A COMPARISON OF BLACK AND WHITE EMPLOYEES IN RACIALLY HOMOGENEOUS AND HEIEROGENEOUS COMPANIES: INTERNAL-EXTERNAL CONTROL ' EXPECTANCIES, POWERLESSNESS. INSTRUMENTAL WORK ORIENTATION. ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTIFICATION. AND TURNOVER Dissertation for the Degree of m D. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY“ SPENCER I), JORDAN 1973 » ---......).;.} III III IIIIIIIIIII 31293010732 LIBRARY Michigan State University .23; «In .I‘ .l ‘bwL‘l. .(II‘IU O IN I A ’Efi‘I'J“. Mi::(' ' 8003 (“7 BLAI. I ‘\N'.‘ W?“ 7'1; I." INKS: [QT R‘s".lkJ-J.z P “"5085 I‘NJ HZ. LLHE! 5 bit-UK. '1 L: u-LMIBti IXTERNAL LAN] RIM. k-z‘". '--.-‘~‘-‘Z~'.‘~, ""vvl'-iiZ.rZ$S.‘t}'.~.$, , 1A1. “CM! H-rwI-a I I. 'WV‘25T10W IDKN'vP 5.. "M. a" '-;-.. :~ ¢ [‘0 3-. :r .. *7“ - u'“ H] - “I. Min "Al’lf"'1'- .. :5... 1 .V 'rznrifiattcr was out; m Ilack «my ;~_'-'eo .- 1 r,‘ we." v- “panaes an -% ”\IJ‘H-m. o: lflmrnai-wzv. . . w-I '. um ,er aatv.s‘»'at.91<;.x. Ln “with”. rem ' I Hut". znpgzvvecs ;:2 -. "tI-xc‘h . .I‘ $79": .1. I “-opotatod Kalb-Ech'VJ C‘Lvilif‘a't" Hams Hammad with d filack wiry-mg m .f{\1t€:*tr~n“d I16¢1d11£ nixed) ‘ In additirn, and; missus Hun. made betwemr. Mack "W '3. *loymn Ln a wu::e—r'ta«ne-‘ {racany numb mm- 1 I éhmn Black employees :n ax. all-819a); aways-fly I I I. "M " I" I , ' 5" “team in am ill—White magany. N'.? A. Wt varilab en 11‘. the study were: poz'oonal filed-nun Ethic Ldeolcqv, inuividudl-Cftu 51*. ie “ifiability, iad1v1dm1-wllccuh lad”. ,pworluslwu in work. imtm M flout-attend identificatlan, and ”I“ ‘3 Tm: rates and nouns (or am ..\'.' J fit?” i-“— ..0 "~ 5.-. A- w-" ' ' ABSTRACT A COMPARISON OF BLACK AND WHITE EMPLOYEES IN RACIALLY HOMOGENEOUS AND HETEROGENEOUS COMPANIES: INTERNAL-EXTERNAL CONTROL EXPECTANCIES,POWERLESSNESS, INSTRUMENTAL WORK ORIENTATION, ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTIFICATION, AND TURNOVER BY Spencer D. Jordan The main purpose of the present investigation was to compare Black employees in two different companies on measures of internal—external control and job satisfaction. The attitudinal responses of Black employees in a Black- owned and operated (all-Black) company were compared with those of Black employees in a white—owned (racially mixed) company. In addition, comparisons were made between Black and white employees in a white-owned (racially mixed) com— pany, and between Black employees in an all-Black company and white employees in an all-white company. Dependent variables in the study were: personal control, Protestant Ethic ideology, individual-system blame, discrimination modifiability, individual-collective action, racial militancy, powerlessness in work, instrumental work orientation, organizational identification, and race of company owner. Turnover‘rates and reasons for termination were also examined. Spencer D. Jordan Linkage analysis of the dependent variables identified two superclusters. One cluster contained the personal control measure and work—related variables, while the other cluster was composed of the Protestant Ethic measure and race-related variables. The primary conclusion was that Black employees in an all-Black company compared with Black employees in a racially mixed company exhibited a higher sense of control over their personal life situation, had a stronger belief that success was a result of luck, fate, chance, right breaks, and knowing the right people, were more inclined to attribute responsibility for failure to social system factors, had a stronger group activist orientation in com— bating discrimination, a higher degree of control and free- dom in the work environment, a greater perception of work as having intrinsic value, a higher identification with the work organization, and a stronger belief that the race of the company owner was salient in the work milieu. In the comparison of Black and white employees in the same company, white employees had a higher sense of control over their personal life situation, a higher degree of control and freedom in the work environment, a greater perception of work as having intrinsic value, a higher identification with the work organization, and were more _'M~ _r— Spencer D. Jordan inclined to attribute responsibility for failure to individual Blacks. The comparison between Black employees in an all- Black company and white employees in an all-white company indicated that white employees had a stronger belief that success was determined by hard work, skill, effort, and ability, were more inclined to attribute responsibility for failure to individual Blacks, had a stronger individual ori- entation in combating discrimination, and felt the race of the company owner was less important. The data revealed a remarkable similarity between Black employees in an all- Black company and white employees in an all-white company concerning their attitudes toward work. Black workers, like white workers, appear to identify with their work and the organization if they are provided with plausible alterna- tives that enhance their self—esteem and hasten their social mobility. In regard to turnover, Black employees in an all-Black company terminated primarily for economic reasons (inappropriate salary/higher paying jobs) while Black employees in a racially mixed company left their orga- nization because of ambiguous personal reasons. Overall, correlations between the demographic variables (age, edu- cation, length of employment, type of job, income) and the dependent measures were insignificant. Spencer D. Jordan )0' L ~ i‘, V" #; ”EEhe importance of a favorable organizational climate .§~iuplicaticns of the continued growth of Black I“ ,;¢e7~fiéss'and ingroup commitment were discussed. ‘::_tation Committee: Dr. John H. Wakeley, Chairman Dr. Carl F. Frost Dr. James L. Phillips Dr. Michael L. Moore .31 MARISON or BLACK AND WHITE EMPLOYEES IN RACIALLY HOMOGENEOUS AND HETEROGENEOUS COMPANIES: Imam-EXTERNAL CONTROL EXPECTANCIES, POWERLESSNESS, ' INSTRUMENTAL WORK ORIENTATION, ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTIFICATION, AND TURNOVER BY Spencer D. Jordan A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Psychology 1973 1 "$14.23;; ‘~ ~. The plea-31'; 1r: :~:.;:~- WV -. assistance and anon)... ‘I- eamwt he 'r‘a unspent “@424— m. _ , .‘ _ . “Joy, to: his ran-1‘42“]; J. ”a; I . also indebtrd u. =. “TOW/lam m: ‘ china" 9:. Carl 4....“ (J, .4. '“Ol‘l exp-Brian‘s, Ir. ..«-~—.~; J ;‘ _m W‘msttuctlau- ‘zlltyj'y- ;. ; a , ‘-.,IJ-. g‘. A. ' thin! Wtfld lfiCl‘ai 5'17 }"«W:. -,¢ ‘35“. I .. I C 909.52.»: 17 thaazkfe .rrugg, Wilmkpx'l, m ”a my noon- sgo, CC.1'J§4~\‘.-\'v' e- vat no mountain a- ~14- tie—‘4‘ M ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The present research was made possible by the assistance and encouragement of many people. Although all cannot be mentioned, I must express my gratitude to those individuals who participated directly in bringing this manuscript into existence. I wish to extend my deepest appreciation to my committee chairman, Dr. John Wakeley, for his responsiveness and indefatigable aid. I am also indebted to the other members of my dissertation committee: Dr. Carl Frost, for his valuable insight and practical experience, Dr. James Phillips, for his pene- trating and constructive criticism, and Dr. Michael Moore, for his undaunted moral support. I am especially thankful to my parents, particularly Mom, who, many moons ago, convinced me that no mountain was too high to climb. Last, but far from least, my wife, Diana, deserves a special word of thanks for being patient and understand- ing. Without her support and dedication this study would have been impossible. rw TABLE OF CONTENTS , Page LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vii ‘ Chapter I. THE BLACK WORKER AND BLACK POWER: A SOCIO-ECONOMIC VIEWPOINT . . . . . . . . . . 1 I fl Occupational Metastasis and the Black - Worker . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 ’ Black Business Ownership: A Question f of Equity Capital . . . . . . 5 r The Quest for Autonomy-—Black Focus . . . . 6 2 The Content of Black Power . . . . . . . . 14 f Research Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 ; II. ALIENATION, POWERLESSNESS, INTERNAL- | EXTERNAL CONTROL: SOURCES AND CONSEQUENCES . 22 3 Alienation: A Conceptual Perspective . . . 22 Alienation and the Work Organization . . . 29 Etiology of Powerlessness and . Theoretical Suppositions . . . . 33 » Sense of Personal Control of Environment . 38 Dimension of Powerlessness . . . . . . . . 39 Powerlessness and Social Learning . . . . . 41 Unemployment and the Sense of Powerlessness . . . . . . 47 Powerlessness--Lack of Control in the I Work Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Expectancies of Control . . . . . . 50 Internal Versus External Control of Reinforcement . . . . . . . . 51 Internal-External Control: Related Concepts and Theories . . . . . .». . . . 53 " Internal-External Control: Learning, Risk-Taking, Influence, and Attitude Change . . . . . . . . . 56 \ Conceptual Definition of. Internal- \ External Control . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 \ iv -__~—— --- . _‘-—-—-—-' III. IV. rt Chapter Internal—External Control as an Intrapersonal Variable . . . . . . . . Internal-External Control: Issues of Concern . . . . . . . . . . . Multidimensional Construct of the Internal—External Control Scale . . . . MAJOR HYPOTHESES . . . . . . . . . . . . . METHODOLOGY AND CONDITIONS OF THE STUDY . . Subjects . . . . . . . . . . . . . Description of Companies . . . . . . . . Ins trmn ts I 0 I O C O O C I O D I I O I Demographic Questionnaire . Multidimensional I- E Control Scale (with emphasis on race ideology) Powerlessness in Work Index . . . . Instrumental Work Orientation Index Organizational Identification Index Employee Termination Form . . . . . Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pilot Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RESULTS 0 o s s e I I o o o o o I I I o I a General Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . Tests of Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . Comparison of Black Non-Managerial Employees in Companies (A) and (B). Comparison of Black and White Non- Managerial Employees in Company (B) Comparison of Black Non-Managerial Employees in Company (A) and White Non-Managerial Employees in Company (C) . . . . . .‘. . . . . . Ancillary Comparisons . . . . . . . . . . Race of Company Owner Index: Attitudinal Responses of Non-Managerial Employees in Companies (A), (B), and (C) . . . . Analysis of Turnover . . . . . . . . . . Association between Demographic Variables and Dependent Measures . . . . . . . . Managerial Employees . . . . . . . . . . O o I I s o s Page 59 66 72 77 100 102 105 105 108 110 110 115 117 120 122 ("7" Chapter Page VI. DISCUSSION I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 123 Summary of Results . . . . . . . . . 123 Personal Control, Powerlessness in Work, Instrumental Work Orientation, Organizational Identification (lst cluster) . . . . . . . . . . 127 Protestant Ethic Ideology, Racial Militancy, Individual-System Blame, a Individual—Collective Action, Dis- | crimination Modifiability, Race of 2 Company Owner (2nd cluster) . . . . . . . 140 1 Implications of Employee Turnover . . . . . 148 Conclusions and Recommendations for Future Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 ; LIST OF REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 1 Appendix 3 A. Demographic and Attitudinal Questionnaire . . 182 s ‘ B. Part I--Demographic Questionnaire . . . . . . 183 C. Part II--Multidimensional I-E Control Scale . 186 D. Part II—-Race of Company Owner, Powerlessness in Work, Instrumental Work Orientation, and Organizational Identification Indices . . . 191 E. Interitem Correlations and Item-Total Correlations: Scale of Powerlessness in Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193 F. Interitem Correlations and Item-Total Correlations: Scale of Instrumental Work Orientation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194 G. Employee Termination Forms . . . . . . . . . 195 H. Interitem Correlations for Non-Managerial Employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197 x I. Tables for Managerial Employees . . . . . . . 202 vi Table 1. LIST OF T Description of Companies ABLES Means and Standard Deviations of Non-Managerial Employees Measures . . . . . . . . on Dependent Linkage Analysis of Intercorrelations among Dependent Variables Multivariate Analysis of Non—Managerial Employees and Black Non-Managerial Company (B) . . . . . . Multivariate Analysis of vNon-Managerial Employees and White Non-Managerial Company (B) . . . . . . Multivariate Analysis of Non-Managerial Employees and White Non-Managerial Company (C) . . . . . . Multivariate Analysis of Non-Managerial Employees and White Non-Managerial Company (C) . . . . . . Multivariate Analysis of Non-Managerial Employees and White Non-Managerial Company (B) . . . . . . Multivariate Analysis of Non-Managerial Employees and White Non-Managerial Company (C) . . . . . . Variance of Black in Company (A) Employees in Variance of Black in Company (B) Employees in Variance of Black in Company (A) Employees in Variance of White in Company (B) Employees in Variance of Black in Company (A) Employees in Variance of Black in Company (B) Employees in s o I o s o s s I Page 91 103 104 107 109 111 113 114 116 Table 10. 11. 12. H-l. I-2. I-5. Turnover Rate, Occupational Category, Average Length of Employment, and Reason for Separation of Non—Managerial Employees Terminating over a Six-Month Period . . . . Correlations of Dependent Measures and Demographic Factors among Non—Managerial Employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . risons of Non-Managerial Employees on the Dependent Measures Used in the Study . . Interitem Correlations for Non-Managerial Employees I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Interitem Correlations for Black Non- Managerial Employees in Company A . . . . . Interitem Correlations for Black Non— Managerial Employees in Company B . . . . . Interitem Correlations for White Non- Managerial Employees in Company B . . . . . Interitem Correlations for White Non- Managerial Employees in Company C . . . . . Means and Standard Deviations of Managerial Employees on Dependent Measures . . . . . . Correlation Matrix of Dependent Variables . Multivariate Analysis of Variance of Black Managerial Employees in Company (A) and White Managerial Employees in Company (B) . Multivariate Analysis of Variance of Black Managerial Employees in Company (A) and White Managerial Employees in Company (C) . Multivariate Analysis of Variance of White Managerial Employees in Company (B) and White Managerial Employees in Company (C) . viii Page 119 121 124 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 CHAPTER I THE BLACK WORKER AND BLACK POWER: A SOCIO-ECONOMIC VIEWPOINT A substantial portion of behavioral science research in work organizations has focused on the dis- tinctions between various occupational and professional groups regarding job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction. There have been a number of studies comparing accountants and engineers (Herzberg, Mausner, and Snyderman, 1959; Wernimont, 1966), blue-collar and white-collar workers (Centers and Bugental, 1966; Friedlander, 1965, 1966), line and staff managers (Porter, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964; Porter and Lawler,.l965), managers and non—managers (Gurin, Veroff, and Feld, 1960; Porter and Lawler, 1968; Vroom, 1964, 1965), professional and non-professional employees (Lindsay, Marks and Gorlow, 1967), regular employees and temporary student workers (Rothe, 1968; Wolf, 1967), scientists and technicians (Wernimont, Toren, and Kapell, 1970), semi-skilled workers (assemblers) and engineers (Armstrong, 1971; Myers, 1964), supervisory and non- supervisory personnel (Hackman and Lawler, 1971; Ronan, 1970), and cross-cultural.investigations of blue-collar (Slocum and Topichak, 1972; Whitehill, 1964) and managerial employees (Clark and McCabe, 1970; Haire, Ghiselli, and Porter, 1966; Triandis, 1963). However, an examination of these diverse comparisons reveals that the factor of race was not investigated. The inattentiveness in comparative studies to differences in job-related attitudes between Black and white employees and between Blacks in different organizations is difficult to com- prehend. Presently, there is evidence which indicates that Blacks andwhiteS:h1the work force vary on need deficiency (Slocum and Strawser, 1972), perceived importance of hygiene factors (Bloom and Barry, 1967; Malinovsky and Barry, 1965), and leadership and followership styles (King and Bass, 1970). King and Bass assert that except in a rhetorical sense, little has been done by organizations to enhance the potentiality of Black employees satisfying their egoistic and self-actualization needs. They conclude that an accretion of empirical research is essential in the industrial setting concerning Blacks and their attitudes toward work. A diminutive amount of information exists regard- ing both the Black employee and the Black-owned and operated work organization. Thus, the primary purpose of the present research was to compare Black employees in two different companies on measures of internal-external control and job satisfaction. Do the attitudes of Black employees in a Black-owned and operated (all-Black) company differ from those of Black employees in a white- owned (racially mixed) company? In addition, for purposes of a more systematic analysis, comparisons were conducted between (a) Black and white employees in a white-owned (racially mixed) company, and (b) Black employees in an all-Black company and white employees in an all-white company. The remainder of the present chapter will address itself to the dynamics behind Black socio-economic develop- ment in the attempt to establish a basis for assuming differences between Black workers in different organiza- tions, and between Black and white employees in the work environment. Occupational Metastasis and the Black Worker In recent years our working population has under- gone considerable change in terms of its composition and occupational distributions. A major change has been evidenced by the marked improvement in the number and types of jobs held by Black Americans. Occupational up- grading has accelerated sharply, with the number of Blacks moving into better jobs reaching sizable proportions among professional and technical workers, clerical workers, craftsmen, foremen, and operatives in the steel, automobile, and other durable goods manufacturing industries (Hodge, 1969; Wolters, 1971). The metamor— phosis of the labor force has become a source of great challenge to the industrial-organizational psychologist who concerns himself with the special characteristics of Blacks which might be of relevance to organizational behavior. The increasing divergence of Blacks from menial jobs of a less significant nature to higher level responsible positions has prompted many industrial- organizational psychologists to begin examining the psycho- social variables involved as they relate to the work setting. Despite the fact that substantial gains in the occupational upgrading of the Black work force have been encouraging, they cannot camouflage the reality that Blacks still constitute a disproportionate share of the workers at the lower end of the occupational ladder and are underrepresented in the higher level occupation groups (Brimmer, 1972). An evaluation of Black employment pat- terns during the past decade reveals that the proportion of Blacks employed in white-collar manager, official, and proprietor occupation groups has remained virtually static.1 There are a myriad of reasons for this phenomena, but the most salient in the case of neophyte Black entrepreneurs appear to be (1) racial discrimina- tion, (2) educational and training opportunity disparities, and (3) the limited availability of needed working capital (Johnson and Smith, 1969). Blggk Business Ownership: A Question of Equity Capital Large, established corporations and lending insti- tutions, in many instances, have completely ignored the opportunities offered by investing in businesses owned by Blacks. They have failed to react to the exigencies among Black entrepreneurs primarily because of inadequate economic incentives. In the traditional economic view, equity investment in "perceived" marginal businesses is regarded as inadvisable use of capital, and even by high- risk, high-gain standards of venture capital, the Black community is seldom seen as a promising locale for invest- ment. This vexatious attitude has compounded the equity issue in terms of granting tax credits and concessions to various white businesses. 1Estimate was derived by comparing absolute and relative number of employed persons 16 years and over, by occupation group and race, using annual averages. Man- ower Re ort of the President. U.S. Department of Labor. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972, 173. Corporate profits of major U.S. corporations have appeared as a ready source of funds to be tapped in developing Black-owned businesses, but pressures such as profit level and stability have eliminated the cost- absorption premise. Whether or not such businesses should be financed by tax credits or other incentives for even a proportional share of job creation is open to conjecture, and can only be answered by the relative effectiveness of this financing in actually making a significant break- through into the causes of the Black economic malaise. Conceptually, however, it would appear that financial incentives for embryonic Black businesses could be justi— fied more easily and completely than similar financial support for successfully functioning, established corpora- tions, with direct government financing being the most propitious approach. The Quest for Autonomy--B1ack Focus The civil rights movement began the decade of the 1960's with a concern for voting rights and access to public facilities, but the decade ended with a rising demand for economic power and rights, particularly Black economic development. What was responsible for this pro- found diversification of strategy? Rustin (1967) contends there have been three distinct periods in the Black civil rights movement, with the first two "demanding only a philosophy of faith." The third and most recent period of civil rights activity began in the late 60's and has continued to the present. According to him, it is characterized by the analysis of society's economic structure, historical philosophy and psycho-social change, in addition to the philosophy of faith. Thus, Rustin argues that the Black man is presently concerned with economic problems only because he has moved somewhat successfully through the spectrum of permissive legal conditions, within which attention can now be focused on the obvious symptoms of his impoverished condition. With the shift in emphasis came a call not merely for more and higher paying jobs, but also a demand for economic independence, where economic institutions in the Black community would be owned or at least controlled by Black residents. Concomitant with the new emphasis was the cry for "Black Power." The implications of this maxim permeate the centrality of a number of social and psychological assumptions concerning the basis of unrest and dissatisfaction in the Black urban milieu. It should be noted that studies in the economics of development indicate that cultural and institutional changes are prerequisites for the development process in both the social and economic dimensions. One precondition I“ for development is a sense of cultural pride or identity, which can overcome traditional cultural restraints to attain high achievement and motivation in the populace. Viewed in this perspective, emphasis on "Black Power" and "Black Pride" is a coherent step in establishing preconditions for social and economic development among the Black working population. The dynamics of power and autonomy play a sig- nificant role on the fluidity of organismic processes within the Black community. Consequently, the recent surge among Blacks for self-control and self—determination can be viewed in the context of social influence and power theory. In the conception of power advanced by French and Raven (1959), the social agent exerting influence is denoted as O (e.g., person, norm, role, institution, group, or work organization), and the person(s) subjected to influence denoted as P. When an agent, 0, performs an act resulting in some change in P, O influences P. If 0 has the capability of influencing P, 0 then has power over P. In this framework, 0 can influence P because it can take some action that has significance for P's needs and values. P submits to 0's wishes because he hopes thereby to gain a reward, avoid punishment, become more like 0, do what he perceives as right, or have a more effective relationship with his environment. p’.‘ . In analyzing the processes in P (Black community) that are activated by an influence attempt of 0 (white power structure), it is important to recognize that the strength of P's needs are not the only determinant of the magnitude of force set up by an act of 0. Another deter- minant is P's belief concerning its chances of actually satisfying its needs through compliance. Presently, the strength of force induced by an act of O has been lessened or weakened, due to P's greater subjective probability that compliance will result in an unfavorable outcome. Thus, P believes that 0 actually controls appropriate resources, but will not use them in a manner favorable to P (Carmichael and Hamilton, 1967). What maintains the pre-existing state (i.e., beliefs, attitudes, cognitions) of P? The answer can be found in the summation of experiences and interactions of P with O. The most salient elements that maintain the pre-existing state can be identified as P's direct expe- rience with reality, its needs and internalized values, its defense mechanisms, states previously induced by other agents, and its reference groups. Because of these mani- festations the influence attempts of 0 have encountered avid opposition from P. In accord with Cartwright and Zander (1968), it would appear that the strength of the opposition to an 10 influence attempt is contingent upon (1) the degree of incompatibility between the state to be induced and the pre-existing state, and (2) the strength of "anchorage" to the pre-existing state. Thus, for example, when a person's judgment is at odds with those of others, he must decide whether to rely upon his own sagacity or upon that of others. It has been repeatedly shown that the more self-confidence or control a person has, the less likely he is to yield to the judgment of others (Argyris, 1964; Campbell, Dunnette, Lawler, and Weick, 1970; Coleman, Blake, and Mouton, 1958; Harvey and Rutherford, 1958; Hochbaum, 1954; Kelley and Lamb, 1957; Korman, 1971; Mausner and Bloch, 1957; Samelson, 1957). Additional studies (French, Morrison, and Levinger, 1960; Raven and French, 1958; zipf, 1960) lend support to the view that opposition tends to arise when the basis of power acquires negative value for P. Thus, P is likely to resist an influence attempt from 0 whenever the attempt is viewed by P as illegitimate, when it is coercive, and lastly, but extremely crucial, when P dislikes or "mistrusts" O. The aforementioned conceptualized processes may underlie the finding of Seashore (1954) that in a large manufacturing firm the productivity standards of cohesive work groups were high or low, depending upon the degree to which group members felt "secure in their relation to 11 the company." Presumably the company attempted to induce high standards, but the efforts encountered opposition whenever the employer-employee relationship was of a nega— tive nature. The generally “positive effects" produced by allowing people to participate in organizational deci- sions (Argyris, 1970; Elbing, 1970; Lawler and Hackman, 1969; Lewin, 1958; Likert, 1967; Marrow, Bowers, and Sea— shore, 1967; Tannenbaum, 1966) may be accounted for in part by the assumption that "meaningful participation" modifies the relationship between the individual and the organization so as to reduce the potentiality of opposi- tion. In much of the literature dealing with social influence, most theorists agree that a major base of influence is the possession, or control, of valued resources, provided these can be used to facilitate or hinder the goal attainment of another agent. Economic resources have this property, and significant attention has been directed toward an analysis of the power in society and economic institutions. Dahl (1957) contends that the "base" of an actor's power consists of "all the resources-~opportunities, acts, objects, etc.--that he can exploit in order to affect the behavior of another." He further adds: In a sense, the base is inert, passive. It must be exploited in some fashion if the behavior of 12 others is to be altered. The means or instruments of such exploitation are numerous; often they involve threats or promises to employ the base in some way, and they may involve actual use of the base (p. 203). Cartwright (1965) expands this interpretation by stating: It should be evident that the specific resources which constitute a base depend upon the nature of the agent and the social setting under considera— tion. Thus, lists of "resources" contain such diverse items as wealth, military capability, prestige, skill, information, physical strength, and even personal rewards like recognition or affection (p. 5). As mentioned previously, ownership of economic resources has been emphasized in the many analyses on the basis of power in our society. Individuals, or collec- tions of people, gain the ability to exert influence in society, according to theorists, primarily because they possess wealth and, especially, the means of production (Galbraith, 1969; Lundberg, 1969). This line of thought is further advanced by Harbrecht (1959) in his thesis that we are a "paraproprietal society" in which "a man's relationship to things—-material wealth--no longer deter- mines his place in society (as it did in a strong pro— prietary system) but his place in society now determines his relationship to things." In other words, an indi- vidual gains the ability to exercise influence by occupy— ing a position which controls economic resources.2 2This analysis of power is mirrored in our society by treatments of power within organizations which attrib- ute the power of an office or position to its control over 13 Many psychologically oriented theorists have also maintained that various human needs require valu- able resources, other than the economic ones, which an agent may control. As a result, the concept of resource is given a wide range of referents. Contemporary indus- trialrorganizational psychologists tend to view the role of a supervisor (i.e., his ability to influence) in a much broader perspective than that of simply providing or negating economic rewards. It has been illustrated that employees in an organization have a multiplicity of needs, in addition to economic necessities, which may be satisfied or frustrated by the supervisor (Fleishman and Harris, 1962; Ghiselli, 1963; Greenwood and McNamara, 1969; Kipnis, 1960; Korman, 1966; Rosen, 1969). As Likert (1961) indicates, "Each of us wants appreciation, recognition, influence, a feeling of accomplishment, and a feeling that people who are important to us believe in us and respect us." McGregor (1960), in his analysis of the management of formal organizations, proposes that a manager's implicit "theory of human nature" (i.e., resources valued by the members. Thus, it is said that a supervisor can obtain compliance with his directives because his position gives him the ability to reward or punish lower level employees by controlling promotions, salary increases, terminations of employment or suspen- sions. It is frequently argued that union contracts which remove these matters from the control of the super- visor thereby undermine his ability to direct behavior toward the accomplishment of organizational objectives. 14 Theory X, Theory Y) basically affects the method of influence he utilizes. Therefore, a manager who believes that employees are "interested in only money" will tend to employ financial incentives; one who thinks employees "respond only to the big stick" will rely on coercion; and one who sees employees as "basically reasonable" will tend to use persuasion. McGregor's hypothesis seems rational in that an individual's philosophy of human nature most likely affects his expectations concerning the probable success of various methods of influence and thereby his choice of method.3 The Content of Black Power The psychological basis for Black Power emanates from a common set of experiences of the group and a common mode of group behavior with respect to these experiences. The most pervasive experience of Black people has been the difficulty of survival under a set of socially pre- scribed rules that relegated Black people to marginal jobs 3The concept of "intention" concerning the influ- , encing agent has been given an ambiguous status in social influence theory, primarily because various theorists Object to its use because of its "subjective nature." However, there is significant doubt it can be avoided in the contemporary social setting. Blauner (1970) contends that the Black community views the socio-political system as operating consciously against its "vested interest," whereby, institutional discrimination enhances the privi- leges of whites, while dehydrating the efforts of indige— nous ghetto residents. Lfllfl? 15 and marginal economic opportunities. It is therefore understandable that this type of experience elicited a psychological defense mechanism of passivity and docility. Presently, the mass of the Black populace has sensed that the individualistic and personalistic approach of submis- siveness is no longer vital to group survival. Thus, the defense mechanism for survival is shifting from the per- sonalistic approach to the group approach of Black Power, a major element of which is group power for survival in a social system of racial grouping and power blocs. The underlying basis for the Black Power approach is personi- fied in the concepts of Black self-determination and Black identity. Therefore, these are the cohesive elements that are rooted in the Black experience and designed as the mainspring for group action and group recognition. "Black Power" has an amorphous conceptual defini- tion. It carries a different connotative impulse to various individuals and indeed, being essentially an emo- tional concept, can have a divergent meaning to the same individual on differing occasions. It is impractical to attribute its denotation to any single individual or organization; therefore, the researcher should look beyond personal styles, verbal flourishes and the hysteria of the mass media to honestly assess its implications.“ “Scholars and social commentators, Black and white alike, disagree in interpreting the contemporary Black 16 The call for Black Power unites a number of varied movements and tendencies. Though few clear-cut pro— grams have yet emerged, the most provocative emphasis seems to be the movement for economic control of the Black community. Black leaders and organizations are increasingly concerned with owning and controlling those institutions that exist within or impinge upon their community. There is also a significant concern for having resources outside the parameter of the com— munity which can help facilitate internal socio- economic processes. It is appropriate to understand that the call for Black Power is in reality a symptom of "Black Powerlessness." The Kerner Report (1968) contains one statement which is particularly pertinent in character— izing the social context of the Black community. It expounds the situation by indicating: Finally, many Negroes have come to believe that they are being exploited politically and economi- cally by the white "power structure." Negroes, like people in poverty everywhere, in fact lack the channels of communication, influence and appeal that traditionally have been available to ethnic minorities within the city and which Power movement. The issues concern whether this is a new development in Black protest or an old tendency revised; whether the movement is radical, revolutionary, reform- ist, or conservative; and whether this orientation is unique to Black Americans or essentially a Black parallel to other ethnic group strategies for collective mobility. For an introspective discussion of Black Power, see Cruse (1968, pp. 193-258). 