozlowski and Hattrup (1992) note that agreement using rug is attenuated in small groups; therefore, the level of agreement in the 58 groups should be considered high because it was exhibited even with small group sizes. Further information about the agreement analyses is provided in the section describing the group updating climate measure. Thus, the final sample size used to test the hypotheses and propositions was 171. Descriptive statistics of the sample of 171 engineers are: males = 149 (87%); females = 22 (13%); mean age = 39 (SQ = 11.3, range: 23 to 69); mean years as an engineer = 13.4 (SQ 10.0, range: 2 to 44). All (100%) participants had at least a bachelor's degree, and 63 (39%) had at least a master’s degree. Engineers with various bachelor's specializations were sampled; about half were electrical engineers (p = 88, 52%), followed by mechanical (p = 26, 15%), and various other degrees including physics, civil engineering, and math. Mgggprgs This section describes the measures used, provides descriptive statistics about the measures in Table 1 and intercorrelations and reliabilities of scales in Table 2. In addition, the results of a factor analysis of the attitudes toward updating scale are discussed. The scales completed by engineers and background information questions are located in Appendix A: Engineers' Scales. The complete engineer survey (except the personality scales) is located in Appendix B: Engineer Technical Updating Survey. The work pressure scale and the Table 1 Means gng Spandarg Deviations Vpriable 29 1. Achievement Orientation 2. Adaptability to Change 3. Job Involvement 4. Technical/Mgrl Interest 5. Technical Interest 6. Group Updating Climate 7. Attitudes Toward Updating 8. Total Updating Hours 9. Hours Formal Updating 10. Hours Informal Updating 11. Number of Courses Taken 12. Work Pressure 13. Technical Performance 14. Age 15. Years Education M SD .69 .12 1.00 .27 3.15 .85 1.54 .85 19.12 3.23 3.60 .54 4.30 .86 1224.14 915.71 149.07 249.73 1075.07 845.66 2.68 2.67 3.40 .74 6.89 1.44 38.67 11.34 4.96 1.52 .oooH>ona mH onx .H oHanHm> Hod .momocucouod o“ accommfic ecu co oocH>ouQ one mofiuflafinmfiaou mcdac .Ho. v a a: .mo. v a «aqua NH. .mH. ,oH. ,,oH. oo.- oo. oH. oo. No.- No.- coHumosem memo» .mH oo.- .:oN.- oH.- oH.- :NH. oo. :1oN. oo. NH.- No. mm< .oH HH. No.- oo. oo. oH. oo. oo. oo. oo. oo. Euomuma\zocx HouHccome .NH HH.- ,NH.- ,oH.- oo.- :mH.- Ho.- :oH.- NH. oo. oo. uncommon xuoz .NH oo. ,,om. :4NN. :1oN. oo. NH. ,mH.- oo. oo.- mo.- cmxoe mmmusoo no Honesz .HH «\2 .oH. .,om. :4Hm. 14H. :,NN. oH. oH. oo. mo. mcHuooao HmeHoNcH mason .oH <\z ..Ho. ,4Hm. ,NH. :.HN. oo. mo. oo.- oo. mcHuoooo HoeHom muses .o «\z :iom. ,oH. :,oN. oH. oH. mo. oo. musom mcHumoao Hobos .o 1mm.v :mH. ,1oo. :NH. 4,44. oo. Ho. been: oumzoe moosuHuu< .o Hoo.o oo. :NH. oH. :1NN.- oo. oumeHHo mcHuooao ozone .o Hmo.o .4Nm. :,HN. :NH.- ..oN. ummumucH Hoochome .m «\z No. :oH.- :«mN. ummumucH Hnmz\HmoHcsume .o Hoo.o oo.- ,4NN.- ucmEm>Ho>cH poo .m HoH.o Ho. omcmnu ob SHHHHnouoooa .N Hmm.v coflumucmfluo ucoeo>oflco¢ .H oH m m b w m v m N H OHDMHHMN u N N oHnae .momocucoumd ca Hocomofip ecu :0 popH>ouQ one moHuHHHnoHHou mnda< .Ho. v m a: .mo. v a iuqdm 4\z Ho.- mo. ,goH.- :mH. :oHumozom meow» .mH «\z ,mH. oo.- .:om.- mma .oH ANN.1 ,mH. mo.- eHoNHmN\3ocx Hmuchome .NH Hmo.o oo.- ousmmmua egos .NH «\z :mme mmmusou no Honeoz .HH mooumpms HoEHOMGH muse: .OH mowumods HmEuom musox .m undo: mcHumodD Hobos .m Doom: ouosoh moosufluud .b oumEHHu mofiumods macho .m umoumucH Hmoflccowa .m ummumucH Humz\amoficnoms .w ucoEo>Ho>cH poo .m omcmcu o» >DHHHcmudmo¢ .N coHuchmHHo ucmEm>oHco< .H ma vH ma NH HH manunmu> .Ho.ucouo .N «Heme 32 three technical performance scales completed by supervisors are located in Appendix C: Technical Updating Survey for Supervisors. l knowl e erform nc . Three, 9-point behaviorally anchored rating scales (BARS) developed by Farr et al. (1980) were used by supervisors to assess their subordinate engineers' scientific and technical knowledge, problem recognition and definition, and development of alternative solutions. Technical knowledge is defined as, "The possession of fundamental specific, mathematical, and engineering knowledge necessary for adequate completion of a project or assignment." Problem recognition and definition is defined as, "The ability to understand the cause(s) of the symptoms of a problem." Development of alternative solutions is defined as, "The ability to create several possible solutions to a problem which are technically feasible." Correlations of these three scales showed they were all significantly intercorrelated (knowledge--solutions = .74, knowledge-- recognition = .76, solutions--recognition = .83: N = 174, p's <.001) with a mean intercorrelation of .78. Therefore, the three scales were averaged to create a single technical knowledge/performance composite (alpha = .92) for each engineer. Work pregsure. This 8-item scale (alpha = .75) was mainly derived from Farr et al. (1983) Work Description Questionnaire items pertaining to work pressures. One item was adapted from Kozlowski and Hults' (1987) minimal pressure scale: "The job requires extensive overtime," and two were from their updating support scale: ”All of the engineer's time must be charged to project budgets with no allowance for general technical updating," and "The engineer's job allows some free time to explore new, advanced ideas." One item was adapted from Noe and Schmitt (1986): "It is easy for this engineer to work on updating and expanding his/her technical knowledge and skills while on the job." The scale was completed by the supervisor to measure the amount of overtime, workload, and changing project plans the engineer typically encounters I)! 33 on the job. A six-point response format was used ranging from 1-~A very inaccurate statement to 6--A very accurate statement. W This measure asked engineers about their participation in ten technical updating activities, both formal and informal, over the past two years. An eleventh item asked engineers to specify any other activity not already listed and estimate the time spent on that activity. Answers to this "other activity" item were recategorized by the researcher into one of the ten activities. Updating activities categorized as formal were: attending conference meetings/seminars, in—house and external (university or non- company) courses taken, and courses taught. Updating activities categorized as informal were: preparing a paper for publication/ presentation, studying to obtain professional registration, talking with other engineers, working on job tasks/assignments, reading trade journals and magazines, and self-study courses. Participation in "updating activity was therefore measured in four different ways: 1) hours of formal updating, 2) hours of informal updating, 3) total updating hours (formal + informal), and 4) number of courses taken. Engineers first indicated "yes" or "no" to participating in an activity over the past two years with the exact month and year indicated on the survey. If they answered "yes" to a formal updating activity, they then indicated the subject area of the activity in which they participated (e.g., subject of each course attended or taught). Then, engineers estimated the total hours spent on each activity (e.g., number of hours spent in each course). Hours of formal updating were calculated by adding hours spent on each formal updating activity. If engineers answered "yes" to participating in an informal updating activity, such as reading trade journals and magazines, they were asked to estimate the average number of hours spent on the activity per month (See Appendix B: Engineer Technical Updating Survey for wording). Total hours of informal updating activity were 34 calculated by 1) taking the monthly estimates and multiplying by 24 (e.g., 10 hours/months240 hours over 2 years), and then 2) summing hours spent on each informal updating activity. The frequency distributions for participation in formal updating hours and total number of courses were negatively skewed. Thirty-six (21%) of the engineers reported zero hours of formal updating (range: 0 - 1,980 hours), and 38 (22%) reported participating in no courses over the two-year period (range: 0 - 11 courses). Only one engineer had no updating hours (< 1%). The entire sample range of total updating hours (formal and informal) was from 0 to 4,032. Two engineers indicated no participation in informal updating (1%). The entire sample range of informal updating hours was from 0 to 3,840. Descriptive statistics about participation in the ten updating activities are provided in Table 3 . Appipudeg powarg pechnipgl ppdgting. This originally 18-item scale was developed to measure engineers' attitudes toward technical updating. Items were developed to target the cognitive, affective, and intentional components of attitudes, but the scale was considered unidimensional overall. Attitudes toward technical updating addressed the importance of updating for the engineer, whether opportunities to update are taken, motivation and effort to update, and intentions to participate in future updating. Since this was a newly created measure, the 18 items were factor analyzed using principal components analysis with a varimax rotation to explore the underlying factor structure. The factor analysis converged on a four-factor solution, with the first factor accounting for 43.8% of the variance. Eigenvalues for the four factors were 7.89, 1.30, 1.10, and 1.04, respectively. Examining the rotated factor loadings in Table 4, most of the items load highest on the first factor. When trimming the scale, items loading highest on the first factor were included (along with Item 9 since it loaded about equally on Factor 1 and Factor 2), resulting in a 13-item scale (alpha = .93). Six-point 35 Table 3 Mssns and Stsngsrg Devispipns of gpdsging.Ac;ivi;ies Hours or HrsZMo fl Courses A_Ct ivi tv M SD M so 1. attending a professional society 17.09 hrs 30.59 .81 1.17 meeting or conference seminars 2. preparing a paper for publication 53.06 hrs 173.21 or presentation at meeting/confer 3. studying to obtain professional 10.70 hrs 45.07 registration 4. taking a technical course offered 86.14 hrs 227.59 .73 1.50 by a university or college 5. taking an in-house or non-company 33.06 hrs 70.03 1.15 1.54 technical seminar, workshop, etc. 6. teaching or leading a technical 12.78 hrs 63.62 course, seminar, workshop, etc. 7. discussing technologies/procedures/ 13.09 h/mo 13.13 developments with other engineers 8. working on parts of job tasks/assign/ 20.61 h/mo 22.75 projects that require learning technologies/procedures/developments 9. reading trade journals, magazines, 8.57 h/mo 10.32 books (outside of reading associated with activities already listed) 10. participating in a self-study program 9.79 h/mo 49.90 involving workbooks, tutorials, audio or video tapes (outside of studying associated with activities already listed) Note. Means include individuals with zeros. hrs = hours over a two- year period. h/mo = hours per month. 36 Table 4 Rot Fa r L in s of Attitudes T ward Techn ial U datin Items Fsctor I II III IV Item 22 .82 .27 .09 .02 Item 21 .80 .27 .05 .04 Item 31 .77 .32 .20 .11 Item 28 .74 .12 .20 .17 Item 17 .72 .07 .26 .16 Item 14 .70 .05 -.02 —.13 Item 36 .67 .27 .04 -.08 Item 16 .67 .38 -.27 .02 Item 24 .64 .33 -.13 —.06 Item 8 .60 .54 -.23 -.06 Item 34 .57 .44 .17 .11 Item 15 .51 .41 -.37 .09 Item 1* .19.. .77 .17 .03 Item 2* .17 .75 .10 .07 Item 9 .51 .53 -.21 .04 Item 25* .24 .17 .81 -.09 Item 27* .11 .11 .04 -.85 Item 3* ' .19 .29 -.06 .52 % Variance: 43.8 7.2 6.1 5.8 Eigenvalue: 7.89 1.30 1.10 1.04 * Items deleted when revising the scale. 37 agree-disagree response formats were used. Orgsnizspionsl plimaps. This work environment variable was measured using Kozlowski and Hults’ (1987) updating climate scale. This 11-item scale has a reported alpha reliability of .88 and .93. The reliability found in the present study was .93. A six-point response format was used ranging from 1--A very inaccurate statement to 6--A very accurate statement. Qrgsnizspionsl pplicies. This ten-item scale (alpha = .74) consisted of eight items from Kozlowski and Hults’ (1987) updating support scale, one from their innovation policy scale, "The organization has a performance appraisal system which ties financial gain to technical competence," with one additional item added. Three of the original scale items were dropped because it appeared that the content of two items applied more directly to the construct of work pressure and are included in that measure. The third item was dropped because it appeared to measure commitment more than a policy supporting updating. A sixepoint response format was used ranging from 1--A very inaccurate statement to 6--A very accurate statement. Supervispr sppporp. This nine-item scale (alpha = .93) again uses Kozlowski and Hults (1987) as a foundation with six items from the supervisor support scale and three additional items adapted from Noe and Schmitt (1986) regarding supervisor support. Two of the original supervisor support scale items were dropped because of their similarity to items already included. A six-point response format was used ranging from 1--A very inaccurate statement to 6—-A very accurate statement. onup ppgasing plimate. Examination of the three work environment scales showed they all had acceptable alphas and were fairly highly intercorrelated (climate--policies = .64, climate—- supervisor = .73, policies--supervisor = .57: N = 174, p's < .001) with a mean intercorrelation of .65. To obtain a group measure of the work environment, engineers under the same supervisor were to be aggregated 38 on each of the three scales. Agreement was calculated using James et al.'s (1984) 11% index using a rectangular null distribution. It was discovered that obtaining acceptable 115’s for a group across all three scales would result in eliminating about 35% of the sample. That is, if a group showed inadequate agreement on one of the three scales, the entire group would be eliminated from the sample. Given the fairly high intercorrelation among the scales and the fact that they were all measures of the work environment supporting updating, the thirty items for the three scales were averaged to create a single group updating climate composite (alpha = .94) for each engineer. The mean 119 on group updating climate was .88 (range = .00 to .99, §Q =.24) for 58 groups. Only four groups (p = 12) were eliminated due to 115's below the cutoff of .60. The rationale behind the .60 cutoff was described in the Method section, "Participants." Nine other engineers were eliminated because they were single individuals under a supervisor and 1&9 "agreement" could not be calculated. Each remaining engineer was then assigned the value of his or her group mean on the group updating climate variable. When describing relationships with the work environment, group updating climate is used instead of the three separate measures of climate, policies, and supervisor support. Achievement oriengagion, The California Psychological Inventory (CPI) Achievement via Independence (Ai) scale was used to measure the engineer's achievement orientation in situations that require independence and autonomy (KR20 = .58). The A1 scale consists of 32 items, three of which are keyed true and 29 which are keyed false. Three of the original scale items were excluded due to their limited applicability and face validity. One item referred to being in a boxing match, another to an earthquake, and the third to being watched on streetcars. Thus, a 29—item scale was used with three items still keyed true. The scale is described as identifying those factors of interest 39 and motivation which facilitate achievement in any setting where autonomy and independence are positive behaviors. The following descriptions of high and low scorers show the constructs measured by this scale. High scorers are independent and self-reliant, preferring to work