”11M“ . L'ztp‘fiéi'ia‘u
‘ ' -" MIL ‘IF WI; 23?}
w ~: I I:

Hi. .

14'::1;“.1~2:l:;:.'
: : ' III»: .

 

       

    

'w-‘J. '
wow

3

1“." $1146 .1;

.S‘Iyru

”in”! {lg
:1 1:41 In.

’—
—‘

.‘IBIII

 

an
2-“.

S 13:51 .
"

.J
u.»

. .
v

u. .. ‘ ‘ Ih"

L11 1.} 51:: "5 ‘ ; "L .I 'v 1H. L123,
x ‘ flir: ’, E‘ Q _ y. : V: . . at”

5" . - ‘ . u‘ :I '2. L;
‘ .

"1-1: ..
‘ ‘ 1|}‘I1I‘I9'V‘ '4' I ‘
mg; I l‘I1‘ 3..

-7' lflkfi???‘ V5.2 m

A .Jfijzj;
_4_._J.-

b 4““ M‘

L
‘ I II WI \:
1 3 1L, '. .I 'h" L”: ‘9' 1;!
1M1" ~1L I]. .1. . LI”;
- l I' I I r. :2
4‘ ~ I 41 ' . ‘ 1" hf." 1‘"! ‘1
4’ I ‘4 I it] 1_:_IIIL 1‘1“”
I. ,. ”31.". . If”... ”‘3 .utflu
01-. ' , 'I 1‘ . I. H “3741-, M

 

41“ .Igi‘

.
p‘l’uI‘lI'

V1.4” 4,” j '|
. : .,- ' !.II [”431 l,
' '1‘: ” r1v.".|:-
' 3,:“t -

Ill"
”1:?
I:-

H‘IIIHM'

:‘IHI'I;

,. II 3'31”?“ - - ‘ 3m
afl'III‘ .. 111.211....
3"" ”3:; ‘ 1,1115»

.-
In :1‘12'7;

 

. '“12; ‘_
1': w
‘.I

D' '4 '
' . . I :1; any 1.11mi“
1,1,“1I.;:u._v .Lm‘sj'imflnz 1'1 '5“ I." 11'; :74:
’I- Ii” if": f 5,11'XIIIEL1 "4' t1???“
" I” 4 L $115.13?

« It}

*5.”

 

no??-

. -A.

P:-
l

"3*.

LI“. 1%.: '

I“ 1
. 1..“ . . I'- I
1"” 5%" mm [L
4 .114 I“ ‘ {I} 'H.
1‘”? ”111.1191? mg; I can
If?) Eff

.
::'4'~"

m8 IHIUINIWIll!HIHHIHUHIHHIIHHIIHIIIIllllllllllil

g 913 01565 0983

((M7)

 

LIBRARY

Michigan State
University

 

 

 

This is to certify that the

dissertation entitled

THE IMAGE OF MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION AS
PERCEIVED BY COUNTY EXTENSION ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS
AND EXTENSION FIELD STAFF IN MICHIGAN

O
presented by

Usman Adamu

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph.D. degreein W3] and Extension

 

 

 

Education
Major professor
Date September 9 , 1996
MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-12771

4' ‘ .‘_ g

V

r ‘ -—r ‘v v

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove We checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

$8091»; I
j I

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WWI—7

MSU Ie An Nflrmeflve Aztlan/Equal Opportunlty InetItqun
Wm:

 

*—

 

THE IMAGE OF MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION AS PERCEIVED
BY COUNTY EXTENSION ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND
EXTENSION FIELD STAFF IN MICHIGAN

By

Usman Adamu

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Agricultural and Extension Education

1 996

 

THE N3
BY

Image
knmxing z
the image
and issue:
Emensiox
My an:
People \‘i
selected
[llh‘ergj

A sur
COVE! 161
°0nsisti1
mile
hl’POIhe

quefllol

 

ABSTRACT
THE IMAGE OF MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION AS PERCEIV ED
BY COUNTY EXTENSION ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND
EXTENSION FIELD STAFF IN MICHIGAN

By

Usman Adamu

Image is important. Responsive organizations are and will always be interested in
knowing and understanding how their public view them and their services. In this study,
the image of the organizational structure, mission, personnel, services, delivery methods,
and issues programming of Michigan State University Extension, as perceived by County
Extension Advisory Committee Members and Extension Field Staff, were examined. The
study attempted to investigate whether demographic variables have influence on the way
people view image of an organization. An attempt was also made to determine which of the
selected demographic variables are important predictor(s) of image of Michigan State
University Extension among Advisory Members as well as Extension staff.