17 enabled them--unburdened by color--to scale the walls of the white ghettos in an earlier era. The frustrations of powerlessness have led some to the conviction that there is no effective alternative to violence as a means of expression and redress, as a way of "moving the system." More generally, the result is alienation and hostility toward the institutions of law and government and the white society which controls them. This is reflected in the reach toward racial consciousness and solidarity reflected in the slogan "Black Power." These facts have com— bined to inspire a new mood among Negroes, par— ticularly among the young. Self—esteem and enhanced racial pride are replacing apathy and submission to "the system" (p. 205). Clark (1964) adds a further dimension by cogently describing the relationship between complex socio- economic conditions and powerlessness. He emphasizes: Ghettos are the consequence of the imposition of external power and the institutionalization of powerlessness. In this respect, they are in fact social, political, educational, and above all-- economic colonies. . . . The concrete indications of the powerlessness aspect of the American urban ghetto are to be found in deteriorated housing, overcrowdedness, infant mortality, and high dis- ease rates. . . . The community can best be described in terms of the analogy of a powerless colony. . . . Its economy is dominated by small businesseses which are largely owned by absentee owners. . . . Given the fact of objective deterio- ration and physical ugliness that characterize so much of the ghetto, the chances for the dominance of the psychological negatives are increased. In fact, the psychological characteristics of the ghetto community determine its atmosphere and tend to perpetuate themselves through cumulative dete- rioration and isolation. This self-perpetuating community pathology provides the basis which reinforces the negative self-image of the individ- uals and confirms their feeling and the fact of their impotence (p. 12). As the aforementioned statements indicate, Black Powerlessness is a pervasive element in the general 18 typography of the Black community.5 It is seen as the result of a myriad of intricate socio-economic processes which impose a network of structural relationships that call for dependency, subordination, and self-denigration (Rosenberg, 1968). However, Lasch (1968) asserts that there has been a growing rejection of paternalistic pro- grams by Black community residents, and views the assimilation of collective economic and political power as having a positive and direct bearing on feelings of self-control and self-esteem. Furthermore, Innis (1969) contends that it is no longer palatable for ghetto resi- dents to "only" procure jobs, housing, and better income, but it is "how" they were obtained, and "who" will ulti- mately control them. sThe subordinate member of a power relationship confronts a situation containing many potential incon— veniences, disadvantages, and threats. If 0 has power over P, it follows by definition that O can bring about changes in P. When P interacts with 0, it is O's inter— ests that control the interaction. Interaction under these conditions is likely to produce frustrations for P and make him feel that his freedom of action is cur- tailed. Therefore, the mere existence of a power rela- tionship poses a threat to P, and he should be expected to seek ways of defending himself against it. There are long term effects on the person who is consistently subs jected to power by others. The literature contains sug- gestions that he will tend to become apathetic, pessi- mistic, submissive, or alienated. But it also contains indications he will become hostile, aggressive, or rebellious against authority. 19 Research Objectives During the past five years there has been a pronounced dilation in the number of Black-owned firms, creating a palpable image of Black economic development (Rose, 1971). However, despite this augmentation, researchers have yet to present systematic and inte- grated analyses of Black-owned organizations. This is not to imply that such companies should be viewed in a "deficit" model conception, but positive factors should be identified which will help facilitate meaningful intra— organizational and interorganizational processes. To date, there exists a paucity of empirical research engrossing the Black-owned enterprise; however, with the advent of an increasing number of Black-owned companies, research possibilities are now feasible. This may prove useful in comparing differences and similarities in the "organizational environment" (i.e., among Black- and white-owned firms), while measuring and identifying methods or procedures used by employers in relationship to their employees. Cross-communication and information sharing among such firms may evolve from these efforts, enhancing the viability of germinal enterprises in terms of their market and competitive status. Such analyses may also reveal that more neoteric approaches are appli- cable in the areas of supervision, training and v w." 20 development, and personnel selection. Without viable research in this area, the industrial-organizational psychologist can only theorize the extent of its mag- nitude, with answers to critical problems being couched in speculation and uncertainty. In addition to this descriptive concern, it is apparent that various questions have an intriguing quantitative and qualitative interest to the industrial- organizational psychologist. For example, do Black employees in Black-owned companies differ in their attitudes toward work, as compared to Black and white employees in white-owned companies in the same industry? Do Black employees in Black-owned companies have similar perceptions of power, control, and influence, as compared to Black and white employees in white-owned companies in the same industry? Also, do Black employees in Black- owned enterprises differ in terms of their identification with organizational goals and objectives, as compared to Black and white employees in white-owned enterprises in the same industry? As can be seen, these are only a few of the significant matters of concern that need to be analyzed and interpreted by the researcher. Consequently, the aim of the present study was to help fill this re- search gap by examining three organizations in the same industry with race of owner and race of employees varied. 21 The present effort serves the purpose of providing insight into the organizational milieu of the Black-owned and operated work organization. The informa- tion gained can be useful in at least two respects: First, it represents an attempt to expand the existing body of knowledge relating to internal-external control, job satisfaction, communication, and leadership. Second, the information may be put to some practical use by managers and businessmen for purposes of enhancing organi- zational effectiveness. The following chapter presents a review of the literature that examines: (l) the theoretical framework of alienation, powerlessness, and internal-external con- trol; (2) the relationship of the aforementioned to the individual in the work organization. CHAPTER II ALIENATION, POWERLESSNESS, INTERNAL- EXTERNAL CONTROL: SOURCES AND CONSEQUENCES Alienation: A Conceptual Perspective The concept of alienation has been a pervasive theme throughout the literature in analyses of our con- temporary society. Various theorists and social scien- tists have utilized the concept as a vehicle for describing and interpreting particular aspects of the behavior of man. As a perspective, alienation has a diversity of meanings in both the forms that it may take and the social levels at which it may be studied. Alienation has been correlated with, and used to explain a variety of social problems such as apathy (Clark, 1955; Kahler, 1957; Keniston, 1960, 1969), authoritarianism and conformity (Adorno gt_al., 1950; Christie and Cook, 1958; Cloward, 1959; Cohen, 1959; Dean, 1961; Fromm, 1941; Jaco, 1954; Marx, 1932; Riesman, 1953; Roberts and Rokeach, 1956; Srole, 1951), cynicism (Merton, 1946), juvenile delinquency (Douvan and Gold, 1966; Gold, 1967; Jaffe, 22 23 1963; Marwell, 1966; Short and Strodtbeck, 1965), political apathy (Olsen, 1965; Rosenberg, 1951; Seeman, 1966a; Silvern and Nakamura, 1971; Templeton, 1966), prejudice and racism (Blauner, 1970; Jones, 1972; Marx, 1970; Young, 1969), suicide (Durkheim, 1951; Powell, 1958; Srole, 1956), and violence (Bienen, 1968; Caplan and Paige, 1968b; Forward and Williams, 1970; Miller, 1962; Ransford, 1968; Schlesinger, 1968; Wolfgang and Ferracutti, 1967; Wright, 1968). Alienation, while variously defined, is most often conceptualized as a syndrome which refers to an indi- vidual's perception of other people as hypocritical, selfish and uncaring, and the social order as oppressive and impersonal. Within a sociological framework, cultural conflict and social change are regarded as the major determinants of alienation. Merton (1949), for example, hypothesizes that alienation is a symptom of dissociation between culturally prescribed aspirations and socially structured avenues for realizing these aspirations. From a psychological perspective, alienation is viewed as being deeply rooted in the individual's developmental history, with origins in early prototypical experiences such as separation anxiety (Keniston, 1963), basic mis- trust (Erikson, 1959, 1968), and loss of relatedness (Fromm, 1941, 1955). Both positions, however, regardless 24 of differences concerning etiology, concur that the experience of alienation will give rise to particular interpretations of social institutions and events, and be manifested in a variety of attitudes and behavior patterns. Despite the abundance of theoretical speculation, a clear consensus does not exist as to the meaning of alienation. In the social science literature there are at least three common meanings of alienation, represent- ing three distinct phenomena. Thus, the conceptual sense of the term demands exploration. "Not part of" lies at the core of the meaning of alienation, etymologically and connotatively, thereby, focusing on the question-—"not part of what?" In this sense, there are essentially three answers, each with its own history and direction. The first meaning of alienation implies that the individual is not a part of various social and cultural regulating systems, which give structure and meaning to existence, and enable him to realize his potential for humanity. Regulating is the key term in this formulation, for it qualifies the sense in which the individual is "not part of," but more explicitly, is "not influenced by" the social system. Alienation as "not influenced by" is the thread of meaning common to Durkheim (1951), Keniston (1960, 1965, 1969), Merton (1957), and Srole (1956). 25 Anomie, a term extensively developed by Durkheim, is an integral part of the "not influenced by" definition. Describing "anomie" by its opposite, Durkheim asserts: Men must receive the law of justice from an authority they can respect, to which they yield spontaneously. Either directly and as a whole, or through the agency of one of its organs, society alone can play this moderating role; for it is only moral power superior to the individual, the authority of which he accepts. It alone has the power necessary to stipulate law and to set the point beyond which the passions must not go (p. 249). In the aforementioned conceptualization, anomie (normlessness) develops when individual behavior is no longer guided by societal norms. This situation can evolve from a breakdown of social norms and values, or because of a feeling on the part of the individual that the existing norms are incomprehensible. The latter case might occur, for instance, when an individual alters his social status and finds a new normative system with which to contend (Davis, 1970). In the extreme case adjustment takes the form of suicide, or in Durkheim's syntax "anomic suicide." A second meaning of alienation is that the indi- vidual is "not part of himself." He develops a feeling or sense of "self-estrangement," becoming alienated while carrying out unfulfilling or uncreative work. Thus, "self-estrangement" is the dissociation that occurs between unrewarding activity and the individual. Hegel L-.- 26 (1899) describes it as mind alienated "from its own essence"; Marx (1959) as "alienation of self—consciousness"; and Fromm (1941, 1955) as "man alienated from himself." A third meaning of alienation is the converse of the first. It has to do, not with the effect of the environment on the person, but with his effect, or lack of effect, on the environment. Therefore, the concept of "not able to influence" (powerlessness) is salient in this meaning. Alienation as powerlessness can be readily traced to the writings of Marx (Fromm, 1971). The worker, in Marx's view, was alienated to the extent that he had been denied the power necessary to control the economic means of production. He was, in short, being exploited by the ruling class, and the result was to have led inevitably to revolution and the replacement of the capi- talistic system with socialism and eventually communism. Specifically, Marx's chief concern lies with worker alienation, which is dependent on the expropriation of the means of production by the ruling entrepreneurs. His interest in the powerlessness of the worker flowed from his solicitude involving the consequences of alienation in the work place, i.e., the alienation of man from him- self and other men, and the exploitation and degradation of workers subjected to the economic system (Meszaros, 1970). 27 Marx, in the opinion of the writer, offers the industrial-organizational psychologist a succinct expla- nation of the alienated worker. A worker, he relates, is alienated when: . . . the work is external to the worker, it is not part of his nature; and consequently, he does not fulfill himself in his work but denies him- self, has a feeling of misery rather than well- being, does not develop freely his mental and physical energies but is physically exhausted and mentally debased (Fromm, 1971, p. 98). Alienation in the form of powerlessness is a con- cept that Max Weber also considered. However, Weber submits a more global application than Marx, and expands its interpretation beyond the periphery of the industrial setting. Gerth and Mills (1946) comment: Marx's emphasis upon the wage worker as being "separated" from the means of production becomes, in Weber's perspective, merely one special case of a universal trend. The modern soldier is equally "separated" from the means of violence; the scientist from the means of inquiry, and the civil servant from the means of administration (p. 50). Social scientists, in recent years, have shown an increasing interest in alienation as an empirically measurable concept, but remain stymied by contradictions and inconsistencies in the assessment of its generality and specificity. There still persists a lack of uni- versal agreement as to whether alienation is a unidimen- sional or multidimensional phenomenon; however, empirical research conducted by Neal and Rettig (1967) suggests ;‘i _ 28 alienation can be seen as either unidimensional or multidimensional depending on one's level of analysis. Seeman (1959) extirpated five categories or variants of alienation from the sociological literature.6 Seeman maintains that to be alienated means to be characterized by one (or several) of the following: (1) a sense of powerlessness, a low expectancy that one's behavior can control the occurrence of personal and social rewards; (2) a sense of meaninglessness, the lack of a clear belief system by which to interpret and judge behavioral outcomes; (3) a sense of normlessness, a break- down in the regulatory power of social norms, and a high expectancy that socially unapproved behavior is necessary to achieve desired goals; (4) value isolation (cultural estrangement), a feeling of apartness from society, expressed by rejecting the commonly held values it attaches to its belief systems; (5) self-estrangement, the individual's sense of a discrepancy between his ideal and actual self-image, and failure to satisfy certain postulated human needs. Seeman (1971a) adds a sixth dis- tinct variant to the concept of alienation. He refers to sSeeman was not the first researcher to perceive alienation as a multidimensional concept. See Anthony Davids, "Generality and Consistency of Relations Between the Alienation Syndrome and Cognitive Processes," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1955, 51, 61-67. (3 29 it as social isolation, whereby the individual has a low expectancy for inclusion and social acceptance, with his behavior expressed typically in feelings of rejection or repudiation. Seeman argues for the independence of these six variants with the recognition that they may be related under certain conditions. His argument for independence rests on the assumption that, e.g., a per— son may feel powerless in a given role but still assign high reward value to the goals of the system of which he is a part (Shepard, 1968). According to Seeman, the most conclusive evidence about the meaning of these types of alienation concerns the sense of powerlessness. Alienation and the Work Organization Alienation from work in the Marxian sense is an undeviating concept. Productive work was seen as a basic and essential ingredient of human nature, i.e., an inherent human need. However, the advent of the indus- trial revolution brought about certain changes in the nature of work, the effect of which was to deny the worker a means to the satisfaction of these needs. The craftsman was replaced by the machine tender, and control was then vested in the machine. As a consequence, the individual worker began to experience intense feelings of alienation. According to Blauner (1964), alienation 30 in the form of powerlessness occurs when the worker is treated as an object and is dominated and controlled by other people, or a technological system of production, in such a way that he cannot alter the condition. He further remarks: The machine system now controlled the pace of the work and restricted the employees' free movements. Factory technology dominated the workers, whose alienation was expressed in their relative power- lessness before the machine system (p. 2). Currently, the theoretical basis for alienation can be found in the more general theory of bureaucracy. Specifically, that is, the majority of organizational theorists tend to discern the basic causes of alientation in the various features or attributes of the contemporary large scale bureaucratic organization. The more common or potential causes of alientation are such organizational lineaments as the assembly line (Blauner, 1969; Chinoy, 1955; Susman, 1972; Turner and Lawrence, 1965), the loca- tion of the plant (Hulin and Blood, 1969), superior- subordinate relationships (Pearlin, 1962), and centrali- zation and formalization (Aiken and Hage, 1966). Conse- quently, it appears that any condition within the bureaucratic structure which serves to extricate from the individual the power to control his own activities is, or can be, a potential source of alienation. Regardless of the causes, alienation once estab- lished can have serious ramifications for both the 31 organization and the individual. In his discussion of the auto worker, Blauner (1964) mentions such problems as monotony, personal stagnation, and an instrumental attitude in which security and high pay are the only positive features of the job. He further indicates that the older worker adapts psychologically to such alienating conditions through "fantasy and the projection of his own frustrated ambitions on his children," while younger workers tended to quit more regularly and seek employment elsewhere. It has been argued that alienation is no longer a problem or potential problem because the "central life interest" of the worker has shifted from the job to other pursuits, primarily related to leisure time (Dubin, 1956). Presthus (1962), for instance, believes that the individual accommodates himself to alientating conditions by becoming indifferent toward the organization while at the same time developing a sense of identification with external interests. He maintains: The indifferents are those who have come to terms with their work environment by withdrawal and by a redirection of their interests toward off the job satisfactions. They have been alienated by the work itself, which has often been downgraded by machine processing and by assembly line methods (p. 208). To some extent, this contention is supported by such trends as a shorter work week, earlier retirements, 32 and increased vacation time. Nevertheless, as Blauner points out, those who embrace the leisure argument tend to discount the fact that "work remains the single most important life activity for most people in terms of time and energy, and the quality of one's work life affects the quality of one's leisure, family relations, and basic self-feelings" (1964, pp. 183-184). Further support for this assertion can be readily found in the widely held notion of integrating the needs of the individual with the goals of the organization. This approach, perhaps best exemplified by such themes as "job enrichment and participation," stands in clear recognition of the many problems commonly associated with alienation from the work organization (Denhardt, 1971). It is recognized that all workers are not alien- ated from the work organization, and among those who are, differences in degree can certainly be found. How- ever, as the aforementioned conspectus would suggest, alienation from the work organization, particularly in the sense of powerlessness, is sufficiently widespread throughout the industrial milieu to justify its classifi- cation as a significant contemporary problem. 33 Etiology of Powerlessness and Theoretical Suppositions The theoretical model advanced by Etzioni (1969) to describe the nature of power relationships within complex organizations lends itself logically to the fol- lowing analysis of the origins of powerlessness. Etzioni views compliance as the pivotal structural variable in elucidating the relationship between those who have power and those over whom power is exercised. In this context, there are two parties to a compliance relationship, the actor who exercises power, and the actor over whom power is expressed; with those exercising power referred to as "elites" (e.g., chairman, board of trustees, employers, managers, supervisors, and staff), and those over whom power is exercised being referred to as "lower partici- pants" (e.g., employees, inmates, clients, members, rank and file). Etzioni posits three types of compliance adapta- tions that the subordinate actor can make in response to the authority of the higher power actor. Specifically, the subordinate actor can consider the controlling behaviors as: (l) alienative or unjust because they are contrary to the actor's own beliefs and perceived self- interests, prompting an intense negative orientation; (2) calculative, due to remuneration or reward in exchange 34 for compliance, producing either a negative or positive orientation of low intensity, or (3) moral, because they are consistent with the actor's own values and therefore regarded as legitimate, instigating a positive orientation of high intensity. Utilizing these compliance criteria, Etzioni proceeds to classify organizations as coercive, remunerative (calculative), or normative, depending on the modal compliance pattern that characterizes each type of organization. Coercive organizations are those in which the capacity to control rests upon the application of force, threat of force, or control over the supply of physical necessities and functions. Calculative organi- zations are those in which the compliance relationships are based on mutual self-interest (e.g., in industry or other organizations where the principal reason for com- plying is wages, fringe benefits, commissions, stock options, or bonuses). Finally, normative organizations are those in which the relationship between elites and lower participants is based on shared values, for example, religious and political organizations. Etzioni maintains that most organizations employ all three compliance criteria, but the degree to which they rely on each differs from organization to organization. The central assumption that underlies the present research effort is that Blacks, particularly the mass of 35 Black workers, are chronically in the position of being the "lower participants" in an all-encompassing network of coercive systems and organizations. While the "elites" who operate these systems view their organizations as calculative or normative, many Black employees view them as coercive (Purcell and Cavanaugh, 1972). If this sup- position is warranted, a more concentrated effort in the direction of improved job status might alter the coercive perception and elevate self-esteem. Pinkney (1969) concludes that the various public systems such as schools, public welfare, health, and police depend almost exclusively on threats, negative sanctions, punitive policies, and direct force to achieve their avowed directives in relation to the Black urban poor. The consequence is that compliance is alienative, i.e., the goals, policies, and practices of the various systems are viewed as unjust and contrary to the perceived self-interests of Blacks. TherefOre, the long range result of this structured compliance adaptation has been the ingraining of attitudes of impuissance and self- deprecation. The following examples are illustrative of the compliance pattern. In the educational system, many Blacks have virtually no influence over various policies and practices. For instance, according to the Kerner Report (1968), many 36 years after the court decision of 1954, on school desegregation, schools are more segregated than ever. Despite protests, demonstrations, and even violence, the "elites" of many school systems continue to maintain autocratic control, particularly at the local level, where many attempts by parent groups to have a voice in school policy and decision-making have been met with intransigence on the part of school boards and adminis- trators (Glazer, 1966). Furthermore, the relationship between teachers and students in Black community schools has been cited as somewhat analogous to the compliance relationships inside custodial institutions (Hentoff, 1966; Kozol, 1967). This picture contrasts sharply with the high influence that pertinacious white suburban parents are able to exert on their school systems. Thus, for many white middle class students, the school system is basically perceived as normative or calculative, with the goals of a college education and the "good life" generally being shared by the elites and lower participants in a suburban school system (Sexton, 1966). However, this conception does not necessarily hold for many Blacks, particularly when access to the rewards of society is hindered or denied. In public housing, the threat of eviction and prosecution are ubiquitous elements of danger to the Black 37 low income tenant. Many Black residents have an aversion toward requesting maintenance service for fear the housing manager will consider them obstinate and evict them. Also, various leases are written in such a manner as to render ultimate control and power to the management, e.g., tenants are obliged to maintain their apartments and surroundings in a prescribed manner, while management may have considerable discretion in the performance of its maintenance responsibilities. As a result of this pro- hibitive and acrimonious type of administration, many Black tenants tend to respond to management in an alienated fashion, often expressing their hostility by vandalizing property in the housing complex (Schorr, 1969). The preceding synopsis illustrated some salient features of the coercive nature of public systems which constantly impinge upon the life of the Black ghetto resident. The critical factors in each system that elicit the alienative compliance pattern are (1) the tOtal dependence of many Blacks on these systems for survival and well-being, and (2) the threat of force or punishment that these systems employ in order to maintain subordina- tion. The same pattern of coercion and compliance, to a large extent, also applies to organizations and inter- personal interactions in the private sector. Slum land- lords, in many instances, are able to procure exorbitant 38 rents from tenants because of the restricted housing market for Black consumers. In addition, merchants are able to charge egregious prices for inferior products because low income Blacks lack the necessary means to travel and do comparative shopping (Caplovitz, 1969). The reality dimension of the situation is that, when people have no plausible alternatives available to them, they are compelled to assume subordinate roles toward those on whom they are totally dependent. Sense of Personal Control of Environment Under various rubrics, and from diverse orienta- tions, investigators have concerned themselves with man's ability to control his personal environment. Concepts such as competence (White, 1959), efficacy (Piaget, 1954), helplessness (Mowrer and Viek, 1948), hopelessness (Richter, 1959), and powerlessness (Seeman, 1959), have all been utilized in one way or another to describe the degree to which an individual is able to control the important events occurring in his life space. Recently, an increasing theme among social scientists has been about man's decreasing ability to cope with his environ- ment. This problem centers around the "quality of living" and comprises the rationale behind the current drive for individual participation and self-determination (Tiffany, Cowan, and Tiffany, 1970). 39 Indeed, the very concept of power and the professed lack of it by many segments of the population is held accountable for many of the problems confronting society. Student unrest, racial confrontations, prison riots, and church upheavals are often accompanied by cries for more power. Only recently have the effects of the systematic denial of a minority group's right to exercise mastery and autonomy been recognized, and this denial has formed the basis for current movements such as Black, Brown, and Red Power.7 Dimension of Powerlessness Seeman (1959) indicates that powerlessness, as a variant of alienation, can be defined as the perception (i.e., expectancy or probability) held by the individual that his own behavior cannot determine the occurrence of the outcomes, or reinforcements, he seeks. In a similar fashion, powerlessness can also refer to the individual's sense of no personal control over rewards and reinforce- ments in contrast to his sense that rewards and rein- forcements are controlled by forces outside of himself, and may occur independently of his own activities. Seaman's idea of "expectancies" refers to "sub- jective probabilities" held by the individual that he will 7Pertains to the demand for increased social and economic independence among Blacks, Chicanos, and Indians. 40 be unable to determine or control his destiny or fate. He describes this conception of powerlessness as being predicated on the social and psychological views held by the individual, and does not treat it from the standpoint of the objective conditions in society.8 Seeman does not mean to imply, however, that these conditions should be ignored in research dealing with powerlessness. Instead, he believes them to be relevant, for example, in deter- mining the degree of realism involved in the individual's response to his situation. He maintains that objective conditions of the situation should be treated like any other situational aspect of behavior, that is, they should be "analyzed, measured, ignored, experimentally controlled or varied, as the research question demands." In addition, Seeman indicates that his view of powerlessness does not take into consideration the frustra- tion an individual may feel as a consequence of the 8Seeman explains that an individual's expectancy for control of events should be clearly distinguished from an observer's judgment of an objective situation of powerlessness, the observer's judgment of that situation against some ethical standard, and the individual's sense of a discrepancy between his expectations for control and his desire for control. This is in direct contrast to Clark (1959), who contends that a measure of alienation, in the sense of powerlessness, must be a measure of the discrepancy between the power man believes he has and what he believes he should have--his estrangement from his rightful role. In this conception, a sense of discrepancy is thought to precede the development of powerlessness. Alienation, therefore for Clark, involves separation from a valued resource. 41 discrepancy between the control he may expect and the degree of control he desires; therefore, it takes no direct account of the value the individual places on control. In establishing a theoretical perspective, it should be remembered that Seaman's use of powerlessness as an expectancy is closely related to Rotter's (1966) idea of internal versus external control of reinforcements. The latter concept refers to the individual's sense of personal control over the reinforcement situation as con- trasted with his View that the occurrence of reinforce- ments is dependent upon external conditions such as fate, chance, luck, or manipulation of others. Powerlessness and Social Learning During the last decade, a number of research studies (Neal and Seeman, 1964; Olsen, 1965; Seeman, 1963, 1966a, 1966b, 1967a, 1967b, 1971a, 1971b; Seeman and Evans, 1962; Silvern and Nakamura, 1971; Templeton, 1966; Thompson and Horton, 1962) have indicated that a feeling of powerlessness is inversely related to attempts of people to control the environmental factors in their life situations, that is, a high feeling of powerlessness is related to a low level of effort toward manipulating situations. Other findings also denote that a sense of powerlessness is an important variable in predicting 42 behavioral and attitudinal patterns among "disadvantaged" Blacks (Bullough, 1967; Dubey, 1969, 1971; Gordon, 1965; Gore and Rotter, 1963; Gottesfeld and Dozier, 1966; Rans- ford, 1968; Rosenberg, 1968; Strickland, 1965). Seeman and Evans (1962) investigated the behavior of patients in a tuberculosis hospital in relation to: (1) the extent patients knew about their condition; (2) how much they questioned doctors and nurses about their condition, and (3) how satisfied they were with the doctor's reports of their progress. As hypothesized, they found that patients who perceived a greater degree of con- trol over events affecting them (i.e., those who measured low on a powerlessness scale) knew more about their con- ditions, asked more questions of the doctors and nurses, and were less satisfied with the amount of information they were receiving from the hospital personnel. Following this research effort, Seeman (1963) con- ducted an experiment involving reformatory inmates in an attempt to determine if a relationship existed between powerlessness and social learning relating to: (1) type of administrative control in the reformatory; (2) parole, and (3) economic factors that would affect inmates after leaving the reformatory. Seeman found a significant rela- tionship, independent of intelligence, between a low feeling of powerlessness and a high degree of knowledge concerning relevant information. 