without rules and structures, and value creativity and originality. They are self-motivated and rejecting of conventional standards of productivity. They produce best and are most efficient when left to regulate their own behavior. Low scorers are submissive and compliant before authority and have difficulty trusting their own abilities. They need others to specify their proper course of action and tend to be moderately anxious and inhibited, lacking in self-insight and understanding. The A1 scale was designed to predict achievement in a college environment. This is one of the more thoroughly investigated CPI scales and evidence shows that Ai correlates with GPA. There is support that it assesses achievement best in settings where originality or independence is rewarded (Megargee, 1972). The Ai scale has test-retest reliabilities of .57, .63 and .71 for high school females, males, and prison males respectively. In an assessment of 100 military officers, Ai correlated .30 with the staff's composite Q-sorting of the phrase, "Is self-reliant, independent in judgment, able to think for himself." For 220 agriculture freshmen, Ai correlated .44 with first semester grades. Finally, in a sample of 40 medical school seniors, Ai correlated .31 with faculty ratings of "potential success as a physician and surgeon" (Gough, 1975). Adeptepility so phenge. Adaptability to change (alpha = .19) was measured by the 01 scale from the 16PF. Despite the low alpha for this scale, no corrections were undertaken because the scale was to be used intact. It may be that alpha is not an appropriate measure of reliability for this scale since no published or reported alphas were found. The Q1 factor of the 16PF measures conservativism-radicalism, describing people who are conservative versus experimenting. Three options are given for each item and are scored from 0 to 2. Scores are 40 then added across the 10 items to obtain the raw score. High scorers are described as experimenting--liberal, critical, and open to change. Low scorers are described as conservative, respecting traditional ideas. The following descriptions of high and low scorers show the constructs measured by the Q1 scale which most closely taps the variable of adaptability to change than other scales from commonly-used personality inventories. High Scorers are usually independent-thinking, intellectually oriented individuals who are strongly inclined to question, analyze, and often disparage traditional beliefs. Such individuals tend to be free- thinking and experimental in their approach to life. They enjoy work involving critical analysis, feel comfortable in working alone on projects of interest to them, and find it emotionally rewarding to put their own ideas into action. High scorers on this index generally keep themselves well- informed, tend to feel adequate to nearly any task, and usually welcome positions of leadership. Low Scorers are usually conservative individuals who are inclined to place confidence in what they were taught to believe in childhood. They tend to respect established ideas and traditional beliefs. As a group, they are conservative in the areas of religion and politics. They usually are opposed to innovation and generally seek to postpone change in traditions and conventions. The test-retest reliability (1 to 7 days) of the 01 scale in 3 different samples is .73, .78, and .82. A study by Meredith (1967 as cited in Cattell et al., 1992) found "tending to variety" as measured by the Similes Preference Inventory to be associated with Q1 (.17). Occupationally, it is high in executives, university professors and especially scientific researchers. Ql+ is an outstanding characteristic of engineers as well. In general research, there is evidence that Q1+ persons are more inclined to experiment with problem solutions and less unquestioning about views generally (Cattell, Eber, & Tatsuoka, 1992). gpb invplvement. Kanugo's (1982) 10—item questionnaire (alpha = .87) was used to measure the engineer's job involvement. This scale is a shorter, empirically-tested improvement over Lodahl and Kejner's (1965) classic job involvement scale. Six-point agree-disagree response formats were used. 41 Tepppipel_gseggspegepie;_;ppepespsg Ritti (1968) identified a number of work goals of engineers and scientists. The present 8-item scale was adapted from the technical goals and managerial goals Ritti found to be important to engineers and scientists. Scores on this variable reflect the engineer’s technical career interests compared to managerial career interests using a division score. The sum of the ratings from the four technical interest items was divided by the sum of the four managerial interest items: 2 of managerial interest ratings This scoring enabled identification of the proportion of an engineer's interests since both may be present; the stronger the technical interest compared to managerial interests, the larger the score, reflecting a stronger technical orientation. The alpha for the four technical interest items was .73, and for the four managerial interest items was .82. Beekgrppng information. Basic demographic and background information were obtained as possible control variables or for use with further exploratory analyses. The items were: engineering area, year degree was received, company name, years with present company, years as an engineer, age, and gender. Engineering fpncpion. Engineers were asked to indicate which of six different engineering functions best reflected their job. Two of the functions included in the survey, consulting and engineering operations and maintenance, were derived from the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) membership renewal form (1991). The remaining four functions were derived from Mali's (1969) study of obsolescence by engineering function. Only five engineers indicated their function was "Production engineering (processing or manufacturing)," so that function was dropped from consideration. The distribution of the 171 engineers in the remaining 5 functions was: 1) Basic research and development--31 42 (18%), 2) Product or systems design including applied R & D--71 (42%), 3) Testing, reliability assurance, quality control and standards--23 (13%), 4) Engineering operations and maintenance--23 (13%), and 5) Consulting--23 (13%). Aggipipnal Measure Effecpiveness pf ppgating eetivigies. Engineers rated the effectiveness of the ten updating activities as ways of updating technical knowledge and skills. Engineers rated the activities on a 5- point scale ranging from 1--One of the least effective activities to 5- -One of the most effective. Mean effectiveness ratings on the ten activities are provided in Table 5. Since analysis of these data were outside of the proposed hypotheses, all available data were used to calculate means. Relevant p’s used to calculate mean effectiveness are provided in Table 5 as well as the rank order of the activities from one of the most effective (job tasks/assignments: 4.32) to moderately effective (self—study: 3.08). The results section describes post-hoc analyses conducted to detect significant differences among these ten means. Anelyses The hypotheses and the propositions of this study were examined using hierarchical multiple regression in SPSS and structural equation modeling (SEM) in LISREL 7.16. Since age and years of education were significantly correlated with several variables, their effects were controlled by entering them first in all regression equations. To test for the moderating effect of work pressure, the interaction between work pressure and attitudes toward updating was entered last in a hierarchical regression equation to determine if significant variance was added to the variance explained by preceding variables. To test for the influence of engineering function on updating hours and attitudes toward updating, functions were dummy coded. In the additional analyses section of the results, relationships 43 Table 5 Meens ang Spenserg Deviepipns of Effeppiveness pf Updeping Activipies Act ivitv M SD N Rsn_k_ 1. attending a professional society 3.22 1.05 218 8 meeting or conference seminars 2. preparing a paper for publication 3.36 1.16 218 7 or presentation at meeting/confer 3. studying to obtain professional 3.17 1.15 209 9 registration 4. taking a technical course offered 4.07 .88 218 2 by a university or college 5. taking an in-house or non-company 3.58 1.01 221 5 technical seminar, workshop, etc. 6. teaching or leading a technical 3.62 1.12 215 4 course, seminar, workshop, etc. 7. discussing technologies/procedures/ 3.82 1.01 220 3 developments with other engineers 8. working on parts of job tasks/assign/ 4.32 .85 220 1 projects that require learning technologies/procedures/developments 9. reading trade journals, magazines, 3.38 .92 221 6 books (outside of reading associated with activities already listed) 10. participating in a self-study program 3.08 1.01 218 10 involving workbooks, tutorials, audio or video tapes (outside of studying associated with activities already listed) Note. Means are out of a 5—point scale. Rank indicates the rank order of the means from most effective (1) to least effective (10). 44 of individual characteristics and group updating climate with demographic variables are examined. Also, differences in the effectiveness of the updating activities were examined using a repeated measures randomized blocks analysis of variance (RBANOVA). Post-hoc Scheffe tests were conducted to determine which activities significantly differed from others. Finally, in the LISREL Analyses section a variation of the initial model is tested to determine the path coefficients and overall fit of the model. An alternative, exploratory model is presented as well. 45 RESULTS This section first describes the results obtained from hierarchical multiple regression analyses conducted to test the five hypotheses and two propositions. All regression analyses control for age and years of education by entering both first in all equations. All regressions were conducted on an E of 171. When looking at relationships with participation in technical updating, four regressions are conducted on each of the four measures of participation: total updating hours, formal, informal, number of courses. Results of hierarchical regressions are presented in the order of the hypotheses, followed by additional analyses, summary of hierarchical regression results, results from LISREL analyses, and a summary of overall findings. Standardized beta weights and p values are provided in the text, but complete regression statistics are located in tables. Hiererehipal Regression Anelyses Hypophesis 1. The first hypothesis posited that participation in technical updating activities would be positively related to engineer technical knowledge/performance as rated by supervisors. In the regressiOn equation, age and years of education were entered first, followed by participation in technical updating second. Four regressions were run; one with each participation measure. The hypothesis was not supported for total updating hours (B = .10, p > .18). When looking at formal updating (B = .02, p > .84), informal updating (B = .11, p > .17), and number of courses (s = .01, p > .92), the hypothesis still was not supported. Table 6 contains the beta weights and regression statistics for Hypothesis 1. Table 6 H' r hi 1 R re Persieipspion in Technicel Upgaping 46 i n of T hni a1 Knowled e Performance on Dependent Independent Change Change Varieple Variebles Bete R2 R2 F F Technical Age .15 .02 .02 2.11 2.11 know/perf Years education .05 Total updating hours .10 .04 .01 2.02 1.82 Technical Age .15 .02 .02 2.11 2.11 know/perf Years education .05 Formal updating .02 .02 .00 1.41 .04 Technical Age .15 .02 .02 2.11 2.11 know/perf Years education .05 Informal updating .11 .04 .01 2.06 1.94 Technical Age .15 .02 .02 2.11 2.11 know/perf Years education .05 Number courses taken .01 .02 .00 1.40 .01 I‘—-I.IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII:t———————————————————+r——— c=r===__HHHrH_ 47 Hyppphesis 2. The second hypothesis posited that attitudes toward technical updating would be positively related to participation in technical updating activities. In the regression equation age and years of education were entered first, followed by attitudes toward technical updating second. This hypothesis was supported for all measures of participation in updating activity: total updating hours (g = .34, p < .001); formal updating (g = .26, p < .001); informal updating (B = .29, p < .001); and number of courses (s = .22, p < .01). Attitudes toward technical updating added a significant amount of variance in participation in technical updating when controlling for age and education. Table 7 contains the beta weights and regression statistics for Hypothesis 2. Hypophesis 3. The third hypothesis posited that the relationship between attitudes toward technical updating and participation in technical updating activities would be moderated by an engineer's work pressure as rated by his or her supervisor. The regression equation entered age and years of education first, attitudes toward updating second, work pressure third, and the interaction term (attitudes x work pressure) fourth. This hypothesis was not supported using total updating hours (gnomes... = --73. 2 > .12). informal updating (Emma... = --41. e > .40) , or'number of courses (Emmamm = -.83, p > .06) as measures of participation. However, the attitudes x work pressure interaction was significant for formal updating activity (Buuumnum = —1.28, p,< .01). The negative beta weight for the interaction term denotes a negative moderating influence; the greater the work pressure, the lower the relationship between attitudes toward technical updating and participation in formal updating. Table 8 contains the beta weights and regression statistics for Hypothesis 3. Figure 2 plots the one significant interaction found with formal updating activity as the dependent variable. In Figure 2, the work pressure variable is divided into high or low by the sample mean. Table 7 48 Hiererchicel Regressipns of Parpicipapion in Technical Updating on Appitudes Toward Technicel Updeping Dependent Independent Change Change yepieble Variables Bete R2 R2 F F Total hours Age .10 .03 .03 2.98 2.98 updating Years education .16 Updating attitudes .34 .15 .11 9.44** 21.62** Formal Age .29 .10 .10 9.82** 9.82** updating Years education .15 Updating attitudes .26 .17 .07 11.55** 13.54** Informal Age .02 .02 .02 1.37 1.37 updating Years education .12 Updating attitudes .29 .10 .08 5.95** 14.89** Number of Age .37 .15 .15 15.35** 15.35** courses Years education .14 taken Updating attitudes .22 .20 .05 13.87** 9.37** Note. *Q < .05; **Q < .01. ,- av- ’ ( v 9.; t».— 0 V. ,4 1.. dtv'i O Table 8 49 Work Pressure Moderetion of the Relagionship Between Attitudes Toward T hni d in n Par ici ti n in Te hni al U datin Activi i s Dependent Independent Change Change Varieple Vepieples Beta R2 R2 F F Total hours Age -.10 .03 .03 2.98 2.98 updating Years education .16 Updating attitudes .34 .15 .11 9.44** 31.62** Work pressure -.10 .15 .01 7.60** 1.92 Attitudes x workpr -.73 .17 .01 6.62** 2.45 Formal Age -.29 .10 .10 9.82** 9.82** updating Years education .15 Updating attitudes .26 .17 .07 11.55** 13.54** Work pressure -.11 .18 .01 9.36** 2.49 Attitudes x workpr -1.28 .22 .04 9.44** 8.15** Informal Age -.02 .02 .02 1.37 1.37 updating Years education .12 Updating attitudes .29 .10 .08 5.95** 14.89** Work pressure -.08 .10 .00 4.72** 1.02 Attitudes x workpr -.41 .11 .00 3.91** .72 Number of Age —.37 .15 .15 15.35** 15.35** courses' Years education .14 taken Updating attitudes .22 .20 .05 13.87** 9.37** Work pressure -.08 .21 .00 10.72** 1.21 Attitudes x workpr -.83 .22 .01 9.38** 3.43 Note. *2 < .05; **Q < .01. Formal Updating Hours 600 —' 50 — Low Work Pressure - - - - High Work Pressure 500— 400'— 300'— 200— ’- 100 ‘,.