A survey method using a self administered questionnaire was used. Questionnaires with
cover letters were mailed to a stratified, randomly drawn sample of 171 participants
consisting of 95 Advisory members and 76 Extension staff. Demographic data were
analyzed using basic descriptive statistics such as mean, median, and mode. Null

hypotheses were tested using t-test and analysis of variance (AN OVA). The research

question was answered through the use of multiple linear regression analysis.

 

 

 

Fmdin
Adxisom‘
members
Emensio
image 01
people. :

were ob

Amt
differs]
Uniter
the ser
sigmfi
OCCUp.

Fir

[mite

Findings revealed that there were statistically significant differences in the perceptions of
Advisory Members based on their age, occupation, and place raised. Younger Advisory
members were more positive about the image of services of the Michigan State University
Extension than older members. Government employees were more positive about the
image of the personnel of the Michigan State University Extension than farmers, business
people, and others like homemakers, retirees, etc. No statistically significant differences
were observed in gender, educational level, and income among Advisory Members.

Findings showed that place raised was an important predictor of image of the Michigan
State University Extension among Advisory members.

Among Extension staff, findings showed that there was a statistically significant
difference in the way they perceived the image of the services of the Michigan State
University Extension based on their age. Younger Extension staff perceived the image of
the services of the organization more positively than did older staff. No statistically
significant differences were observed in gender, position, programming area, duration in
occupation, place raised, and place of residence among Extension staff.

Findings revealed that the most important predictor(s) of image of Michigan State

University Extension among among Extension Field Staff were race and place raised.

 

 

l ded‘

DEDICATION

I dedicated this work to my father Malam Adamu Gungura and mother Malama Hauwa
“Auwa” Adamu Gungura who believe in the value of all form of education.

 

.\l)‘ ;
the M)
mic ll
m y.

lift“

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

My academic journey have been a very long one. Many people have contributed along
the way. Therefore, I wish to expressed my sincere appreciation and gratitude to all who
made it possible. Whether your name appeared in this acknowledgment page(s) or not, I
want you to know that you are all in my heart. I know who you are and you know who you
are.

I am particularly indebted to Dr. Frank Bobbitt, my academic advisor and chairman of
the dissertation committee. He has gone above and beyond the call of duty to ensure a
successful completion of this degree. At any juncture, he has made himself available. He
has advice, assist, guide, and taught me through the years that I have been his student at
Michigan State University. My sincere appreciation goes to the rest of my committee
members: Dr. Eddie Moore, Dr. Frank Brewer, and Dr. Cas Heilman. Your constructive
suggestions, criticisms, and advice have provided insight and elevated the quality of this
study.

A special thanks is extended to Dr. Carroll Wamhoff, Chairman of the Department of
Agricultural and Extension Education for his advice and support during the process of my
data collection. I thank all staff of the Department of Agricultural and Extension Education

who have consistently offered services in a professional and friendly manner.

The at
Peters. C
for prox'i
and Dr. T
1993.

My 5
timers
sincere
l'nited
this lor

Fin

The author wishes to express his sincere appreciation and heartfelt thanks to Dr. George
Peters, Chairman of the Department of Linguistics and Dr. John Eulenburg (Malam Yusuf)
for providing graduate assistantship in Hausa language program, and to Dr. Joseph Levine
and Dr. Murari Suvedi for providing scholarship for the Summer Research Institute of
1 992.

My special appreciation is extend to Dr. Larry Powers of North Carolina A & T State
University for his advice and encouragement to come to Michigan State University. My
sincere appreciation and heartfelt thanks is extend to our entire families and friends here in
United States and at home (Nigeria) for their prayers, support, and understanding during
this long period of time.

Finally, I am deeply indebted to my wife Ummul-Khairi for her love, patience,
endurance, support, prayers, and understanding during these difficult years of pursuing

higher education, to our children Nana-A’ishatu, Imrana, and Maryam for their endurance

and understanding. You have made sacrifice and may Allah reward you for that amen.

 

hsofT

Usoff

(HAP

CHAl

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
List of Tables ................................................................................................................ x
List of Figures ............................................................................................................. xiv
CHAPTER
I INTRODUCTION .............................................................................. 1
Theoretical Foundations of the study ...................................... 6
Statement of the Problem ...................................................... 1 1
Purpose and Objectives ......................................................... 13
Research Hypotheses & Research Question ......................... 13
Importance of the Study ........................................................ 14
Assumptions and Limitations ................................................ 15
Definition of Terms Used ...................................................... 15
CHAPTER
II LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................. 18
Innovation and Change ....................................................... .19
Organizational Transformation and Renewal ....................... 27
Image: Definitions, Theory, and Concept ......................... .32
Previous Studies on Extension Image ................................ 40
Issues Programming: General Background,
Concept, and Theories... 5.2
Genesis of Issues Programming" in Extensron .................... 66
The Process of Issues Programming 1n Extension ........... 70
Issues Programming in Michigan: Background
and Process ....................................................................... .76
Differences Between Issues Programming and
Disciplinary Programming .................................................. 84
Summary ......................................................................... 88

vii

 