43 A survey by Dubey, Grant, and Thompson (1969) revealed that in low income areas, parents of retarded children who displayed high feelings of powerlessness knew much less about the agencies and services available to their children than parents who displayed a low sense of powerlessness. Moreover, Gottesfeld and Dozier (1966) reported that persons who had undergone training in com- munity organization development displayed a lower sense of powerlessness than did those who had not been exposed to community organization programs. The findings indi- cated that when the poor assume new roles of influence and responsibility they become more hopeful and ambitious about what they can do in their own behalf. Gore and Rotter (1963) examined the relationship between feelings of powerlessness among students of a southern Black college and their engagement in militant civil rights activities. A comparison was made between those who were willing to "actively" participate in civil rights demonstrations, and those who were only willing to attend a rally, or not participate at all. The results illustrated a clear difference between the orthogonal groups, with students having low feelings of powerless- ness being more actively oriented, whereas those with high feelings of powerlessness were more passively oriented. The willingness of many of the Black students 44 to engage in aggressive activity appears to have been related to their own generalized expectancy that their expended efforts would have a noticeable impact and effect. A similar study was performed by Strickland (1965), in which Black activists and non-activists in civil rights movements were analyzed in relation to their feelings of powerlessness. The subjects were matched according to education and socio-economic status. Not surprisingly, it was found that there were signifi- cant differences between high and low powerlessness subjects, with the high powerlessness subjects being non- activists and the low powerlessness subjects being activists. In another conceptual framework, Dubey (1969) examined two postulates. The first concerned the rela- tionship of powerlessness and affiliative orientation (i.e., identification with group goals), while the second was concerned with the relationship of powerlessness and violent attitudes. He predicted that "disadvantaged" Blacks with low feelings of powerlessness would more frequently display an individualistic (non-affiliative) orientation. The individualistic orientation implies that a Black person believes he is responsible for the solution of his plight, whereby his primary obligation in the distribution of money, time, occupational skills, 45 and other resources is to serve his own interest and not the interests of Blacks as.a group. Conversely, he predicted disadvantaged Blacks with a high degree of powerlessness would more frequently display a collective (affiliative) orientation. The collective orientation implies that a Black person believes that his own condi- tion cannot be improved unless additional economic resources, power, and prestige are made available to all Blacks regardless of their personal worth, motivation, proven ability, or special characteristics of individual members. The data indicated that high and low powerless- ness groups differed significantly in their individualistic and collective orientation. Thus, in other words, the results revealed that low feelings of powerlessness generate a sense of individual identification among dis- advantaged Black males, and high feelings of powerlessness emit a sense of identification with collective goals. In addition, high feelings of powerlessness were found to be positively related to an attitude of violence. That is to say, it was concluded that violent attitudes appear to develop when there is little belief in the possibility of individual accomplishment. Rosenberg (1968), in a revealing experiment, examined the relationship between a sense of powerlessness and occupational-educational aspirations and expectations among "lower class" Black youth. He found significant 46 relationships between: (1) powerlessness and occupational aspirations, with the low powerlessness respondents almost unanimously aspiring to professional and white-collar occupations, and the high powerlessness respondents divided between the higher status occupations and the lower status occupations; (2) powerlessness and occupational expecta- tion, with the low powerlessness group expecting high occupational status, and the high powerlessness group expecting low occupational status; (3) powerlessness and educational aspirations,with the high powerlessness sub- jects expressing low educational aspirations, and the low powerlessness group expressing high educational aspira- tions; (4) a sense of powerlessness and educational expec- tation, with the high powerlessness group expecting low educational status, and the low powerlessness group expecting high educational status. However, the role reversal technique Rosenberg employed in the research to modify attitudes of powerlessness among the subjects in his experimental group failed. Consequently, he concludes that "powerlessness is a deeply entrenched attitude that is related to the more fundamental conditions of society rather than ephemeral social interactions." Therefore, he argues that unless there are major social-structural reforms, current social service programs will succeed in intensifying the volatile state of affairs in the major metropolitan centers instead of ameliorating them. 47 Powerlessness has also been studied in a different cultural population. Seeman (1966b) reported that among Swedish workers there were significant rela- tionships between: (1) feelings of powerlessness and membership in unions versus non-membership (i.e., those with a high degree of powerlessness were less likely to join unions); (2) a sense of powerlessness and activity within the union, and (3) the degree of powerlessness and knowledge of politics. He found these differences held up when age, income, and education variables were con- trolled. ' Unemployment and the Sense of Powerlessness The association of unemployment with a sense of powerlessness can best be understood within the "class situation" framework advanced by Max Weber. Weber (1953) maintains that the amount of power or the lack of power (powerlessness) to dispose of goods and skills in return for income determines the common class situation and the "life chances" of a group of people. Therefore, these "factors" influence a group's socio-psychological cogna- tion with society. In other words, an individual's work abilities and skills determine the degree and the extent of his command over social and economic resources. This 48 in turn presumably influences his attitudes and feelings toward life in general. Thus, an employed person has command over certain material and social resources, which augment his sense of control over things affecting him. However, on the other hand, an unemployed person lacks command over these resources, and, therefore, con- stantly feels powerless (Ferman and Aiken, 1967; Gordon, 1965). Our society is marked basically by a central stress upon personal achievement, particularly occupa- tional achievement. More specifically, as Williams (1960) points out: The "success story" and the respect accorded to the self-made man are distinctly American (p. 417). A striking feature of American culture is its tendency to identify standards of personal excel- lence with competitive occupational achievement. For the most part, the value attached to achieve- ment does not perceive the person as a whole but only his accomplishment, emphasizing the objective results of his activity (p. 418). Thus, to be unable to make one's own living through work in a society which places a great emphasis on occupa- tional or in a broader sense economic success is of more than usual consequence. The results that follow will, in most instances, lower one's sense of self-worth and generate feelings of powerlessness (Liebow, 1967). Rosenberg (1968) analyzed the relationship of age, marital status of parents, state in which respondents 49 were born, educational level, and father's employment status with a perception of powerlessness among Black youths. He found that only the father's employment status was significantly related to a sense of power- lessness. Those high in powerlessness came from house- holds where the father was unemployed, and those low in powerlessness came from homes where the father was employed. In a similar study, Dubey (1971), using Black respondents, examined the relationship of educational level, age, birthplace, and employment status with a sense of powerlessness. Among these factors, he found that an extended unemployment experience had the strongest correlation with a sense of powerlessness. Powerlessness--Lack of Control in the WOrk Setting It has been shown that organizations which prac- tice a high degree of centralization with respect to policy decisions are likely to experience higher levels of alienation (i.e., in the form of perceived powerless- ness) than are those in which decision making is widely diffused throughout the authority structure (Blood, 1969; Brown, 1970; Ronan, 1970; Simmons, 1965; Strauss, 1970). Based upon their research, Aiken and Bags (1966) concluded that it is those organizations in which "professionals" are denied access to power, particularly in policy formu- lation, that the sense of powerlessness is greatest. 50 According to Blauner (1964), there are at least four attributes of the bureaucratic organization which directly influence feelings of powerlessness. These are: (1) separation from ownership of the means of production and the finished products; (2) the inability to influence general managerial policies; (3) the lack of control over the conditions of employment; and (4) the lack of control over the immediate work process. The second attribute relating to managerial policies, and the fourth, work process control, are of significant interest to the pres- ent research effort. Expectancies of Control The concept of internal-external control as derived from social learning theory (Rotter, 1954) posits two characteristic "world views" or generalized expec- tancies concerning reinforcement. Based on past experi- ence, one group of individuals acquires the view that the locus of causality for personality-relevant events, or reinforcements, is external. Others view events as products of their own actions, capacities, or traits (i.e., internal). Thus, individuals are conceived as varying along a locus of control dimension, with the ends of the continuum labeled internal and external. In Rotter's social learning theory, the potential for any behavior to occur in a given situation is a 51 function of the person's expectancy that the given behavior will secure the available reinforcement, and the value of the available reinforcements for that person. In a particular situation, the individual, though desirous of an available goal, may believe there is no behavior in his repertoire that will allow him to be effective in securing the goal. Within this specific situation, the person may be described as anticipating no contingency between effort on his part and the end result in the situation. In this context, Rotter (1966) states: In social learning theory, a reinforcement acts to strengthen an expectancy that a particular behavior or event will be followed by that rein- forcement in the future. Once an expectancy for such a behavior-reinforcement sequence is built up, the failure of the reinforcement to occur will reduce or extinguish the expectancy. . . It follows as a general hypothesis that when the reinforcement is seen as not contingent upon the subject's own behavior that its occurrence will not increase an expectancy as much as when it is seen as contingent (p. 2). Internal Versus External Control of Reinforcement Rotter (1966) defines internal-external control by asserting: The role of reinforcement, reward, or gratifica- tion is universally recognized by students of human nature as a crucial one in the acquisition and performance of skills and knowledge. How- ever, an event regarded by some persons as a reward or reinforcement may be differently per- ceived and reacted to by others. One of the 52 determinants of this reaction is the degree to which the individual perceives that the reward follows from, or is contingent upon, his own behavior or attributes versus the degree to which he feels the reward is controlled by forces out- side of himself and may occur independently of his own actions. The effect of a reinforcement fol- lowing some behavior on the part of a human sub- ject, in other words, is not a simple stamping-in process but depends upon whether or not the person perceives a causal relationship between his own behavior and the reward. A perception of causal relationship need not be all or none but can vary in degree. When a reinforcement is per- ceived by the subject as following some action of his own but not being entirely contingent upon his action, then, in our culture, it is typically perceived as the result of luck, chance, fate, as under the control of powerful others, or as unpre- dictable because of the great complexity of the forces surrounding him. When the event is interpreted in this way by an individual, we have labeled this a belief in external control. If a person perceives that the event is contingent upon his own behavior or his own relatively per- manent characteristics, we have termed this a belief in internal control (p. l). Adding to Rotter's definition of internal-external control, Lefcourt (1966) contends that when a person believes reinforcements are controlled by internal rather than external forces, he is likely to make greater attempts at mastering the environment; to be more resistant to influence attempts by others, yet more effective in attempts to influence others; to prefer high probability choices in risk-taking behavior; to be lower in anxiety and higher in achievement orientation; to act more respon- sively to probability changes in the life situation; to place high value on skill-determined rewards, and to be more involved in social action. 53 Internal-External Control: Related Concepts and Theories Before analyzing and defining internal-external control as it will be employed in the present study, it is appropriate to first examine a number of related theories and concepts which place the construct into a theoretical perspective. Social scientists and social philosophers from various disciplines have, over the years, been interested in the significance of belief in fate or luck as an underlying determinant of behavior. Veblen (1899), for example, implied that belief in chance or luck was a less productive solution to one's problems, and beared a relationship to general passivity. More recently, Merton (1946) has discussed belief in chance as a defense mechanism, that is, as an attempt "to serve the psychological function of enabling people to preserve their self-esteem in the face of failure." The concept of alienation which has figured so prominently in sociological theory for many years appears, at a group level, to be strongly related to the variable of internal-external control. Marx, Weber, and Durkheim placed great importance on this concept as the basis for their explanations of behavior, along with Merton (1949) in his study of asocial behavior. Seeman (1959) links the concept of alienation, as it refers to powerlessness, 54 to internal-external control as a crucial psychological variable. There are some suggestions of a relationship between internal-external control and Machiavellianism. Geis and Christie (1965) point out that high Machs (i.e., individuals with high scores on the Mach scale-- those who endorse items indicative of a cynical outlook, interpersonal detachment, and manipulativeness) appear to be fairly accurate in their perception of others, but this accuracy is based on indiscriminate cynicism and suSpicion rather than on sensitivity. Insensitivity to feedback tends to be consistent with external control. Another finding that is suggestive of a relationship between internality and Machiavellianism is Christie's (1964) citing of a positive correlation between a modi- fied version of Srole's (1956) anomia scale and the Mach scale. The attributed power theory (i.e., attitudes one has with respect to his own power are less, equal to, or greater than the power he attributes to others) has an important relationship to internal-external control. Studies by Jones and DeCharms (1958), Scholper and Matthews (1965), Thibaut and Riecken (1955), and Wilkins and DeCharms (1962) indicate that individuals who are presented as being powerful are seen as being responsible 55 for their own actions, and individuals who are presented as being languid are seen as being not responsible for their actions. An extension of this is DeCharms' (1968) theory of the "Origin-Pawn" variable in person perception. According to DeCharms, an Origin is a person who perceives his behavior as determined by his own choosing, whereas a Pawn is a person who perceives his behavior as determined by external forces beyond his control. He concludes that feeling like an Origin has stronger effects on behavior as compared to feeling like a Pawn. Thus, he maintains that the distinction is continuous, not discrete, whereby a person feels more like an Origin under some circum- stances and more like a Pawn under others. While there are a number of other psychological variables which appear to have some relationship to internal-external control, according to Rotter (1966), the one conception that relates most directly to the be- lief iJ: internal-external control is the need for achieve- ment. The studies of Atkinson (1958), Atkinson and Feather (1966), McClelland (1951), McClelland, Atkinson, Clark, and Lowell (1953), dealing mainly with adults, and Crandall (1963), who worked chiefly with children, indicate that people who are high on the need for achievement, in all probability, have some belief in their own ability or skill to determine the outcome of their efforts. 56 Igternal-External Control: Learning, Risk-TakingJ Influence, and Attitude Change A series of studies have demonstrated that the perception of a situation as controlled by chance, luck, or fate will lead to predictable differences in behavior (i.e., expectancies are differentially affected), in comparison to situations where a person feels that reinforcement is controlled by his own behavior (Holden and Rotter, 1962; James, 1957; James and Rotter, 1958; Phares, 1957, 1962; Rotter, Liverant, and Crowne, 1961). Various studies have also indicated that individuals differ reliably in the degree to which they perceive reinforcement in a variety of ambiguous social situations to be controlled by their own characteristics or behavior versus by external forces. Results of other investiga— tions have shown that the individual who tends to perceive reinforcement as contingent upon his behavior is more likely to take social action to better his life conditions (Gore and Rotter, 1963), is more likely to attend to, and to learn and remember information that will affect his future goals (Seeman, 1963; Seeman and Evans, 1962), and is generally more concerned with his ability, particularly his failures (Efran, 1964). The individual who appears to be more internal also seems to have a greater need for independence (Crowne and Liverant, 1963) and is resistive 57 to subtle attempts at influence (Getter, 1963; Gore, 1962; Strickland, 1963). Many studies have been conducted involving internal- external control and various social behaviors. For example, in two experiments deriving from a sociological emphasis on alienation (Seeman, 1963; Seeman and Evans, 1962), Seeman reported differential learning between internals (low alienated) and externals (high alienated) in two field settings. With groups matched on socio- economic and hospital experience variables, Seeman and Evans found that hospitalized tuberculosis patients characterized as external controls had less objective knowledge about their individual conditions than patients characterized as internal controls. In the second investi- gation by Seeman, the essential prediction was that reformatory inmates scoring low in externality would show superior retention of parole material, since this material most clearly implied the possibility and value of personal control. The results indicated inmates low in externality learned the parole-related material significantly better than inmates high in externality. Liverant and Scodel (1960) showed that subjects low in externality believe they can exert a modicum of control in chance-determined situations while subjects high in externality view outcomes in such situations as 58 occurring randomly. In sum, perceived control was found to differentiate behavior in the risk-taking situation, with low externals revealing a greater tendency toward self-regulation in regard to objective probabilities. Gore (1962) related experimenter influence to the concept of internal-external (I-E) control. She found no differences between internals and externals in her overt-influence and control conditions. However, in the subtle-influence condition the internals showed more influence than the externals, and also tended to respond more in the opposite direction of her subtle suggestion than externals. In independent investigations, Rotter (1966) analyzed the correlation between petition signing and I-E control. In both experiments, the I-E scale failed to predict signers and non-signers. Rotter interpreted the findings as indicating that other extraneous variables in the situation tended to mask the variable under study. A more stringent test of attitudes relating to I-E control was conducted by Phares (1965). He selected and tested two samples of college students, one internal and one external, using an I-E scale.‘ As hypothesized, he found that internally controlled experimenters were able to induce significantly greater change in expressed attitudes than were externally controlled experimenters. 59 Conceptual Definition of Internal- External Control For purposes of the present study, internal- external control will be defined as follows: (1) internal control refers to the individual's expectancy or expect- ancies of positive and/or negative reinforcement being contingent upon his own actions and thereby under personal control; (2) external control refers to the person's expectancy or expectancies of positive and/or negative reinforcement being unrelated to his own behavior in cer- tain situations and therefore beyond personal control. Internal-External Control as an Intrapersonal Variable Various scales have been developed to measure the I-E control concept. The first attempt to measure the I-E control dimension as a personality variable was reported by Phares (1957), using a Likert—type scale which examined both internal and external attitudes. James (1957) revised the Phares scale by inserting addi- tional items. Rotter, Seeman, and Liverant (1962) developed the I-E measure into a forced-choice scale, and then broadened it to investigate such areas as achieve- ment, affection, and general socio-political attitudes. Rotter (1966) later reduced the scale to its present form of 29 items (23 items and 6 filler items). Additional 60 scales have been developed which look at I-E control in children. Bialer (1961) uses an orally administered true-false scale, Battle and Rotter (1963) a projective technique, Morrison (1966) a questionnaire, and Crandall, Katkovsky, and Crandall (1965) provide for possible dif- ferences between responsibility attribution for success and failure outcomes. These scales have proved useful in explaining a variety of behaviors such as: academic performance, involvement and persistence in achievement tasks, attempts at mastering the environment, occupa- tional and educational aspirations, planning and activity oriented to reaching goals, risk-taking preferences, participation in social action, resistance to suggestion and exertion of influence over others. The fact that many studies have related the I-E control concept to low income and minority groups, especially Blacks, is of particular interest for purposes of the present research. With the assumption that Blacks can easily perceive impediments in the way of goal striv— ing, several studies suggest that Blacks tend to be more external than whites. For instance, studies of motivation and performance of Black student populations conclude that Black students, in comparison with whites, are less likely to hold strong beliefs in internal control; that social class and race probably interact so that lower-status 61 Blacks particularly stand out as externally oriented, and that internal control is a critical determinant of aca- demic performance. An example of the relevance of this concept appears in the Coleman et_al. (1966) report. In the Coleman study, internal control proved to be unusually important for Black students in two ways. It explained more of the variance in achievement for Blacks than for white students, and furthermore, it explained more vari- ance for Black students than any other measure included in the survey of academic behavior. More specifically, it was found that the extent to which a pupil felt he had control over his destiny appeared to have a stronger rela- tionship to academic achievement than all other "school factors." The responses to questions in the survey showed that Black students, particularly, had far less conviction than whites that they could affect their own environment and future. Therefore, the variability between Blacks on the internal control and achievement variables was less than the variability that existed between white students. Also, a feeling of internal control for Blacks was found to be directly related to the proportion of whites in the schools. Thus, Blacks in schools with a high proportion of whites had a greater sense of personal control. Battle and Rotter (1963) found an interaction between race and social class on the control variable as 62 measured by a projective device-~The Children's Picture Test of I-E Control. They found that lower class Blacks were significantly more external than lower class whites or middle class Blacks and whites. Middle class Blacks were also found to be more external than middle class whites. Using students enrolled in a southern Black col- lege, Gore and Rotter (1963) found that the I—E control scale predicted type and degree of commitment behavior manifested to effect social change. Subjects scoring lowest in externality signed statements expressing the greatest amount of interest in social action (the march on washington and forming a freedom riders group) while the more external subjects either expressed no interest in participation or minimal involvement (willingness to attend a rally). The study was later replicated by Strick- land (1965), with almost identical results. In a near replication of the Liverant and Scodel (1960) study, Lefcourt (1965) compared the risk-taking behavior of Blacks and whites whose behavior had reflected high external and low external orientations, respectively, in previous experimentation in skilled tasks (Lefcourt and Ladwig, 1965a). On the assumption that a chance task would elicit less defensiveness or failure avoidance than a skill task for Blacks, it was predicted that Blacks would prove less external than whites in a chance situation. Using 63 the same task and indices as Liverant and Scodel, Blacks significantly chose less low-probability bets, and were generally less risk-taking than whites. This reversal of internal-control reflecting behavior in skill versus chance situations was interpreted as being due to Blacks' disbelief that achievement in self- evaluative, skill-demanding tasks is controllable. What are the implications of these findings? It may be helpful in the attempt to understand these social behaviors and their significance for Blacks to relate the discussion to some of the recent work in the general psychological literature on motivation theory. Of par- ticular relevance is the concept of "expectancy" that has been central in the motivational theories of Atkinson (1964) and Rotter (1954, 1960, 1966). These theorists have stressed that the motivation of any given behavior depends not only on a generalized disposition to approach or avoid a given class of objects--the motive, to use Atkinson's terminology-~and the incentive value of the particular goal or object at issue, but also on the expec- tancy or person's estimate of the probability that his behavior will lead to a desired goal. Stress on the con- cept of efficacy (Gurin, 1968) has highlighted the expec- tancy aspect of motivation since feelings of competence and efficacy are a major determinant of a positive 64 expectancy, i.e., the feeling that the probabilities are high that one's behavior can implement one's goals. In this view, the motivational problems of Blacks may come not so much from a lack of desire for societal goals, but from the feeling that they have little chance of attain- ing these goals. The expectancy construct integrates individual and situational approaches to the problems of Blacks which are often seen as pointing in divergent directions. Expectancies are affected by the immediate objective situational payoffs and are thus subject to change as situational opportunities change. However, expectancies also represent the residuum of the history of the indi- vidual's past experiences with success and failure and therefore influence the way he reacts to the realities he faces and to changes in these realities. Because the determinants of expectancies lie in the past as well as the present, increased subjective probability of success does not automatically follow an increase in objective probabilities. Even in a situation where opportunities are expanding rapidly (e.g., increasing number of Black white-collar workers), some motivational relearning is necessary to change expectancies so they conform to the present rather than past realities. Thus, many problems of Blacks follow the fact that expectancy is to some extent 65 a generalized disposition that develops like other personality dispositions out of the whole life history of relevant success and failure experiences, and this affects the specific subjective expectancies that will be perceived in any particular situation. When expectancy is viewed in these general dispositional terms, it presents problems of resocialization and relearning as serious as those of other personality dispositions. As has been previously indicated, Rotter and asso- ciates (1966) addressed themselves systematically to the issue of the "bases" of expectancy--specifically whether expectancies are seen as deriving from internal or external control of reinforcement, and the relationship of this to problems of learning and generalizing new expectancies. Because of the recent interest in the content of the I-E construct and its relation to issues of self-control and powerlessness, it is usually forgotten that Rotter's interest in this variable did not come from his substan- tive concern, but rather from his theoretical interests in the question of how one learns new expectancies. Look- ing at the I-E control concept both as characteristic of a situation and as a personality orientation, Rotter and associates have shown that where causality is seen as external, rather than internal, one learns less predictably from reinforcement. They have shown that people in 66 experimental situations ruled by chance rather than skill, as well as people who show a disposition to view the world in external terms, are less guided by their experiences of success and failure in learning new expectancies and in generalizing this learning to new situations. Conse- quently, if a person feels that his success or failure in a given situation is determined by chance rather than by his own skill and resources, there is no reason for him to utilize this experience as a basis for evaluating future analogous situations. Internal-External Control: Issues of Concern The prominence of the I-E control dimension in studies by various researchers has been previously cited. Specifically, in contemporary writings it has become somewhat common to view the motivational problems of poverty populations, e.g., Blacks, as deriving from powerlessness in confronting an environment viewed as bewildering and uncontrollable. However, despite all the writings and research concerning the I-E construct, and regardless of the fact that conceptually it appears to represent a somewhat common sense notion, it presents a number of complexities that have usually been ignored, but that are extremely important to the present research effort. 