— "7 u“’— ’ —‘—“ l J J I i l 2 3 4 5 Attitudes Toward Technical Updating Figure 2: Interaction of Work Pressure and Attitudes Toward Technical Updating 51 Hypophesis 4= The fourth hypothesis posited that group-level perceptions of work environment support for updating would be positively related to individual attitudes toward technical updating. In the regression equation, age and years of education were entered first with group updating climate second. This hypothesis was supported (B = .18, p < .05). Table 9 contains the beta weights and regression statistics for Hypothesis 4. Table 9 Hierarchical Regression of Attituges Towerg Technipel Updeting on Group-level Perceptions of Wprk Environmen; Support Dependent Independent Change Change Verieple Varieples Bets R2 3’ F F Updating Age -.10 .04 .04 3.77* 3.77* attitudes Years education .18 Group updat climate .18 .07 .03 4.47Mr 5.65* Note. *p < .05; **p < .01. As previously described in the methods section, group updating climate was created out of the climate, policies, and supervisor support scales to arrive at a single composite of the work environment. This hypothesis required aggregation of engineers under their individual supervisor on group updating climate. All participants included in the final sample of 171 (58 groups) met the criterion of Zhaving a group 119 of at least .60 (mean = .88, s_ = .24). The mean group size was 3.33 (S9 = 2.06, Range = 1 - 10). Hypothesis 5, The fifth hypothesis posited that individual characteristics of achievement orientation, adaptability to change, job involvement, and technical versus managerial interest would be positively related to attitudes toward technical updating. In the regression equation, age and years of education were entered first. followed by all four individual characteristics variables as a set second. ‘:pbg" raz'a :abav; 0.05.. I an. V5'v on... . \- / 52 When initially testing this hypothesis, technical vs. managerial interest had a marginal, but not significant beta weight in the final regression equation (g = .14, p > .05). Examining the zero-order correlations in Table 2, technical interest alone, not divided by managerial interest, showed greater association with attitudes toward technical updating. For the technical interest-~attitudes relationship, the p was .60, p < .01; and for technical vs. managerial interest--attitudes, the p was .13, p < .05. Therefore, two regressions were run, one with technical vs. managerial interests (along with the other three individual characteristics variables) and one with technical interest. The results from both overall regression equations support the hypothesis; the individual characteristics variables as a set added a significant amount of variance when entered last (technical/managerial interest R? change = .22. p,< .001; technical interest R? change = .46 p < .001). Table 10 contains the beta weights and regression statistics for Hypothesis 5. Table 10 Hiererehieal Regressipn of Attigndes prerd Technieel deaping on Ingivigual Characteristics Dependent Independent Change Change yepieble Verieples Bet_, R2 R2 F F Updating Age -.10 .04 .04 3.77* 3.77* attitudes Years education 18 Achievement orient .08 .26 .22 9.75** 12.24** Adaptability change .04 Job involvement .46 Tech vs. ngrl inter .14 Updating Age -.10 .04 .04 3.77* 3.77* attitudes Years education .18 Achievement orient —.03 .50 .46 27.64** 37.92** Adaptability change .10 Job involvement .33 Technical interest .55 Nope, *p_ < .05; **p < .01. u} to." :P ‘ (Sound-o . . 1:13:12 il:-~ “noun. . u A v_nr;c: ou‘do‘...“ - ;-yu>...: ‘Ibdyvu' ‘8- In 't 1 n-_.. .; :"‘~.‘ '?v I ‘a 54:: ‘I u.‘ a l l I .'.' P“: . a.“ I I :ro.‘ o.‘ A. 53 Examination of the variable beta weights in the second regression equation (with technical interest) revealed only two of the four variables were significantly related to attitudes toward technical updating: job involvement (5 = .33, p < .001) and technical interest (B = .55, p < .001). Additionally, the zero-order correlation between adaptability to change and group updating climate was significantly negative (p = -.22, p < .01). This indicated that group updating climate had a suppressing effect on the beta weight for adaptability to change. When group updating climate was controlled in another regression, adaptability to change became a stronger predictor of attitudes toward updating providing evidence of suppression (Cohen & Cohen, 1983). The more adaptable to change, the less an engineer viewed the work environment as supportive of updating, even though both adaptability and a supportive work environment were each related to positive attitudes toward updating. Prpppsipions 1 & 2. Engineering function was posited to be related to attitudes toward technical updating (Proposition 1) and to participation in technical updating activities (Proposition 2). Since the five functions were categorical variables, four dummy—coded variables were created to test for the effect of function in the regression equations. Product or systems design was used as the baseline function and not dummy coded. Five regression equations were run with attitudes toward technical updating (for Proposition 1) and with each of the four participation measures (for Proposition 2) as the respective dependent variables. In each regression equation, age and years of education were entered first, followed by the four dummy-coded function variables (there were five functions) entered as a set second. No specific hypotheses regarding particular engineering functions were predicted. Proposition 1 was not supported; function was not significantly related to attitudes toward technical updating (R? change z .03, 1...; 3r “‘0‘ nee , . 700‘. U o W“' b u .91.»:- O A .A.:‘ udodn 0 “ch": in; J- boy ‘ AUE - ... . ‘flfll..- a- -~a. ‘ * It" op- r":"’ run. .4- . C :~: m “- nu . nq‘,” A '“U. U ‘2“ :‘M‘I‘.’ 3..“ c ‘”‘ - 'Vfia' a v-“‘ ~ 4 o . 6‘ 3.5" '6'... 54 = .03, p > .24). Proposition 2 was not supported for formal updating or number of courses taken. However, Proposition 2 pee supported for total updating hours (R? change = .17, p,< .01) and informal updating 0? change = .17, p < .01) as dependent variables. Therefore, engineering function was significantly related to total updating hours and informal updating. Table 11 contains the beta weights and regression statistics for Propositions 1 and 2. For each function, sample size, means, and standard deviations on total hours of updating and attitudes toward technical updating are provided in Table 12. Addipipnal Anelyses Relationships wish gemogrephic veriaples. Individual characteristics variables and group updating climate were regressed on age and years of education to determine whether there were any significant age or education relationships. No significant regression relationships were found between the demographic variables and individual characteristics variables or group updating climate. Table 13 displays the results of the regression analyses. Although regressions on age and education did not yield significant relationships, age and education did have significant zero- order correlations with variables shown in Table 2. Age was positively related to group updating climate (r = .13) and negatively related to formal updating hours (p = - .29) and number of courses taken (; = - .37). Education was positively related to attitudes toward technical updating (p = .18), total updating hours (I = .16), formal updating hours (p = .15), and number of courses (3 = .15). Education was negatively related to work pressure (p = -.18). Effeetiveness of updating acpivipies. Mean ratings and rank orders of effectiveness for the ten updating activities toward increasing an engineer's technical knowledge and skills were presented in Table 5. A repeated measures randomized blocks analysis of variance (WMMNOVA) was conducted to see if there were significant differences sud-5‘ -Aba‘ ,- ov-‘A unn~ 3544C A C . 'A N l w-»c. . ‘I an. . A ‘0‘ Big. ' . .‘A‘n. CAO.~‘I ‘ ., ,. . .ppa, l3..- ‘ ificp "n..~;.‘ “m. ug‘rs ..1 ~U3' ‘vs Table 11 55 flieperehicel Regressipns of Aptitpdes Toward Technical Updating and Persieipegipp ip Teehnigel Updating on Engineering Function Dependent Independent Change Change Eerieble Veriables Bete'i R2 R2 F F Updating Age -.10 .04 .04 3.77* 3.77* attitudes Years education .18 Function 1 .05 .07 .03 2.19* 1.38 Function 2 -.07 Function 3 -.08 Function 4 -.15 Total hours Age -.10 .03 .03 2.98 2.98 updating Years education .16 Function 1 .34 .20 .17 6.97** 8.70** Function 2 .02 Function 3 -.12 Function 4 —.14 Formal Age —.29 .10 .10 9.82** 9.82** updating Years education .15 Function 1 .14 .14 .04 4.53** 1.79 Function 2 -.04 Function 3 -.08 Function 4 -.05 Informal Age -.02 .02 .02 1.37 1.37 updating Years education .12 Function 1 .32 .17 .15 5.54** 7.52** Function 2 .03 Function 3 -.10 Function 4 -.14 Number of Age -.37 .15 .15 15.35** 15.35** courses Years education .14 taken Function 1 .12 .19 .04 6.34** 1.71 Function 2 —.05 Function 3 -.09 Function 4 —.07 ARUBA; *p,< .05; **p < .01. Function 1 = R & D, 2 = Testing, 3 = Operations, 4 = Consulting. 56 Table 12 De r' 'v t is i n To 1 Ho rs of tin an A i udes Towsrd Teppnipel Updeting py Engineering Funepion .22tal_updating_ __Attitudes_ Function M SD M SD N 1. Basic research & development 1996.61 995.92 4.54 .75 31 2. Product or systems design 1174.70 750.77 4.39 .83 71 including applied R & D 3. Testing, reliability assurance, 1191.70 1008.12 4.18 .92 23 quality control & standards 4. Engineering operations & 801.09 581.82 4.12 1.06 23 maintenance 5. Consulting 791.09 863.57 4.00 .74 23 Nppe. An additional function "Production engineering (processing or manufacturing)" was not included due to a small p of 5. Table 13 Hieparchicel Regressions With Age end Years pf Edppegion Dependent Independent Change Change yepieple Veriables Betei R2 R2 F F Group updat Age .13 .02 .02 1.69 1.69 climate Years education -.04 Achievement Age .02 .00 .00 .06 .06 orient Years education -.02 Adaptability Age -.12 .01 .01 1.20 1.20 to change Years education -.02 Job Age .08 .01 .01 1.06 1.06 involvement Years education .08 Technical Age .09 .01 .01 .83 .83 interest Years education .04 .0 if... dus- ‘HII II. Ibei“ :Aro- Mimi DA. v: “v-.. :- ‘v n n j_— V‘l‘.‘ " ‘ On 1“ v P l)! A . .l' “A ‘.H~: ‘- l V ‘~ ‘5. h 57 among these means. The overall E for (effectiveness rating x person) was significant: £(9, 1998) = 37.96, p < .001. Therefore, post-hoc Scheffe tests were conducted to determine which activities were rated significantly more effective than others. Table 14 denotes pairs of activities significantly different on updating effectiveness. The magnitude of significant differences was determined by the critical value of p = 4.11 for p < .05, and p = 4.66 for p < .01. As seen in Table 14, job assignments ranked as most effective and had a significantly higher mean than six of the other activities. Job assignments were pp; rated as significantly more effective than attending university courses, reading, or self-study. Differences petween formal and informal ppdeping. A t-test was conducted to determine whether the mean difference between hours of formal and informal updating activity was significant. The mean for hours of formal activity over a two Year period was 149.07 (sp = 249.73). The mean for hours of informal activity was 1075.07 (sp = 845.66). The t-test showed the difference to be significant (t = 14.29, p < .001, g = 170). A sepond look a; the participapion--performance reletipnship. Given that engineering function was directly related to participation in total hours of updating and technical knowledge/performance, regressidns were run to determine the participation--performance relationship for each engineering function. Five regressions were run using only the sample of engineers within each of the five functions. For each engineer and function, age and years of education were entered first followed by total updating hours second. None of the regressions were significant; that is, no significant amount of variance was added by total hours of updating. However, the basic research and development (R & D) function had the largest beta weight of .22 (p > .27), followed by operations and maintenance (U = .10, p > .00). Beta weights and regression statistics for these results are shown in Table 15. Table 14 Ch ff 1 e f Effec iven s 9. 10. T w r 1 2 58 da in En ineer 3 I 4 i nifi an Differences Between Activi ie on Technical Knowled e an Skill 5 6 7 8 9 10 Conference course Paper for public. Studying registr. University courses ** Other courses Teaching Discuss w/engineers ** Job assignments ** Reading Self-study ** -** -** -** Ngtg, .A '-" mean than the activity at the top. differences at p < .05 level. indicates the number (activity) to the A "*I indicates significant left has a lower A "**" indicates the p < .01 significance 59 Table 15 Hiererehicel Regressions of Technical KnpwledgeZPerformance on Total Updeping Hours py Funcpion Dependent Independent Change Change Verieble Variables Beta R2 R2 F F B i Re arch Devel men Technical Age .15 .11 .11 1.73 1.73 know/perf Years education .29 Total updating hours .22 .15 .04 1.59 1.27 grpdpep pr systems Design Technical Age .26 .09 .09 3.51 3.51 know/perf Years education -.16 Total updating hours .03 .09 .00 2.32 .05 Tesping, ReliebilityI Qpelity Cpntroll Stenderds Technical Age -.01 .09 .09 .99 .99 know/perf Years education .30 'Total updating hours -.06 .09 .00 .65 .07 Uperepions and Maintenance Technical Age .02 .00 .00 .01 .01 know/perf Years education .03 Total updating hours .10 .01 .01 .05 .13 We Technical Age .16 .04 .04 .38 .38 know/perf Years education -.13 Total updating hours —.06 .04 .00 .26 .81 [ll 5 i3; 6' Oh: vi... >00\. 95‘. 00V ‘ up) .-.L o a.“ .‘v: \ 'E‘Vv . 60 W The summary of the results from testing each hypothesis using hierarchical regressions is depicted in Figure 3. Standardized beta weights are provided except with engineering function because it was dummy-coded and does not have a single beta weight associated with it (overall change in 33 indicated a significant relationship with participation). Figure 3 shows that when using total hours of updating (formal and informal) as the participation measure, Hypothesis 1 (about technical knowledge/performance), Hypothesis 3 (about work pressure moderation), and Proposition 1 (about function related to attitudes) were pp; supported. Figure 4 summarizes the results when formal updating is used as the participation measure instead of total updating hours. In Figure 4 the interaction of attitudes toward technical updating with work pressure is significant, so only Hypothesis 1 and Proposition 1 were not supported. As a note, the models depicted in Figures 3 and 4 are not structural equation models and are only designed to summarize the findings from the various hypotheses. LISREL Anelyses While each hypothesis was tested using separate hierarchical regressions, McPhee and Babrow (1987) note that structural equation modeling (SEM) provides added value when a system of interrelated hypotheses is proposed. Therefore, LISREL (Joreskog & Sorbom, 1989) analyses were also conducted to examine the overall fit of the conceptual model to the data and to retest the series of separate regression equations taking into account all the other model variables simultaneously. The theoretical latent variable model was tested with scale scores used as single indicators assumed to have no measurement error (reliability of 1.00). Error terms of the latent variables were not allowed to covary. Initially LISREL would not run the program on untransformed 61 28533 .0: n 6:: .. 8. v a 3 «me. v a . daun— muoom mafiacnb Room. ”monocuogm .8.“ Scams? 30m m0 Dacha—m .m ohsmwm 7.0225“. 93.80595 0 O G! M: « \2. 3:08.310; 3200.305. .03-.50... Ala—.l =oEL£E+ .0850: toaaom - atop. - 20E=U - 0.oE__U mczopa: 9.0.0 . .coficozEm o...0>> 0;... $30... uczopaD .20... . 3”. #95225 _u\u.csua._. 93—011: .03—:30... I 2.. .2030... 3.553 5 :0=oa_u_tom _ 0532—.— o...0>> _ //V. i/E/otot: .32—.00... . 2080202.. 40.. . cacao—U 0. £302.03. . cozoEoto EoEo>oEu< . mutate—00.5.6 1523.2.