CHAPTER
III

CHXPTEF

l\

CliiPTE

APPENI

CHAPTER

III METHODOLOGY ............................................................................. 90
Research Design ................................................................... .90
Population ............................................................................ .90
Sample & Sampling Technique ............................................. 92
Instrument Development ......................................... 94
Validity and Reliability .......................................................... 95
Data Collection ...................................................................... 97
Data Analysis ...................................................................... 100
CHAPTER
IV FINDINGS ...................................................................................... .102
Demographics Characteristics of Participants ..................... 102
Findings Relevant to the Hypothesis ................................... 112
Findings Relevant to Hypothesis 1 ...................................... 113
Findings Relevant to Hypothesis 2 ...................................... 132
Findings Relevant to Hypothesis 3 ...................................... 153
Findings Relevant to Research Question ............................. 156
CHAPTER
V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS..161
Summary ............................................................................. 161
Problem ................................................................ 161
Design and Method .............................................. .161
Findings ................................................................ .163
Discussion and Conclusions ............................................ .167
Recommendations ........................................................... 175
Suggestion for Future Study ................................................ 178
APPENDICES ......................................................................................................... 180
A First Memo to Extension Directors Requesting
Addresses of Prospective Participants ............................................ 181
B Second Memo to Extension Directors Requesting
Addresses of Prospective Participants ................................ 182
C Approval Letter from UCRIHS ...................................................... 183

viii

 

BlBlll

D Notification Letter to Participants ..................................... 184

E Cover Letter .............................................................. 185
F Questionnaire ............................................................ 1 86
G F ollow—Up Post Card ................................................... 196
H Second Follow-Up Letter .............................................. 197
I Third Follow-Up Letter ................................................ 198
BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................ 199

mi;

3.1 Cror

‘

4.] The
4.3 II]:
Mi

4.3 Dr

M
44 Th
4.5 Ti
4.6 Tl
4.7 T
4.8 I

4.9 i

4.10

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page
3.1 Cronbach Alpha Reliability Results ..................................................... 97
3.2 Summary of Response Rate by Group .................................................. 99
4.1 The Gender of Extension Advisory Committee Members and Michigan State

University Extension Field Staff. ......................................................................... 102
4.2 The Distribution of Race of Extension Advisory Committee Members and

Michigan State University Extension Field Staff. ............................................... 103
4.3 The Distribution of Age of Extension Advisory Committee Members and

Michigan State University Extension Field Staff. ............................................... 104
4.4 The Distribution of Occupation of Extension Advisory Committee Members

and Michigan State University Extension Field Staff. ........................................ 104
4.5 The Distribution of Duration in Occupation of Extension Advisory Committee

Members and Michigan State University Extension Field Staff. ........................ 105
4.6 The Distribution of Position of Extension Advisory Members and Michigan

State University Extension Field Staff. ............................................................... 106
4.7 The Distribution of Michigan State University Extension Field Staff by

Programming Area. .............................................................................................. 107
4.8 The Distribution of Education Level of Extension Advisory Committee Members

.and Michigan State University Extension Field Staff ......................................... 108
4.9 The Distribution of Extension Advisory Committee Members and Michigan

State University Extension Field Staff by Place Raised ...................................... 108
4.10 The Distribution of Extension Advisory Committee Members and Michigan

State University Extension Field Staff by Place of Residence .......................... 109

x

 

4.15

LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

Table Page

4.11 The Distribution of Income of Extension Advisory Committee Members
and Michigan State University Extension Field Staff ............................... 110

4.12 The Distribution of Marital Status of Extension Advisory Committee Members
and Michigan State University Extension Field Staff ......................................... 111

4.13 T-test results for the Differences of Perceptions of Advisory Members toward
the Image of the Organizational Structure, Mission, Personnel, Services,
Delivery Methods, Issues Programming, and the Overall Image of Michigan
State University Extension by Gender ................................................................. 116

4.14 Analysis of Variance of Perceptions of Advisory Members Toward the Image
of the Organizational Structure, Mission, Personnel, Services, Delivery Methods,
Issues Programming, and the Overall Image of Michigan State University
Extension by Age ................................................................................................ 119

4.15 Analysis of Variance of Perceptions of Advisory Members Toward the Image
of the Organizational Structure, Mission, Personnel, Services, Delivery Methods,
Issues Programming, and the Overall Image of Michigan State University
Extension by Educational Level ......................................................................... 122

4.16 Analysis of Variance of Perceptions of Advisory Members Towards the Image
of the Organizational Structure, Mission, Personnel, Services, Delivery Methods,
Issues Programming and the Overall Image of Michigan State University
Extension by Occupation ................................................................................... 125