67 First, although most researchers have presented I-E control as a unitary concept, some studies have stressed distinctions in the concept that would enhance its predictive capabilities. For example, in applying this concept to children's beliefs about academic rein- forcements, Crandall et_al. (1965) noted the importance of distinguishing different types of external environ- mental forces. In their view, control by other people should be separated from control by impersonal forces, since academic successes and failures may have little to do with chance or luck but still be subject to external control through teachers' behaviors. Hersch and Scheibe (1967), noting that people scored as highly external often exhibit greater variance in behavior than do people scored as strongly internal, conclude that the meaning of exter- nality should be further differentiated. They stress the need to assess how realistic it is for a person to per- ceive that events are beyond his control and whether he considers external forces to be benevolent or malevolent. Crandall.g§;al, (1965) also distinguished responsibility for causing positive events from negative events, since the dynamics in assuming credit for causing good things to happen may be very different from those Operating in accepting blame for unpleasant consequences. These kinds of distinctions have shown to be helpful in studying Black 68 youth who have encountered social constraints associated not only with race but also with low income and lower- class status (Gurin, 1968; Gurin, 1970; Gurin and Katz, 1966). For Blacks, an internal orientation based on responsibility for their failures may be more reflective of intrapunitiveness than of efficacy. Thus, an internal response reflecting acceptance of blame for one's failures, which might be considered "normal" in the typical middle class experience, may be extreme and intrapunitive for a Black youth growing up in poverty in the ghetto. Second, another complexity arises from the fact that writings in this area have implicitly assumed that a belief in internal control represent's a person's evaluation of his own life experience in which he can influence the outcomes of situations through his own actions. Taken this way, internal control overlaps con- siderably with concepts of competence and personal efficacy. Yet, questions on the Rotter (1966) I-E control scale include two types of items that according to Gurin (1968) have not been distinguished-ethose which refer explicitly to the respondent's own life situation and those which seem to tap beliefs about what causes success or failure for people generally. Third, there is another implicit assumption in the way an internal orientation has been viewed that should 69 also be noted, particularly in regard to Blacks. It has usually been assumed that internal beliefs represent some type of positive affirmation. However, Gurin EE_El° (1969) assert that the literature has neglected the fact that an internal orientation may also have negative implications. They maintain that when associated with success, an internal orientation can lead to feelings of competence and efficacy, but when associated with failure, it can lead to self-derogation and self-blame. Rotter (1966), in a finding that has tended to be overlooked in the focus on the positive aspects of an internal orienta- tion, noted that the relationship between the internal- external control dimension and personal adjustment may be somewhat curvilinear. Thus, Gurin 2512;: (1969) indicate that because of the potential intrapunitive implications of an internal orientation, people with extreme internal scores, as well as those with extreme external scores, tend to be psychologically less well adjusted and healthy. Fourth, the implications of an internal or external orientation are also complicated by the issue of reality- based obstacles the individual has faced. This points to a complexity on the "external" end of the continuum that has not been considered in discussion of the dimension. Practically all of the research on internal and external bases of expectancy has examined just two bases--skill 70 versus chance. The experimental studies have varied characteristics of the situation to produce the percep- tion that success and failure are the result of either skill or chance; the personality measure of I-E control developed by Rotter and associates requires the individual to choose between two explanations for success and failure--an internal explanation asserting that what happens in life is the result of skill, ability, or effort, and an external explanation maintaining that suc- cess and failure are determined by fate or chance. Gurin 22.213 (1969) indicate that the aforemen- tioned aspects may be the most pertinent bases for people whose advantaged position in the social structure limits the operation of other external determinants of success and failure. However, they conclude that low income groups, e.g., Blacks, experience many external obstacles that have nothing to do with chance; for instance, the operation of the labor market which can lead to layoffs over which they have no control, poor transportation facilities which reduce possibilities for employment, and the tendency of many employers to hire within the social network of those already on the payroll. In addition, there are class-tied constraints to all kinds of oppor- tunities and to resources that Open up other Opportunities, which may be perceived correctly by Blacks as external but ,71 not as a matter of randomness or luck. Moreover, for Blacks there is also the external factor of racial discrimination which operates over and above class obstacles. Thus, racism may be perceived as operating quite the opposite of chance--in a systematic, predict- able, and reliable fashion. According to Gurin ep_al. (1969), this distinction on the external side of the continuum is not just an eso- teric issue. They suspect that it matters motivationally for Blacks, particularly, whether the external orientation refers to chance or to more systematic constraining forces. Consequently, they maintain that although much of the literature indicates that people who believe in internal control are more guided by reality cues in learning new expectancies, are generally more effectively motivated, and perform better in achievement situations, these same effects may not follow for Blacks who believe that eco- nomic and discriminatory factors are more important than individual skill and personal qualities in explaining success and failure. Therefore, it appears that focusing on external factors may be motivationally healthy for Blacks instead of damaging when it concerns assessing one's probabilities for success against systematic and real external obstacles rather than exigencies of fate. 72 Multidimensional Construct of the Internal-External Control Scale Gurin eg_al. (1969) found that I-E control as measured by Rotter (1966) was not a unidimensional con- cept in the attitude structure of Black college students. Thus, a multidimensional construct of internal-external control was conceptualized, and a corresponding technique of measurement was presented. The multidimensional approach is based on twO key distinctions. The first, a distinction between self_and gtheg, highlights the fact that a person may feel he is in control of his own life, yet believe that people in general are not; or as is more likely for a victim of discrimination, he may feel that most people control their destinies, although he himself does not. A second distinction, important for Blacks, Gurin e5_21, labeled individual-system blame. The issue here is whether a person sees individual qualities of Blacks or social system factors as the key determinants of their fate. Gurin e£_al, established that the self-other distinction was very important in the way Blacks perceive control. In a factor analysis of the original items from Rotter's (1966) I-E control scale administered to Black respondents, Gurin et al. reported that two separate 73 factors emerged.9 One, which includes almost all of the items with a first-person referent, is very close to the conceptual definition of internal control given by Rotter. Thus, the individual who consistently chooses the internal alternative believes he can control what happens in his own life, and has a strong conviction in his own compe- tence; therefore, he has a sense of personal control. The second factor, in contrast, consists of items with a third-person referent, and measures the respondent's ideological or general beliefs about the role of internal and external forces in determining success and failure in the culture at large. Endorsement of the internal alter- native on these items means rejecting the notion that success follows from luck, the right breaks, or knowing the right people. Such an individual feels that hard work, effort, skill, and ability are the important determinants of success in life. It is referred to as a measure of the respondent's Protestant Ethic ideology. For example, a sense of internal personal control is defined by endorsing the item "When I make plans, I am almost certain I can make them work," rather than ”It 9In a factor analysis, the items on a measure like the I-E scale are compared statistically to determine which are most highly correlated, that is, which questions tend to group together because respondents tend to answer them similarly. It is then assumed that these items are measuring the same variable, designated as a factor. 74 is not always wise to plan too far ahead because many things turn out to be a matter of good or bad fortune anyhow." Defining the Protestant Ethic measure, on the internal control end of the dimension, is endorsement of the item "People will get ahead in life if they have the goods and do a good job; knowing the right people has nothing to do with it," instead of "Knowing the right people is important in deciding whether a person will get ahead." Presenting data from high school and college samples (Coleman eE_al., 1966; Gurin, 1970; Gurin 33‘213, 1969; Gurin and Katz, 1966) and job retraining programs (Gurin, 1968), findings indicate that Black students and adults are equally, if not more, internal than whites in endorsing the Protestant Ethic ideology, but are less internal than their white counterparts in answering ques- tions concerning their sense of personal control. It appears that many Blacks adopt the general cultural beliefs about internal control but find these beliefs cannot always be applied to their own life situations. Without the same experiences of prejudice and racism, whites are less likely to be cognizant of an inconsistency between cultural beliefs and reality. Therefore, Blacks may endorse general cultural beliefs in the Protestant Ethic just as vehemently as their white peers, but at the same time, 75 they may express much less certainty that they can control the outcomes of their own lives. To relate the I-E control concept more specifi- cally to the racial situation, Gurin et_al. produced an additional set of race-relevant, internal-external control items. They were also subjected to a factor analysis, producing several factors, the central one being individual- system blame. Consistently choosing the internal alter- native means resting the burden for failure on Blacks themselves, Specifically on the lack of skill, ability, training, effort, or proper behavior. In contrast, choos- ing the external alternative means attributing the responsibility for failure to the socio-economic system. The other factors are concerned with what can and should be done about racial discrimination. Gurin e£_31, indicate that although they seem related, they are somewhat dif- ferent in content. The first is called discrimination modifiability. An internal score on this factor repre- sents the belief that discrimination can be eliminated or modified through social and economic interventions. An external score reflects the conviction that the phenomena of discrimination is a basic part of human nature, and therefore unchangeable. The next factor is a measure of the respondent's preferred strategies for dealing with discrimination, called individual-collective action. An 76 internal score on this factor suggests that the respondent feels "individual effort" is the best way to overcome discrimination. Whereas an external response indicates the respondent prefers "group action" to combat discrimi- nation. The last factor, racial militancy, poses alter- native forms of collective action for the respondent to choose. An internal response is the preference for a less militant approach such as relying on biracial councils or conversations and negotiations to alleviate problems of discrimination. An external response consists of a preference for protest and pressure activities. CHAPTER III MAJOR HYPOTHESES In the preceding chapter, an attempt was made to explore some of the primary issues that have been dominant in theoretical and pragmatic endeavors to under- stand the motivational perplexities of Blacks. Particular interest has focused on the polarization of those who see low income groups, i.e., Blacks, as lacking some of the aspirations, goals, and values of middle class society, and those who see the problems of Black people in terms of powerlessness-~the inability to implement these goals and values. While recognizing that no single approach repre- sents the complete answer to the motivational concerns of Blacks, the approach focusing on the issues of power- lessness and efficacy, although not the only avenue, appears to be justified. Extracting from the psychological literature on motivation, particularly the research on expectancy theory, the orientation to motivational concerns of Blacks has some salient implications for the work organization. First, it highlights the importance of pro- viding a meaningful job pay-off for training and 77 78 education, underscoring the significance of job placement and job development activities. Second, it suggests that it might be more useful to concentrate psychological and counseling efforts around the problems that occur when the neoteric Black employee or trainee is entering or adjusting to the world of work, rather than around resocializing attempts to prepare him for that world. Third, it points to the need for combining supportiveness with realism regarding the successes and failures that the Black worker experiences; especially that he perceives his successes and failures as tied to his "own" developing skills and abilities. Caplan (1970), in his review of the empirical literature on the causative factors related to the ghetto riots of the 60's, indicated that extensive changes have taken place in the social-psychological make-up of the urban Black man. He explains: What clearly emerges from the recent research on Negroes is a picture of a new ghetto man: a Black militant who is committed to the removal of tradi- tional racial restraints by open confrontation and, if necessary, by violence; a ghetto man who is very different in his actions and sympathies from the Negro of the past and from the white ghetto dwellers of an earlier period in this country's history. He is a ghetto man whose characteristics are seldom recognized and understood by most white Americans (p. 59) . One of the most important psychological changes concerning the new urban Black man has been the way he 79 views himself in relation to his world. Whereas formerly most ghetto residents were inclined to accept their fate passively and to acquiesce to the external social and economic forces which shape the Black com- munity, the new urban man is coming to see himself as capable of direct and effective action toward changing the oppressive conditions under which he lives (Caplan and Paige, 1968b; Forward and Williams, 1970; Marx, 1967; Pettigrew, 1967). Moreover, instead of accepting the old stereotypes about his condition being the result of his own inherent weaknesses and lack of motivation, the new urban Black man is becoming increasingly aware of the socio-economic forces that lock him into the ghetto. Thus, he can now appraise more realistically the sources of the discriminatory barriers that block him from developing and utilizing his abilities. Possibly the characteristics of the new urban Black man which have the most etiological significance for understanding the rise of self-assertion are the development of his Black consciousness and Black identity. The Detroit and Newark riot studies indicate that rioters had strong feelings of racial pride and even racial superiority (Caplan and Paige, 1968a, 1968b). They not only rejected the traditional stereotype of Blacks, but also created a positive stereotype. In both cities, 80 rioters were more likely to view their race more positively than non-rioters on racial comparison items involving such aspects as dependability, courage, and intelligence. Furthermore, 75% of the rioters and only a third of the non-rioters preferred to be called "Black" rather than "colored," "Negro," or "Afro-American." Marx (1967) reported that militants prefer Black newspapers and magazines, are better able to identify Black writers and civil rights leaders, and have a more positive appreciation of Black culture than non-militants. Darrow and Lowinger (1967) also encountered feelings of a new, positive Black self-image among rioters they studied. A positive affirmation of ethnic identity was found not only among the militants, but was perceived to be widespread throughout the Black community by Campbell and Schuman (1968). Ninety-six percent of the sample in their study agreed that "Blacks should take more pride in Black history," and four out of ten respondents thought that "Black school children should study an African language." What does the preceding abridgement have to do with Black employees in the work organization? It would appear that, based on the stress among Blacks for self- determination and identity, these personalistic factors permeate the industrial sphere and elicit certain reactions and interactions. For example, in a Black-owned and 81 Operated company, the total social transaction process is basically with employees of similar ethnic backgrounds, who share similar experiences. Thus, the concept of collective identity takes on an added dimension, whereby a situation of this type may actually enhance racial pride, and individual self-esteem, while elevating the sense of personal control. In a perceptive sense, the Black owner of the company may serve as a "model" illustrating the fact that the level of president or plant manager can be attained by a Black man. Also, with Black supervisors and foremen, the lower level Black worker can identify with his superiors, and in many instances feel certain that he is understood, important, and recognized. Many contemporary, urban-based, Black-owned and operated organizations place an important emphasis on their communicative and economic relationship with the Black community. Concomitant with this, these companies also utilize various organizational techniques that pro- mote feelings of identification with the company (e.g., Afro haircuts and the Black Power sign and handshake are encouraged instead of discouraged. Black literature can be brought on the job and read during lunch time; slogans and posters such as "Buy Black," "Power to Black People," "The Black man is not free until all Black people are 82 . free," are frequently observed on walls, doors, and tack boards. Pep talks by supervisors and foremen continu- ously relate to the potential of "all" Black employees to assume higher level positions).1° Thus, when Black employees view this entire orientation, in most cases a positive internalization takes place. However, what about the vast majority of Blacks employed in white- owned organizations? In many instances, a strong Black identity may be viewed as disruptive or coercive, par- ticularly with white employees in the key managerial and supervisory positions. The Black employee himself may perceive the environment as hostile or threatening (i.e., resulting in loss of job if he is regarded as a "Black militant" or "troublemaker") and therefore abrogate his desire for efficacy and identity. More specifically, the point being made here is that there are obviously certain "company environmental factors" (i.e., unique qualities in the relationship of the owner, management, foremen, and workers) in a Black-owned and operated company that 1"The writer observed five Black-owned and operated companies in the city of Detroit during the period of September-October 1972. The companies varied according to the type of business they conducted. Two were in the clothing and commodities industry, one in the manufactur- ing industry (metal stamping), one in the glass industry, and another in the newspaper industry. Although there were obvious differences in organizational structure and operations, there were astounding similarities in terms of their Black awareness and identity. 83 are not present, or present in a limited degree, in a white-owned company with a sizable population of Black employees, and one with a small number of Black workers. Based on the aforementioned rationale, the present study examined and compared employees in three different companies (Black-owned company with Black employees, white-owned company with a racially mixed work force, and a white-owned company with white employees) on the variables of personal control, Protestant Ethic ideology, individual-system blame, discrimination modifi- ability, individual-collective action, racial militancy, powerlessness in work, instrumental work orientation, organizational identification, and race of company owner. The most significant comparisons in terms of the present research are those between Blacks in a Black- owned and operated (all-Black) company and Blacks in a white-owned (racially mixed) company. However, the atti- tudinal responses of whites in a white-owned and operated (all-white) company and whites in a white-owned (racially mixed) company are included to clarify the interpretation of results. Non-managerial employees in the companies were the focus of the present study. Systematic comparisons were made between managerial employee groups; because of their small N's, the findings were reported but not 84 discussed. If the present study had been completely symmetrical, included in the design would be a Black- owned (racially mixed) company, a white-owned company with all Black employees, and a Black-owned company with all white employees. However, the practical aspects of the situation transcend fantasy. The researcher was unable to find these three conditions primarily because (1) of the small size (N = 11, 14, 19 employees) of the few companies that met these criteria, and (2) the socio- political milieu negates some conditions (e.g., Black civil rights leaders and militants would object vehemently to a Black-owned company devoid of Black employees). Taking the view that psychological well-being among Black employees is measured by internal personal control, attributing responsibility for failure to social system factors, and a collective consciousness, the fol- lowing hypotheses are posited: 1. Black non-managerial employees in a Black-owned and operated (all-Black) company are psycho- logically better adjusted than Black non-managerial employees in a white-owned (racially mixed) company. .This statement will be manifested by examination of the succeeding variables. Black employees in an all-Black company when compared II. 85 with Black employees in a racially mixed company: a. will be more internal on the personal control factor. b. will be equally internal on the Protestant Ethic ideology factor. c. will be less internal on the individual- system blame factor. d. will be less internal on the discrimination modifiability, individual-collective action, and racial militancy factors. e. will have a lower degree of powerlessness in work, a lower instrumental work orientation, i.e., a higher intrinsic value for work in total life, and a higher identification with the work organization. According to the findings of Gurin (1968) and Gurin e£_§l. (1969), it would appear that Black non-managerial employees in a white-owned (racially mixed) company will have a more external orientation on the self-other distinction than white non-managerial employees in the same company. Previous research has not been explicit in terms of assessing differences on race ideology. However, the generalized expectancies of Black III. 86 employees in the white-owned (racially mixed) company will affect their role perception and job satisfaction in a different manner than for the white employees. These factors will be illustrated by the following. Black employees in a racially mixed company when compared with white employees in the same company: a. will be less internal on the personal control factor. b. will be equally internal on the Protestant Ethic ideology factor. 0. will be equally internal on the individual- system blame factor. d. will be equally internal on the discrimination modifiability, individual-collective action, and racial militancy factors. e. will have a higher degree of powerlessness in work, a higher instrumental work orientation, i.e., a lower intrinsic value for work in total life, and a lower identification with the work organization. In comparing Black non-managerial employees in an all-Black company and white non-managerial employees in an all-white company, the literature is either non-existent or not explicit in terms 87 of making predictions. This results from the limited number of Black-owned and operated companies in which comparisons can be made. It is difficult to assess the effect of a Black- owned work organization on the expectancies and job satisfaction of Black employees because the degree of change in the employee is Obviously related to the social conditions outside the place of work. The assumption being made here is that differences between Blacks and whites found in previous research on I-E control, e.g., personal control, could easily have been an artifact of a particular group or organization. Moreover, when Black employees have or perceive themselves as having self-control and independence, there will be no significant differences between them and their white counterparts on the self- other and job satisfaction factors. However, because Blacks in an all-Black company are "extremely aware" of their socio-economic status in society, they will tend to be more external than whites in an all-white company regarding race ideology factors. The related postulates are listed below. Black employees in an all-Black company when compared with white employees in an all-white company: 88 will be equally internal on the personal control factor. will be equally internal on the Protestant Ethic ideology factor. will be less internal on the individual- system blame factor. will be less internal on the discrimination modifiability, individual-collective action, and racial militancy factors. no significant differences will occur on the variables of powerlessness in work, instrumental work orientation, and iden- tification with the work organization. CHAPTER IV METHODOLOGY AND CONDITIONS OF THE STUDY Subjects The respondents consisted of employees in three different companies. Company A--Black-owned and operated organization; 96 Black males were employed as §$° Eighty- four were classified as non-managerial employees, and 12 were classified as managerial employees.11 Company B-- white-owned organization with 58% white employees, and 42% Black employees; 108 Black and white males were utilized in the research. Ninety-five were classified as non- managerial, 47 Blacks and 48 whites. Thirteen whites were classified as managerial employees. Company C--white-owned and operated organization; 121 white males were employed as ‘gs. Ninety-seven were classified as non-managerial employ- ees, and 24 were classified as managerial employees. Females were tested in all companies, but their sam— ple size was too small to assume statistical significance 11Managerial employees in the present research were defined as employees from first-level supervisor or foreman to plant owner or manager. This also included office personnel such as accountants, personnel managers, sales engineers, and programming engineers. 89 90 (Company A= 3; Company B = 5; Company C = 6), and were not used in the present study. In addition, this held for the other male employees tested--three whites, an East Indian, and a Virgin Islander in Company A, two Black managerial employees in Company B, and five Blacks and a Puerto Rican in Company C. Description of Companies Table 1 provides a descriptive comparison of the three companies as to: type of organization, location, number of employees, ethnic composition, plant ownership, length of plant operation, median educational level of employees, average age of employees, average length of employment of employees, plant size, modernity of equipment, organizational structure, financial condition, corporate strategy, orientation, probationary period prior to becoming a regular employee, wage scale, sickness and accident insur— ance, hospital plan, additional fringe benefits, apprentice programs on the job, supervisory training program, plant ecology, union affiliation, and contribution to the community. 921 TABLE 1 DESCRIPTION OF COMPANIES Company A Company B Company C Type of organization Location No. of employees Ethnic composition Plant ownership Length of plant operation Median educational level of employees Average age of , employees Average length of employment of employees Plant size Modernity of equipment Organisational structure financial condition corporate strategy Metal stamping planta Detroit 108 100% Blackb Black-owned 3 years 10.4 years 29.3 years 1.6 years 53,000 sq. ft. of manufacturing area Manual and semi- automatic stamping presses somewhat out- datedsd unable to 1111 various orders on time because of breakdowns. Organisational chart was ambiguous in terms of chain of command after plant owner, however,job designa- tions and employee duties were clear. rixed assets—~3l.7 million (approx. ) Planned to expand in future by establishing additional plants. Same as company A Same as company A 125 58% white; 42% Black White-owned 17 years 9.3 years-~white 9.9 years--Black 30.8 years--white 30.2 years-Black 3 5 years--white 1.3 ye ars-—Black 67,000 sq. ft. of manufacturing area Same as company A Formal structure was defined and clear,but employee responsibilities were opaque. Fixed assets--$2.5 million (apprqu Continued growth and development, while updating and adding new equipment. Same as company A Same as company A 170 c lOOt white White-owned 51 years 9.8 years 33.4 years 4.7 years 102,000 sq. ft. of manufacturing area Semi-automatic and fully automatic stamping presses were -of latest type: able to fill more orders than were contracted.° Formal structure and employee duties were defined and concise. Fixed assets--$S.B million (approx.) Diversification of operations. .Baoh plant manufactured unexposed metal parts and distributed them to various automotive plants and private outlets. b Company A had three white employees; approximately 3‘ of total work force. cCompany C had eight Black employees: IPProxfleately 5a of total work force. dStaQing presses in companies A and B ranged from 15-25 years in age. °Presses in company C ranged from 4-12 years in age, and also were of a higher tonnage to permit the production of more pieces per minute. 92 TARIF- 1--C_°asi_nu£ Company A Company B Company C Orientation Probationary period prior to becoming a regular employee wage scale (unskilled laborers) wage scale (skilled laborers s Igt.) Sickness 5 Accident insurance Hospital plan Additional fringe benefits Each new employee was taken throughout the plant and all company operations were ex- plained from the job of owner to that of press operator. Rules and plant regulations were described by the imme- diate supervisor. It was emphasized "very heavily" that the pur- pose of the firm was to serve as proof that Black firms can partic- ipate fully and effec- tively in the industrial process. Thus, it was expounded that the com- pany served the needs of its Black employees as well as the Black community. 90 days $3.25/hr up to 90 days. $3.35/hr after 90 days (maximum). Herit systemf Employees paid 50% of s a A insurance. Employees paid 503 of hospitalization insurance. Managerial and non- managerial employees were able to purchase stock in the company. Also, a continuing education plan was in effect, in which 1/2 of tuition was paid, for up to 4 hrs of course work taken at an accredited technical school , college , or university. Rules and regulations were explained to new employees by the immediate supervisor. Same as company A $2.95/hr up to 90 days. $3.15/hr after 90 days. $3.40/hr after 18 months (maximum). Same as company A company paid all S a A insurance. Company paid all hos- pitalisation insurance. None Same as company 8 Same as company A $3.10/hr up to 90 days. $3.30/hr after 90 days. $3.67/hr after 18 months (maximum). same as company A Same as company 3 Same as company 3 None fThe esployer of each company had separate pay scales for management and skilled laborers. The scales were never revealed to the researcher, but it was indicated there were different "pay levels“ based on merit. 93 mm 1"M Company A Company B Company C Apprentice programs on the job Supervisory training program Plant ecology Union affiliation Contribution to the community General maintenance and tool and die maker apprentice programs. Managerial employees (including the plant owner) held weekly ”in house“ classes concern- ing improving supervi- sory skills in the areas of training and development, communica- tions, and participa- tive management. Company was well- lighted, clean, and equipment was well- spaced. None Allotted a percentage of its earnings to various Black orga- nizations and agencies (e.g., United Negro College Fund, NAACP, SCIC, Black Scholarship Foundation, Sickle Cell Anemia Foundation, Black Businessmen's League). None None Same as company A After 30 days a new employee was required to join the Union (closed shop). Allotted a percentage of its earnings to the March of Dimes, Red Cross, United Fund, Muscular Dystrophy, and the American Cancer Society. None None Same as company A Same as company 8 Same as company 3 94 Instruments The demographic and attitudinal questionnaire employed in the present study incorporated five separate indices and a demographic information form. The question- naire was divided into two parts (see Appendix A). Each instrument used in the study is discussed in the following section. Demographic Questionnaire The demographic characteristics considered to be most relevant to the study include age, education, length of employment with company, present position, and income. Although these characteristics are not necessarily important in and of themselves as predictors, they can serve as mediating variables, and as such exert influence on other variables (see Appendix B). Multidimensional I-E Control Scale (with emphasis on race ideologyTI The first part of the attitudinal questionnaire measures the internal or external response for each respondent (see Appendix C). It consists of 26 items from the Gurin et a1. (1969) scale.12 Six items from _ 12The contemporary term "Black" was substituted for the word "Negro" on the race-relevant items. The term "Negro" among many Blacks carries negative connotations (e.g., Uncle Tom, the man's boy), whereas "Black" sym- bolizes self-determination, intelligence, and power. 95 the original 32, were eliminated based on redundancy and ambiguity as perceived by respondents. (A pilot study revealed the preceding factors and will be addressed later.) The scale contains five items on the personal control factor, 12 items on the Protestant Ethic ideology factor, four items on the individual—system blame factor, two items on the system modifiability factor, and one item each on the discrimination modifiability, individual- collective action, and racial militancy factors. Gurin (1972) indicated the test-retest reliability,13 and the validity of the scale is reported in Forward and Williams (1970), Gurin et_31. (1969), and Lao (1970). In addition, a Likert scale item was interjected into the study con- cerning the importance of race of company owner. The item was included because the researcher was taking for granted that race of company owner made a difference to employees, when actually it may not (see Appendix D). Thus, positive findings in this instance can add statis- tical weight to race-relevant predictions forwarded in the study. Powerlessness in Work Index The items composing the powerlessness index refer to feelings of freedom and control on the job. The original 13In a personal interview with Dr. Patricia Gurin, ISR—University of Michigan (Sept. 28, 1972), she indicated that the analysis of the test-retest reliability data had not been completed, but was certain the scale was reliable. 96 scale was developed by Shepard (1971) as a means of testing feelings of powerlessness among a large sample of blue and white-collar factory workers. The index contains two items selected from Shepard's scale which are meaningful to the present study population (see Appendix D). A 5-point Likert scale was used to measure the intensity of response to each question. The interitem correlations and item-total corre- lations are given in Appendix E. Instrumental Work Orientation Index Instrumental work orientation attempts to cope with the question of the meaning of work in one's total life. Specifically, in this study the concern is with the employ— ees' attitudes toward work in a given organization. Accord- ing to Shepard (1971), instrumental work orientation is conceptualized as the degree "to which work is considered to be primarily a means to ends outside of work as opposed to experiencing work activity as intrinsically meaningful." Two items were selected from his scale and utilized in the present research (see Appendix D). A 5-point Likert scale was used for both questions. Interitem correlations and item-total correlations are included in Appendix F. 97 Organizational Identification Index Developed by Patchen (1965), this instrument measures the extent of employee identification with the work organization, i.e., the sense of solidarity among all members of the organization in relationship to common goals and objectives. One item was selected from Patchen's work organization indices, and a S-point Likert scale was applied to measure the intensity of response to the question (see Appendix D). The item was chosen based on its applicability for purposes of the present study. Test-retest reliability and validity data are reported in Patchen (1965, 1969). Employee Termination Form An employee termination form (ETF) was used in the present study as an indicator of absolute turnover in each organization. The personnel manager or (equivalent) in each company was instructed to send the researcher an ETF, as soon as an employee terminated (who completed the question- naire) during a 6-month period following administration of the research instruments.1“ When an employee terminated, and gave his two week notice, he was asked by his foreman 1“In each company a confederate was used to identify employees who completed the questionnaire. An (x) was placed by the respondent's name on the company roster and pay record. Thus, prior to his name being removed from the pay record and company roster after terminating, the (X) mark revealed the person had completed the questionnaire. 