— 62 2002.30 .0: u .218. v 0:18. v a. .302 £003 masmcmb .0800...— ”momofiofimm 00,. WHEELS 000m .0 buEEHHm .v gnaw”. _ 00:05". 93.00595 ”Nomad...“ H 0.0.5.5 - 0.08:0 950.00: 050.0 . \B —. 00:02:30.. \0200355. 30.5.00... INQII .250". . 9.20.00: 30.5.00... :. oo.—00.3.00; 2.0500325 0.3.5 0.... Al eoQN. l -nc/topaa .00\.E_.00.p 0.0.50... 00.02.:< neQN. _.u _ 05000.... o...0>> _ //W ._/ / 3mm. EOEo>.0>c. 30.. . 09.0.5 0. £302.03. . I c0..0.c0..O E080>0....0< . 83.20220 .8031... /// .0202. 30.5.00... . . ‘r‘ EL?»- ’ v ‘lf‘ 5'- ‘d‘l 55! ”Au“ 3' «or . 1:35" “'50.“. ‘V ‘ n ""F .300,“ “'AFA r‘vgw 63 variables. Seven of the ten variables had significant skewness so each was transformed as follows: achievement orientation, technical interest, attitudes toward updating, and technical knowledge/performance were squared; the square roots of job involvement and total updating hours were calculated; and the natural log of age was used. Adaptability to change, group updating climate and work pressure did not need to be transformed. The model tested in LISREL 7.16 used total updating hours as the measure of participation in updating activities. In addition, three revisions were made to the original conceptual model in order to run it in LISREL. First, the propositions about engineering function were dropped because the dummy-coded variables could not be tested as a set and there was too small of an N to look at each function as a separate group. Second, the work pressure moderation hypothesis (H3) was determined to be significant only with formal updating as the dependent variable, so the moderation was dropped. Instead, work pressure was proposed to be directly related to total updating hours. Therefore, only four of the original five hypotheses were tested in the LISREL model. Finally, age and education were previously used as control variables. Instead of including both as exogenous variables in the SEM model, only age was included with a direct path to technical knowledge/performance (the zero-order correlation of age with technical knowledge/performance was r = -.37, p < .01). Therefore, ten latent variables were included in the LISREL model. Once the transformations were conducted, LISREL computed path coefficients and g values for the model presented in Figure 5. While seven out of nine paths were significant in Figure 5, the overall fit of the model resulted in a significant chi-square (X2== 31.79, p < .007, with 15 degrees of freedom) indicating the model did not sufficiently match the data. The goodness-of-fit index (GFI) was .966. The adjusted goodness-of-fit index was .874. Table 16 sunmmrizes the various goodness-of-fit indices for the model and its . Al‘- lmldl‘ I \ I9m0'mk'huukctu scanhsrhfivth 6h MO.VQQ.£QZ. 0%.). 000m... 3...... .m 8:0... I in. 0u< a... h ..0E..o.0.+ 3.0.0.. 0000.03.00. . E00... 00.30.: .03» . 3000.305. Alh— I m0..00.: 30.5.00... 30.5.00... 0. 00..0..0....0. 50.- _ 0.00.0.0... 0.00.5; toaaam - m3.0.3. - 0.0E..U .. \ 0.00...U 9.30.... 000.6 . m .. .00800...>0m 0.32. 0.... * \ 00.30.: 30.0000... 0.030... m000....< / am—. , / I 06... /.00.0.0_ 30.5.00... . .000.0>3>0. 00.. . 0909.0 0. b...b0..00< . 00.3.0000 .00E0>0...0< . 8.3020205 3:03.00. 5. 'I‘ " \ p luau-o \ 00'“.- 0 u I I 'I in (I! .0» ’l ‘ c I]! "~-:. \- u... I . . E‘- "ua. \ 5. c". o 1'- ._'. '. n ' I Q 65 Table 16 Goodness-of-Fit Summary fgr Initial LISREL Model #_M9del df X: rm§r GFI AGFI NFI NNFI Null 45 235.10* 91.31 .80 .75 Proposed 15 31.79* 23.59 .97 .87 .87 .73 No g. * Q < .05. null. The LISREL model in Figure 5 replicated the significant results for Hypotheses 2, 4, and 5 that had been found in the separate hierarchical regression analyses. However, two paths that were not significant in the previous analyses were significant in the LISREL analyses. As shown in Figure 5, the path coefficient between adaptability to change and attitudes toward technical updating was significant (g = .15, p < .05). and the path between total updating hours and technical knowledge/performance (g = .15, p < .05) was also significant. LISREL provides the unique effect of a variable controlling for all other variables leading to the dependent variable. Previous analyses already demonstrated the suppressing effect of group updating climate on the adaptability to change-~attitudes relationship. In LISREL, the unique effect of adaptability to change on attitudes toward technical updating turned out to be significant when the suppressing effect of group updating climate was controlled. In the case of the participation--performance relationship, the fact that both of these variables were significantly skewed provides an explanation as to why the hierarchical regression analyses found a rxxwignificant relationship. When conducting regression analyses, residuals are assumed to be normal and homoscedastic. However, with significantly skewed data, these assumptions are violated. While ordinary least squares regression will still provide a consistent estimate despite violations of these assumptions, the standard errors .and significance tests for the estimator are not dependable (Bollen, 1989) . By transforming the variables before running LISREL, the 66 residuals were normalized, the beta weight of the relationship increased slightly, and the significance test became valid revealing the participation--performance relationship to be significant--thereby supporting Hypothesis 1. Exploratory LISREL Analyses Even though the initial LISREL model resulted in a significant X?, the magnitude of the goodness-of-fit indices indicated that slight modification of the model might result in a non-significant chi-square and improved fit. Modification indices indicated where model revisions could be made. Therefore, the two nonsignificant paths from achievement orientation and from work pressure to total updating hours were eliminated. In addition, two paths were added; one path from work pressure to technical knowledge/performance as well as a path from age to attitudes toward technical updating. Since these modifications were consistent with the theory, the revised model with nine variables was run in LISREL similar to the first model. All nine paths in the revised model shown in Figure 6 were significant. In addition, the revised model resulted in a non- significant chi—square (X2 = 17.93, p > .118). Table 17 summarizes the various goodness-of-fit indices for the revised model and its null. As can be seen from comparison of Tables 16 and 17, the revised, second model had higher goodness-of-fit indices and represented an improvement over the initially proposed model. Table 17 e s- f-Fi Summa for E lorat LI REL Mo 1 Model df X2 rmsr GFI AGFI NFI ,NNFI Null 36 211.91* 100.94 .79 .74 Proposed 12 17.93 24.16 .98 .92 .92 .90 Note. * g < .05. 6T 00< \— — , 3N. _ 00005300. 3000.305. 30.0000... ll...h—.I / mo.va..u...qz .282 0000... 0302.00 .0 8:0... «mp. .. t0..0m - 00.0..0. - 03E._0 - 03.0..0 00.30.: .090 . 0—.\ 3.08—.0530.” v...0>> 09:. § 208.0%... + _OE..Ot/' \ 0.50... 00.30.: 33h . 00.30.: 30.0000... 0. 00..0..0....0. .ON. 0.5000... 0.32. II .00. 00.30.: 30.0000h 0.0.50... 0000....< «mm .00. 0M —. // // .0033. 30.0000... . 300.0003. 00.. . 000000 0. b...00..00< . 00..0...0.00..000 300.200. \‘fi’ “'0' no 05‘. '95". d .. h... ,, . 0:. r‘~. 9'- 00.~ '. ‘¢a. i "v '0 u D (I) hi 0..“ u. 0": 68 Summary of Overall Results Two primary types of analyses were conducted to test the five hypotheses and two propositions: separate hierarchical multiple regressions and structural equation modeling using LISREL 7.16. Utilizing separate hierarchical regressions, Hypotheses 2, 3, 4, and 5 as well as Proposition 2 were supported. Hypothesis 1 relating participation in technical updating to technical knowledge/performance was 39; supported, nor Proposition 1 relating engineering function to attitudes toward technical updating. Although Hypothesis 5 relating individual characteristics as a set to attitudes toward technical updating was supported overall, the paths from achievement orientation and adaptability to change (in Hypothesis 5) were non-significant. In the initial LISREL model, Hypothesis 3 (work pressure moderation) and the two Propositions were not tested, but the LISREL results replicated support for Hypotheses 2, 4, and 5. However, contrary to the separate hierarchical regression results, the LISREL analyses suppgrrgg Hypothesis 1, and the relationship of adaptability to change to attitudes toward technical updating (in Hypothesis 5). In the case of these two contradictory findings, the LISREL analyses are preferred because the effects of the variables were determined within the structure of all the variables in the model, and because transformations of the variables led to more valid and appropriate significance tests of the relationships. Finally, the second, exploratory LISREL model suggested that work pressure has a significant effect on technical knowledge/performance and that there is a negative relationship between age and attitudes toward technical updating. In conclusion, across both the separate hierarchical regression analyses and the LISREL analyses, all five hypotheses and one of the two propositions were supported. 0O; avL‘ 0:F* Ii».- man U... . . v05- “.04 . “AA; l bib. - 30.- ‘05. " ID in FrAuJ HavL. ‘ 0 . ‘an‘ It‘d: u I" b, M .V m '1 «0 (D '2‘" ‘ ~x ,. . 9’. 0“. H '1 In [H 69 DISCUSSION The purpose of the present thesis was to examine the individual, attitudinal, and work environment antecedents of participation in technical updating activities, as well as knowledge/performance outcomes. A conceptual model was presented which posited that four individual characteristics and group-level climate perceptions would be positively related to attitudes toward technical updating; that these attitudes were positively related to participation in technical updating, but the relationship would be moderated by work pressures; and finally that participation in technical updating was positively related to technical knowledge and performance. In addition, two propositions examined the relationship between engineering function and attitudes toward technical updating and participation in technical updating. All five hypotheses and one of the two propositions were supported across the separate hierarchical regressions and LISREL analyses. Three of the four individual characteristics--adaptability to change, job involvement, and technical interest--showed positive relationships with attitudes toward technical updating. Group—level perceptions of work environment support were also positively related to attitudes toward technical updating. Attitudes toward technical updating were positively related to participation in updating activities, with work pressure (rated by supervisors) moderating the relationship with formal updating, and approaching significance in moderating number of courses. Participation in technical updating was related to higher technical knowledge/performance in the LISREL model. Proposition 1 was not supported; engineering function was not related to attitudes toward technical updating. However, Propostion 2 was supported by the finding that engineering function was related to participation in technical updating activities. The implications of these results will be discussed in the order 70 of the variables in the conceptual model with antecedent variables first and outcome variables last. Impligarigns of Results Individual gharacrerisrics= The four individual characteristics variables in the study as a set explained a significant and large amount of variance in attitudes toward technical updating (46% change in _R_2 due to the four variables). However, the two personality variables were least predictive of attitudes toward updating. Achievement orientation was not found to be related, perhaps due to range restriction in the sense that engineering professionals as a whole are probably highly achievement oriented compared to non~ professionals. Adaptability to change was weakly related to attitudes toward technical updating. Interestingly, adaptability to change had a significant negative zero-order correlation with group updating climate (r = -.22). This finding indicates that a negative updating climate suppresses the ability of an individual's adaptability to change to be related to more positive attitudes toward technical updating. Job involvement and technical interest were more strongly associated with attitudes toward technical updating than the personality measures. It may seem that little can be done to influence these individual characteristics, but since they are not really personality variables which would be considered more stable, it is possible that organizational interventions could work. Dubin (1990) cites a study by Jelenek that found engineers ranked intellectual challenge first as what they wanted most in their careers- -above money, independence at work, or security. Therefore, jobs can be redesigned to be more challenging or allow more autonomy and creativity which may stimulate more technical interest or job involvement. In addition, Farr and Middlebrooks (1990) suggest that the relative scarcity of challenging tasks can be approached using the Premack Principle--using more desired, engaging activities to reward performance on less interesting tasks. Temporary projects or committee " -939-t- ”1'00. 0 “VH3? . 001‘... v 'fake ...‘~ "CNN 71 assignments can also enhance employee’s involvement with their work (Maurer & Tarulli, 1994). Thus, there may be several ways to influence an engineer’s technical interest and job involvement to some degree, thereby positively influencing their attitudes toward technical updating and participation in updating activities. Relationships of age revealed that older workers participated in significantly fewer courses and participated less in formal updating overall which is consistent with previous research findings. The other interesting finding was that more educated engineers (those with education beyond a bachelor's) had significantly less work pressure in terms of overtime and changing work schedules. Wgrk environmenr, As far as the work environment is concerned. numerous previous studies have shown that a supportive climate, organizational policies, and supportive supervisors are all positively related to participation in updating and development (Parr et al., 1984; Kozlowski & Farr, 1988; Noe & Wilk, 1993; Maurer & Tarulli, 1994). The present study found moderately high agreement among engineers under a particular supervisor when describing the organizations' climate, policies, and supervisor support for updating-- further supporting the concept of updating climate. In addition, this study's finding that group updating climate was positively related to attitudes toward technical updating, which were in turn positively related to participation in updating, was consistent with previous research findings. Additionally, in contrast to the 46% variance explained by individual characteristics, group updating climate explained only 3% of the variance in attitudes toward technical updating. This finding is consistent with previous studies by Noe and Wilk (1993) and Maurer and Tarulli (1994) who found individual characteristics and attitudes explained more variance in participation in development activities than work environment variables. tq hr: 05‘ v. u ..\IAA¢ ‘ u u r-:‘ on.. u '*":rn u u... ’alc‘ '.‘0.