98 or supervisor to fill out the ETF (if he desired). If the employee did not fill out the form, or left without notice, the personnel manager or equivalent was instructed to fill out the first four items (person's position, length of employment, work shift, reason for separation) and then mail the ETF promptly to the researcher. The significance of the ETF was that it enabled the researcher to provide information to the company owners on reasons for employee turnover, i.e., identification of factors causing turnover. A color code was used with ETF, since race of the employee terminating was not included on the instrument. A (blue) ETF was used in each organization for Black employee turn- over, and a (white) ETF was utilized for white employee turnover (see Appendix G). Procedure Each respondent completed a questionnaire while assembled in a group of between four and seven in the com- pany lunchroom. The group size and group composition (managerial and/or non-managerial employees) were determined by the company owners in regard to employee availability and plant work load. The purpose of the study and general instructions were read aloud by the researcher while each respondent followed the reading. They were informed that the maximum time for completion of the questionnaire was 99 30 minutes. The respondents were also told, "if they had any questions concerning the items, to feel free to ask the researcher." In addition, a blackboard was used in each company as a visual aid in illustrating the appropriate technique for answering questions. To differentiate between Black and white respondents, a color code was used on the forms as they were received. A log was kept for recording the time in which the employees of the three companies took the questionnaire, and the length of time it took individual respondents to complete the items. Pilot Study The Gurin gE_gl. (1969) Multidimensional I-E Control Scale of 32 items, and an additional six research-related items were administered to a group of four managerial and four non-managerial employees from company A. After come pleting the questionnaire, each respondent was interviewed. Based on unanimous agreement among respondents, six items in the Gurin g£_gl.'scale were evaluated as being ambiguous and redundant and were dropped. CHAPTER V RESULTS The general area of statistical concern in the present chapter circumvents the multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA), i.e., the study of group differences in location in a multidimensional measurement space. The distinctive multivariate nature of MANOVA designs is that the dependent variable is a vector variable. This depen- dent vector variable is assumed to be multivariate normal in distribution with the same dispersion, or variance- covariance matrix, for each population. Equality of dis— persions is the MANOVA extension of the assumption of homogeneity of variances in ANOVA designs. The research issues concern whether some or all of the populations are centered at different locations in the measurement space spanned by the dependent vector variable. Figure l illus- trates the research situation of the simple MANOVA design for a bivariate dependent variable. 100 101 Figure 1. Simple MANOVA situation; real differences among the populations. 102 General Findings A general overview of the non—managerial data is presented in Tables 2-3. Table 2 gives the group means and standard deviations for the Black and white employees on the dependent variables. Table 3 presents the inter— correlations of the dependent measures as used in the questionnaire. Inspection of this table reveals some significant relationships among the variables. At this point, a comment regarding the magnitude of the obtained relationships is appropriate. Obviously, in accord with Gurin g£_gl. (1969), it should be understood that the extent of association between variables is related to the population which is observed. Therefore, the present find— ings may be an artifact of this particular group. Also, it should be remembered that several measures (discrimination modifiability, individual-collective action, racial mili- tancy, attitude concerning race of company owner, organi- zational identification) were composed of a single attitude item. Thus, the obtained relationships may be considered as being "somewhat" inconsequential in magnitude. Based on the linkage analysis (McQuitty, 1957) per— formed in Table 3, the dependent variables took the form of two superclusters. The first cluster contained the combina- tion of the work-related variables (powerlessness in work, instrumental work orientation, organizational identification) 103 .bmuza .mvuzo hvu.zm .vmlzu .cowusuwccmuo ecu cues coeueowuwuoooa cows advocated m.omao .ooeuuuacsmwo ecu sue: cowusowuwucoow 30a mouuowocd.m.30qo .oowunucowuo rho: Heucosssuncw omen moueowooe m.ome: .oowusucoeuo macs Huucussuuuce sod advocated.” some .usMuHOQHH ones noose mundane we soon mausowocw.m cues .ucouwomaw mood Moose accosoo «0 some sebaceous.” some .xuos ca nuocumoauosom Ho «cameo 30H nousowoc«.m omen .xuos :4 uncommoduosom no common cows mouooeocd.m.soqo .noaocwncb roadwocwuwoOI caduecdswuoneo one .oowuos o>auooaa001aesow>wocw .eleao Inseam necsoe>eoce .aocduwaes Heaven .oecum usdunououm .Houucoo uncommon so Hosucoo Hassocks one! noueowoc«.m.:owo .Houucoo Masseuse one: mausoeond.m.soae .5335: accuses co monsoon use: 3033.6“. masque Es ecsotluduom me. can ms..." .38 main mm.“ mmé com hm. barn an. Haze .3. ov.v on. corn v~.~ and mm...” vein. «5 hscmlouv cues: 2.. mm... meta m~.m mm. $4 no..." «on 3... moé we. not" no. mo; on. v04 mné no.2 am. can :3 g. 3H5. moé 24 omé can no. 004 cam Nb.n an. .34 ow. 34 cm. :6 on. 34 No.n 2.3 no...” one ma 33900. vacuum 34 mic mo.N mm.n mmé om.v mmé 3.0 mm. 84 on. v04 $04 on.» we. on; amé mat—d barn «6.x». «2 union: 303m D m D M D M O M D M D M D M D W D M D M osofieowueucooa oscflouoowuo smog momma—00 oxao: a.“ 33.3433 seeded seam succeed..- amoHoooH edowusoo h§\uookoH9-m Hecowucuefimuo xuox we ovum nmocnnoauosOm oceans—3.830 o>euooadoo Iceman .3..de 3.5m Announce Houses-Sauce 13.3.35” Igow>eosn agnououm 8.3 3. .8 CL 3. .3 .3 8. AN. .3 mflfibm‘fl! BZNQZMAMD 20 mmmhoamlfl AdHNNQ‘Z‘lIZOZ ho mZOHB¢H>MD nfl¢flldhm 024 main! N Mflmdk 11)4 .Ho. v Nae .mo. vNe .Auoumsao ocmv noaocwuo> mounHoH-oomu pom mmoaooow owmum ucdunououm scum coauMHucoHomwflo no nonoouom mom mouwdouemmo ones Auoonoao undo noanofiuc> ooumHoHIxHoz one Houucoo HocOnHom .ommmoummsn use: accommeo ecu cw m.a one .cuoouodso phones: on monsoon who: mucowowumooo cOfluMHoHHOUII.ouoz .nwnhascs ecu ow moosdosw pom poseduopco ones ma. A ncOHumHoHHou «.m.- .8. :«M. Si no. no. so. 3. :Mmf 335E353 gaoneaquaomo 8: mle.- mo. .«Mmf mo. oo.- mo.- Sf Sf tale. oneaezmHmo smog flaggemza :3 no. mo. vo. imam. «.Mm. «Mm. 3%. 3%. mo... 885 sewage mo 8mm as «M. wwf «o. 3. oo.- 8. 3. S. :N..- use: 2H mmmzmmflmmzom E S.- co. m. S.- :Mm. rum). ta. 3%. mo. 333333: schema-“53.0.13 so 8. 8.- mm. 00,- m. :N. ....”._-m. :Mm. oaf :ofloa 33838-853505 5 mo. mo.- mm. 8. mlm. Mm. 2m. :MM. 8. 33m gamm-amsofiauau a: so. 2.- Mm. 2. am. .mlv Mm. idle. oo.- 8533: 88.2 E S. B.- m. 2 N. W... file. a. mo.- $383 355 ufiumfioua 5 mm.- mm. mo.- .m-m-f mo. 3.- S. 8- mo.- aomszB gazomamm a Aoav Ame Ame any on Ame Av. any «we AHV wmqm fizmazmmmfl UZOZ‘ magsgoumBZH ho mHm>§ mag m Manda. 105 and the personal control measure (self-distinction). The second cluster included the combination of race-related variables (discrimination modifiability, individual- collective action, individual-system blame, racial mili— tancy, attitude concerning race of company owner) and the Protestant Ethic ideology measure (other-distinction). Thus, it can be seen that the employees were relating their "expectancies" of personal control to the job context. Whereas in the second instance, they related their general beliefs about the role of internal and external forces in determining success and failure in the culture at large, with their perception of the racial situation. More spe- cifically, the type of response elicited by non-managerial employees, i.e., internal or external on the Protestant Ethic measure, affected their reply on the race-related variables. The importance of these clusters and their relationship to the individual analyses will be addressed more extensively in the following chapter. Tests of Hypotheses Comparison of Black Non-Mana erial Employees in Companies (A) and {BS The data from the present research were subjected to single factor multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVA's). This approach was appropriate because of the non-orthogonal nature of the cell frequencies, and the one-way design. 106 Table 4 reveals a significant multivariate F-ratio for the two groups (F= 55.56, df=lO/120, p< .0000). Therefore, it was concluded that the dispersions in the two populations as measured by the ten dependent measures were not equal (variation in population centroids was significantly different from zero). Because the Lambda (A) test rejected the null hypothesis of the equality of mean vectors (MANOVA null hypothesis), inspection of the univariate F-ratios is warranted. It is observed that all the univariate analyses were significant.15 The results indicated that Black 15An alpha level (a) of .05 was set for the multi- variate F-ratios. When the MANOVA null hypothesis was rejected, the a level was divided by 10 (no. of dependent measures), raising it to .005. The univariate F-ratios had to therefore attain this level of significance. This was, done in accord with Bock and Haggard (1968), and Tatsuoka' (1971), who indicate that dependency among the variables affects the experimentwise error rate. The experimentwise error rate is defined for experiments containing more than one comparison and is the probability that at least one comparison will be declared significant when in fact the null hypothesis is true for all the comparisons. Therefore, the correlations that exist among the 2 (dependent) variables must be taken into account, and a rule of thumb procedure a (e.g., no. of E variables) is used for this purpose. Furthermore, Hummel and Sligo (1971) conclude that the approach consisting of a multi- variate analysis of variance followed by univariate analyses of variance is recommended for a multivariate experiment because of its consistency and lack of extreme conservatism. They assert that the combination approach results in an experimentwise error rate which is reasonably coherent, regardless of E_(i.e., degree of correlation or size), and the proportion of variance in common. The procedure does not eliminate the occurrence of group errors, but keeps the probability of group errors at a low level. 107 TABLE 4 MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF BLACK NON-MANAGERIAL EMPLOYEES IN COMPANY (A) AND BLACK NON-MANAGERIAL EMPLOYEES IN COMPANY (B) _ l"___ w”-_ __r”_fiu-nw__1 . -- -m”n,wl_nm_l,-m__ fly ======= F—ratio for Multivariate Test of Equality of Mean Vectors==55.56 d.f. = 10 and 120 p_< 0.0000 Variable Bet. Mean Sq. Univariate F E< 1. PERSONAL CONTROL 486.23 382.84 0.0000* 2. Protestant Ethic Ideology 1865.20 318.75 0.0000 3. Racial Militancy 13.12 86.91 0.0000 4. Individual-System Blame 241.28 279.75 0.0000 5. Individual-Collective Action 19.41 194.13 0.0000 6. Discrimination Modifiability 18.08 175.66 0.0000 7. POWERLESSNESS IN WORK 687.39 166.94 0.0000 8. Race of Company Owner 194.86 172.04 0.0000 9. INSTRUMENTAL WORK ORIENTATION 859.68 235.43 0.0000 10. ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTIFICATION 171.97 137.44 0.0000 d.f. d.f. (Hypothesis) = 1 (Error) = 129 *All univariates were significant beyond .005 level. 108 non-managerial employees in company A, significantly differed from their Black counterparts in company B on the personal control measure and work-related variables (lst cluster), and on the Protestant Ethic ideology (PEI) measure and race-related variables (2nd cluster). The findings were in accord with the stated hypotheses, except for the Protes- tant Ethic ideology variable. The null hypothesis, i.e., both groups would have a similar internal orientation, was predicted for this measure. However, the latter was re- jected because Black employees in company A were more "external" on the PEI measure than Black employees in company B (see Table 2). Comparison of Black and White Non-Managerial Employees in Companyf(BT Table 5 indicates that the MANOVA null hypothesis was rejected (F==202.13, df==10/84, pg<.0000). In accord with this, the univariate F-ratios were examined to deter- mine which vector variables contributed to the discrimina- tion of the two groups. Black and white employees differed significantly on the personal control measure and work- related variables (lst cluster), and on the individual— system.blame measure (one element of the 2nd cluster). The results of the analyses were as predicted, except for the individual-system blame variable. The null hypothesis, i.e., both groups would have an equal internal orientation, 109 TABLE 5 MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF BLACK NON-MANAGERIAL EMPLOYEES IN COMPANY (B) AND WHITE NON-MANAGERIAL EMPLOYEES IN COMPANY (B) v.7 F-ratio for Multivariate Test of Equality of Mean Vectors==202.13 d.f.=10 and 84 p< 0.0000 Variable Bet. Mean Sq. Univariate F p< 1. PERSONAL CONTROL 492.79 803.58 0.0000* 2. Protestant Ethic Ideology 19.39 6.60 0.0118 3. Racial Militancy 0.00 0.00 0.9831 4. Individual-System Blame 3.90 17.70 0.0001* 5. Individual-Collective Action 0.01 0.36 0.5500 6. Discrimination Modifiability 0.01 0.14 0.7050 7. POWERLESSNESS IN WORK 666.97 207.61 0.0000* 8. Race of Company Owner 0.01 0.02 0.8689 9. INSTRUMENTAL WORK ORIENTATION 756.60 318.78 0.0000* 10. ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTIFICATION 180.22 208.45 0.0000* d.f. (Hypothesis) =1 d.f. (Error) ==93 *Significant beyond .005 level. 110 was predicted for this measure. However, the null hypothesis was rejected because Black employees were more "external" than their white counterparts on the I-SB measure (Table 2). Comparison of Black Non-Managerial Employees in C§§pany (A) andIWhite Non—Managerial Employees in Company (C) Table 6 shows that the null hypothesis for the equality of mean vectors was rejected. Therefore, it was concluded that the dispersions in the population samples were unequal. Due to this distinction, the univariate F- ratios were inspected to find on which variates the two groups differed. The Black employees significantly varied from white employees on the Protestant Ethic ideology mea- sure and race-related variables (2nd cluster). The results were in accord with the postulates, except for the Protestant Ethic ideology variable. The null hypothesis, i.e., both groups would have an equivalent internal orientation, was predicted for this measure. However, it was rejected because Black employees proved to be more "external" than white employees on the PEI measure (Table 2). Ancillarnyomparisons The prior analyses incorporated the major hypotheses of the present study. However, there were additional find— ings that help augment the scope of the research effort. 111 TABLE 6 MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF BLACK NON-MANAGERIAL EMPLOYEES IN COMPANY (A) AND WHITE NON-MANAGERIAL EMPLOYEES IN COMPANY (C) F—ratio for Multivariate Test of Equality of Mean Vectors==52.04 d.f.=10 and 170 p_<0.0000 Variable Bet. Mean Sq. Univariate F E< 1. PERSONAL CONTROL 0.00 0.00 0.9844 2. Protestant Ethic Ideology 2912.70 496.72 0.0000* 3. Racial Militancy 18.46 142.56 0.0000* 4. Individual-System Blame 377.43 377.68 0.0000* 5. Individual-Collective Action 24.11 208.07 0.0000* 6. Discrimination Modifiability 23.07 186.33 0.0000* 7. POWERLESSNESS IN WORK 4.93 1.34 0.2475 8. Race of Company Owner 252.28 181.41 0.0000* 9. INSTRUMENTAL WORK ORIENTATION 0.28 0.08 0.7772 10° ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTIFICATION 2.11 1.88 0.1716 d.f. (Hypothesis) = l d.f. (Error) = 179 r *Significant beyond .005 level. 112 Table 7 presents a comparative analysis between white non-managerial employees in company B and white non- managerial employees in company C. This analysis was conducted primarily to offset the argument that the same degree of difference between two white population samples would occur on the dependent measures as it did for the Black samples. Although the MANOVA null hypothesis was rejected in this case, i.e., the population centroids (mean vectors) were not equal, the two groups differed significantly on only one vector variable, that being, organizational identification (F = 13.03, df = 1/143, 3 < .0005). Table 4 shows that significant variations between Black employees in companies A and B occurred on every vector variable, and the differences were of such a high magnitude, that an argument of the aforementioned nature carries little statistical weight. The comparison of Black non-managerial employees in company A and white non-managerial employees in company B is presented in Table 8. The results were similar to the findings observed in comparing Black employees in company A and white employees in company C (Table 6). That is, the groups differed significantly on the Protestant Ethic ideology measure and race-related variables (2nd cluster). The main exception was a significant variation between the employees on the personal control measure (F==9.95, 113 TABLE 7 MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF WHITE NON-MANAGERIAL EMPLOYEES IN COMPANY (B) AND WHITE NON-MANAGERIAL EMPLOYEES IN COMPANY (C) W F-ratio for Multivariate Test of Equality of Mean Vectors= 2.51 d.f. =10 and 134 p< 0.0083 Variable Bet. Mean Sq. Univariate F p< 1. PERSONAL CONTROL 9.19 7.51 0.0069 2. Protestant Ethic Ideology 16.97 4.27 0.0406 3. Racial Militancy 0.01 . 0.24 0.6193 4. Individual-System Blame 3.70 6.00 0.0155 5. Individual-Collective Action 0.27 3.66 0.0576 6. Discrimination Modifiability 0.21 1.79 0.1823 7. POWERLESSNESS IN WORK 23.46 7.92 0.0056 8. Race of Company Owner 0.69 0.60 0.4386 9. INSTRUMENTAL WORK ORIENTATION 1.60 0.59 0.4428 10. ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTIFICATION 10.90 13.03 0.0005* d.f. (Hypothesis)==l d.f. (Error) = 143 *Significant beyond .005 level. 114 TABLE 8 MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF BLACK NON-MANAGERIAL EMPLOYEES IN COMPANY (A) AND WHITE NON-MANAGERIAL EMPLOYEES IN COMPANY (B) ~ .' .._.— __..__ _——___—~..—.-——._~_..._-...~.»’.—-—__.—-»-- -» .—-—m— .—-—-———-— F-ratio for Multivariate Test of Equality of Mean Vectors==137.9l d.f. =10 and 121 p< 0.0000 Variable Bet. Mean Sq. Univariate F E< 1. PERSONAL CONTROL 8.86 9.95 0.0020* 2. Protestant Ethic Ideology 2349.78 467.27 0.0000* 3. Racial Militancy 13.33 89.00 0.0000* 4. Individual-System Blame 319.68 383.48 0.0000* 5. Individual-Collective Action 20.76 225.51 0.0000* 6. Discrimination Modifiability 19.43 202.48 0.0000* 7. POWERLESSNESS IN WORK 8.38 2.57 0.1113 8. Race of Company Owner 193.18 149.60 0.0000* 9. INSTRUMENTAL WORK ORIENTATION 2.81 0.79 0.3732 10. ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTIFICATION 4.09 4.00 0.0476 d.f. (Hypothesis) =1 d.f. (Error) = 130 *Significant beyond .005 level. 115 df==1/130, pg<.002). On this variable, the white employees were more "internal" than the Black employees (see Table 2). Table 9 displays the comparison between Black non- managerial employees in company B and white non-managerial employees in company C. The results were analogous to the findings observed in comparing Black and white employees in company B (Table 5), i.e., the groups varied significantly on the personal control measure and work-related variables (lst cluster). However, in this analysis there was no significant distinction between Black and white employees on the individual-system blame variable. Race of Company Owner Index: Attitudinal Responses of Non-ManageriaIIEmployees in Companies (A), (B), and (C) A dependent measure of attitude concerning race of company owner was employed in the present study to determine if the ethnicity of the company owner made a difference to the employees in the three organizations. The cell mean for Black employees in company A was higher than that of Black and white employees in companies B and C on this variable (see Table 2). Furthermore, there was a significant vari- ation between Black employees in company A and Black employees in company B (Table 4; F==172.04, df==1/129, p<1.0000). The univariate F—ratio in Table 6 (F==181.41, df==1/179, 21:.0000), also presents a significant difference 116 TABLE 9 MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF BLACK NON-MANAGERIAL EMPLOYEES IN COMPANY (B) AND WHITE NON-MANAGERIAL EMPLOYEES IN COMPANY (C) M W F-ratio for Multivariate Test of Equality of Mean Vectors==77.74 d.f. =10 and 133 p< 0.0000 Variable Bet. Mean Sq. Univariate F p< 1. PERSONAL CONTROL 511.73 325.96 0.0000* 2. Protestant Ethic Ideology 0.98 0.21 0.6475 3. Racial Militancy 0.01 0.22 0.6383 4. Individual-System Blame 0.13 0.21 0.6434 5. Individual-Collective Action 0.15 1.93 0.1665 6. Discrimination Modifiability 0.10 0.86 0.3540 7. POWERLESSNESS IN WORK 625.48 167.35 0.0000* 8. Race of Company Owner 0.97 0.96 0.3284 9. INSTRUMENTAL WORK ORIENTATION 930.29 329.40 0.0000* 10. ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTIFICATION 149.38 143.27 0.0000* d.f. (Hypothesis) =1 d.f. (Error) = 142 *Significant beyond .005 level. 117 between Black employees in company A and white employees in company C on this measure. Specifically, Black employees in company A held the attitude that the company owner should be of the same race or ethnic group as the majority of his employees, however, Black and white employees in company B, and white employees in company C, disagreed with the latter. Consequently, the ethnicity of the company owner was extremely important to employees in company A, whereas its importance was not considered paramount by employees in companies B and C. Thus, the vector variable of attitude concerning race of company owner contributed to the diversity between the aforementioned groups. Table 5 reveals there was no sig- nificant difference on the race of company owner variable involving Black and white employees in company B. Analysis of Turnover One of the most persistent theoretical and practical problems facing industrial-organizational psychologists is employee turnover. Thus, the present study included a comparison of turnover during a 6-month period among non- managerial employees and attempted to determine etiological factors for termination. An "in-depth" analysis of employee turnover was not readily established because of the inabil- ity to identify employees regarding their I-E control 118 expectancies and work—related attitudes.16 Table 10 shows the data revealed by utilization of the employee termination forms. Specifically, two important aspects of the turnover data stand out. The first relates to the termination per- centages of the Black non-managerial employees in companies A and B, while the second relates to their reasons for separation. In comparing the employees, it was noted that the Black employees in company B had a significantly higher turnover rate (pg<.01) than Black employees in company A (i.e., differences in population proportion). Also, it can be seen that the reasons for termination among Black employees in companies A and B were distinct in nature. At the end of 6 months, 16 of the 19 respondents who ter- minated in company A, did so, for reasons of inappropriate salary and procurement of a new job. Whereas, 13 of the 17 Black employees who terminated in company B,indicated per- sonal reasons as their explanation for leaving the organi- zation. A third and striking feature of the turnover data 16Employees who terminated could not be identified in terms of type of response elicited on the questionnaire (e.g., internal or external on personal control variable). This was primarily due to time limitations placed on the researcher by the company owners, and the desire among two owners for employee anonymity. Despite assurances of the latter, plant managers of companies B and C expounded that "they didn't want any trouble with the union, or a court suit facing them for violating an individual's right to privacy." 119 .o>onc and Ho>oa Ho. onu um accowuecmwm mum nooeouowuev ommucoouomu .cowuccflahmu new mfinmuonaoa mnoum noosuwn mflnmcoeumaou ecu OGHEHouop on com: um: unou panama-“nu ¢II.ouoz no“ 3mz-H mcommou Manatee Ho Spacer-H poouocomfip Ho pouwmlm uoumuomo moaaom-H uom map-hemmou men-d mucwh on.m Ho>wup OH-wm-H mH.m m hm amazemumm QSIGMOHUIH uoucuwmo momma-H Io sandaoov cues: no“ 3mz-H uom aflo-Hwomou own-H pomumsomfip Ho tough-H munch om.~ unflucmummc map can Moos-H ha.v N we Am acmmaoov oven: :dfihwmmou ocwnodz|d wumamm museumoummmcH-H cos nwuu docs-H new 3mz-H . Ho>wuu xuaHe-H . cmmuusumao no sauna-m muses no A oce>wwoou u ocnaaegm-H he on he be .m mamasoov xomam mcomcou anaemuomlma awesomuom malcmmaonm muoomummo woman-m oocwcuu :Mwowuuoon-H mcommou Accomuom-H cue camomna pwvumnomflp no poufimum . GOEhflomou ocazomxlm . nofl swz-n mucus ~v H Hmccomuod ms-qmmHo-N «mm mm ma em 1e scmmaooe xomam whoamm «pneumoummccnlm nuo>fiup cater-N muoumuomo mocha-AH coeucummom you conmmm acos>OHQEm mo whoooucu Accowummaooo mcowuucflauoa meowuccdauma z accmEOO\uoo>0Hmau sumcvq oomuo>4 a no Honfisz Hmcwmwuo AMF. EUK0 02HB¢ZHS¢HB meMquxm AdHflmUdZdllzoz ho 20H8¢mQARIN NO mBUZHA m0¢mm>¢ .NflOOHBflU AdZOHBdeUUO .NB¢N MN>OZMDH OH manta 120 relates to the variations in termination among Black and white non-managerial employees in company B. Black employ- ees had a significantly higher turnover rate (pg<.001) than white employees. Comparing the white employees in company C with Blacks in company A, revealed Black employees had a significantly higher turnover rate (pg<.01) than their white counterparts in company C. Association between Demographic Variables and Dependent Measures Since the relationship of the dependent measures and the demographic variables was of interest to the present research, the correlations for the total number of non- managerial employees are presented in Table 11. It is observed that there were only a few significant correlations in the matrix. Therefore, it was concluded that age, edu— cation, length of employment, type of job, and income in an overall sense, had no direct effect (i.e., exiguous relationships, and the few that were significant accounted for very little variance) on the employees' attitudinal responses regarding the self-other, race ideology, and work- related items. Interitem correlations for the entire group of non-managerial employees, and for each individual group, e.g., Black employees in company A, are presented in Tables H-l-H-S (see Appendix H). 1J21 .3. Va: .3. Va. .nupouvnsa vacuum: on povcaou 0H0: mucufloauwooo cowuuHOHHOUII.ouoz mo. «me. vo. ca. «ma. oneauHmHezmoH qaonaeuezaomo Aoae mo. «ea.- Ho. mo.- mo.- oneaszmHmo axon qgszmzememzm Ame mo. mo.- Ho.- Ha. oo.- amaze mqwdaoo no moms Ame oo. «.oa. mo. mo. «we. use: zH mmmzmmmqmmsom .51 do. we. mo.- mo. Ho. sueaeanuscoz aosumceaeuummo loo mo. Ho.- «o.- .ma. Ho. coeuoa m>euowaaoo-Hmsoe>wcaa Ame Ho.- mo.- «o.- mo. . mo.- «amen acumen-Hmsce>ecaH Ave mo.- oo.- so.- no. oo. avenueae: Humans Ame co. vo.- no.- mo. oo.- smoaoocH owgum usuaauuoum Am. oa. oH.- oo. .mH.- eo.- nomezoo qazommmm .HV oaoocH non no game acoa>oamsm mo numcoq coauooupm 0mm Am. Avv Amy ANS AH. Amhm I, 2v gas AdHKNUdZEIIZOZ my; mmoauflh UHEA‘KUOSEG DZK mmMDm¢MI Bzmdzmmmn m0 mZOHadqmmmOU HH Hugh. 122 Managerial Employees As mentioned previously, analysis of the managerial employees was not the locus of concern in the present study. Because of the small cell frequencies, and the unavailabil- ity of Black managerial employees in company B, the findings cannot be considered as representative of the manufacturing industry population. However, the analyses of Black and white managerial employees in companies A, B, and C are included in Tables I-l-I-S to provide more information (see Appendix I). The implications of the results, final conclusions, and recommendations for future research are discussed in the succeeding chapter. CHAPTER VI DISCUSSION Summary of Results The data in the present investigation indicated there were significant attitudinal differences between Black non-managerial employees in an all-Black company and Black non-managerial employees in a white-owned (racially mixed) company on every measure of internal-external control and work-related factors (lst and 2nd clusters). The results also revealed significant differences between Black and white non-managerial employees in a white-owned (racially mixed) company on the personal control measure and work- related variables (lst cluster), and on one variable of the second cluster, individual—system blame. Furthermore, sig- nificant variations between Black non-managerial employees in an all-Black company and white non-managerial employees in an all-white company were noted on the Protestant Ethic ideology measure and race-related variables (2nd cluster). To enable the reader to conceptualize the breadth of the present study, Table 12 presents a synopsis of the research findings. 123 124 £588 323.43 5 81.398 33: .. 3 $880 892i 3:89.: 0085-32: 5. cocky—.8 «can! I I. £3250 can I H San? Gala! :Hauuauv vain-audi- 5 nooks—.8 #013 I in 3.33.? an." I H .hedioo salsa-«Ha ca cannons luau: I n .oueououuwu 0:333:33 I x . soggy canon-achi— 06 3.53.? 33.365. m-n coda-B: . Anonoguomh: uoflul Bananas. onv Buddha -.-.-- x III-II- uuuuuu x IIIII III-I x :3. I!- x -.l Illa m x x x x x x in x Inn iln m IIIIII N III! he. x x x x x 2 Inn 6 unnunn x Huuunuunnnnn x “nun ”Hun” x nun-II” x nun x u“ Eula m Hnnnun x nn-I-HHHHHHHH x unnnn x flunuu x unnnnn x x x x x nun x nun Sale .5 guanuancvpm cougar—cane .355 >580 xuo: 5. hawznawuwvo: :owuo‘ clean Sawdust EH89" fiend-00 83.3 van-n. Haeonuuaaumuo 3303 no 005— anocumwauoaom 6035:3030 u>nuuozoo auu>m Memos. 0.23m Andaman.— dwuculfiuwca «Ha-61593.. «Hi—cabana ”.5808.— 8: a. .3 A: A3 A3 A: .2 .3 a: waning, Emaaaggaggflaagsgggsmagg N.— "Han. 125 For purposes of recapitulation, three sets of hypotheses were tested in the present research and the results were as follows: Ia. Ib. Ic. Id. IIa. IIb. IIC. Black non-managerial employees in company A more internal on personal control factor than Black non-managerial employees in company B (confirmed). Black non-managerial employees in company A and Black non-managerial employees in company B equally internal on Protestant Ethic ideology factor (not confirmed--Black non-managerial employees in company A less internal (more external) than Black non-managerial employees in company B on Protestant Ethic ideology factor). Black non-managerial employees in company A less internal on individual—system blame, individual-collective action, discrimination modifiability, and racial militancy factors than Black non-managerial employees in com- pany B (confirmed). Black non-managerial employees in company A lower degree of powerlessness in work, lower instrumental work orientation, and a higher identification with the work organization than Black non-managerial employees in company B (confirmed). Black non-managerial employees in company B less internal on personal control factor than white non-managerial employees in company B (confirmed). Black and white non-managerial employees in company B equally internal on Protestant Ethic ideology factor (confirmed).. Black and white non—managerial employees in company B equally internal on individual-system blame, individual-collective action, discrimina- tion modifiability, and racial militancy factors (confirmed, except--Black non-managerial employees in company B less internal (more external) than white non-managerial employees in company B on individual-system blame factor). IId. IIIa. IIIb. IIIC. IIId. 126 Black non-managerial employees in company B higher degree of powerlessness in work, higher instrumental work orientation, and a lower identification with the work organization than white non-managerial employees in company B (confirmed). Black non-managerial employees in company A and white non-managerial employees in company C equally internal on personal control factor (confirmed). Black non-managerial employees in company A and white non-managerial employees in company C equally internal on Protestant Ethic ideology factor (not confirmed-—B1ack non-managerial employees in company A less internal (more external) than white non-managerial employees in company C on Protestant Ethic ideology factor). Black non-managerial employees in company A less internal on individual-system blame, individual-collective action, discrimination modifiability, and racial militancy factors than white non-managerial employees in come pany C (confirmed). Black non-managerial employees in company A and white non-managerial employees in company C, no significant differences on variables of power- lessness in work, instrumental work orientation, and identification with the work organization (confirmed). In summary, the present research effort provided evidence which indicated that the attitudes of Black non- managerial employees in an all-Black company were signif- icantly different from those of Black non-managerial employees in a white-owned (racially mixed) company concerning internal-external control (i.e., self-other distinction and race ideologY)- and job satisfaction (i.e., 127 work-related factors). Black and white non-managerial employees in the same company varied significantly on factors of personal control, job satisfaction, and individual-system.blame (race—related measure), but were comparable on the Protestant Ethic ideology variable and other race-related measures. In addition, the attitudes of Black non-managerial employees in an all-Black company and white non-managerial employees in an all-white company were similar on personal control and work-related measures, but were significantly divergent on the Protestant Ethic ideology and race-related factors. Personal Control, Powerlessness in Work, InstrumentaIIWork*Orientation, Organizatibnal Identification (1st cluster) In conjunction with Table 12, the first cluster (personal control and work-related variables) was analyzed in terms of employee differences, and where apprOpriate, the hypotheses were restated to clarify the meaning of the results. The primary hypotheses regarding the first cluster involved Black non-managerial employees in companies A and B. It was predicted that Black non-managerial employees in an all-Black company would be more internal on the personal control measure, have a lower degree of powerlessness in work, a lower instrumental work orientation, i.e., a higher intrinsic value of work in total life, and a higher 128 identification with the work organization. The results revealed that these postulates were supported, as they were in the comparison of Black and white non-managerial employ- ees in a white-owned (racially mixed) company. Therefore, a logical question at this point would be, what accounted for these significant variations? Contrary to the findings of Coleman e£_§l. (1966) and Gurin (1968, 1970), Blacks of similar background and circumstances differed in terms of their expectancies of personal control. Thus, it would appear, at least on a surface level, that differences in the work milieu might be responsible for interindividual variations among Blacks in an all-Black company and Blacks in a racially mixed company. It also appears quite possible that the all-Black work organization in some form or mode, enhances feelings of self-control, self-esteem, and self- determination, which are inseparable entities of the Black consciousness movement. In addition, deviations in manage- ment objectives and leadership styles of Black and white company owners might affect the perception of its Black employees in such a manner, as to result in differences in expectancies of personal control and job satisfaction. A myriad of factors could account for attitudinal differences between Black non-managerial employees in all- Black and racially mixed organizations. However, the writer posits several plausible explanations for the significant 129 distinctions on personal control and work-related factors among Black employees.' The first explanation is in agree- ment with Korman (1971), that individuals will tend to engage in and will find satisfying those behavioral roles which maximize their sense of cognitive balance or con- sistency. This being the case, two derivations are implied: (a) individuals will be motivated to perform on a task or job in a manner which is consistent with the self-image with which they approach the task or job situation. That is, to the extent-that a person's self-concepts concerning the job or task situation require effective performance in order to result in consistent cognitions, he then will be motivated to engage in effective performance: (b) individuals will tend to choose and find most rewarding those job and task roles which are consistent with their self-cognitions. Thus, to the extent that a Black employee has a self- cognition of himself as a competent, need satisfying individual, then to that extent, he has a sense of internal personal control. Differences among employees regarding self—esteem, self-evaluation, and personal control may arise in a number of ways. In the case of Black employees, interaction with the social environment, as well as with peers, supervisors, foremen, and management in the work environment, is largely responsible for the variance in personal control expect- ancies. Second, one's self-perceived competence may be 130 conceived as concerning a particular task or job at hand. This may occur as a result of differential learning experiences or the specific characteristics of the moment. Finally, and extremely important, it should be noted that one's sense of personal control is a function of the expec- tations others have of us. As Tannenbaum (1962) has argued, to the extent that others (a) think that we are competent, need satisfying, and able, and (b) exhibit such thoughts by their behavior toward us, to that extent our self-perceived competence concerning the task at hand is increased and so is, predictably, task performance. The rationale is that such interpersonal evaluation provides a base of "reality" which one can learn from his previous experiences (Vroom, 1964). There are a variety of studies which are supportive of the first explanation. In what was termed a test of dissonance theory, Denmark and Guttentag (1967) found that women with good self-concepts (i.e., low self-ideal discrep- ancies) were more likely to engage in behavior designed to achieve their college attendance goals than women with poor self-concepts. Similarly, Korman (1967a, 1967b) found that individuals of high self-esteem.were more likely to have chosen occupations where they thought they had high abil- ities than individuals of low self-esteem. Perhaps, the most revealing and consistent findings are those of Katz (1964), which indicate, that the task performance of Blacks 131 is a function of their "expectancy" of success in the situation, both as they perceive it, and as others perceive it in them. Two later studies (Katz, Roberts, and Robinson, 1965; Katz, Henchy, and Allen, 1968) revealed that the self- perceived competence of Blacks for a task may be a function of "who" is doing the observing and evaluating of task per- formance. For verbal tasks, a Black person's self-perceived competence for a task, was less when he was observed by whites. However, the reverse was the case when the task was a motor one, a finding that was predictable because of the erroneous stereotype among whites that Black people are superior on motor tasks and other physical skills. Since it is assumed that a component part of a person's expectancy of personal control is the extent to which he sees himself as competent and efficacious, as opposed to incompetent and impuissant, these studies are consistent with the first explanation. A second explanation for distinctions among employ- ees on the first cluster, lies in the area of the "organie zational make-up" of the different companies. For example, Black employees in a white-owned (racially mixed) company may be in a type of organization which is need fulfilling and enhancing for its white members, but is impractical and ineffective in meeting the needs of its Black employees. Such an organization may be following a "traditional or 132 classical approach" in the way it defines its goals, and how worker behavior will be perceived and dealt with. One of the most crucial criticisms of the traditional organiza- tion is that even when individuals are oriented toward the success of the organization as a "whole," the emphasis on dependency on the approval of supervisors in the hierarchy, will result in significant motivational deficits in at least two ways. First, there is the observation by many investi- gators that situations and environments of dependency are inimical to creative expression. This is especially true of the Black worker in a white-owned organization, who may introduce various change processes (e.g., demands for an additional number of Black employees in the company, or increased promotions to managerial positions), and also begin to assert his Black consciousness through various mannerisms and interactions. Creative expression from a subordinate, particularly one who is Black, can be consid- ered as an attack on the superior-subordinate assumptions of the traditional organizational model. Second, traditional organizations may also inhibit creativity because of their reliance on antiquated rules from "above." Hence, such behavior may come to be perceived as "normal" and "expected" by the organization members, both Black and white. This could lead them to reject innovation 133 and change as being inconsistent with the work environment as they know it. However, the effect would appear to be more deleterious for Black employees than for whites because of the constant metamorphosis that is taking place outside the world of work. One of the characteristics of the traditional organization model that has been of considerable interest is the direct derivation that individuals are encouraged to concern themselves with and identify with only matters relating to themselves and their own specific jobs. This may lead to cognitive processes centering on one's own subgroups, high subgroup identification, and resulting differences across subgroups. Two studies support this derivation as to the consequences of the traditional orga- nizational model. Dearborn and Simon (1958) found that middle-level executives tended to perceive that the most important and significant problems facing a company were those relating to their "own" occupations, a set of findings generally replicated by Korman (1963). In addition, Korman found that this effect was also true of lower-line supervi- sors and tended to show up as early as two years after they entered the organization. It should be noted that one prob- lem in interpreting these results and applying them to the Black-owned and operated work organization and the white- owned (racially mixed) company in comparing differences on 134 the first cluster, is that, perhaps the occupational identifications occurred before the workers entered the organization, and they may have chosen the occupations because of such identifications. Assuming that employees with differing perceptions and attitudes (e.g., Black and white racial subgroups within an organization) are less likely to agree on the status of others and themselves (including other stimuli within the organization), is this important? There is evidence, as Hunt (1969) points out, that lack of status congruence tends to be associated with such variables as low satisfaction, stress symptoms of various types, intragroup conflict, withdrawal, and low productivity. Such outcomes are not surprising when one considers the importance of consistency in human behavior. Employees, as well as management, need an organized, coherent view of the world in order that they may adjust their behavior appropriately, and it is when their world is not consistent and is incongruent that organizations become misguided and uncertain as to how they should function. Such abashment, lowers behavioral efficiency and increases stress and anxiety indices, with the consequences being those heretofore mentioned. This is not to maintain that an unchanging, static environment must always be sought, and that changes can never be introduced into the organization for fear of 135 disrupting the positive relationship between congruency and desired outcomes. Rather, the task for the white-owned organization with Black employees especially, is to see that change is introduced in such a manner that the self-perceived competence of Blacks is either increased or at least main- tained. When this is done, the negative effects of incon- gruency will be overcome to a great degree by the fact that change and its implications are not as anxiety-provoking for high-self—esteem individuals (since they have the confidence to handle what is coming and it is likely that they have built high self-esteem.by handling and becoming acclimated to change in the past) and by the positive effects of a work force that has a high degree of self-perceived competence (i.e., personal control) and hence, is more likely to be motivated to reduce its inconsistency by achieving perfor— mance outcomes which are consistent with positive self- evaluation. There are a number of studies of change proc- esses which indicate that if change agents are implemented so as to achieve favorable self-evaluation, the results from such changes are beneficial for performance (Bennis, Benne, and Chin, 1969). There is a wealth of data which points clearly to the conclusion that the growth of permanently committed, and classified subgroups, of the type encouraged by the tradi- tional organizational model, with the resulting within-group 136 similarity and betweenégroup differences, may be debilitating both for organizational creativity and for the control of conflict (Kahn, Wolfe, Quinn, Snoek, and Rosenthal, 1964). From the viewpoint of creativity, it is quite clear that companies following a traditional model are incapable of creative change and creative expression. Why are traditional organizations relatively non-creative? According to Steiner (1965), the answer is that creativity involves a "newness" and "difference" of approach, something which is quite opposite in meaning from the conformism implicit in the traditional organization. In terms of conflict, it appears obvious that the growth of divergent groups within the organization may lead to discord. That is, it would encourage a lack of reliance on overall company identification, a growth of a "we-they" syndrome as opposed to an "us" system of thinking, and a lack of movement across departmental and subgroup lines on any voluntary basis (due not only to a belief in differences between employees, but also the development of social norms, values, and perceptions legitimatizing and reinforcing dif- ferences). The combined characteristics would then serve to maximize the possibilities of intergroup conflict within the organization (Schein, 1965). Thus, conclusions on the basis of the aforementioned evidence are quite transparent. To the extent that an 137 organization has an orientation toward its "parts," such an orientation will probably lead to states of status incongruity, role conflict, and between-group differences (Korman, 1970). This would, in turn, have such negative outcomes as lower performance, a higher degree of power- lessness in work, a higher instrumental work orientation, lower identification with the organization, and a greater likelihood of intergroup conflict. It is, also, unfortu- nately the case that such a part orientation is most likely to occur in an organization which does not provide the environmental supports to overcome the nocuous effects of differences and disparities within its system. As has been indicated earlier and will be amplified again, distinctions and change, in addition to being inevitable, are not neces- sarily malefic for organizational functioning, if a company develops ego supports that help employees (Black or white) handle various disequilibrium states. Such supportiveness has been found to result in less negative effects of change and instability (Leeds, 1964). Therefore, when changes and disequilibrium are combined with high self-esteem and high self-perceived competence, they are less likely to result in low personal control. Finally, a more meaningful and explicit explanation of the dramatic differences on the first cluster between Black non-managerial employees in companies A and B, as well 138 as Black and white non-managerial employees in company B, may be attributed to variances in the "organizational climate." Forehand and Gilmer (1964) feel that climate consists of a set of characteristics that describe an organization, distinguish it from other organizations, are relatively enduring over time, and influence the behavior of the people in it. Georgopoulos (1965) talks of a norma- tive structure of attitudes and behavior standards which provide a basis for interpreting the situation and act as a source of pressure for directing activity. Litwin and Stringer (1966) further add that organizational properties must be perceived by individuals in the organization and that an important aspect of climate is the "patterns of expectations and incentive values that impinge on and are created by a group of people that live and work together." From this compilation of properties, components, and determiners that various authors feel contribute to cli- mate, one might conceptualize climate as a set of attributes specific to a particular organization that may be induced from the way that organization interacts with its members and its environment. For the individual member within the organization, climate takes the form of a set of attitudes and expectancies which describe the organization in terms of both static characteristics (e.g., degree of autonomy) and behavior-outcome and outcome-outcome contingencies 139 (Campbell, Dunnette, Lawler, and Weick, 1970). Thus, the organizational milieu and its employees may be viewed in terms of the self-evaluations that such environments cultivate. That is, to the extent that such organizations lead to high self-perceived competency and evaluation, an increase in goal-directed behavior, competence-oriented behavior, and the desire to achieve congruence with a posi- tively valued self-concept might be expected. The all-Black company appears to foster such traits or ideals, but the white-owned (racially mixed) company is not perceived in this manner by its Black employees. Variations in employees' perception of the relevant stimuli, constraints, and rein- forcement contingencies are evidenced in Tables 4 and 5. In agreement with Argyris (1964), McGregor (1960), and Likert (1967), the extent that an individual feels he is an important part of the organizational structure, is a function of the degree to which the organization provides an ego-enhancing atmosphere, as Opposed to one that is debilitating. Such an atmosphere would be reflected by the organization in terms of the following behaviors: (a) increased decision-making responsibility over one's job; (b) decreased amount of external control; (c) degree to which company has training and development policies that are ego-enhancing and which imply that individuals in the organization are capable and competent enough to perform 140 higher level job functions. Therefore, it is the contention of the writer that when the aforementioned factors are pre- sented as relative to the level at which the employee is working, they will tend to increase the worker's (e.g., Black employees in racially mixed company) sense of self- control and competence in the given work situation, as well as stabilize the level of work motivation so that it is congruent with the employee's self-image. Support for this explanation was established in a study by Friedlander and Greenberg (1971) involving the hard-core unemployed (HCU). Using 478 respondents, of which 91% were Black, the authors found that the sole correlate of the HCU's work effectiveness and behavior was the degree of supportiveness of the organizational climate in which he was placed. Protestant Ethic Ideology, Racial Militancy, IndIVidual-System Blame, Individual- Cbllective Action, Discgimination Modifiability, Race of Company Owner (2nd cluster) Some significant variations were noted among the non-managerial employees on the Protestant Ethic ideology (PEI) and race—related measures used in the research (see Table 12). The second cluster also appears to have come prised the respondents' belief-value system, a hypothetical explanation which will be addressed later in this section. 141 Specifically, the principal hypotheses for the second cluster involved Black non-managerial employees in come panies A and B. It was predicted that Black non-managerial employees in an all-Black company and a white-owned (racially mixed) company would be equally internal on the Protestant Ethic ideology measure (i.e., they would share the belief that hard work, skill, effort, etc., are important deter— minants of success in life). Furthermore, it was predicted that Black non-managerial employees in an all-Black company would be more external (i.e., display a more affiliative or group orientation) than their Black counterparts in company B on the race ideology variables, excluding the race of company owner index. Comparisons of Black and white non- managerial employees in company B, and Black and white non-managerial employees in companies A and C were also conducted. The hypotheses regarding equivalent internality on the PEI measure between Black non-managerial employees in company A and Black and white non-managerial employees in companies B and C were not supported. Blacks in company A were significantly more "external" on the PEI measure (i.e., expressed belief success follows from luck, right breaks, knowing the right people, etc.) than both the Black employ- ees in company B (Table 4), and white employees in company C (Table 6). Black and white non-managerial employees in com— pany B did not differ on this variable. 142 The postulates involving the race-relevant, internal-external control items were supported in the comparison of Black non-managerial employees in companies A and B, and between Black non-managerial employees in company A and white non-managerial employees in company C. In the analysis of Black and white employees in company B, the hypotheses of similar internality on the race-related measures were substantiated, with the exception of the individual-system blame measure (see Table 5). In this case, the Black non-managerial employees in company B proved to be significantly more "external" on the I-SB measure (i.e., attributed responsibility for failure to the socio- economic system). Significant distinctions on the race of company owner variable were revealed in the comparison of Black non-managerial employees in companies A and B (Table 4), and between Black and white non-managerial employees in companies A and C (Table 6). In contrast to the findings of Coleman gt_gl. (1966) and Gurin and Katz (1966), Black non-managerial employees in company A did not share the belief in the Protestant Ethic with Black and white non-managerial employees in companies B and C. Why? The explanation appears to lie in the periph- ery of acculturation and socio—political sophistication. For example, Black activists and civil rights leaders are currently grappling simultaneously to discard victim per- spectives and to revise the view of Black history in terms 143 of exploitation and-oppression, thereby develOping pride in the group's heritage of adaptive strength and endurability. Group pride therefore demands a collective consciousness of racial oppression and an understanding of the Black man's historical, contemporary, and international experience (Barbour, 1968). Based on this analysis, it would seem that Black non-managerial employees in the all-Black company have a more sophisticated collective consciousness and group pride orientation regarding their role in society. Reject— ing a rigid Protestant Ethic vieWpoint likewise implies this consciousness by questioning the legitimacy of the dominant group's cultural norms, which, when internalized by subor- dinated groups, produces self-blame for their life situation. Blacks in company A probably felt that if everyone is a master of his fate, and if success follows inevitably from the hard work and talents of the individual, the status differential between Blacks and the majority group reflects the personal deficiencies of their people. Therefore, they refused to accept this explanation because when traditional work ethic definitions of success are applied to minority status, it inevitably infers a negative identity. The race-related measures (i.e., discrimination modifiability, individual-collective action, individual- system blame, racial militancy) also tap the group conscious- ness ideology by questioning who is responsible for racial 144 inequities and discrimination. For instance, in the case of individual-system blame, accepting the system explanation implies both the awareness of discrimination and oppression and a positive group identity that comes from refusing to blame one's own group for the inequities it faces. Thus, this is the simultaneous process of becoming conscious of oppression and developing group pride. It should be remembered that, Blacks, like other minorities, historically have chosen between two alternative modes of handling discrimination and promoting social change. Some, expressing a valued belief in the American experience that the good life follows as a reward to moral discipline, hard work, and ambition, have resolutely sought individual advancement both as their personal solution and as their strategy for aggregate change in the group's status as well. This appears to be the ideology of Black and white non- managerial employees in companies B and C. Whereas, others have insisted on the necessity of group action, since racial subordination violates two preconditions for individual mobility—~access to favorable life opportunities and eval— uation of performance by non-racial, universal achievement standards. These alternatives of individual mobility and group action presume very different conceptions of social change. Elder (1971) maintains that the individual and collective modes of social ascent are incorporated in two contrasting approaches to social change, an emphasis on 145 individual achievement as expressed in Weber's Protestant Ethic and McClelland's achievement motive and the revolutionary-collectivist approach outlined by Coleman (1969), Franklin (1969), and Killian (1968). He further comments: Achievement theory stresses the development of motivation to excel through family socialization, freedom from binding group obligations or ties, and a willingness to take advantage of Oppor- tunities in areas away from home. Applied to majority-minority relations, this approach would view racial change as a consequence of the aggregated achievements of individual Negroes. Revolutionary-collectivist theory, on the other hand, sets forth the rationale for commitment to a collectivity, a belief that the deprived, apathetic masses can only achieve a better life through involvement in a collective, revolutionary struggle. Participation in the movement is the primary agent of personal change. Thus psycho- logical change among participants in the Black liberation movement-~toward a greater sense of racial pride and efficacy--would constitute a major accomplishment in its own right and an important prerequisite for Negroes to achieve their goals. While both theories view the disciplined effort of individuals as an essen- tial determinant of change, revolutionary theory joins this quality with subordination of self to a collective cause and authority (p. 674). The race of company owner variable also had unique implications concerning the level of collective conscious- ness among the non-managerial employees in the various companies. The attitudes of Black non-managerial employees in company A, concerning the ethnicity of the company owner were significantly different (i.e., they felt the company owner should be of the same race or ethnic group as the 146 majority of his employees, while the other employees did not feel it was important) from those of Black and white non-managerial employees in companies B and C. Thus, it would appear that the most salient reason for variation on this measure circumvents one of the basic strategies of the Black Power movement. That is, stress is placed on economic, social, and political development, with emphasis on the control and ownership of those institutions that exist in or impinge upon the Black community. Conversely, another alternative explanation for expressing such a "strong" atti- tude on this index, was the possible sentience among Black non-managerial employees in company A, that the majority group (i.e., whites) "actually" prefers the company owner or manager to be white, even though such an attitude is not "openly expressed" in most instances. As has been previously mentioned, distinctions on the second cluster can be viewed in terms of the different belief-value systems of the non-managerial employees. A belief system in this case, involves the cognitive assump- tions, expectancies, or predictions the employee has con- cerning race ideology (e.g., individual-system blame, placing burden for failure on Blacks themselves versus attributing responsibility for failure to socio-economic system). Whereas, a value system is the predilections or priorities the employee has concerning needs to be 147 satisfied and the means to those satisfactions (i.e., Protestant Ethic versus group collectivism). The belief system and the value system mutually affect one another in the process of the employee's decision on desirable and possible goals and desirable and possible means to their accomplishment. Consequently, the employee's decisions about his behavior can be expected to be a result of the operations of his belief-value system. A final explanation for the significant variations on the Protestant Ethic and race-relevant variables between Black non-managerial employees in company A and Black and white non-managerial employees in companies B and C, focuses on the differences in perception of the legitimacy of the political system. Black and white employees of companies B and C, in line with Kelman's (1969) political conceptualization, probably perceived the system as legit- imate by virtue of the fact that they share some of the basic values and beliefs on which the system is established. These may be the cultural beliefs that define the national identity, or the social values reflected in the institutions by which society is organized. On the other hand, Black non-managerial employees in company A did not appear to perceive the system as legitimate in at least two ways. First, the system was probably not interpreted as repre- senting their group identity. By this it is meant, that, 148 they possibly did not consider the system as a reflection or an extension of their personal coalescence. Second, they probably didn't see the national system as an effective vehicle for achieving their needs and those of other system members (e.g., Chicanos and Indians). Moreover, if the system is not seen as being representative of an individual's identity and effective in meeting his needs and interests, then it is likely to engender distrust and suspicion. In summary, Dizard (1970) feels that the primary tenet of the Black Power movement is to transform the present system into one that is legitimate for the Black population so that it adequately represents its identity and effectively meets its needs and interests. Therefore, rejection of the Protestant Ethic and a self-blame orien- tation by Black non-managerial employees in company A may exemplify their belief that the system has not met their needs, that is, the national system has methodically excluded them from full participation in the social, economic, and political institutions of the larger society. Implications of Employee Turnover A review of the data in Table 10 reveals that Black non-managerial employees in companies A and B left their respective organizations for diverse reasons. Black employees in company A primarily terminated for reasons of inappropriate salary and obtaining a new job. Therefore, 149 it is quite possible they had a high expectancy of increasing their salary (and thus obtain the various gratifications additional income could offer, including added prestige, status, etc.) and when this expectancy was not reinforced, salary then may have acted to lower satis- faction to the extent that it was perceived as reducing or preventing gratification of their active needs. This was probably the underlying reason why a large percentage of the Black employees in company A indicated "new job" as their explanation for termination, because of an expectancy of increased compensation. It is important to mention here, that, although Blacks in company A had an overall high posi- tive identification with the work organization (i.e., the company appeared to satisfy their intrinsic needs), the company did not satisfy the extrinsic needs of certain employees as measured by salary and fringe benefits. Thus, the central theme for termination in this case appears to be upward mobility. That is, employees who terminated in company A, apparently had certain behavioral goals which were related to personal economic advancement. Regarding Black non-managerial employees in company B, the "personal reasons" explanation (which realistically could by a myriad of factors) for termination quite possibly involves intrinsic as well as extrinsic factors. For exame ple, some intrinsic variables may be, limited occupational 150 growth, advancement, and task responsibility, while in an extrinsic framework, negative aspects may circumvent per- sonal status, salary, or interpersonal relations with peers, subordinates and superiors. Moreover, as shown by Table 2, Black employees in company B have an extremely low identifi- cation with the work organization that is undoubtedly reflected in their high turnover rate. It is also quite interesting to note the differential turnover percentages between Black and white non-managerial employees in company B. In this instance, white employees appear to be content with the work environment, while their Black counterparts readily terminate for indefinite personal reasons with generally no particular behavioral goal indicated. The writer would tend to speculate that the organizational climate of company B is not perceived by its Black members as adequately providing satisfaction of their intrinsic and extrinsic needs, but its white members probably perceive the organization as doing just the obverse. In sum, ithas recognized that the present research effort did not include a viable job satisfaction index which could have possibly shed additional light on the relation- ship between job satisfaction and turnover among employees in racially homogeneous and heterogeneous companies. Thus, it is important to study these relationships in greater detail, particularly, identifying specific determiners of 151 both job attitudes and turnover. The suggestion is made because the job satisfaction-turnover cognation appears to be extremely complex, and may be specific to a given orga- nization, probably requiring extensive study in order to be useful in predictive operations. Conclusions and Recommendations for Future Research Perhaps the most trenchant conclusion to be arrived at from the present study is that the attitudes of Black non-managerial employees in an all-Black company significantly differed from those of Black non-managerial employees in a white-owned (racially mixed) company on internal-external control and job satisfaction indices. Specifically, Black employees in an all-Black company had a high internal sense of personal control, rejected the Protestant Ethic, attribufed responsibility for failure to social system factors, tended to be external regarding race ideology (favored group activist approach in combating dis— crimination), felt they had a high degree of power in the work environment, perceived work as having intrinsic value (low instrumental work orientation), identified with the work organization, and lastly, felt the race of the company owner was an important factor in the work milieu. On the other hand, Black employees in a white-owned (racially mixed) company had a high external sense of personal control, 152 accepted the Protestant Ethic, attributed responsibility for failure to individual Blacks, tended to be internal regarding race ideology (favored individual approach in combating discrimination), felt they were relatively powerless in the work situation, perceived work as a means to an end outside of work (high instrumental work orienta- tion), did not readily identify with the work organization, and felt the ethnicity of the company owner was basically unimportant. In the comparison of Black and white non-managerial employees in the same company, the most significant finding was that they were similar on the Protestant Ethic and race- related variables, but were different on the personal control (white employees were more internal) and job sat- isfaction measures (i.e., whites strongly identified with the company, work had an intrinsic meaning, expressed low feeling of powerlessness on the job). In addition, the attitudes of Black non-managerial employees in an all-Black company and white non-managerial employees in an all-white company were similar on personal control and job satisfac- tion measures, while being significantly distinct on the Protestant Ethic and race-related variables. Curiously enough, Blacks and whites in this situation appear to identify with their work and the organization in an anal- ogous manner. Thus, it appears that employees, regardless 153 of race, tend to identify with those organizations that satisfy their prepotent needs. There are two additional explanations for the significant distinctions among Black employees that were not addressed in the previous section. The first concerns the differential selection hypothesis. It is possible that the all-Black company and the racially mixed company "attract or select" Black employees with divergent percep- tions, needs, and expectancies. Although this was not directly testable in the present study, this explanation seems highly unlikely. Based on similarity of age, educa- tion, birthplace, residence, and job tenure, the workers seem to come from the same general population. The second explanation concerns adherence to the philosophy of the organization. It is quite possible that the all-Black company and the racially mixed company make demands on employees to adhere to their particular belief-value system. Rewards (e.g., peer approval, promotion, good supervisory ratings) may be contingent upon acceptance of the company orientation. This also was not testable in the' research. The only reasonable conclusion that can be drawn from this explanation is that, the organizational philosophy of the all-Black company differs from that of the racially mixed company. 154 The results of the study generally supported the predictions made, with the primary exception being an external perception (i.e., rejection) of the Protestant Ethic by Black non-managerial employees in the all—Black company. The findings also provide a clear indication of the importance of the organizational climate and the belief- value system of the non—managerial employee. The purpose of the present research was not to maintain that a racially homogeneous (all-Black) company was the complete answer in solving problems of personal control and job satisfaction among Black employees. For this would indicate that the writer was a proponent of racially "segre- gated" companies which he is not. The main point being made here, is that, the results reveal the climate or environment of the all-Black company appears to enhance feelings of efficacy and job satisfaction among its Black employees, while increasing their awareness of group consciousness and sensitivity to white oppression. However, any attempt to generalize from the present findings should be done with caution. How can the white-owned organization reach its Black employees in terms of augmenting their feelings of self- esteem, and maintaining effective job-related attitudes? The answer seems to lie in the degree of intimacy and support within the social climate of the organization. 