=‘ .A \- _._ 72 Arpirudaa tpward pephnipal upaating. Attitudes toward technical updating had a moderately high relationship to participation in every measure of technical updating: total hours, formal, informal, and number of courses taken. Items included in the final attitudes scale loaded highest on one factor in an exploratory factor analysis and exhibited high internal consistency reliability. The original intent to create items targeting the three components of attitudes--affect, cognitions, and intentions-~led to a sufficiently unidimensional scale. This finding supports the notion that attitude is a latent construct comprised of at least these three components. Thus, the newly introduced construct and scale for attitudes toward technical updating appears to be useful in relation to participation in technical updating activities. Similarly, Noe and Wilk (1993) found variables like motivation to learn, motivation to transfer, and perceptions of development needs to be related to hours of development activity. Maurer and Tarulli (1994) found self- perceived need for improvement, and intentions to participate in the future to be related to past participation and interest in development activity. Results from the present study suggest that each of these separate measures could be combined into a single, unidimensional measure of attitudes toward development activity. Combining these separate and more specific constructs leads to greater theoretical efficiency, and allows more emphasis to be placed on other, less explored variables which will be discussed in the section about directions for future research. Partipipation in technical updating, Previous studies by Kozlowski and Farr (1988) and Noe and Wilk (1993) found very low correlations of antecedent variables related to number of courses taken over the past year with engineers. The present study found a much higher correlation between attitudes toward technical updating and number of courses taken. One explanation for this finding is that expanding the time frame to the past two years increased the variance 73 in participation since few or no courses tend to be taken by most engineers in a single year. The average number of courses taken over the two-year period in the present study was 2.68 (sag. = 2.67). Examining the overall participation in technical updating measure, the ten activities seemed to capture the range of activities well since relatively few engineers responded to the "other activity" item. In addition, there was no indication that engineers had any difficulty estimating the number of formal activities they participated in over the past two years (courses). However, there was some indication that estimates of time spent were more difficult to make and considered more like rough estimations of time spent. The primary contribution to research by this study was the inclusion of a measure of informal updating activities. Despite the methodological limitations in this initial attempt, one can reasonably conclude that generally more time is spent in informal updating activities than formal. In addition, the activities rated first and third in terms of effectiveness toward increasing technical knowledge and skills were informal activities: working on parts of job tasks/assignments and discussing technologies/procedures/developments with other engineers, respectively. These results are consistent with Farr et al. (1984) who found these informal activities to be ranked as highly valuable methods. Previous research on updating and development has focused only on formal coursework activity, yet it is obvious that this is not the only form of development in which employees participate. In a quote from their article about the rise of training programs in firms and agencies, Scott and Meyer (1991) exemplify the type of acknowledgement and yet simultaneous disregard of informal training that exists: Setting aside informal training, which occurs in all work contexts, and even excluding the semi-formalized practices of on- the—job and apprenticeship training--types of training that are clearly the dominant mode within organizations [footnote here to a study.by carnevale (1986) which reported that over 80 percent of training in industry was in the form of on-the-job training]-— formal training is very extensive and is growing in magnitude. (p. 298) go‘ ,. v.— “ I“ ,. ‘. 0.. ~' 0-0... 0-0.' .Ihv' vvvvc -:-v: .000» 0. .‘ u .C. u 0..., c.“ ‘« "0 '- 74 Not only is formal training extensive, but also very expensive. Scott and Meyer (1991) quote Carnevale and Goldstein (1983) who estimate the total expenditures for in-house training and external training to be $10 billion excluding trainees' wages and salaries during training, and $21 billion including these items. Given the time and expense that goes into formal training programs, it makes sense to examine participation in informal activities and make attempts to acknowledge and facilitate such activity. In doing so, organizations can take advantage of naturally- occurring mechanisms of training, updating, and development and decrease expenditures involved in formal training. Dubin (1990) discussed how it was estimated that at Proctor & Gamble, half of all critical technical communications were informal and unplanned. To encourage this informal communication, nooks were set up along the corridors with chairs and blackboards to facilitate impromptu conversations and exchanges. Dubin (1990) writes, "Productive new ideas began to surface from the interaction of various disciplines and project teams" (p. 34). Perhaps taking a job-analysis approach to studying existing modes of informal activities can lead to more formal recognition, rewards and incentives for participation in such activity. A job—analysis approach would enable organizations to clearly identify types of informal activity which are currently effective and operating. In addition, new types of informal activities could be identified as useful and introduced. Since informal activities can be equally, if not more effective than formal activities, organizations and researchers need to broaden their scope of investigation to include such participation. Work pressure. The moderating effect of work pressure suggests that under low work pressure, positive attitudes toward updating are more strongly related to participation in formal updating; under high work pressure, attitudes are not as strongly related to participation in formal updating. Thus, work pressure can be thought of as a 75 constraint to participation in formal updating even though attitudes toward updating may be high. If organizations want employees to participate in more formal development activities, work pressure--extensive overtime, fast work pace and heavy work loads-~must be minimized, at least during the time when formal updating is expected to occur or to facilitate formal updating. Interestingly, engineers with greater overtime and heavier work loads were rated higher on technical knowledge/performance by their supervisors. The strength of the work pressure--performance relationship, however, may have been somewhat inflated by method variance since supervisors completed both scales. Technical knowledgelperformance. Based on the results from the LISREL analyses, participation in technical updating was found to be related to greater technical knowledge/performance. This finding supports the assumption that greater updating is related to greater knowledge and performance. Post-hoc hierarchical regression results examining the participation--performance relationship suggest that it may be larger for R & D engineers than other functions. It makes sense for updating to be more critical for R & D engineers whose main function revolves around the generation of new knowledge and technical developments. While the participation in updating--performance relationship was significant, its magnitude of .15 leaves explanatory room for additional outcome measures. Thus, the question arises as to what other relevant ultimate criterion measures are related to participation in updating, and development in general. More simply, what is participating in a lot of updating or development related to? Research by Noe and Wilk (1993) and Maurer and Tarulli (1994) studied participation in various types of development activities and included non-engineering employees, but both studies examined the amount of participation as the ultimate outcome and dependent variable. It seems 76 clear that this area of research must delve further into the pprppmaa of participation in development activity. When development activity includes technical and interpersonal skills training, improvements in knowledge or performance are almost expected outcomes and the present study supports this assumption. However, when development activity includes interpersonal skills, leadership, or time management training, what are the expected, measurable outcomes? Noe and Wilk (1993) found that the greater employees' motivation to transfer and use skills from training on the job, the less they participated in development activities (a = -.26). They interpret this finding as suggesting that employees who wanted to transfer their training to the job did not view development activities as being directly transferrable or applicable to their jobs. If development is not directly transferrable to the job, why participate? Previous research provides clues which suggest that updating or development outcomes can be categorized into short-term and long-term benefits. Short-term benefits for the individual may be increased recognition by the supervisor or an increase in job-relevant skills. Longer-term benefits of development may be directed toward individual career advancement or even career change (for instance, going from line to management). A long-term benefit of development for an organization might be the inculcation of a culture change or significant increase in innovation or competitiveness. Thus, the fulfillment of short-term benefits leads into long-term benefits for both the individual and the organization. Farr and Middlebrooks (1990) note that learning goals as well as performance goals need to be emphasized in relation to training. Learning goals can encourage employees to participate in skills development without fear they will be negatively evaluated. Scott and Meyer (1991) discuss this learning emphasis in terms of education versus training. Education has learning as an end in itself, future 77 utility, and understanding as its goals. On the other hand, training has learning as a means to an end (like improved performance), present utility, and results as its goals. Thus, perhaps participation in updating and development involves some learning and some training goals depending on the particular topic of development. Noe and Wilk (1993) found inconsistent results regarding relationships with development activity across health-maintenance organizations, engineering firms, and banks. They suggest that employees' obligations to participate in development activities or their implicit contracts with their organizations may explain more variance in why employees participate in development activity. The notion of implicit contract implies that companies offer development training as a gesture of their commitment to employee development; and employees participate as a gesture of their commitment to and involvement in the organization and its programs. Perhaps greater participation in company-supported updating and development leads to greater morale, cohesiveness, or further boosts the culture and climate of support for updating. Scott and Meyer (1991) believe training is linked to organizational purposes as opposed to individual development purposes. Organizations obtain outcomes like fostering social control over employees’ internalized commitments to the organization, and maintaining credibility and respect amidst societal pressures to develOp employees' capacities. Scott and Meyer (1991) conclude that: The tightly controlled training system, closely linked to very specific organizational tasks and purposes, is rarely to be found. Organizations tend to copy generally valued models, only loosely linked to their specific tasks and purposes. (p. 322) Thus, the close association between updating training and performance is only relevant when the training directly contributes to and is applicable to job-related tasks. As Scott and Meyer (1991) suggest, it may be difficult to link training to specific outcomes like performance since training is increasingly being provided and supported for reasons outside of improved performance or job-related results. A, 0D" .- .00 0A. . 0'... an. - '00- ‘Int 00'. . . :-~. I‘d“ .. b on ‘ . tho . m.) "0- 3 A». .x “‘0‘ 3'- - ., ‘ ‘ ~ 0"! “M I § . 0.... ‘0 ‘. “ . ‘ § 1'.- “0. . v=~ .. a " ' U 78 Limi ion f th t While one of the present study’s strengths was attempting to measure informal updating activities, the accuracy and verifiability of the estimates of time spent per month are questionable. Yet even considering these to be rough estimates with large confidence bands, the time spent on informal activity was so much greater than time spent on formal activities (from 2 to 10 times greater) that it is likely that a large difference does exist in reality. The estimates of hours spent per month on informal activities are conceptually similar and perhaps as accurate as the typical 1 to 5 estimates of time spent or frequency estimates used in job analyses. In a similar manner, perhaps estimates of time spent in informal activities can be used to study what types of informal activity are used and where time is dedicated, more or less. One of the greatest limitations of the study was its cross- sectional and past-recall design. This and many previous studies address antecedent and outcome relationships with data from one point in time. Where possible, research of this kind should be longitudinal obtaining antecedent measures first and outcome variables last. If further research is to focus on more outcome variables, the longtudinal component will be crucial in terms of measuring future outcomes. Overall, method variance in the study appeared to be minimal. The work environment variable was aggregated at the group level and supervisor ratings were obtained for work pressure and technical knowledge/performance. However, attitudes toward technical updating and participation in technical updating measures were both obtained from engineers. To enable more accurate estimations of time spent and minimize method variance, the participation measure utilized a stepwise, structured recall format with formal activities. This format requested whether the activity was participated in (yes or no), then the subject of the course, and hours spent per class (e.g., 4-hour class for 4 sessions = 16 hours) and did not ask engineers to make 79 estimates of or calculate the total the number of updating hours. In addition, Noe and Wilk (1993) concluded that objective, personnel file data may not be the most reliable indicator of participation in development activities since all necessary information may not be collected. Little can be done to decrease method variance related to self—reports of activity since these are thus far the most accurate sources. Thus, the link in the model with the greatest possibility of method variance is between individual characteristics and attitudes toward technical updating. Yet given the magnitude of the relationships, even accounting for some degree of inflation would probably result in moderate relationships for technical interest and job involvement. Obtaining the individual characteristics measures and attitudes at different points in time in addition to using different sources may help alleviate any inflation from method variance in future research. Dirapripns for Future Research The results examining the effects of personality variables on attitudes toward technical updating were disappointing. Apparently the scales chosed from the CPI and 16PF were not highly linked to attitudes toward technical updating. However, there are numerous alternative personality measures available that may be used to tap the constructs which appear to be relevant to participation in updating and development activities. Since the "Big Five" personality dimensions are being examined more in the literature, choosing a broader measure of Conscientiousness or Openness to Change than the ones used in this study may prove more fruitful. Perhaps other relevant personality characteristics can also be included in future research. Examination of participation in informal updating, development, and training activities should continue. Measures can be improved, verified, and their test-retest reliabilities examined. Further research investigating informal activities has implications especially 80 relevant to older workers. The aging of the baby-boom generation is expected to result in an increase in the number of older workers in the near future (Offerman & Gowing, 1990). However, nearly all studies of obsolescence and updating have found that older engineers tend not to participate in more formal types of activities. The correlation between age and formal activity in this study was -.29 (p < .01) and was -.37 for courses taken, but there was no such relationship with informal activity (r = -.03). As the workforce advances in age, this predisposition not to attend courses or participate in formal updating could be problematic. Ways of facilitating and improving modes of informal development would enable individuals to choose the methods they find more useful and accessible. The ultimate criterion issue should be examined further: What is participation in a lot of updating or development related to? Further research is needed to investigate the payoffs and outcomes of updating, training, and development both for the organization and the individual. Research could investigate implicit obligations at the organizational level about how much to support and offer training. Research could also study implicit norms at the individual level about how much and what training to participate in. Are there negative outcomes or repercussions for pp; participating--even in so-called voluntary programs? If organizations are predicted to continue and even increase their training programs, it makes sense to investigate the goals driving this increase and whether these goals, individual and organizational, are being met. Further research on the individual and organizational outcomes associated with development activities may provide answers to these research questions. APPENDIX A: ENGINEERS’ SCALES 81 Attitudes Toward Technical Updating Using the scale below, rate your degree of agreement/disagreement with the following statements: 1---Strongly disagree 2---Disagree 3-—-Slightly disagree 4---Slightly agree S---Agree 6---Strongly agree —1.