155 Demonstrating to the Black employee that he is important, and responding to his intrinsic and extrinsic needs appears to be the initial key to success. Also, an effective orientation program may have a significant impact on the expectancies and attitudes of the neophyte Black employee in a white-owned (racially mixed) company. For example, Rosen and Turner (1970) found that an orientation program conducted by members of the hiring organization who were able to intervene between hard-core employees and first-line supervision in problem areas was significantly more effec- tive than a quasi-therapeutic program.based on individual adaptation issues and conducted by a university. Therefore, it would appear, that the greater the degree to which an orientation program is related to company practice and structure, the more effective that program.will be. The results of the present investigation appear to indicate several areas in which future research would be clearly ascribable. A potential research area circumvents the various ways in which variance in work and non-work environments can affect the behavior of Black and white employees. The central question is whether a situational variable affects behavior directly or exerts effort through its interaction with other variables. The process which links situational differences to individual behavior must be investigated. This may include 156 variables such as organizational structure (size, supervision ratio, authority structure), organizational functions or processes (communication, coordination), organizational environment (resources, race relations), and organizational philosophy (managerial orientation). After significant knowledge has been acquired via the previously mentioned techniques, a host of research questions concerning what specific situational and climate factors augment or inhibit the performance of various employees (e.g., Black/white) for different types of jobs (e.g., press operator or tool and die maker) must be answered. Do all-Black organizations and racially mixed organizations attract Black employees with divergent per- sonality composites? That is, are the more aggressive, efficacious, and risk-taking Blacks attracted more readily to the all-Black or racially mixed company? This may prove to be quite interesting, particularly, as it concerns inter- organizational and interindividual dissimilarities. A major consideration relates to expectancies, valences, and goals interacting with employee variations. How do preferences and expectancies develop and change as the result of a Black and white worker's experiences in the organization? Therefore, the study of worker motivation should be more individualized and much more developmental in character. 157 There is also a need for research that will explore the extent and consequences of a "training program" enabling Black and white employees in the same company to increase the probability that each group will "understand" the other. This may involve deve10ping skills in making the correct inferences about intentions and predicting the behavior of members of the other group (Triandis and Malpass, 1971). Findings should also be documented concerning the training of white employees--non—managerial, foreman, supervisors, and plant managers regarding their understanding the basic features of the Black culture and how it relates to the organizational milieu. Finally, the recommendations posited in the present study can be readily applied to various research situations in the attempt to procure additional empirical evidence concerning the complex interrelationship between employees, particularly Blacks, and the work environment. LIST OF REFERENCES LIST OF REFERENCES Adorno, T. W., Frenkel—Brunswick, E., Levinson, D. J., and Sanford, R. N. The authoritarianjpersonality.. New York: Harper and Row, 1950. ‘ Aiken, M., and Hage, J. Organizational alienation: A comparative analysis. American Sociological Review, 1966, 31, 497-507. V Argyris, C. Integratin the individual and the organization. New York: Wiley, 1 64. ' Argyris, C. Intervention theory and method: A behavioral science view. Reading,‘Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1970. Armstrong, T. B. Job content and context factors related to satisfaction for different occupational levels. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 1971, 52, 57-65. Atkinson, J. W. (Ed.) Motives in fantasy, action and society. Princeton, N.J.: ’Van Nostrand, 1958. Atkinson, J. W. An introduction to motivation. Princeton, N.J.: Van Nostrand, 1964. Atkinson, J. W., and Feather, N. T. (Eds.) A theogy of achievement motivation. New York: .Wiley, 1966. Barbour, F. B. (Ed.) The Black power revolt. Boston: Sargeant, 1968. Battle, E. S., and Rotter, J. B. Children's feelings of personal control as related to social class and ethnic group. Journal of Personality, 1963, 31, 482-490. Bennett, L. The making of Black America: The Black worker. Ebony, July 1972, 31, 110-122 (Part I). Bennett, L. The making of Black America: The Black worker. Ebony, November 1972, 28, 150-162 (Part II). 158 159 Bennett, L. The making of Black America: The Black Worker. Ebony, December 1972, 18, 73-82 (Part III). Bennis, W. G., Benne, K. D., Chin, R. The planningpof change. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1969. Bialer, I. Conceptualization of success and failure in mentally retarded and normal children. Journal of Personality, 1961, 12, 303-320. Bienen, H. V191ence and social change. Chicago: Univer— sity of ChiEago Press, 1968. Blauner, R. Alienation and freedom: The factory worker and his industry. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964. Blauner, R. Work satisfaction and industrial trends. In A. Etzioni (Ed.), A sociolpgical reader on complex organizations. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1969? ' Blauner, R. White racism, Black culture. Boston: Little, Brown, 1970. Blood, M. R. Work values and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1969, 51, 456-459. Bloom, R., and Barry, J. Determinants of work attitudes among Negroes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1967, 51, 291-294. I Bock, R. D., and Haggard, E. A. The use of multivariate analysis of variance in behavioral research. In D. K. Whitla (Ed.), Handbook of measurement and assess- ment in behavioral sciences. Reading, Mass.: Addison- Wesley, 1968. Brimmer, A. F. Income and welfare in the Black community. Ebony, October 1972, 11, 64-70. Brown, D. R. Do personnel policies alienate employees? Personnel Administration, Jan.-Feb. 1970, 11, 29-36. Bruning, J. L., and Kintz, B. L. Computational handbook of statistics. Glenville, Ill.: Scott,’Foresman, 1968. Bullough, B. Alienation in the ghetto. American Journal of Sociology, 1967, 11, 469-478. 160 Campbell, A., and Schuman, H. ‘Racial attitudes in fifteen American cities. Supplement Studies'for the National Advisorprommission~on Civil Disorders.‘ Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1968. Campbell, D. T., and Stanley, J. C. Experimental and gpasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally, I966. Campbell, J., Dunnette, M., Lawler, E., and Weick, K. Managerial behavior, performance, and effectiveness. New York: McGraw—Hill, 1970. Caplan, N. The new ghetto man: A review of recent empir- ical studies. Journal of Social Issues, 1970, 16, 59-73. I Caplan, N. S., and Paige, J. M. In 0. Kerner et a1. Report of the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disordérs. New York: Bantam Press, 1968(a). Caplan, N. S., and Paige, J. M. A study of ghetto rioters. Scientific American, August 1968, 219, 15-21(b). Caplovitz, D. The merchant and the low-income consumer. In L. Ferman, J. Kornbluh, and A. Haber (Eds.), Povert 1n America. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University of MicEigan Press, 1969. Carmichael, S., and Hamilton, C. V. Black power: The politics of liberation in America. New York: Random House, 1967. Cartwright, D. Influence, leadership, control. In J. March (Ed.), Handbook of organizations. New York: Rand McNally, 1965. Cartwright, D., and Zander, A. (Eds.) Group dynamics. New York: Harper and Row, 1968. ' Centers, R., and Bugental, D. Intrinsic and extrinsic job motivations among different segments of the working population. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1966, 52, 193-197. Chinoy, E. Automobile workers and the American dream. New York: Doubleday, 1955. 161 Christie, R. The prevalence of machiavellian orientations. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psycho- logical Association, Los Angeles, 1964. Christie, R., and Cook, P. A guide to published literature relating to the authoritarian personality through 1956. Journal of Psychology, 1958, 45, 171-199. Clark, A., and McCabe, S. Leadership beliefs of Australian managers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1970, 51, 1-6. Clark, J. P. Measuring alienation within a social system. American Sociological Review, 1959, 11, 849-852. Clark, K. B. Prejudice and your child. Boston: Beacon Press, 1955. Clark, K. B. Youth in thepghetto: A study of the conse- quences of powerlessness. New York: Haryou Associates, 1964. Clark, K. B. Darkpghetto: Dilemmas of social power. New York: Harper andIRow, I965. C Cloward, R. A. Illegitimate means, anomie, and deviant behavior. American Sociolog1oal Review, 1959, 11, 164-176. Cohen, A. K. The study of social disorganization and deviant behavior. In R. K. Merton et al. (Eds.). Sociology today. New York: Basic Books, 1959. Coleman, J. F., Blake, R. R., and Mouton, J. S. Task difficulty and conformity pressures. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1958, 21, 120-122. Coleman, J. S. Race relations and social change. In I. Irwin and P. Gurin (Eds.), Race and the social sciences. New York: Basic, 1969. Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E., Hobson, C., McPartland, J., Mood, A., Weinfield, F., and York, R. Equality of Educational Opportunity. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and welfare. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1966. Crandall, V. J. Achievement. In H. W. Stevenson et al. (Eds.), National society for the study of education earbook: Part I. Child Psydhology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press,'1963. 162 Crandall, V. C., Katkovsky, W., and Crandall, V. J. Children's beliefs in their control of reinforcement in intellectual-academic achievement situations. Child Development, 1965, 16, 91-109. Crowne, D. P., and Liverant, S. Conformity under varying conditions of personal commitment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1963, 66, 547-555. ‘ Cruse, H. Rebellion or revolution. New York: Morrow, 1968. Dahl, R. A. The concept of power. Behavioral Science, 1957, 1, 201-218. Darrow, C., and Lowinger, P. The Detroit uprising: A psychosocial study. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis, New York, 1967. Davis, K. E. Identity, alienation, and ways of life. In M. Wertheimer (Ed.), Confrontation: Ps chology and the problems of today. Glenview, 111.: Scott, Foresman, 1970. Dean, D. G. Alienation: Its meaning and measurement. American Sociological Review, 1961, 16, 753-758. Dearborn, D. C., and Simon, H. A. Selective perceptions: A note on the departmental identification of executives. Sociometry, 1958, 11, 140-144. DeCharms, R. Personal causation: The internal affective determinants of Behavior. New York: Academic Press, 1968. Denhardt, R. B. Alienation and the challenge of partic- ipation. Personnel Administration, Sept.-Oct. 1971, a, 25-320 Denmark, F., and Guttentag, M. Dissonance in the self- concepts and educational concepts of college and . non-college oriented women. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1967, 11, 113-115. Dizard, J. E. Black identity, social class, and Black power. Psychiatry, 1970, 11, 195-207. 163 Douvan, E., and Gold, M. Modal patterns in American adolescence. In M. L. Hoffman and L. W. Hoffman (Eds.), Review of research in child development, Vol. 2. New Yofk: Russell Sage Foundation, 1966. 1 Downie, N. M., and Heath, R. W. Basic statistical methods. New York: Harper and Row, 1965. Dubey, S. N. Powerlessness and the predominant forms of adaptation responses offlower class Negroes. (Doctoral dissertation, Case Western Reserve University) Ann Arbor, Mich.: University Microfilms, 1969. No. 70-4911. Dubey, S. N. Powerlessness and mobility orientations among disadvantaged blacks. Public Opinion Quarterly, Summer 1971, 11, 183-188. ' Dubey, S. N., Grant, M. L., and Thompson, H. Hartford Survey report: Some implications for planning for social action in the field of mental retardation. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Asso- ciation for Retarded Children, New York, 1969. Dubin, R. Industrial workers' worlds: A study of the central life interests of industrial workers. Social Problems, 1956, 1, 131-142. Durkheim, E. Suicide: A study in sociology. (J. A. Spaulding and G. Simpson, Trans.) New York: The Free Press, 1951. Efran, J. S. Some personality determinants of memorypfor success and failure. ifidctoral dissertation, Ohio State University) Ann Arbor, Mich.: University Microfilms, 1964. No. 64-4793-4794. Elbing, A. Behavioral decisions in organizations. Oakland, N.J.: Scott, Foresman, 1970. Elder, G. H. Intergroup attitudes and social ascent among Negro boys. American Journal of Sociology, 1971, 11, 673-697. Erikson, E. H. The problem of ego identity. In identity and the life cycle, Psychological Issues. New York: International Universities Press, 1959. Erikson, E. H. Identity: Youth and crisis. New York: Norton, 1968. 164 Etzioni, A. A sociological reader on complex organizations. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1969. Fanon, F. Black skin, white masks. New York: Grove Press, 1967. Ferguson, G. A. Statistical analysis in psychology and education. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1959. Ferman, L. A., and Aiken, M. Mobility and situational factors in the adjustment of older workers to job displacement. Human Organization, 1967, 11, 235-241. Fleishman, E. A., and Harris, E. F. Patterns of leadership behavior related to employee grievances and turnover. Personnel Psychology, 1962, 11, 43-56. Forehand, G. A., and Gilmer, B. v. H. Environmental variation in studies of organizational behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 1964, 11, 361-382. Forward, J. R., and Williams, J. R. Internal-external control and Black militancy. Journal of Social Issues, 1970, 11, 75-92. Franklin, R. S. The political economy of Black power. French, J. R., Morrison, H. W., and Levinger, G. Coercive power and forces affecting conformity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1960, 11, 93-101. French, J. R., and Raven, B. The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power. Ann Arbor: Mich.: University of Michigan Press, 1959} Friedlander, F. Relationships between the importance and the satisfaction of various environmental factors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1965, 11, 160-164. Friedlander, F. Motivations to work and organizational performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1966, 11, 143-152. Friedlander, F., and Greenberg, S. Effect of job attitudes, training, and organizational climate on performance of the hard—core unemployed. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1971, 11, 287-295. Friedman, H. Introduction to statistics. New York: Random House, 1972. 165 Fromm, E. Escape from freedom. New York: Farrar and Rhinehart, 19411' Fromm, E. The sane society. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston,11955. Fromm, E. Marx's concept of man. New York: Frederick Ungar Publishing Company, 1971. Galbraith, J. K. The affluent society. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1969. Geis, F., and Christie, R. Machiavellianism and the tactics of manipulation. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, Chicago, 1965. Georgopoulos, B. S. Normative structure variables and organizational behavior. Human Relations, 1965, 11, 115-170. Georgopoulos, B. S., Mahoney, G., and Jones, N. W. A path- goal approach to productivity. Journal of Applied Gerth, H. H., and Mills, C. W. (Eds.) From Max Weber: Essays in sociology. New York: Oxfbrd University Press, 1946. Geschwender, J. A. (Ed.) The Black revolt. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1971. Getter, H. Variablss affecting_the reinforcementsin verbal conditioning. (Doctoral dissertatidn, Ohio State University) Ann Arbor, Mich.: University Microfilms, 1963. No. 63-3474. Ghiselli, E. E. Managerial talent. American Psychologist, 1963, 11, 631-641. Glazer, N.” School integration policies in northern cities. In The urbsp school cr1s13: An anthology of essays. New York: League for Industfial Democracy, 1966. Gold, M. On social status and delinquency: A comment on Voss' article. Social Problems, 1967, 11, 114-116. Gordon, D. A note on Negro alienation. American Journal of Sociology, 1965, 11, 477-478. 166 Gore, P. M. Individual differences in the prediction of subject compliance to experimenter bias. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, 1962. Gore, P. M., and Rotter, J. B. A personality correlate of social action. Journal of Personality, 1963, 11, 58-64. Gottesfeld, H., and Dozier, G. Changes in feelings of powerlessness in a community action program. Psychological Rsports, 1966, 11, 978. Gottlieb, D. Poor youth: A study in forced alienation. Journal of Social Issues, 1969, 11(2), 91-120. Greenwood, J. M., and McNamara, W. J. Leadership styles of structure--consideration, and managerial effective- ness. Personnel Psychology, 1969, 11, 150. Grier, W. H., and Cobbs, P. M. Black rage. New York: Bantam, 1968. Gurin, G. Inner-city Negro youth in asjob training project: A stuoy of factors related to attritibnsnd‘job success. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, 1968. Gurin, G., Veroff, J., and Feld, S. Americans view their mental health. New York: Basic Books, 1960. Gurin, P. Motivation and aspirations of southern Negro college youth. American Journal of Sociology, 1970, '11, 607-631. Gurin, P., Gurin, G., Lao, R., and Beattie, M. Internal- external control in the motivational dynamics of Negro youth. Journal of Social Issues, 1969, 11(3), 29-53. Gurin, P., and Katz, D. Motivation and aspiration in the Negro collegs. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, 1966. Hackman, J. R., and Lawler, E. E. Employee reactions to job characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1971, 11, 259-286. (Monograph) Haire, M., Ghiselli, E., and Porter, L. W. Managerial thinking: An international study. New Yofk: Wiiey, 1966i— 167 Harbrecht, P. P. Pension funds asoeconomic power. New York: Twentieth Century Fund, 1959. Harvey, O. J., and Rutherford, J. Gradual and absolute approaches to attitude change. Sociometry, 1958, 11, 61-68. Hauser, S. T. Black and white identity formation: Studies in the psychosocial development of lower socioeconomic class adolescent boys. New York: Wiley, 1971. Hegel, G. W. F. The philosophy of history_(J. Sibree, Trans.). New York: The Colonial Press, 1899. Henderson, W. L., and Ledebur, L. C. Economic disparity: Problems and stratsgies for Black America. New York: The Free Press, 1970. Hentoff, N. Our children are dying. New York: Viking Press, 1966. Hersch, P. D., and Scheibe, K. E. Reliability and validity of internal-external control as a personality dimension. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1967, 11, 609-613. Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., and Snyderman, B. The motivation to work. New York: Wiley, 1959. Hochbaum, G. M. The relation between group members' self- confidence and their reactions to group pressures to uniformity. American Sociological Review, 1954, 11, 678-687. Hodge, C. C. The Negro job situation: Has it improved? Monthly Labor Review, 1969, 11, 20-28. Holden, K. B., and Rotter, J. B. A nonverbal measure of extinction in skill and change situations. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1962, 11, 519-520. Hulin, C. L., and Blood, M. R. Job enlargement, individual differences, and worker responses. In L. L. Cummings and W. E. Scott (Eds.), Readings in organizational behavior and human performance. Homewood, 111.: Irwin, Dorsey,dl969. Hummel, T. J., and.Sligo,J. R. Empirical comparison of univariate and multivariate analysis of variance procedures. Psychological Bulletin, 1971, 11, 49—57. 168 Hunt, J. G. Status congruence: function. _ An important organization Personnel Administration, 1969, 11, 19-26. Innis, R. Separatist economics: A new social contract. In W. F. Haddad and G. D. Pugh (Eds.), Black economic development. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: 1969. Prentice-Ha11, Jaco, E. G. The social isolation hypothesis and schizo- phrenia. American Sociological Review, 1954, 11, 567-577. Jaffe, L. D. Delinquency proneness and family anomie. Journal of Crim1nal Law, Criminology, and Police Science, 1963, 13, 146-154. James, W. Internal versus external control of reinforce- ments as a basic variable in learning theory. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, 1957. James, W., and Rotter, J. B. Partial and 100% reinforce- ment under chance and skill conditions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1958, 11, 397-403. Johnson, L., and Smith, W. Black managers. In W. F. Haddad and G. D. Pugh (Eds.), Black economic development. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Pféntice-HaIl, 1969. Jones, J. M. Pre'udice and racism. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1972. Jones, E. E., and DeCharms, R. The organizing function of interaction roles in person perception. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1958, 11, 155-164. Kahler, E. The tower of the abyss. New York: Braziller, 1957. Organizational stress: Kahn, R. L., Wolfe, D., Quinn, R., Snoek, J., and Rosenthal, R. A. and ambigui_y. Studies in role conflict New York: Wiley, 1964. Kardiner, A., and Ovesey, L. The mark of oppression. New York: Norton, 1951. Katz, I. Review of evidence relating to effects of desegregation on the intellectual performance of Negroes. The American Psychologist, 1964, 11, 381-399. 169 Katz, I., Henchy, T., and Allen, H. Effects of race of tester, approval-disapproval, and need on Negro children's learning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1968, 1, 38-42. Katz, D., and Kahn, R. L. The social psychology of organizations. New York: Wiley, 1966. Katz, I., Roberts, S. 0., and Robinson, J. M. Effects of task difficulty, race of administrator, and instructions on digit-symbol performance of Negroes. Journal of Personalitysand Social Psychology, 1965, 1, 53-59. Kelley, H. H., and Lamb, T. W. Certainty of judgment and resistance to social influence. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1957, 11, 137:139. Kelman, H. C. Patterns of personal involvement in the national system: A social-psychological analysis of political legitimacy. In J. N. Rosenau (Ed.), Inter- national politics and foreigm policy (2d ed.). New York: Free Press, 1969. Keniston, K. Alienation and the decline of ut0pia. The American Scholar, 1960, 11, 164. Keniston, K. An American ishmael. In R. White (Ed.), The study_of lives. New York: Atherton Press, 1963. Keniston, K. The uncommitted: Alisnated youth in American society. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and World,*1965. Keniston, K. Heads and seekers. The American Scholar,’ 1969' lg, 97—1120 Kerner, 0., et a1. Report of the National Advisory Commission on Civil’Disorders. New’York: Bantam, 1968. Killian, L. The impossible revolution? Blackpomer and the American dream. New York: 'Random House, 1968. Killingsworth, C. C. Jobs and income for Negroes. Policy papers in human resources and industrial relations (No. 6). The Institute of Labor and Industrial Rela- tions, University of Michigan, Wayne State University, 1968. 170 King, D., and Bass, B. Leadership, pomsr and influence. Lafayette, Indiana: Institute for Research in the Behavioral, Economic, and Management Sciences, H. C. Krannert Graduate School of Industrial Administration, Purdue University, 1970 (Paper no. 280). Kipnis, D. Some determinants of supervisory esteem. Personnel Psychology, 1960, 11, 377-392. Korman, A. K. Selective perceptions among first-line supervisors. Personnel Administration, 1963, 11, 31-36 0 Korman, A. K. Consideration, initiating structure, and organizational criteria--a review. Personnel Psychology, 1966, 11, 349-361. Korman, A. K. Self-esteem as a moderator of the relation- ship between self—perceived abilities and vocational choice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1967, 11, 65-67. (a) Korman, A. K. Ethical judgments, self-perceptions and vocational choice. In Proceedings, 75th Annual Convention, American PsychologicaliAssociation, Washington, D.C., 1967.‘Tb1 Korman, A. K. Toward an hypothesis of work behavior. ‘ Journal ofAApp1ied Psychology, 1970, 11, 31-41. Korman, A. K. Industrial androrganizational psychology. Englewood C1iff§, N.J.: Prentice-Hall,fl97l. Kozol, J: Death at an ear1y age. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1967. Lao, R. C. Internal-external control and competent and innovative behavior among Negro college students. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1970, Lasch, C. The trouble with Black power. The New York Review of Books, Feb. 20, 1968, 5. Lawler, E., and Hackman, R. Impact of employee participation in the development of pay incentive plans: A field experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1969, 11, 467-471. 171 Leeds, R. The absorption of protest: A working paper. In W. Cooper et al. (Eds.), New perspectives in organization research. New York: Wiley, 1964. Lefcourt, H. M. Risk-taking in Negro and white adults. Journaliof Personality and Social Psychology, 1965, '1, 765-770. Lefcourt, H. M. Internal versus external control of reinforcement: A review. Psychological Bulletin, Lefcourt, H. M., and Ladwig, G. W. The American Negro: A problem in expectancies. Journal of Personality and Social Psyshology, 1965, 1, 377-380. (a) Lefcourt, H. M., and Ladwig, G. W. The effect of reference group upon Negroes' task persistence in a biracial competitive game. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1965, 1, 668-671} (B) Levinson, H. Organizational diagnosis. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1972. Lewin, K. Group decision and social change. In E. E. Maccoby, T. Newcomb, and E. Hartley (Eds.), Reading in socialspsychology. New York: Holt, 1958. Liebow, E. Tallyis corner: A study of Negro streetcorner men. Boston: Little, Brown, 1967: Likert, R. New patterns of management. New York: McGraw- Hill, 1961. Likert, R. The human organization: Its management and value. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967. Lindsay, C. A., Marks, E., and Gorlow, L. The Herzberg theory: A critique and reformulation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1967, 11, 330-339. Litwin, G. H., and Stringer, R. The influence of organi- zation 1 climate on human motivation. Paper presented at con erence on organizational climate, Foundation for Research on Human Behavior, Ann Arbor, Mich., 1966. Liverant, S., and Scodel, A. Internal and external control as determinants of decision-making under conditions of risk. Psychological Rsports, 1960, 1, 59-67. 172 Lundberg, F. The rich and the super-rich. New York: Bantam, 1969. Malinovsky, M., and Barry, J. Determinants of work attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1965, 11, 446-451. Marrow, A., Bowers, D., and Seashore, S. Management by participation. New York: Harper and Row, 1967. Marwell, G. Adolescent powerlessness and delinquent behavior. Social Problems, 1966, 11, 35-47. Marx, G. T. Protest and prejudice: A study of belief in the Black community. New York: Harper and Row, 1967. Marx, G. T. Perspectives on racism. In M. Wertheimer (Ed.), Confrontation: Psychology_and the problems of today. GlenView, Ill.: Scott, Foresman, 1970. Marx, K. Capital, the communistmanifesEo and other writings—by_Karl Marx. M. Eastman (Ed.). New York: The Modern Library, 1932. Marx, K. Economic and philosophic manuscripts of 1844. Moscow: Foreign Language Publishing, 1959. Mausner, B., and Bloch, B. L. A study of the additivity of variables affecting social interaction. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1957, 11, 250-256. McClelland, D. C. Personality. New York: Dryden Press, 1951. McClelland, D. C., Atkinson, J. W., Clark, R. A., and Lowell, E. L. The achievemsnt motive. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1953. McGregor, D. The human side of enterprise. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1960. . McQuitty, L. L. Elementary linkage analysis for isolating orthogonal and oblique types and typal relevancies. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1957, 11, 207-229. Merton, R._ Mass persuasion. New York: Harpers, 1946. Merton, R. Social structure and anomie. In sos1al theory and social structure. Glencoe, 111.: Free Press, 1949. 173 Merton, R. Social theory and social structure. New York: Free Press, 1957. Meszaros, I. Marx's theory of alienation. New York: Harper and Row, 1970. Miller, A. The bored and the violent. Harper's, 1962, 11, (No. 1350), 50-56. Morrison, B. M. The reactions of external and internal pupils to patterns of teaching behavior. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, 1966. Morrison, D. F. Multivariate statistical methods. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967? Mott, P. E. The characteristics of effective organizations. New York: Harper and Row, 1972. Mowrer, O. H., and Viek, P. An experimental analogue of fear from a sense of helplessness. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1948, 11, 193-200. Myers, S. M. Who are your motivated workers? Harvard Business Review, 1964, Jan.-Feb., 73-88. Neal, A. G., and Rettig, S. Dimensions of alienation among manual and non-manual workers. American Sociological Review, 1963, 11, 599-608. Neal, A. G., and Rettig, S. On the multidimensionality of alignation. American Sociological Review, 1967, 11, 54-'4. Neal, A. G., and Seeman, M. Organizations and powerlessness: A test of the mediation hypothesis. American Sociolog- ical Review, 1964, 11, 216-226. Ofari, E. 1mg myth of Black capitalism. New York: Monthly Review Press, 1970. Olsen, M. E. Alienation and political opinions. Public Qpinion_guarterly, 1965, 11(2), 200-212. Patchen, M. Some questionnaire measures of employee motivation and morale: A rsport on their reliability 3nd validity. (Monograph”¥'4l)' Ann AfBOr, Mich.: Institute for Social Research, 1965. 174 Patchen, M. Identification with the work organization. In J. Robinson, R. Athanasiou, and K. Head (Eds.), Measures of occupational attitudes and occupational characteris- tics. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Institute fOr Social Research, University of Michigan, 1969. Pearlin, L. Alienation from work: A study of nursing personnel. American Sociological Review, 1962, 31! 314-326. Pettigrew, T. F. Social evaluation theory: Convergences and applications. In D. Levin (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation. Lincoln, Neb.: University Of’Nebraska Press, 1967. Phares, E. J. Expectancy changes in skill and change situations. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, Phares, E. J. Perceptual threshold decrements as a function of skill and chance expectancies. Journal of Psychology, 1962, £3, 399-407. Phares, E. J. Internal-external control as a determinant of amount of social influence exerted. Journal of Person- ality_and Social Psychology, 1965, 3' 642-647. Piaget, J. The constguction of reality in the child. New York: Basic Books, 1954} Pinkney, A. Black Americans. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-HalIT‘l969. Porter, L. W. A study of perceived need satisfactions in bottom and middle management jobs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1961, 42, 1-10. Porter, L. W. Job attitudes in management. I. Perceived deficiencies in need fulfillment as a function of job level. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1962, 2Q, 375-384. Porter, L. W. Job attitudes humanagement. II. Perceived importance of needs as a function of job level. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1963, 41, 141-148. Porter, L. W. Organizational pattergs of managerial job attitudes. New York: American Foundation for Manage- ment Research, 1964. 175 Porter, L. W., and-Lawler, E. E. Properties of organization structure in relation to job attitudes and job behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 1965, Q4, 23-51. Porter, L. W., and Lawler, E. E. Managerial attitudes and performance. Homewood, Ill.: Dorsey-Irwin, 1968. Poussaint, A. F. A Negro psychiatrist explains the Negro psyche. New York Times Magazine, August 12, 1967. Powell, E. H. Occupation, status, and suicide: Toward a redefinition of anomie. American Sociological Review, 1958, 33, 131-139. Presthus, R. The organizational society. New York: Random HouSe, 1962. Purcell, T. V., and Cavanaugh, G. F. Blacks in the indus- trial world: Issues for the manager. New York: The FreefiPress,wl972. Ransford, H. E. Isolation, powerlessness, and violence: A study of attitudes and participation in the Watts riot. American Journal of Sociology, 1968, 1;, 581-591. Raven, B., and French, J. R. Group support, legitimate power, and social influence. Journal of Personality, 1958, gg, 400-409. Richter, C. F. Sudden death phenomenon in animals and humans. In H. Feifel (Ed.), The meanipg_of death. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1959. Riesman, D. The lonely crowd. New York: Doubleday Anchor Books, 1953. Roberts, A. H., and Rokeach, M. Anomie, authoritarianism, and prejudice: A replication. American Journal of Sociology, 1956, Q3, 355-358. Ronan, W. W. Individual and situational variables relating to job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1970, 24, 1-31. (Monograph) Rose, H. M. The Black ghetto: A spatial behavioral perspective. New York: McCraw-Hill, 1971. Rosen, H., and Turner, J. Effectiveness of two orientation approaches in hard-core unemployed turnover and absenteeism. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1971, 52, 296-301. 176 Rosen, N. A. Leadership chapge and work-group dynamics. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1969. Rosenberg, M. The meaning of politics in mass society. Public Opinion Quarterly, 1951, 15, 5-15. Rosenberg, M. L. An experiment to change attitudes of powerlessness among_1ow-income Negro youth. (Doctoral dissertation, Case Western Reserve University) Ann Arbor, Mich.: University Microfilms, 1968. No. 69-9370. Rothe, H. F. Attitudes of various groups of employees toward job and company. Personnel Psychology, 1968, 21, 515-522. Rotter, J. B. Social learning and clinical psychology. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1954. Rotter, J. B. Some implications of a social learning theory for the prediction of goal directed behavior from test- ing procedures. Psychological Review, 1960, 61, 301-316. Rotter, J. B. Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 1966, 82, 1-28. Rotter, J. B., Liverant, S., and Crowne, D. P. The growth and extinction of expectancies in chance controlled and skilled tasks. Journal of Psychology, 1961, 53, 161-177. Rotter, J. B., Seeman, M., and Liverant, S. Internal versus external control of reinforcements: A major variable in behavior theory. In N. F. Washburne (Ed.), Decisions, values, and gropps, Vol. 2. London: Pergamon Press, I962. Rustin, B. Funding full citizenship. Council Journal, 1967, 6, 4. Samelson, F. Conforming behavior under two conditions of conflict in the cognitive field. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1957, 52, 181-187. Schein, E. H. Organizational psychology. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1965. Schlesinger, A. Violence: America in the sixties. New York: New American Library, 1968. 177 Scholper, J., and Matthews, M. W. The influence of the perceived causal locus of partner's dependence on the use of interpersonal power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1965, 2, 609-612. Schorr, A. L. How the poor are housed. In L. Ferman, J. Kornbluh, and A. Haber (Eds.), Povertyiin America. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University of Michigan Press, 1969. Seashore, S. B. Group cohesiveness in the industrial work group. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Institute fbr Social Research, 1954. Seeman, M. On the meaning of alienation. American Socio- logical Review, 1959, 24, 783-791. Seeman, M. Alienation and social learning in a reformatory. American Journal of Sociology, 1963, 62, 270-284. Seeman, M. Alienation, membership, and political knowledge: A comparative study. Public Opinion Quarterly, 1966, 32, 353-367. (a) Seeman, M. Antidote to alienation--learning to belong. Seeman, M. Powerlessness and knowledge: A comparative study of alienation and learning. Sociometry, 1967, _3_, 105—123. (a) * Seeman, M. On the personal consequences of alienation in work. American Sociological Review, 1967, 33, 273-285. (b) Seeman, M. Alienation: A map of its principal territories. Psychology Today, August 1971, 5, 83-95. (a) Seeman, M. The urban alienations: Some dubious theses from Marx to Marcuse. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1971, 12, 135-143. (b) Seeman, M., and Evans, J. W. Alienation and learning in a hospital setting. American Sociological Review, 1962, 21, 772-782. 7 Sexton, P. C. Class struggles in the schools. In The urban school crisis: An anthology of essays. New York: League for Industrial Democracy, 1966. 178 Shepard, J. M. Man-machine relationships, attitudes toward work and meanings in the work role. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1968. Shepard, J. M. Functional specialization, alienation, and job satisfaction. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 1970, $3, 207-219. Shepard, J. M. Automation and alishation: A study of office and factorysworkers. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, I971. Short, J. F., and Strodtbeck, F. L. Group process_and gang delinguensy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1965? Silberman, C. E. Crisis in Black and white. New York: Random House, 1964. Silvern, L. E., and Nakamura, C. Y. Powerlessness, social- political action, social-political views: Their inter- relation among college students. Journal of Social Issues, 1971, 21, 137—157. Simmons, J. L. Liberalism, alienation and personal disturbance. Sociology and Social Research, 1965, 29, 456-464. Slocum, J. W., and Strawser, R. H. Racial differences in job attitudes. Journal of Applied PsycholOgy, 1972, 56, 28—32. Slocum, J. W., and Topichak, P. M. Do cultural differences affect job satisfaction? Journal of Applied Psychology, 1972, is, 177-178. Srole, L. Social dysfunction, personality and social distance attitudes. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Sociological Society, 1951. Srole, L. Social integration and certain corollaries: An exploratory study. American Sociological Review, 1956, g1, 709-716. Steiner, G. A. (Ed.) The creative organization. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1965. Strauss, P. S. The professional attitude. Personnel“ Administration, 1970, 3;, 33-36. ' 179 Strickland, B. R. The relationship of awareness to verbal conditioning_andiextinction. (DoctoraI dissertation, Ohio State University) Ann Arbor, Mich.: University Microfilms, 1963. No. 63-2988. Strickland, B. R. The prediction of social action from a dimension of internal-external control. Journal of Social Psyghology, 1965, fig, 353—358. Susman, G. I. Process design, automation, and worker alienation. Industrial Relations, 1972, 2, 34-47. Tannenbaum, A. S. Control in organizations: Individual adjustment and organizational performance. Adminis- trative Science Quarterly, 1962, 1, 236-257. Tannenbaum, A. S. Social psychology of the work organiza- tion. Belmont, CaIif.: Wadsworth, I966. Tatsuoka, M. M. Multivariate analysis: Techniques for educational and psychoIogicaI research. New Yofk: Wiley, 1971. Templeton, F. Alienation and political participation: Some research findings. Public Opinionggarterly, 1966, 32, 249-261. Thibaut, J. W., and Riecken, H. W. Some determinants and consequences of the perception of social causality. Journal of Personality, 1955, 22' 113-133. Thompson, W. E., and Horton, J. E. Powerlessness and political negativism: A study of defeated local referendums. American Journal of Sociology, 1962, g1, 485-493. Tiffany, D. W., Cowan, J. R., and Tiffany, P. M. The unemployed: A social-psychological portrait. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1970. Triandis, H. C. Factors affecting employee selection in two cultures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1963, 21, 89-96. ' Triandis, H. C., and Malpass, R. S. Studies of Black and white interaction in job settings. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 1971, 1, 101-117. 180 Turner, A. N., and Lawrence, P. R. Industrial jobs and the worker:_An investigation of response to task attributes. Boston: Division of Research, Graduate School ofi Business Administration, 1965. Veblen, T. The theory of thewleisure class. New York: MacMillan, Modern Library Edition, 1899. Vroom, V. H. Work and motivation. New York: Wiley, 1964. Vroom, V. H. Motivation in management. New York: American Foundation for Management Research, 1965. Weber, M. Class, status, and party. In R. Bendix and S. Lipset (Eds.), Class, status, and power: Social strssificationiin comperativeyperspective. New York: Free Press, 1953. Weber, M. The Protestant Ethic and the spirit of capitalism. New York: Scribner, 1958. Weick, K. The social psychology of or anizin . Menlo Park, Calif.: Addison-WeSley, 196g. Wernimont, P. F. Intrinsic and extrinsic factors in job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1966, 2, 41-500 Wernimont, P. F., Toren, P., and Kapell, H. Comparison of sources of personal satisfaction and of work motivation. Journal of Applied Psyehology, 1970, E4, 95-102. White, R. W. Motivation reconsidered: The concept of competence. Psychological Review, 1959, §§, 297-333. Whitehill, A. M. Cultural values and employee attitudes: United States and Japan. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1964, 38, 68-72. Wilkins, E. J., and DeCharms, R. Authoritarianism and the response to power cues. Journal of Personality, 1962, 32, 439-457. Williams, R. M. American society: A sociological interpre- tation. New York: A. A. Knopf, 1960. Winer, B. J. Stsgistical principles in experimental design. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1962. 181 Wolf, M. G. Need gratification theory: A theoretical reformulation of job satisfaction/dissatisfaction and job motivation. "Journal of Applied Psychology, 1970, 54, 87-94. Wolfgang, M. E., and Ferracutti, F. The subculture of violence. London: Tavistock, 1967. ’ Wolters, R. The Negro in American industries. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 1971, 2E, 116-123. Wright, N. Readyyto riot. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1968. Young, W. M., Jr. Beyond racism: Building an Open society. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1969. Yukl, G. A., and Wexley, K. N. (Eds.) Readings in organizational and industrial psychology. New York: Oxford University Press, 1971. Zipf, S. Resistance and conformity under reward and punishment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1960, El, 102-109. APPENDICES APPENDIX A DEMOGRAPHIC AND ATTITUDINAL QUESTIONNAIRE APPENDIX A DEMOGRAPHIC AND ATTITUDINAL QUESTIONNAIRE You are invited to participate in a research project currently being conducted at Michigan State University. The purpose of this project is to investigate the attitudes and perceptions of employees in the manufacturing industry. Responses or answers to all questions will be treated as strictly confidential, and no person other than the researcher will have access to your questionnaire. The questionnaire is divided into two parts: a In Part 1, we ask you about yourself and your job. This information will help us better understand your answers in Part 2. o In Part 2, we ask you how you feel about your life and work. Your help is essential to the success of this project, and your participation will be gratefully appreciated. Please answer all items. 182 APPENDIX B PART I--DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONNAIRE APPENDIX B PART I--DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONNAIRE Instructions: The following information will be used only as a means of separating respondents into similar groupings. It will so; be used to identify specific individuals. Please complete this part of the questionnaire by placing an "X" in the appropriate space. Mark only one alternative for each item. 1. Age: under 20 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 or over 2. Birthplace: City of Detroit, or its surrounding suburbs Outstate Michigan Midwest South Northeast West Other (Explain): llHlll 3. Marital Status: Single Married Divorced or Separated Widower 183 184 Education: (Mark the last grade completed) 4th-8th_grade 9th-12th grade Completed high school Some college Bachelors degree Some graduate work Masters degree or above Length of employment with this company: 1-11 months 1-3 years 4-6 years 7-9 years 10 years or more Present Position: Press operator (interchangeable) Boiler operator-janitorial Clean-up personnel Die maker-die set Die repair-die set Die setter trainee Electrician Electrician trainee Foreman General foreman General maintenance Hi-Lo driver Machine repairman Plant manager Production control follow-up Scale man Shipping and receiving Superintendent Tool crib man Tool and die apprentice Truck driver Other (Explain): .7 i 185 Shift: (Mark the shift that you work) lst 2nd 3rd Income: (from this job only) under $4,000 $4,000-$5,999 $6,000-$7,999 $8,000-$9,999 $10,000 and above APPENDIX C PART II--MULTIDIMENSIONAL I-E CONTROL SCALE APPENDIX C PART II--MULTIDIMENSIONAL I-E CONTROL SCALE Instructions: In this section of the questionnaire there are several statements which relate to how you see life in general. For each item, select the statement 'ou feel is closest to your own Opinion. That is, choose e statement you agree with most. Answer the items by circling the letter "a" or "b," before the statement you agree with more. Circle only one letter for each item. Please remember--there are no r155? or wrong answers. The best answer is how yogreally feel. 1. a. Who gets to be the boss often depends on who was lucky enough to be in the right place first. b. Who gets to be the boss depends on who has the skill ' and ability; luck has little or nothing to do with it. 2. a. When I make plans, I am almost certain that I can make them work. b. It is not always wise to plan too far ahead because many things turn out to be a matter of good or bad fortune anyhow. 3. a. Depending on bi-racial committees is a dodge. Talking and understanding without constant protest and pressure will never solve problems of discrimination. b. Talking and understanding as Opposed to protest and pressure is the best way to solve racial discrimination. 186 10. 187 In the case of the well-prepared student, there is rarely if ever such a thing as an unfair test. Many times exam questions tend to be so unrelated to course work that studying is really useless. What happens to me is my own doing. Sometimes I feel that I don't have enough control over the direction my life is taking. The racial situation in America may be very complex, but with enough money and effort, it is possible to get rid of racial discrimination. We'll never completely get rid of discrimination. It's part Of human nature. Without the right breaks one cannot be an effective leader. Capable people who fail to become leaders have not taken advantage of their opportunities. In my case, getting what I want has little or nothing to do with luck. Many times we might just as well decide what to do by flipping a coin. It's the lack of skills and abilities that keeps many Blacks from getting a job. It's not just ‘ because they're Black. When Blacks are trained they're able to get a job. Many qualified Blacks can't get agOOd job. White persons with the same skills wouldn't have any trouble. It is hard to know whether or not a person really likes you. How many friends you have depends upon how nice a person you are. ll. 12. l3. 14. 15. 16. 188 One of the major reasons why we have wars is because people'don't'take*enough'interest*in'politics. There will always be wars, no matter how hard people try to prevent them. No matter how hard you try, some people just don't like you. People who can't get others to like them, don't understand how to get along with others. The best way to handle problems of discrimination is for each individual Black person to make sure he gets the best training possible for what he wants to do. Only if Blacks pull together in civil rights groups and activities can anything really be done about discrimination. Getting people to do the right thing depends upOn luck and fate; ability and effort have little or nothing to do with it. Getting people to do the right thing depends upon ability and effort; luck and fate have little or nothing to do with it. “ I have often found that what is going to happen will happen. Trusting to fate has never turned out as well for me as making a decision to take a definite course Of action. Knowing the right peOple is important in deciding whether a person will get ahead. People will get ahead in life if they have the goods and do a good job; knowing the right people has nothing tO do with it. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 189 Many Blacks who don't do well in life do have good training, but the Opportunities just always go to whites. Blacks may not have the same Opportunities as whites, but many Blacks haven't prepared themselves enough to make use Of the Opportunities that come their way. Becoming a success is a matter of hard work, luck has little or nothing to do with it. Getting a good job depends mainly on being in the right place at the right time. As far as world affairs are concerned, most of us are victims of forces we can neither understand nor control. By taking an active part in political and social affairs, the people can control world events. People are lonely because they don't try to be friendly. There's not much use in trying too hard to please people; if they like you, they like you. Many Blacks have only themselves to blame for not doing better in life. If they tried harder, they'd do better. When two individuals with equal qualifications, one Black and one white, are considered for the same job, the Black applicant won't get the job, no matter how hard he tries. People who don't do well in life Often work hard, but the breaks just don't come their way. Some people just don't use the breaks that come their way. If they don't do well, it's their own fault. 23. 24. 25. 26. 190 Many times I feel that I have little influence over the things that happen to me. It is impossible for me to believe that chance or luck play an important role in my life. Leadership positions tend to go to capable people who deserve being chosen. It's hard to understand why some peOple get leader- ship positions and others don't; ability doesn't seem to be important. The attempt to "fit in" and do what's prOper hasn't paid Off for Blacks. It doesn't matter how ”proper" you are, you'll still meet serious discrimination if you're Black. The problem for many Blacks is that they aren't really acceptable by American standards. Any Black person who is educated and does what is considered proper will be accepted and get ahead. Most people don't realize the extent to which their lives are controlled by accidental happenings. There really is no such thing as "luck." APPENDIX D RACE OF COMPANY OWNER, POWERLESSNESS IN WORK, INSTRUMENTAL WORK ORIENTATION, AND ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTIFICATION INDICES APPENDIX D RACE OF COMPANY OWNER, POWERLESSNESS IN WORK, INSTRUMENTAL WORK ORIENTATION, AND ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTIFICATION INDICES PART II (Continued) Instructions: In this final part of the questionnaire we ask how much you agree or disagree with certain statements concern- ing your work experience. Answer each item by circling the number that best expresses your feeling about the statement. Circle onl one number for each item. The alternatives associated with each number are: 27. 28. 29. 1. Strongly Agree 2. Agree 3. Undecided 4. Disagree 5. Strongly Disagree In general, people feel that the owner of a company or business should be of the same race or ethnic group as the majority of his employees. Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 You can help decide on the methods and procedures used in your job. Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree Your job is something you have to do tO earn a living; most Of your real interests are centered outside your job (occupation). Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 191 30. 31. 32. 192 I think of this company as a good place to work with management and employees, because we are all working together toward the same goals and Objectives. Strongly. Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Disagree You have influence and control over the things that happen tO you at work. Strongly . Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Disagree Money is the most rewarding reason for working. Strongly. Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Disagree APPENDIX E INTERITEM CORRELATIONS AND ITEM-TOTAL CORRELATIONS: SCALE OF POWERLESSNESS IN WORK 193 .mmmhoamfim HwHHOOImuflc3 o» momma mononucmumm cw emcee .muoxuoa HMHHOOIOOHO Op cwmuumm monocucmumm OH pomoaocm uoc chHumaouuoun .ooo.d mo mufim oamfimm w you Hm>ma do. men an ucmOflmwcmflm ma m>onm Ho mo. mo coflumamuuoo m .mommoamfim HOAHOOIOHfl£3 mcflnmpflmcoo .mumxu03 HMHHOWIOOHQ mom Hm>ma Ho. on» an unmowmwcmfim we m>onm HO ma. mo coaumamnnoo and .mon.anuz so comma mum OHOEMm HMHHOOIOuHcs on» How mcowumaounou .momnkm co comma mum OHOEMm HOHHOOIOOHQ on» How mcofiumamuuoom Adm.vmm. Aoo.Hvoo.H Ahv.v mv. .xuo3 um no» on swamp: umfi mmcwfi 93 ~96 Houucoo can mucosamcw 0>mn no» .N Amm.vmv. Aoo.av oo.H .non Hoom cw com: mmuspmooum cam a upocumfi on» so Opwomp mama coo 50» .H meowumamuuou N H HmuoalewuH WGOHflwH @HHOU ETHHHOHGH MmOS ZH mmmmemAmmzom ho deUm muWZOHfimqmmmou AdHOBIZMBH QZ¢ mZOHamflmmmou SMEHmmBZH m xHQZMmMQ APPENDIX F INTERITEM CORRELATIONS AND ITEM-TOTAL CORRELATIONS: SCALE OF INSTRUMENTAL WORK ORIENTATION 194 .mom>OHmEO HMHHOOIOOH£3 Ou momma mononucmumm cw owoca .mumxuo3 HMHHOOIOSHQ Op cappnmm mononucmnmm OH pmmoaocm no: meowumamunoob .ooo.H mo mnwm OHOEMm m How Hm>oa Ho. map um uGMOHmacmfim ma o>onm no mo. mo coaumamuuoo m .mmmmoamam HMHHOOIOHH£3 mcfiuopflmcou .mumxuo3 HOHHOOIOOHQ How Hm>ma do. can an ucmowmacmwm we o>onm HO ma. mo coaumamnuoo and .vom.HnWm co comma mum mamfimm HMHHOOIOHH£3 man How meowpmamnuou .vomufim co comma mum OHOEMm HOHHOOIOOHQ Gnu Mom chHDmamHuoom Lem.ve¢. Aoo.avoo.a Aam.v «m. .mcexuoz new commmu . mcflpumzmu umofi man we mono: .N Amm.emm. loo.acnoo.a .Acoflummsouov non H50» opwmuso pmumvcou mum mumwumpcw anon Hsom mo umOE umcfl>fla m ammo O» Op Op w>ms so» mcfinumeom we now H50» .H chHumHOHHOU m H Hmuoeusmum mcowpmamuuou souwumucH ZOHB¢BZMHMO MMOB AdBZMZDmBmZH m0 MAfiUm mumZOHedqmmmOU ANBOBISmBH 02¢ mZOHB¢AMMMOO EMBHmmHZH m NHszmmfl APPENDIX G EMPLOYEE TERMINATION FORMS company. APPENDIX G EMPLOYEE TERMINATION FORM (Blue Form) We are extremely regretful that you are leaving the It was a pleasurable experience to have you as an employee, and we are hopeful you will be successful in your future endeavors, whatever they happen to be. We would be most appreciatiVe, if you pleasefill out this form. It will help us understand the reasons why our employees leave the company, and also provide information enabling us to make necessary adjustments in the future. 1. Position or job held before leaving company Length of employment with company Work shift Reason for separation: (check one) Fired or discharged Personal reasons Health or medical reasons .New job Would you work for this company again, if a position was available in the future? (check one) Yes NO Not sure, or uncertain If you desire, please explain in detail your reason for leaving the company. (if additional space is needed use other side) 195 APPENDIX H INTERITEM CORRELATIONS FOR NON-MANAGERIAL EMPLOYEES 197 .50055: 93.30: on 0335a and) 35.330000 8333MB .03»?! cum.) 3 Us 3 in .83.. an 05 3 00% g 90:: 0030.395 on: 13505 on» a.“ a; can .303 ouwdqconnonv Managua 3 N38 Pain louHII.ouoz N0.! M0.! Nb. 00.! 00.! b0. NH. vH.! 00. VA.! 0A.! H0.! bH.! 0d.! vH.! 00. 0H.! 0H.! MM.! 00.! NN.! 00. 0A.! 00.! 00. b0. 0N.! 00. NN.! ANMv N0. 0b.! bu. 0b. 00.! 0A.! Md. b0.! 0H. MA. b0. bu. bH. 0H. b0. 0H. CH. 00. 00. 0A. 00.! AN. b0. Hb.! b0. 0H. 00.! NN. AHMV 0b.! bu. H0. NN.! M0.! 0H. Nb.! 0N. 0H. NH. 0H. NN. MN. 00. 0H. 0H. NH. 0H. ON. 00.! MN. NN.! Nb.! HA. NN. Hb.! MN. AOM0 0A.! 00.! 00. NH. MM.! N0. 0N.! NN.! 00.! VN.! 0N. NN.! 00. 0N.! 0H. NH.! 00.! 0N.! H0. 0N.! 0A.! #0. 0A.! NN.! 0b. vN.! AON0 0H. me. 00. v0. MM.! 00. db. H0. 00. db. v0. MN.! 00. 0b. N0. 00. 0b. 0A.! b0. b0. 0N.! M0. 00. 0a.! 00. AON0 00.! 00.! ON. 00.! NN. AN. 0a. VN. bN. CN. 00.! ON. 04. ON. MA. MN. N0.! MN. vd. M0.! NH. MN. 00.! NN. Ava 00. 0M. NH. bM. Mv. 0M. 0v. vv. 0M. 00. MM. Nv. vv. 0M. 0'. M0. N0. 0M. H0. 0M. 00. 00. 0M. AON0 00. AH. 00. 00. N0. 00. M0. 00. 00. MG. v0. M0. 00. 00. M0. 00. b0. M0. 00. b0. 00. M0. “MN. 0A.! H0. 00. #0. N0. H0. M0. 0A.! 00. 00. 0b. 00. b0. 0A.! b0. 00. 0a.! 00. 00. 00.! db. Ava 00.! MM.! b0.! HH.! 0H. MH.! Nb. H0.! Cd. 00. 00.! 0A.! 0b.! mu.! vd.l 0b. 00.! 0A.! Vb. 0a.! AMNV b0. H0. 00. db. Mb. 0A.! 00. Mb. 00. db. b0. NN.! 0b. 00. bH.! N0. b0. MM.! Ab. ANN. Hb. 0b. 0b. 0b. NH.! M0. Mb. 00. ‘0. 0b. 0A.! db. Cb. MM.! 0b. 00. 0A.! 0b. ANNV 00. 00. 0b. 00.! um. 00. Mb. M0. 00. 00.! 00. b0. 00.! 00. '0. N0.! 00. AONV 0b. 0b. MM.! 00. Nb. 00. 00. 0b. 0H.! 00. db. 0A.! H0. Nb. MM.! 00. Andy M0. AH.! 00. Mb. 00. v0. 00. 0N.! bb. 0b. VH.! b0. Hb. 0A.! b0. Abdv 00.! 00. Nb. Nb. db. 0b. VN.! 0b. 00. MM.! N0. 00. 0N.! Cb. AOH0 M0. 0N. b0. 00.! MM.! Vb. 0N.! MM.! Vb. MM.! 0N.! Nb. 0A. and. 00. mm. 00. M0. 00.! 00. 00. 00.! mm. N0. b0.! 00. Avdv 00. db. bb. NN.! 0b. 0b. 0A.! 00. Mb. bH.! Ab. “Maw b0. N0. NH.! 00. M0. vH.! N0. 00. 0A.! v0. ANN. H0. MM.! 00. 00. NN.! M0. 00. 10.! 00. “OH. 00.! 00. H0. 0A.! b0. 00. bd.! 0b. A00 MM.! 00.! 0b. NN.! NN.! 00. 0d. A00 H0. HN.! b0. 0b. NN.! Mb. Abv N0.! 00. v0. 00.! 0b. A00 00.! vN.! 00. MN. «00 N0. H0.! 00. Av. 0N.! vb. AM. NN. AN. 30 “NM. AHMV «OM. AON0 AMNV Ava AON0 «MNV AQNV AMNV ANNV ANN. AONV awn. Abdv g0H0 Andy Ava» .MH. ANA» Acne .00 .00 “by “00 A00 avv AMV AN. Adv ,IIUH A0anuzv mflflhbamlfl AtHIflUdldllez_§Oh alouhdflllloo IHHHIIHIH All ldfldfi 198 0N.! 0H. N0. NM.! 0H. 0H.! 0H.! HH.! NN.! HN.! N0.! bH.! bM.! 0M.! MM.! H0.! bH.! H0.! NN.! bH.! 00.! bH. HN.! NM.! 0N. b0. 00.! bN.! 00.! .NMO 0b. 0M.! 00. Hb. HH. 0N. bM. 0M.! 00. MN. 00. 0M. 00. 00. N0.! OM. 00. bM. MN. 0M. 00.! 00. 0N. M0.! H0. 0M. 00.! 00.! .HMV bH.! 00. 00. 00.! N0. 00. 00.! 00. bN. 00. OM. 00. H0. 00.! OM. 0M. 0M. MM. bM. 00.! 00. HM. b0.! N0.! 00. 00.! M0. .OM0 00.! HM.! 00.! 00.! NN.! 0H. 0M.! 0M.! NH. M0.! 00. N0.! 0H. NN.! 00.! 0M.! 0H.! N0.! NN. HM.! 0M.! HH. 00. H0.! 00. 0M. .0N0 00. MH. 0N. b0. MN.! 00. 0N. 00. H0. 00. N0. N0. 0M. 0N. N0. 0N. 00. 0H.! NM. 0M. 0M.! 00.! 00. 00.! H0.! .0N0 NH. HN. H0. 00.! 00. 0M. 00. 00. 00. H0. 00.! 0M. HM. 00. 0H. 00. 0M.! 00. 0M. NM.! M0.! MM. HM.! 0M. .bN. 0N. 00. 00.! N0.! NH. 00. 0H. 0H. 00. NO. 00. 00. NN. N0.! 0H. N0.! HM. N0. 0N.! NO. HN. HO.! NO. .0N0 0M. N0.! NN. 0H. 0M. NN. 00. 00. 0M.! M0. 0M. N0. 0N. 0H. bM. M0. 0H. 00. 00.! 00. 00.! bM. .0N0 00.! bN. NM. N0. 0M. bN. 0H. 0M.! b0. 0M. 00. MH. 0M. 0N.! 0H. 00. 0M.! 0H.! H0. bN.! 0M. .0N0 NN.! 0M.! 00. bM.! M0.! 00.! 0M. M0.! 0M.! N0.! 0H.! 00.! bM. 0N.! 00.! bM. 00. b0.! 00. bM.! .MNv 0N. MM. 0N. 00. H0. NM.! HM. 0M. 0M. H0. HM. bM.! 0N. 0N. bM.! NO. NM. N0.! 0M.! .NN. bN. H0. H0. MN. NO. ON. MH. 0M. 00.! 0M. b0.! NN. 0N. 0H.! H0. 0N. MH.! HM. .HNV MM. b0. 00. 00.! ON. N0. 00. 0H. 0M. 00.! HM. 00. H0.! bH.! 00. NM.! 00. .ONV 00. ON. MN.! 0H. 0H. 00. b0.! M0. 0N.! 0N. bM. b0.! OH. 00. 0H.! 0M. .0H0 0b. NM.! HM. N0. H0. bH. M0. M0.! H0. 0N. M0.! 00.! 00. b0.! 0M. .bH0 0N.! bM. N0. M0. NN. HM. H0.! 00. bH. N0.! 00. 0M. 00.! M0. .0H. 00.! 00.! 0M.! NM.! 0M.! MN. 0H. 00.! HH. 0H. 0M.! 0N. 0N. .0H. 00. HM. 0N. bH. 0H.! 0N. HO. 0H.! bH. MH. 0H.! 0N.! .0H0 HH. NM. H0. 0M.! 0M. 00. 0N.! 0H.! H0. 00.! 0N. .MHO 0H. bN. bM.! bM. 0H. 00.! 0H.! b0. 0M.! 0N. .NHO H0. 00.! NN. b0. 0N.! 00.! 0M. NN.! MN. .OHO MH.! 0H. Nb. MH.! 00. 00. 0M.! 0M. .00 H0.! N0. M0. 00. NM.! 0M. 0N.! .0. 0H.! M0.! 0H. 00. N0.! 0N. .b. 00.! 0H.! 00. 0M.! M0. .00 0H. 00.! 00. 0M.! .00 0H.! 0H. 00. .00 10.! N0. .3 0M.! .3 .5 .Nfl SM. .03 .03 .03 .bN. .03 .03 .03 .MN. .93 SN. .23 .0: .bd .03 .05 .03 .30 .NH. .03 .00 .00 .b. .00 .00 .00 .M. .NO .5 3H .00-.zV d altmlfiu 2H mflflsoqmlfl AdHlflUfll‘lflOl IUGAI IDS mIOHHAHIIIOO IIHHIHHIH NI! Hausa 199 H0. bH.! bM.! 0M.! NM.! 0H. 0H.! 0M. MN.! 0H. Mb. 00.! 00.! M0. H0. 00.H 00.H!M0. 0b. H0. 00. NM. 00. H0. HH. 00.! M0. bH.! 0H. .NMO 0M. MM. 00. b0. Hb.! 00.! M0. b0. 00.! 00.H 00.! bN. HN. M0.! N0. 00. 00. 0N. N0. H0. 0M.! 0H.! Hb.! NN. bM. 00. H0. M0. .HM. 00. Mb. 0M. 0M. MH. MN. 00.! 0M. 00. H0. 0N. H0. 00. NM. N0. 00. 00. H0. MH.! Nb.! MH. 0H. M0. H0. 0N. M0. M0. .0M0 H0. 0N. bM. 00. M0.! 00. H0.! H0. 0M. b0. HM. MN. 0H. M0. 00. 0b.! Nb. NH.! HH.! 0N. MM.! 00. 00.! MM. bH. 0M.! .0N0 0b. MN.! 00. HM. 00. b0. MH. 00. M0. NM. 0H. 00. 0N. MN. 00.H 00.! HO. HH. bH. 00.! 0H. MH. 0M. 0H. 0N. .0N. 00.! H0. bN.! bN. 0M. 0H. bH. 00. MM. MH. 00. NH. H0. NN.! H0. HM. OM. 0N. bM. 0H.! 0H. Hb. 00.! 0M. .bNO bN. N0. M0. 0b. 00. M0. 00.H!N0. HN. 0N. bM. 0N. NM. M0. N0. 00. 0b.! 00. 0M.! OM. 00. OH.! HH.! .0N0 M0.! bM. M0. H0. MN. 0M. b0. 0N. MN. HM. 0M. MN. MM. HH.! 00. 0b.! 00.! bM.! HM. 00. MH.! N0. .0N0 0M. 00. M0. 00. 0H. 0N. 00. 00. OH. 0M. NM. 00. 00. M0. M0. b0. M0.! 0N. 0O. 00. 00. .0N0 0N. 0N. bN. MH. 0N. bb. 00. HH. 00. 00. 00. N0.! 00. N0. 00.! H0. Mb. M0. M0. 00.! .MN. 0M. 0M. 00. H0. b0. bM. MM. 0N. 0b. 00.H!Hb. 00.H!0M. 00.H!0M. 00.H!HN. 00.! 00.H .NN. bM. MM. 0M.! bM.! 00. 0b.! bN. HN. M0. M0. 00. bM. 00. 0N. HM. 0H. 0H.! 00. .HNV HN. 00. M0. 0H. 00. 0N. NN. M0. N0.! 0M. 0M. 00.H!00.H!0M. HH. N0. OM. .ONO 0H.! 00.! 0M. 0M. Mb. bN. b0. 00.! M0. H0. 0N. 0N. 0M. 00. H0. Ob. .0H. 00. 0H.! b0. HM. 0N. 00.H!N0.! NN. 00. M0. MH. NH. b0. 0H.! M0.! .bHy M0. 00.! M0. N0. 0b. 00. N0. 0b.- 00. 0H. HH. 0O. 00.! 00. .0H0 Hb. H0. bM.! Mb.! bM. 0H.! 0H.! 00.! M0. 0H. 00. 0H. 00.! .0H0 00. 0M. H0. 0H.! 0M.! M0. H0. 00.! 0H. 00. bH. M0.! .0H0 0M.! H0. HH. 0M. H0. 00. b0. 00. 00. M0. 00.H .MHV Mb. 00.! 0M. 0N. 0M. 00. MM. 0H. 0M.! 0M. .NH0 00.! M0. N0. 0N. 00.H 0M. N0. 00.! 00. .OH0 0N. 00. H0. 00. 00. 00. 00. 00. .00 Nb.! 00. M0. 00. H0. 00. 00.! .00 HO. b0.! 00. 0H.! 00.H!OO.H .b. 00. M0. b0. H0.! H0. .00 00. H0. 00. 00.! .00 H0.I 00.H!00.H .00 00.H!00.H .MO 00.H! .NO .3 .NM. .HMO .0M0 .0Nv .QNV .bN0 .0Nv .0N0 .0N0 .MNV .NNO .HNv .ONV .0H0 .bHv .0H0 .0H0 .0H0 .MHO .NHV .OHO .00 .00 .b0 .00 .00 .00 .M0 .N0 .HV IluH .b0l Z. n $24028 2H ass Hag-.202 3 “Oh 080.9538 aHMNHiH Mla ”Hath 12()0 en.- ~v.u na.- bM.- «v.n.no. .mvl 23 m 3380 2H gaunt” H4284; MPH; “Oh (|l. Iv} 0!! HHQ‘B 00.! 00. MN. bM. H0. 0M.! 0b.! bb. Nb. Mb. 00. 0M. HH.! NN. bN. M0. 0M. bH. 0H. MN.! 0M.! 0H.! 00. .NM3 bN. 00. 0H. 0H. MN. 0b. 0N. 0H. MH.! MH. 0N. 00.H!00.H 00. b0. MN. 0N. bN. 0M. 00. H0. N0. H0. 00.! M0.! 00.! bH.! bH.! .HMV 0M. 0N. 0N. HO.! 00. 0N. 0M. N0. 0H. bH.! MM. bH.! 00.H 00. N0. bN. H0. 0N. bM. M0. bM. 00. 00. N0. 00. 00. HM.! .0M3 0H. 0H. M0. 0N. 0N. H0. 00. Mb. MN. 00. 00. MH. N0. NH. 0N. MH. 0b. 00. MM. NM. 0H. 00. b0. 0H. MH. 0H. .0N3 0b. b0.! bb. Nb. 00. OH. 00. NM. HM. 00. NH. MH. 00. O0. 0H. HO. 0M. MN.! MH.! 0H.! 0M.! MM.! 0b.! 00.! 00.! .0N3 NM. 00. H0. 00. b0. M0. N0. 00. 00. 00. b0. 0M. 00. 00.H 00.! Hb. 00. Mb.! 0M. 0M. N0. MM. H0. 00. .bN3 00. 00. 00. N0. HH. 0H. MM. 0b. 00. 0H. MH. H0. 00. HO.! 00. ON. 0H. 0M. ON. 0H. 00. 00. b0. .0N3 0M. NM. M0. 00. 0M. bM. 00. 00.! N0. Mb. 00.H!00.! 00. HO.! 00. 00. 0H. 0N. 0M. 00.H!0H. 00. .0N3 00. MN. 0M. bH.! 00. H0. 00. bM. 00. 0M. MM. bM. 00. 0M. bM. 00. 0M. M0. ON. bM. 00.! .0N3 Mb. 00.! 00.! 0b.! MM. H0. 00. b0. 0N. 00. 0M. MN. N0. b0. 0H. 0H. 00. NN. 00.! 00.! .MN3 00. 00.H!00. bb. bM. 00. 00.H!bM. 00. 0M. M0. M0. bb. 0H. 0H. 00.! 00. 00. 00. .NN3 00.! bN.! 0M.! 0b. M0. bM. 00. 0b. HO.! H0. 00. 00.H!NN. 0H. 00. 00. 00. 00. .HNV 0N. MO. MH. 00. 00. 0H. NH. MH. 0N. 00. 00. M0. 0M. N0. 00. bb. bM. .ONv 00. OH. NH.! MH. b0.! 0H. NH. MM.! M0. M0. H0. 00. 00. NM. 0M. NM. .0H3 0M.! 0M.! 00.! 0M. N0.! MM.! bN. bM. 0M. 00. HO.! HO. HM. bM. 0H. .bH. 0b. 0b. 00. M0. 00. 0M. H0. 0M. 0H.! 00. NN. 0H. M0. 0H. .0H3 00. 00. M0.! 00. 0M.! M0. M0. bN. 00. 00.H!0M. N0. HN. .0H3 00.! 0b. HO.! 0H. 00. 00. 0H. 00. 0M. M0. H0. 0H. .0H. 00. 0M. 0H. 00. b0.! N0. 00.! NH. N0. b0. Nb. .MH. 00. 0H. 0N. M0.! 00. 0H. ON. 00.! MH. 00. .NH. NM.! 00. 0H. 0H.! MM. H0. 00. HH. M0. .OH3 HM. 00. 0b.! 00. 00.! M0. ON. 00.! .03 00. Mb.! 0b. M0.! 00. 0H. 00.! .03 Mb. 00. MH. M0. 00. bH.! .b3 00. 0H. Nb. MM. MN.! .03 HH. 00. 00. HO.! .03 00.H!bM. 00.! .03 0M. N0.! .3 Mo. .3 .3 .33 .H3 .03 .03 .03 .b3 .03 .03 .03 83 .N3 .H3 .03 .03 .b3 .03 .03 .03 .M3 .N3 .03 .03 .03 .b. .00 .03 .03 .3 .3 .3 'un mZOHfiflaflNflQO IMFHNHHZH 201 \l! I ON.I MO. OO. OO. ON. NN. MN. Ob. OO. MO. HM. ON. MM. NH. MH. OM. OO. Ob. OO. Ob. OO. OO.H MO. HO. OO.H MN. MO. Ob. OO. .NMO bN. OM. OH. OO. OO. HO. OO. MO.I OO. bO. MO. OM.I OM. ON. ON. NN. MN. OH. HO. MO. OO. bO. MO. OM. OM. OO. OO.! bO. .HM. OH. NN. HN. MO. OO. MO. bfi. NO. bN. OH. ON. bH.! MH. OH. OM. bM. OO. OO. OO.H OO. OM. OO.! OM.I ON. Ob. OO. OO. .OMO OH. OM.I bM. OO. Mb. HO. ON. MO. ON. Mb. OO. OO. OO. HO. NO. MO. MN. OO. HO. NO. HO. HO. OO. HM.! OH. OO. HON. OO. OO. OO. OO. MO. HM. ON. ON. OO. OH. OO. OM. OO. OM. OO. OO. OM. OM. OO. OO. OH. bH. HN. ON. OO. .ONO bO.! OO.I OH. NM. OO. Ob.| OO. OH. OO.I MO. ON. OH. OH. OO. OO. Mb. bN. OO. OH. HO. OH. Ob. OO.! OO. .bN. OO.H OO. MO. Ob.l NO. Ob. ON. Ob. OO.! bO. bO. OO. MO. ON. MO. OO. NO. HO. bM. HM. HO. MO. MO.I .ONV MO.I HO. Mb. HO. OH. OH.I OH. OM.I OM. HO. MO. OO. OH. ON. ON. MO. MO. HH.I Ob. OO. Ob. NM. .ONO OM. OH.I ON. OH. OH. MN. Ob.l OH. MM. ON.‘ Ob. OO. OO.! OO. OO. OH. MH. OM. HM. OO. OM. .ONO NM.! OM. OM. bH. OH. Mb.l ON. OO. HO.I Ob. ON. MN.! OO.! OO. HO. OH. NM. OO. Mb. OO. .MNO OM. OO. MN. OH.I HO.I OH. OM. OO.! OO. OO. HO. OM.I HO. OO. MO. NO. HO. OO. bH.! .NN. OO. OH. OM.I bM.! ON. OO. bO.- MO. Ob. OO.! MO.I MO.I OO.HIHO.I OO. MM. OO. HO. .HNO OM. MN. OO.I OH. Nb. OO.! OO. OO. MN. bN.! OM. ON. OH. MO. NO. OO.HINH.I .ONO OO. Hb.I OH. Hb.l OO.! bH. OO. OO. OO.I bH. OM.I OO. OO. OO. OO.H MH. .OH. Ob.l MN. OO.! MO.I OH. OO.HIOO.I OM.I OH. Mb.! MN. ON. OM. OO.H MN. .bHv OM. HO. HO.I ON. OO. OO.I bM.! OH. OM.I OO. OM. bH. OO. OO. .OHV MO. OO.! OH. Ob. MO. Ob.I OH. OH. HO. OO.H bb. OO. OO. .OHO ON.I OO. OM. OH. OO.HIMN. MO.I HO. NO. OO. MO. OH. .OHO HO.I OO. OM. HO.I OH. NN. OO. MO. OO. OO. OO.H! .MH. OO. bH. OM. MO. ON.I OH. NO. OO. OO. Ob. .NHO OM. OO. OO. NO. OO. bO. HO. OH. Mb. .OHv NM. OH. MO. HN. OO. MM. MN. OO.I .O. OO. HO. OH. OO. OO. bO. OO.HI .O. MO. bH. OH. NM. Ob. Ob.! .bv NN. OO. MM. OM. OO.I .O. OO.I bN. OO. MO.I .O. «0. 8. OO.- .3 OO. Ob. .M. OO.HI .3 .3 .NM. .HM. .03 .ON. .93 2.3 .93 .ON. .ON. .MN. .NN. .HN. .03 .O3 .b3 .O3 .O3 .O3 .23 .N3 .03 .3 .O. .b. .3 .3 .3 .M. .3 .3 3H .bOII. 0 ES 3H Ea angle. “Bi “Du gag BE Ola MAOQH Table Table Table Table Table APPENDIX I TABLES FOR MANAGERIAL EMPLOYEES presents the group means and standard deviations for the managerial employees on the dependent variables. gives the intercorrelations of the dependent measures. presents the comparison of Black managerial employees in company A and white managerial employees in company B. shows the comparison of Black managerial employees in company A and white managerial employees in company C. presents the comparison of white managerial employees in companies B and C. 202 .ON I In .MH I I A .NH I an .3: an; on coo-Bow on: .8333 Oug- Ond :08:in- ON. ON.O bO.H OO.n OH. HN.N Ob. N0.0 MO. bM.H 0N. OO.H OO. O0.0 bN. OO.H M0.M O0.0H HO. M0.0 0.0 auunlpuv oanI OH. OH.O MN.N HM.O 00. 00.N OO. N0.0 NO. OM.H 00. 00.H OO. HM.O 00. 00.H Ob.N NO.MH Ob. M0.0 A.O unumanO OUHAI an. M0.0 OH.N O~.v OO.H OO.M bN.H bH.m 00. 00.N OO. bO.H bO.H b0.0 HO. OO.H no.1 b0.0H NO. ON.O a.¢ ailnlbuv nuaHO o .m o m o m o m o m. o m o m o m o m o m 3383333 833.38 noes uals-8 “no: 5 aufiqfidao: .8304 II:— FQBSE .6383 33:8 gxoooaoanl Haonnagouo sue: OD 005. uguuoHuotom 8.333.3qu gauooHHoo Scum H13 0H....“ Hgom Hausgusn naugfiin Lad—5.335 wagon." .03 .2 .8 .5 .3 .3 .3 .3 .3 .3 mmmDmdfll BZBGZEANO 20 OMMkqulN HdHIHUOI‘I hO OIOthHDIG Ofldfllflflw Old Oltfll HIH MHO‘F .Ho. vNai .mo.urmr .ommmmummsm mum: HmcomMHv nH m.H can .suvouvnsn umoumwc cu cmucaou mum: mucmHOmemoo GOHHMHmuHOUII.ouoz 2()3 m~.u mo.u mN. Oo. oH. ~H.- HH.: HN.- .vm.u coHuooHuHuauoH HmaoHuuuHcmmuo .oH. 5H. .Hm.u mm. MH.- on.» vH.u mH.u mm. coHumucoHuo xuox Hmucuasnuqu .mv mo. mm. Ho. mH. «mm. «.mm. OH. amaze acumaoo mo comm .m. mH.n mH. mH. «0.- OH.u .«Hm.u Hue: :H mmoammoHumsom .nv no.u oo. «o. hm. game. auHHHnMHuHooz coHuunHaHuomHo .m. «Hm. mo. .om. Ho. :oHuo< m>HuomHHoonHusoH>HucH .mv ..mm. «.MO. mo. oamHm auummmuHmscH>HucH .vv «.Ho. mo. monuuHHHz HuHonm .mv ..vm. .moHoooH oHnuu unuummuoum .Nv Houuaoo Huaomumm .HV .OHV .mv .m. .hv .Ov .OV .Ov .mv .Nv .Hv .mv "2v mmflflflg Ban—29mg ho ”HE—k! wanna—.558 NIH Smflfi 204 TABLE I-3 MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF BLACK MANAGERIAL EMPLOYEES IN COMPANY (A) AND WHITE MANAGERIAL EMPLOYEES IN COMPANY (B) _.__.__ -1- _-.- - _..- -7..- -.. __.._-- -_ _..._— .. ...__—._.___~-_--.._._—__.—.—__.._ —_—.-____- -———-——————.—. F-ratio for Multivariate Test of Equality of Mean Vectors==6.l6 d.f. =10 and 14 Pf 0.0013 Variable Bet. Mean Sq. Univariate F E< 1. Personal Control 0.51 0.55 0.4635 2. Protestant Ethic Ideology 140.41 10.16 0.0041* 3. Racial Militancy 2.12 16.74 0.0005* 4. Individual-System Blame 34.72 22.53 0.0001* 5. Individual-Collective Action 2.77 23.92 0.0001* 6. Discrimination Modifiability 2.36 17.66 0.0004* 7. Powerlessness in Work 0.37 0.17 0.6794 8. Race of Company Owner 15.64 9.24 0.0059 9. Instrumental Work Orientation 0.02 .0.00 0.9409 10. Organizational Identification 2.88 5.83 0.0241 I d.f. (Hypothesis)==l d.f. (Error) == 23 *Significant beyond .005 level. 205 TABLE I-4 MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF BLACK MANAGERIAL EMPLOYEES IN COMPANY (A) AND WHITE MANAGERIAL EMPLOYEES IN COMPANY (C) F-ratio for Multivariate Test of Equality of Mean Vectors= 7.42 d.f. =10 and 25 2(0'0001 Variable Bet. Mean Sq. Univariate F 2< 1. Personal Control 2.72 2.22 0.1450 2. Protestant Ethic Ideology 141.68 9.54 0.0040* 3. Racial Militancy 2.00 14.31 0.0006* 4. Individual-System Blame 39.01 29.72 0.0001* 5. Individual-Collective Action 3.12 29.31 0.0001* 6. Discrimination Modifiability 3.12 18.88 0.0002* 7. Powerlessness in Work 2.34 1.55 0.2208 8. Race of Company Owner 15.12 8.73 0.0057 9. Instrumental Work Orientation 0.68 0.22 0.6389 10. Organizational Identification 2.34 3.86 0.0574 d.f. (Hypothesis) =1 d.f. (Error) =34 fiw— *Significant beyond .005 level. 206 TABLE I-S MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF WHITE MANAGERIAL EMPLOYEES IN COMPANY (B) AND WHITE MANAGERIAL EMPLOYEES IN COMPANY (C) W F-ratio for Multivariate Test of Equality of Mean Vectors==0.3l d.f.=10 and 26 £<0.9711 Variable Bet. Mean Sq. Univariate F E< 1. Personal Control 0.73 0.47 0.4974 2. Personal Ethic Ideology 2.41 0.27 0.6042 3. Racial Militancy 0.05 1.11 0.2977 4. Individual-System Blame 0.19 0.35 0.5537 5. Individual-Collective Action 0.01 0.53 0.4696 6. Discrimination Modifiability 0.00 0.00 0.9557 7. Powerlessness in Work 0.74 0.40 0.5281 8. Race of Company Owner 0.36 0.29 0.5928 9. Instrumental Work Orientation 1.02 0.43 0.5162 10. Organizational Identification 0.16 0.19 0.6610 d.f. (Hypothesis)==1 d.f. (Error) =35 MICHIGAN STATE UNIV. LIBRARIES I“IIHINIWIMIHW11WI)1|le111W“) 31293010732166