* Keeping up with the latest developments is not necessary to get my job done every day. 2.* Participating in some type of updating activity is frequently essential in my field. -3.* Most engineers are very concerned about how up-to-date their knowledge and skills are. -4. Staying up-to-date is critical for some engineers, but not for me. 5. It is very important for me to keep current in my field. 6. I would spend my own time and money to participate in updating activities if the organization did not provide such resources. -7. There are not many advantages to participating in updating activities for me, but for some it is worthwhile. -8. Trying to stay up-to-date with the latest technology is basically a waste of time for me. 9. I take advantage of almost every opportunity to develop my engineering knowledge and skills. 10. Keeping my technical knowledge up-to-date is a major goal of mine. 11. I am highly motivated to participate in activities to update my technical knowledge and skills. -12. I'm not against updating my skills, but I'm not really for it either. 13.* I do not participate in as much updating as I should. -14.* It is primarily the organization’s responsibility to make sure its engineers stay up-to-date. 15. Coworkers would describe me as actively seeking opportunities to develop and expand my engineering knowledge and skills. 16. I put a lot of effort into participating in activities to update my engineering knowledge and skills. 17. I will spend a lot of time learning about new information about technologies and procedures this year. -18. I am more inclined not to participate in updating activities than to participate. * Items 1, 2, 3, 13, and 14 were omitted from the final attitudes scale. 82 Organizational Climate Supporting Updating Adapted from: Farr, J.L., Dubin, S.S., Enscore, E.E., Kozlowski, S.W.J., & Cleveland, J. (1980). Relationships Among Individual Motivation, Work Environment, and Updating in Engineers. Using the scale below, rate the accuracy of the following statements concerning your organization and direct supervisor: 1---A very inaccurate statement 2--—A generally inaccurate statement 3---A more inaccurate than accurate statement 4---A more accurate than inaccurate statement S---A generally accurate statement 6-——A very accurate statement -1. There is a discouraging and indifferent attitude toward technological innovation and excellence in the organization. -2. There is little leadership in the organization regarding professional standards. -3. Personal creativity and growth are stifled by the organization. -4. Low value is placed on the development of human resources to achieve organizational excellence. 5. The organization is concerned with the professional growth of its engineers. —6. There is a limited opportunity for engineers in the organization to use the full extent of their technical knowledge. 7. The organization has a progressive atmosphere. 8. The organization recognizes the technical contributions of its engineers. 9. Innovation is enthusiastically received within the organization. 10. The organization stresses high professional standards. 11. Organizational rewards are given to those engineers with technical competence. 83 Organizational Policies Supporting Updating Adapted from: Farr, J.L., Dubin, S.S., Enscore, E.E., Kozlowski, S.W.J., & Cleveland, J. (1980). Relationships Among Individual Motivation, Work Environment, and Updating in Engineers. Using the scale below, rate the accuracy of the following statements concerning your organization and direct supervisor: 1---A very inaccurate statement 2---A generally inaccurate statement 3--—A more inaccurate than accurate statement 4-——A more accurate than inaccurate statement S---A generally accurate statement 6---A very accurate statement 1. The organization pays for subscriptions to technical and trade journals for the engineer. 2. The organization encourages the reading of technical journals and trade magazines during working hours. 3. The organization provides financial support for attending professional meetings. -4. Engineers who receive advanced training and degrees receive little formal recognition in the organization. -5. The organization has a very limited training budget for its engineering staff. -6. The organization restricts the participation of the engineers in updating activities to a minimum. -7. The organization provides very limited funds for internal research and development. 8. Assignments are made in the area of the engineer's personal interest, when possible. 9. The organization has a performance appraisal system which ties financial gain to technical competence. 10. The organization has a tuition refund policy for continuing education. 84 Supervisor Support for Updating Adapted from: Farr, J.L., Dubin, S.S., Enscore, E.E., Kozlowski, S.W.J., & Cleveland, J. (1980). Relationships Among Individual Motivation, Work Environment, and Updating in Engineers. Using the scale below, rate the accuracy of the following statements concerning your organization and direct supervisor: 1--—A very inaccurate statement 2--—A generally inaccurate statement 3--—A.more inaccurate than accurate statement 4---A more accurate than inaccurate statement 5---A generally accurate statement 6---A very accurate statement 1. Our supervisor provides career counseling for the engineer. 2. Our supervisor's performance reviews point out the engineer’s strengths and weaknesses and offer suggestions for improvement. 3. Our supervisor matches the engineer's need for technical development with opportunities to update knowledge and skills. -4. Our supervisor does not recognize or reward an engineer's efforts to keep technically up-to-date. -5. Our supervisor does little to encourage engineers to stay current with relevant technological developments. 6. My supervisor holds periodic staff meetings to discuss technical problems and developments. Adapted from: Noe, R.A. & Schmitt, N. (1986). The influence of trainee attitudes on training effectiveness: Test of a model, Personnal Payghplogx. 12. 497—523. 7. Our supervisor provides engineers with assistance and direction when needed to solve problems faced on the job. 8. Our supervisor can be counted on to help engineers develop skills. 9. Our supervisor helps engineers set developmental goals to expand their technical knowledge and skills. 85 Adaptability to Change 16 PF--QI Scale (Conservative-Experimenting) The following questions ask about what personal interests you have and how you feel about things. While these questions are somewhat different than the previous ones you have answered, they will help us understand how individual opinions may be related to updating issues. Your responses are strictly confidential, so please give the first, natural answer as it comes to you. Use the "2" answer only when you feel you have to, because neither "1" nor "3" seems right for you. The actual items cannot be shown due to copyright of the personality scales. 86 Achievement Orientation California Psychological Inventory (CPI) Ai scale (Achievement via Independence) Read each of the following statements, decide how you feel about it, and if you agree with a statement or feel that it is true about you, answer TRUE. If you disagree with a statement, or feel that it is not true about you, answer FALSE. The actual items cannot be shown due to copyright of the personality scales. 87 Job Involvement From: Kanugo, R.N. (1982). Measurement of job and work involvement. Journal pf Applied Psychology, §1(3), 341-349. Using the scale below, rate your degree of agreement/disagreement with the following statements: 1---Strongly disagree 2---Disagree 3-—-Slightly disagree 4---Slightly agree 5---Agree 6-—-Strongly agree 1. The most important things that happen to me involve my present job. -2. To me, my job is only a small part of who I am. 3. I am very much involved personally in my job. 4. I live, eat and breathe my job. 5. Most of my interests are centered around my job. 6. I have very strong ties with my present job which would be very difficult to break. —7. Usually I feel detached from my job. 8. Most of my personal life goals are job-oriented. 9. I consider my job to be very central to my existence. 10. I like to be absorbed in my job most of the time. 88 Technical versus Managerial Interests Adapted from: Ritti, R.R. (1968). Work goals of scientists and engineers. Inguatrial Relations, 1, 188-131. Using the scale below, rate your degree of agreement/disagreement with the following statements: 1---Strongly disagree 2--—Disagree 3-—-Slightly disagree 4---Slightly agree 5---Agree 6---Strongly agree T1. T2. T3. T4. M5. M6. M7. M8. Note: It is important to me to have opportunities to explore new ideas about technology or systems. I really enjoy opportunities to work on challenging technical problems. In the future, I would like to advance to a higher level technical position. In the future, I would like to advance to a position with more primarily technical duties than managerial. In the future, I would like to advance to a managerial position with more administrative duties than technical. I seek opportunities to learn administrative/managerial procedures and skills. I would like to advance to a policy-making position in management. I try to learn how the company is set up and run. T=Technical interest item; M=Managerial interest item 89 Background Information 1. Indicate your engineering area (Aer.E., Arc.E., Ch.E., C.E., E.E., M.E., or other) and year in which you received your degree(s). Area Year pf Completion Bachelor's degree Master's degree MBA Doctorate Other (specify): 2. Check one of the following engineering functions which best describes your job: Basic research and development Product or systems design including applied R & D Testing, reliability assurance, quality control and standards Engineering operations and maintenance Production engineering (processing or manufacturing) Consulting 3. Years employed with present company 4. Years employed as an engineer 5. Age 6. Male Female APPENDIX B: ENGINEER TECHNICAL UPDATING SURVEY 9O ‘ f Engineer I 1 Technical Updating ' Survey Overview of Survey: Technical updating develops one’s understanding of advances in scientific and technical knowledge, procedures, and applications. The Engineer Technical Updating Survey was developed by researchers at Michigan State University to gain some understanding of the organizational, work, and personal factors which may influence engineers’ efforts to keep technically up-to-date. Part I of this survey asks about your updating experiences and assessment of organizational and work factors related to updating. Part II asks about your personal opinions and interests, and Part III asks for background information. Privacy Statement: Survey information is being gathered from engineers such as yourself, and also from your direct supervisor who is completing a separate survey concerning some of your work activities. To protect the confidentiality of your responses, this survey is numbered with a code known only to the researchers. Your individual responses will be treat0d with strict confidence and will be used for purposes of this research project only. Your company has agreed to allow its engineers to complete this research survey, but was not involved in its development and will not be involved in its analysis. We will report only group results of the project which will be distributed to all participating organizations when they are available. Participation: This survey will take approximately 50 minutes to complete. Participation in this survey is strictly voluntary; discontinuing your participation will not result in any adverse consequences. You indicate your voluntary agreement to participate by completing and retuming this questionnaire. If you have any questions about anything related to this survey, you may contact one of the researchers, Joann Sam, at (410) 290-3276. lmtructions: Specific instructions are located in each section of this survey. When you have completed the survey, place it in the envelope provided. Seal the envelope and return it to the contact person named below: 91 PART I: The Effectiveness of Updating Activities Using the scale below, rate the following updating activities to answer thequestion: Compared to other updating activities, how effective is this activity as a way of updating an mgineer’s technical knowledge and skills? 1 2 3 4 5 One of the Moderately One of the least effective most effective effective Circle your rating attending a professional society meeting or conference seminars . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 preparingapaperfor publicationorpresentationatarnwtingorconfereme l 2 3 4 studyingtoobtain professional registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 taking a technical course offered by a university or college 1 2 3 4 PPPP?‘ taking an in-house or non-company technical seminar, worksh0p, trainingprograrn,orshoncourse... .......1234 6. teaching or leadrngatechnical course, seminar, workshop, trainingprograrnorshortcourse..... .........1234 7. discussing technologies/procedm'es/developrnents with other engineersinmyorganintionorotherorganintions . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 8. workingonpartsofjob tasks/assignmts/projectsthat require learning technologies/pmcedmes/developmts . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 9. reading trade journals, magazines, books, etc. about technologies/procedures/developments (outside of ,readingassociatedwithactivitiesalready listed). . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 10. participating in a self-study program involving workbooks, tutorials, audio or video tapes, or televised instruction (outside of studying associated with activities alreadylisted).....................1234 5 5 5 S 92 Participation in Updating Activities The following questions ask about your participation in updating activities related to improving your technical knowledge and skills. " Consideryour parficipationintheseactivities overthepastZyears (since August 1991). ‘Ifyoucircle 'YES'toanactivity,completethesectionbelowittoestimatetheamormtoftirne spentinthatactivity. ‘Trytobeasaccurateaspossible. *Ifyouneedmorespacethanispmvided,yournayusethebackofeachsheet. Over the put 2 years (since August 1991), have you... Circle your answer Lattatdedaprofuonalsocietymeetingorconference seminars? YES NO [ Totalhoursspent ineech meeting W W Example 0: Maryland Engineers’ Society 8 horas l. 2. 3. 4. Use back of sheer ifneasmry 2.prepandapapeforpublicafionorpresartafionatameefingorconfm? YEIIS NO Toni hours spent preparing List subject of each mgr WW1 l. 2. 3. Use back of sheet if necessary 3. studied to obtain professional registration? YES NO r Total hours spent List 0 re ‘stration W122; 93 Participation in Updating Activities, continued Over the past 2 yer: (since August 1991), have you... Circle your answer 4.takenatechnicalcotn'seofferedbyamtiversityorcollege? YES NO 0 I - - I lasteach Trniespentrncourse Totalboursspentin QUE subject & studn'ng for course each course since dung; 1&1 Example 0: antenna theory 5 hrs/wk for 16 mks 80 hours Example b: wmputer programming 6 hrs/wk for 8 web 48 hours 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Use back ofslieet ifnecersary 5. takaranin-homeornon—cornpanytechnicalsuninar, workshop, trairfiig program or short course? YI'IIS NO “55"“ Time Spentincourse Totalhoursspentin . Wins: ' t M8: stud in for W122; Example 0: new tedz. procedum 4 workshops/2 hr: each 8 hours Euvnpleb:brownbagseminar Ihr@everyI-‘rifor2yrs whom I. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Use bad ofsheet ifnemsary 6. taughtorledatedmicalcom'se, seminar, workshop, training program or short cmu'se? YES NO . r . . I last each Tune spent teachmg Total hours spent on #2300099..— W W Use back of sheer if necessary git Participation in Updating Activities, continued Over the past 2 years (since August 1991), have you... Circle your answer 7. W technologies/pmmdm-esldevelopments with other engineers in your organintion or other organintiom? YES NO Estimate the avrerage number of hours spent on this activity permonthsinceAugust 1991: hourspermonth 8. worked on parts of job wits/migrments/pmjects that required learrn‘ng tedmologies/promdurcs/developments? YES NO Estimate the airmge number of hours spent on this activity permonthsinceAugust 1991: hourspermonth 9. read trade journals, magan'nes, books, etc. about technologim/procedm'es/ developments? (outside of reading associated with activities already listed) YES NO Estimatetbemlreragenumberof hornsspmtonthisactivity per-month since August 1991: hourspermonth 10. participated in a self-study coin-ac involving workbook, tutorials, audio or video tapes, or televised instruction? (outside of studying associated with activities already listed) YES NO List elach Time spent in program Total hours spent in MEL. __ml_nag__& ’ We): 'ncc u I Ermple a: hydraulia 6 two-hour videocapes 12 hours Example b: ACAD program 2 hr. tutorial & 30 hrs. practice 32 hours 1. 2. Use bad: of sheet if necessary 11. Specify any other relevant activitis and estimate the average manber of hours per month or total horn-s spent on each activity: Average hours per Total hours Other Activity month since Augg 1991 OR gm! aince Augpg 199] 95 Organizational/Supervisor Support Using the scale below, rate the accuracy of the following statements concerning your organization and direct supervisor: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Avery Agenerally Aurore imccurate Amoreaccurate Agenerally Avery inaccurate inaccurate than accurate than inaccurate accurate accurate statement statement statement statanent statement statunent Circle your rating 1. There is a discouraging and indifferent attitude toward technological innovation and excellence in the organintion . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 5 6 2. There is little leadership in the organintion regarding professional standards . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 3. Personal creativity and growth are stifled by the organization . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 6 4. Low value is placed on the development of human resources to achieve organizational excellence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 S. The organization is concerned with the professional growth of its engineers 2 3 4 5 6 6. There is a limited opportunity for engineers in the organintion to use the full extent of their technical knowledge . . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7. The organization has a progrewive atmosphere 1 2 3 4 5 6 8. The organintion recognizes the technical contributions of its ugineers 1 2 3 4 5 6 9. Innovation is enthusiastically received within the organization 1 2 3 4 5 5 10. 'l‘heorganintionstresseshighprofeasionalstandards . 1 2 3 4 5 6 l 1. Organizational rewards are given to those engineers with technical competence l 2 3 4 5 6 12. The organization pays for subscriptions to technical and trade journals for the engineer 1 2 3 4 5 6 13. The organintion encourages the reading of technical journals and trademagazinesduringworlcinghours . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 6 14. The organization provides financial support for attending professional meetings . . . . . l 2 3 4 5 6 15. Engineers who receive advanced training and degrees receive little formal recognition in the organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 5 6 16. The organization has a very limited training budget for its urgineering staff . . . . . . l 2 3 4 5 6 17. The organization restricts the participation of the engineers inupdatingactivitiestoaminimum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 5 6 18. The organization provides very limited funds for internal research and development . . . . l 2 3 4 5 6 l9. Assignmentsaremadeintheareaoftheengineer’spetsonalinterest,whenpoesible . . . . 1 2 3 4 S 6 20. The organintion has a performance appraisal system which ties financialgaintotechnicalcompctence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 3 4 S 21. The organintion has a tuition refund policy for continuing education . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 S 22. Our supervisor provides career counseling for the engineer . . . . . . . . . . . l 2 3 4 5 23. Oursupervisor’sperformance reviewspointouttheengineer'sstrengths andweaknessesandoffermggestionsforimprovement . . . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 6 96 1 2 3 4 S Avery Agenerally Amoreinacctn'ate Amoreaccurate Agents-ally inaccurate inaccurate than accurate than inaccurate acctn'ate statanem Wt statelnent fitment statue“ 6 A very accurate statanent Circle your rating 24. Our supervisor matches the engineer‘ 8 need for technical development with opporttmities to update knowledge and skills. . . . 1 2 3 4 5 6 25. Our supervisor does not recognize or reward an engineer‘ s effortstokeeptechnicallyup—to—date . . 1 2 3 4 5 5 26. Our supervisor does little to encourage engineers to stay current with relevant technological developments. . 1 2 3 4 5 6 27. Our supervisor holds periodic staff meetings to discuss technicalproblemsanddevelopments. . . . 1 2 3 4 5 5 28. Our supervisor provides engineers with assistance and direction when needed to solve problems faced on the job . . . 1 3 4 5 29. Our supervisor can be catmted on to help engineers develop skills 1 2 3 4 5 30. Our supervisor helps engineers set developmental goals to expand their technical knowledge and skills . 1 2 3 4 5 6 PART II: .. Opinions and IntereQS Using the scale below, rate your degree of agreement/disagreement with the following statements: '0 «Law Ut lO. l 2 3 4 5 6 Strongly Disagree Slightly Slighly Agree Strongly disagree disagree agree agree Keeping up with the latest deveIOpments is not necessary to get my job done every day . Participating in some type of updating activity is frequmtly essuitial in my field . Most engineers are very concerned about how up-to-date their knowledge and skills are . In the future. 1 would like to advance to a managerial position with more administrative duties than technical. . . . . . In the future, I would like to advance to a position with more primarily technical duties than managerial .Tome,myjobisonlyasnnllpartofwholam . 'l'hemostimportantthingsthathappentomeinvolvemypreeentjob .Stayingup-to-dateiscritical forsomeengineers,butnotforme It isveryimportantforme tokcepcurrentinmy field I am very much involved personally in my job Circle your rating 1 l l a—oh-lh—ap-a 2 2 2 NNNNNN 3 3 3 WUWUUW 4 4 4 b#&&bt~ 5 5 5 MMMMMM 6 6 6 000000 11. I3. 14. IS. 16. I7. 18. I9. 20. 21. 22. .. . l have very strong ties with my present job which would be very difficult to break 24. .Idonotparticipateinasmuchupdatingaslshould 26. 27. 28. 97 l 2 3 4 S 6 Strongly Dis-em Slightly Slick“! Arm Strongly disagree disagree agree agree It is importanttome tohave opporumitiestoeaplorenew ideasabouttechnologyor systems I really enjoy opportunities to work on challenging technical problems . In thefuture, Iwouldliketoadvancetoahigherleveltechnicalposition Iwouldspendmyowntimeandmoney taparticipateinupdatingactivitiesifthe organization did not provide such resources . . . . There are not many advantages to participating in updating activities for me, but for some it is worthwhile . . . . Tryingtostay up-to-datewiththelatesttechnologyisbasicallyawasteoftimeforme I take advantage of almost every opportunity to develop my engineering bowledge and skills I live, eat and breathe my job Mostofmyinterestsarecenteredaroundmyjob . ltrytolearnhowthecompanyissetupandnm Keeping my technical knowledge up-to-date is a major goal of nine 1 am highly motivated to participate in activities to update my technical knowledge and skills I‘m not against updating my skills, but I'm not really for it either Usually I feel detached from myjob It is primarily the organization's responsibility to nuke sure its engineers any up-to-date Coworkers would dweribe me as actively seeking opporttmities to develop and expand my engineering knowledge and skills . . . . Most of my personal life goals are job-oriented 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. I consider my job to be very central to my existmce . 1 put a lot of effort into updating my engineering knowledge and skills . I seek opportunities to learn administrative/medal procedures and skills I would like to advance to a policy-making position in magement . 1 will spend a lot of time learning new information about technologies and procedures this year. . . .Iliketobeabsorbedinmyjobmostofthetime 36. I am more inclined at to participate in updating activities than to participate . Circle your rating 1 l l hob-Mb. I-‘O-‘U-‘I-‘h-‘h-l ~ p-a 2 2 2 NNNNNNNNNNNNN NNNNNN N 3 3 3 uuuwuuuuwwuuw UUUWNU) In) 4 4 4 bbbbbbfibbbbfib bhbhbdb b MMMMMMMMMMMMM MMMMMM Vt 6 6 6 GOOO‘GO‘O‘GO‘O‘OGQ O\O\O\O\O\O\ O\ 98 Opinions and Interests, continued The followingquestionsaskaboutwhatpersonalinterestsyouhaveandhowyoufeelaboutthings. Whilethese questionsaresomewhatdifferentthantheprevimnonesyouhaveanswered, theywillhelpusunderstandhow individual opinions may be related to updating issues. Your responses are strictly confidential. so please give the first, natural answer as it comes to you. Use the (2) answer gm when you feel you have to, because neither (1) nor (3) seems right for you. Circle your answer The actual ten items cannot be shown due to c0pyright of the personality scale. 10. 99 Read each ofthe followingstatements, decidehowyou feelaboutit, andifyouagreewithastatementorfeelthatitis true about you, answer TRUE. If you disagree with a statemmt, or feel that it is not true about you, answer FALSE. Circle your answer The actual 28 items cannot be shown due to c0pyright of the personality scale. >’ 10. ll. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. I7. 18. 19. 20. 21. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. Pleasemmtothebackofthissheettoprovidesomebackgrumdinformation lOO PART III: Background Information 1. Indicate your engineering area (Aer.E., Arc.E., Ch.E., C.E., E.E., M.E., or other) and year in which you received your degree(s)- Ara tam—Comm Bachelor’s degree Master‘s degree MBA Doctorate Other (specify): 2. Check one of the following engineering ftmctions which best describes your job: Basic research and develop-at Product or systems design including applied R 8: D _ Testing, reliability assurance, quality control and standards Engineering operations and maintenance Production engineering (processing or manufacturing) Consulting 3. Years employed with present company 4. Years employed as an engineer 5. Age 6. Male Female Thank You For Your Participation The time you have taken to complete this survey is greatly appreciated. APPENDIX C: TECHNICAL UPDATING SURVEY FOR SUPERVISORS lOl Techmcal Updatrng Survey for Supemsors Overview of Survey: Technical updating develops one’s understanding of advances in scientific and technical knowledge, procedures, and applications. The Technical Updating Survey for Supervisors was developed by researchers at Michigan State University to gain some understanding of how work schedules and technical performance are related to engineers’ efforts to keep technically up-to-date. In this survey we ask you to assess several subordinate engineers on four dimensions, their: 1) work schedule, 2) technical knowledge, 3) problem recognition and definition, and 4) development of alternative solutions. Privacy Statement: Survey information is being gathered from engineers in a separate survey and from direct supervisors of the engineers such as yourself. Your responses about your subordinate engineers will be treated with strict confidence and will be used for purposes of this research project only. Your company has agreed to allow supervisors to complete this research survey, but was not involved in its development and will not be involved in its analysis. We will report only group results of the project which will be distributed to all participating organizations when they are available. Participation: It will take approximately 3 minutes to complete this survey for each subordinate engineer you assess. If you are assessing 8 of your engineers, it will take approximately 24 minutes to complete. Participation in this survey is strictly voluntary; discontinuing your participation will not result in any adverse consequences. You indicate your voluntary agreement to participate by completing and returning this questionnaire. If you have any questions about anything related to this survey, you may contact one of the researchers, Joann Sorra, at (410) 290—3276. Instructions: To complete this survey, mark your responses on the answer sheet provided for each engineer. To protect the confidentiality of your responses, 3 code number has been assigned to each engineer. Once you have completed the answer sheet for an engineer, remove the engineer '5 name so that only the code remains to identify that engineer. Only the researcher and you as the person’s supervisor will know the code assignment. Specific instructions are located at the top of each dimension of this survey and on the answer sheets. When you have completed an answer sheet for each engineer, place the survey and answer sheets in the enve10pe provided. Seal the envelope and hand it to the researcher or mail it to the address indicated. 102 Dimension 1: Work Schedule Please rate the accuracy of the following statements concerning the engineer’s typical work schedule taking into consideration how the engineer might answer the question: l 2 3 4 5 6 Avery AgmnyAmor-einacem'ate Amoreaoante Agnes-ally Avery inaccurate inaccurate than accurate than imcunte acarate noun-ate stateniem statuaeru stem stem statment stamens 1. Project plans are often changed, resulting in new deadlines and work schedules for this engineer. 2. All of the engineer’s time must be charged to project budgets with no allowance for general technical updating. 3. The job requires extensive overtime. 4. The engineer’s job allows some free time to explore new, advanced ideas. 5. The workload of this engineer is light. . 6. To get the work done, this engineer must work at a very fast pace. 7. This engineer works irregular hours. 8. It is easy for this engineer to work on updating and expanding his/her technical knowledge or skills while on the job. Dimension 2: 103 Technical Knowledge Using the scale below, rate the engineer on his or her current level of technical knowledge. Technical Knowledge. The possession of fundamental scientific, mathematical, and engineering knowledge necessary for adequate completion of a project or assignment. Numerical Scale more than an --adequate or acceptable typical amount of this factor es h’ -—Is considered the technical expert in the department or component of the organization --Uses the latest technical principles, rather than cookbook formulas, to perform tasks --Performs assignments with minimal technical assistance an adequate or --acceptable typical amount of this factor --Bas a good working knowledge of the applicable technology —-Has fundamental grasp of engineering principles -—Is aware of relevant technology advances less than an --adequate or acceptable typical amount of this factor --Is unfamiliar with the precise definitions of many technical terms --Often needs technical help from colleagues in order to complete an assignment --Has difficultly understanding basic engineering designs Dimension 3: 10h Problem Recognition and Definition Using the scale below, rate the engineer on his or her current level of ability in terms of problem recognition and definition. Problem Recognition and Qegigition. symptoms of a problem. The ability to understand the cause(s) of the ammungaLsflale more than an --adequate orxacceptable typical amount of this factor W Able to recognise the existence of a --technical problem before all the negative symptoms are apparent Able to identify a specific problem as —-being an example of a general class of problems with certain possible solutions --Goes to the location of a problem to get direct information about it --hble to distinguish between symptoms and causes of a problem an adequate or --acceptable typical amount of this factor --Accepts other people's opinions about the cause of a problem --Usually determines the cause of a problem as the project progresses less than an --adequate or acceptable typical amount of this factor --Often attacks the first symptoms of a problem rather than looking for its real causes --Often misses one or two important factors in a problem --Usually is not able to see which symptoms are related to each other and treats each symptom as if it were a separate problem Dimension 4: 105 Development of Alternative Solutions Using the scale below, rate the engineer on his or her current level of ability in terms of developing alternative solutions to problems. Development of Altegnative Solutions. The ability to create several possible solutions to a problem which are technically feasible. flamencaligals more than an --adequate or acceptable typical amount of this factor --Is always looking for a better way to do a job --Usually offers several solutions to a technical problem for management to choose from --Creates imaginative solutions to long- term problems an adequate or --acceptable typical amount of this factor --Develops a second approach to a problem only when the first approach fails --Requires prompting by the supervisor to look for more than one possible solution to a problem less than an --adequate or acceptable typical amount of this factor --Will propose and defend the first solution to come to mind --Does not consider challenging the "status quo' of a traditional approach to an engineering problem 106 Answer Sheet for the Technical Updating Survey for Superv’sors Engineer Code # The engineer whom you will assess with this answer sheet is: Remove the label with the engineer’s name when you have completed this answer sheet to pmtect the confidentiality of this information. Circle your rating for this engineer on each of the four dimensions below: Dimension 1: Work Schedule lteml.1234561tern5.12i3456 IQ U A M at ltem2. 1 Itcrné. l 2 3 4 5 6 ltem3.123456ltem7.123456 ltem4. l 2 3 4 5 6 Item8. l 2 3 4 5 6 Dimension 2: Technial meledge l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Dimension 3: Pmblem Recognition and Definition 1 3 3 4 S 6 7 8 9 Dimension 4: Development of Alternative Solutions 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Thank You For Your Participation In This Survey LIST OF REFERENCES 107 Ajzen, I. (1988). A;gitagaay_paragaalityy_aag_gaaayigg. Chicago: The Dorsey Press. Ajzen, I. & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, ag(3), 888-918. Arvey, R. D. & Neel, C. W. (1974). Testing expectancy theory predictions using behaviorally based measures of motivational effort for engineers. Journal of Vocational Bahavigr, 2: 299-310/ Arvey. R. D. & Neel, C. W. (1976). Motivation and obsolescence in engineers. gggaaggial_§a;gggg;ggy, Spring 1976, 113-120. Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Peraonnel Psychology, 23, 1-26. Birren, J. E. & Schaie, K. W. (1977). Han ook f h P h of Aging. Van Nostrand Reinhold: New York. Bollen, K. A. (lPBS). Strucgural egaatigna with lagan; variaplaa. John Wiley & Sons: New York. Carnevale, A. (1986). The learning enterprise. Trainiag ang Davalggman; Journal, 2Q(1). Carnevale, A. P., & Goldstein, H. (1983). Emplgyaa graiaing; Ita changing rola ang an analyaia 9f naw gata, Washington, D.C.: American Society for Training and Development Press. Cattell, R. B., Eber, H. W. & Tatsuoka, M. M. (1992). Hangbggk far the 16PF. Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing. Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). 1i mu i l r re 1 n rr ion analysis for the behavioral aciancaa. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Hillsdale, New Jersey. Dalton, G. W., & Thompson, P. H. (1971). Accelerating obsolescence of older engineers. Harvard Businaas Review, 2g, 57-67. Dubin, S. S. (1972). Obsolescence or lifelong education: A choice for 108 the professional. Amarigan Paychologiat, May 1972, 486-498. Dubin, S. S. (1990). Maintaining competence through updating. In S. L. Willis & S. S. Dubin (Eds.), Maingaining Prgfaaaional ggmpataage (pp. 9-43). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dubin, S. S. &.Cohen, D. M. (1970). Motivation to update from a systems approach. goarnal 9f Enginaaring Baggagign, January gg, 366-368. Dunnette, M. D., Wernimont, P., & Abrahams, A. (1964). Further research on vocational interest differences among several types of engineers. Peraonnel ang Quiganga Journal, 2;, 484-493. Evan, W. M. (1963). The problem of obsolescence of knowledge. In H.G. Kaufman (Ed.), Car r mana men : A ' o in obsolescence (pp. 5-7). New York: IEEE Press. Farr, J. L., Enscore, E. E., Dubin, S. S., & Cleveland, J., & Kozlowski, S- W- J. (1980). WWW idengifying ggnginaing agagagiga aaaga of angiaaega, Washington: National Science Foundation. Farr, J. L., Enscore, E. E., Steiner, D. D., & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (1984). Eaggora tha; inflgaaca tha gaghniga; updating 9f anginaaraI Washington: National Science Foundation. Farr, J. L., & Middlebrooks, C. L. (1990). Enhancing motivation to participate in professional development. In S. L. Willis & S. S. Dubin (Eds.), Maintaining Profassional Compatenge (pp. 9-43). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Fishbein, M. & Ajzen, I. (1975). gelief, Aggitgga, Ingangign, & Behavig;= Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Fossum, J. A., Arvey, R. D., Paradise, C. A. & Robbins, N. E. (1986). Modeling the skills obsolescence process: A psychological/economic integration. Acagamy g; Managemant Raviaw, ;;(2), 362-374. Gough, H. G. (1975). Manaa; ggr gha California Paychglogical Inveagogy. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Groth-Marnat, G. (1984). Hangbook gf Psyghglggigal Asaesament. New York: 109 Van Nostrand Reinhold. Harel, G. H. & Conen, L. K. (1982). Expectancy theory applied to the process of professional obsolescence. Publig Personnal Managemant 1’ 13-21. Journal, Hinrichs, J. R. (1971). Applying motivational concepts to updating. In S. S. Dubin (Chm.), Mogivatipn gpr Professional upgaping. Symposium presented at the International Congress of Applied Psychology, Liege, Belgium, July 1971. Hough, L. M., Eaton, N. K., Dunnette, M. D., Kamp, J. D. & McCloy, R. A. (1990). Criterion-related validities of personality constructs and the effect of response distortion on those validities. Qpprpal pf Applied Paycholggy, 1§(S), 581-595. Hults. B. M. (1986). WWW Unpublished master's thesis, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI. James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. (1984). Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias. quppal pf Appliad Psychplogy, 62(1), 85-98. Johnston, W. B. & Packer, A. B. (1987). Wogggprga ZQQQ; Wprk apg Wprkars for phe Iyanpy-firag genpppy. Indianapolis, Indiana: Hudson Institute. Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (1989). LISREL 7; A gpiga pp pha pppgram and its applicatigna (2mg ag,1, Chicago, IL: SPSS, Inc. Kanugo, R. N. (1982). Measures of job and work involvement. Joprnal of Appliad Payghplpgy, 51, 341-349. Kaufman, H. G. (1973). A critical incident study of personal characteristics associated with technical obsolescence among engineers. Studies in Peraonnal Paychology, 5(1), 63-67. Kaufman, H. G. (1974). Qpaplaaganga apg prpfaaaipnal gapee; davalppmanp. New York: Amacom. 110 Kaufman, H. G. (1975). The older technical professiona1--Continuing education for up-dating technical people. In Kaufman, H.G. (Ed.), Caren—WW (pp. 221- 224). New York: IEEE Press. Kaufman, H. G. (1978a). Continuing education and job performance: A longitudinal study. _figpppa;_p;_gpp;;ag_£ayppp;ggy, £1: 248-251. Kaufman, H. G. (1978b). Technical obsolescence: An empirical analysis of its causes and how professionals cope with it. l21§p5§§§_Apppal Cpnfarenca Progaeginga. Kopelman, R. E. (1977). Merit rewards, motivation and job performance. Researgh Managamant, May 1977, 35-37. Kozlowski, S. W. J. (1981). An integrative model of individual, organizational, and perceptual impacts on engineers’ technical competences. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University. Kozlowski, S. W; J. (1987). Technological innovation and strategic HRM: Facing the challenge of change. prap_3a§ppppa_glappipg, 1p(2), 69-79. Kozlowski, S. W. J. & Doherty, M. L. (1989). Integration of climate and leadership: Examination of a neglected issue. Qpp;pai_p§_§ppliag Psychology, 12(4), 546-553. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Farr, J. L. (1988). An integrative model of updating and performance. Hpman Perfigrmanga, ;(1), 5-29. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Hattrup, K. (1992). A disagreement about within -group agreement: Disentangling issues of consistency versus consensus. Journal pf Applied Payghplggy, 11(2), 161-167. Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Hults, B. M. (1987). An exploration of climates for technical updating and performance. Peragnna; Paypholpgy, 3Q, 539-563. Landis, F. (1969). Continuing education: Who really needs it? In H. G. Kaufman (Ed.), Care r m n m n . A i to mb in 111 obsolescence (pp. 201-220). New York: IEEE Press. Lodahl, T. M., & Kejner, M. (1963). The definition and measurement of job involvement. gppppa1_pf_ApplieQ_£§yphplpgy, 22(1), 24-33. London, M., & Bassman, E. (1989). Retraining midcareer workers for the future workplace. In I. L. Goldstein & Associates (Eds.), Training ang davalppment ip prganizapigna (pp. 333-375). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Mali, P. (1969). Measurement of obsolescence in engineering practitioners. In Kaufman (Ed.), garaa; managamant; A gpiga pp goppapging ppsolaaganga (pp. 25-35). New York: IEEE Press. Margulies, N. & Raia, A. P. (1967). Scientists, engineers, and technical obsolescence. ga11fgppiagnapagapapp_gayiay, Winter 1967. Maurer, T. J., & Tarulli, B. (1994). Investigation of perceived environment, perceived outcome, and person variables in relationship to voluntary development activity by employees. gournal of Appliad Psychology, 12(1), 3-14. McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Jpprnal of Per n 1i n ' 1 Ps h 1 , 51(1), 81-90. McEnvoy, G. M. & Cascio, W. F. (1989). Cumulative evidence of the relationship between employee age and job performance. Jpprna1 pf lied P holo , 12(1), 11-17. McPhee, R. D. & Babrow, A. (1987). Causal modeling in communication research: Use, disuse, and misuse. Cpmpppigapipp_fipppgpappa, 52, 344-366. Megargee, E. I. (1972). The QPI Hapgpggk. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Noe, R. A., & Schmitt, N. (1986). The influence of trainee attitudes on training effectiveness: Test of a model. Parapnnal Payppolpgy, 12, 497-523. Noe, R. A., & Wilk, S. (1993). Investigation of the factors that influence employees' participation in development activities. 112 Journal of Applied Psyghplogy, 1§(2), 291-302. Offerman, L. & Gowing, M. (1990). Organizations of the future: Changes and Challenges. Apapipap_2aygpp1pg;ap, g§(2). Ovesen, N. K. (1980). Continuing engineering education in the United States of America. In Niels Krebs Ovesen, Agyapga§_;p_ppa gppp1ppapg_§gpgap;pp_gf_§pg;paapa, 65-81. Published by UNESCO. Peters, L. H., & O’Connor (1980). Situational constraints and work outcomes: The influences of a frequently overlooked construct. Academy pf Manageman; Raviaw, 5(3), 391-397. Rabinowitz, S. & Hall, D. T. (1977). Organizational research on job involvement. Psyghplggigal Bp11a§in, 82(2), 265-288. Raudsepp, E. (1964). Engineers talk about obsolescence. In H. G. Kaufman (Ed.), r r m n m n - obsolesgenga (pp. 10-13). New York: IEEE Press. Rhodes, S. R. (1983). Age-related differences in work attitudes and behavior: A review and conceptual analysis. anghplpgigal Bullatin, 21(2), 328-367. Ritti, R. R. (1968). Work goals of scientists and engineers. Indpstrial Relapiona, 1, 118-131. Scott, W. R., & Meyer, J. W. (1991). The use of training programs in firms and agencies: An institutional perspective. In L.L. Cummings & B.M. Staw (Eds.), gaaaargh in QrganizapigpaL Bagavipr, 1;, 297-326. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press Inc. Schneider, B. & Dachler, P. H. (1978). A note on the stability of the job description index. Jgprnal pf Appliag Payphplggy, pg, 650- 653. Shearer, L. & Steger, J. A. (1975). Manpower obsolescence: A new definition and empirical investigation of personal variables. Academy of Managamanp Jpgrnal, 1Q, 263-275. Staw, B. M. & Ross, J. (1985). Stability in the midst of change: A dispositional approach to job attitudes. ggprnal pf Applieg 113 Psychology, 19(3), 469-480. Steiner, D. D. & Farr, J. L. (1986). Career goals, organizational reward systems and technical updating in engineers. JOprnal of Occupational Psychology, pg, 13-24. Sterns, H. L. & Doverspike, D. (1989). Aging and the Training and Learning Process. In I. L. Goldstein & Associates (Eds.). Training ang devalopmap; in grganizapipns. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass. Thompson, P., Dalton, G., & Kopelman, R. (1974). "But what have you done for me lately"--The Boss. In H.G. Kaufman (Ed.), flapper managemenp: A gpige go pompagping ppaglaagangp (pp. 49-53). New York: IEEE Press. Wallach, M. A. & Kogan, N. (1961). Aspects of the judgment and decision making: Interrelationships and changes with age. Bapayippal Sgience, a, 23-26. Zelikoff, S. B. (1969, May). On the obsolescence and retraining of engineering personnel. Training app pava1ppman; Qpprnal, 3-14.