4.17 Analysis of Variance of Perceptions of Advisory Members Towards the Image
of the Organizational Structure, Mission, Personnel, Services, Delivery Methods,
Issues Programming and the Overall Image of Michigan State University
Extension by Place Raised ................................................................................. 128

4.18 Analysis of Variance of Perceptions of Advisory Members Towards the Image
of the Organizational Structure, Mission, Personnel, Services, Delivery Methods,
Issues Programming, and the Overall Image of Michigan State University
Extension by Income ................................................................. 131

’1"

~—I
(D

15-

4.19 T-tes
lma
Deli
Stat

4.20 Ah:
the
1551
Ext

4.21 Ah.
the
1551

Ext

4.33 Ah
the
135

Ex

4.33 Ar

LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

Table Page

4.19 T-test Results For the Differences of Perceptions of Extension Staff Toward
Image of the Organizational Structure, Mission, Personnel, Services,
Delivery Methods, Issues Programming, and the Overall Image of Michigan
State University Extension by Gender ................................................................ 134

4.20 Analysis of Variance of Perceptions of Extension Staff Toward the Image of
the Organizational Structure, Mission, Personnel, Services, Delivery Methods
Issues Programming, and the Overall Image of Michigan State University
Extension by Age ................................................................................................ 137

4.21 Analysis of Variance of Perceptions of Extension Staff Toward the Image of
the Organizational Structure, Mission, Personnel, Services, Delivery Methods
Issues Programming, and the Overall Image of Michigan State University
Extension by Position... 140

4.22 Analysis of Variance of Perceptions of Extension Staff Toward the Image of
the Organizational Structure, Mission, Personnel, Services, Delivery Methods
Issues Programming, and the Overall Image of Michigan State University
Extension by Programming Area ....................................................................... 143

4.23 Analysis of Variance of Perceptions of Extension Staff Toward the Image of
the Organizational Structure, Mission, Personnel, Services, Delivery Methods
Issues Programming, and the Overall Image of Michigan State University
Extension by Duration in Occupation ............................................................... 146

4.24 Analysis of Variance of Perceptions of Extension Staff Towards the Image of
the Organizational Structure, Mission, Personnel, Services, Delivery Methods
Issues Programming, and the Overall Image of Michigan State University
Extension by Place Raised ................................................................................ 149

4.25 Analysis of Variance of Perceptions of Extension Staff Towards the Image of
the Organizational Structure, Mission, Personnel, Services, Delivery Methods
Issues Programming, and the Overall Image of Michigan State University
Extension by Place of Residence ..................................................................... 152

 

[gig

4.26 has
Exte
Pers
hna

417 hlu'
ofh

LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Table Page

4.26 T-test Results for the Differences of Perceptions of Advisory Members and
Extension Staff Toward the Image of the Organizational Structure, Mission,
Personnel, Services, Delivery Methods, Issues Programming, and the Overall
Image of Michigan State University Extension by ........................................... 155

4.27 Multiple Regression Analysis For Determining Important Predictor(s) of Image
of Michigan State University Extension .......................................................... .160

 

1.1 Gen

2.1 Sele

2.2 Net

LIST OF FIGURES

Elem liege
1.1 General Systems Philosophy ........................................................ 10
2.1 Selected Summary of Major Findings From the National Study ............... 43
2.2 New and Old Logo of the Cornell Cooperative Extension ...................... 46
2.3 Issues and Resources ................................................................ 59
2.4 Life Cycle of an Issue ............................................................... 65
2.5 Issues Programming Process ....................................................... 75
3.1 Concept of Population and Sample ................................................ 91
4.1 Scale of Image Measurement ..................................................... l 12

 

All I
phenom
Organiz
growth.
die. \V
renews;-
Plannin
Kimber
OIgEmISi
can be
of orgai

The
51311 01
11110an
Conside
needs,
and We.
belief 1

been at

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

All living organisms, be it plants, insects, animals, or people, are subject to a
phenomenon called life cycles (Adizes, 1988, p.1). They are born, grow, age, and die.
Organizations, like any other living organisms go through similar life cycles - birth, rapid
growth, maturity, decline, and death. Organizations, however, do not have to decline and
die. With leadership and visionary action, an organization can be changed, transformed,
renewed, or repositioned to continue the growth, maturity, and regeneration cycle (Strategic
Planning Council Report, 1991, p. V, Goens & Clover, 1991, p. 79, Adizes, 1988, p. 4,
Kimberly et a1. 1980, p. 6-7, & Lippitt, 1969, p. 5). The concept of life cycles of living
organisms, which basically consists of four sequential stages (birth, growth, age, and death),
can be equated to Daft’s entrepreneurial, collectivity, formalization, and elaboration stages
of organizational life cycles (Goens & Clover, 1991, p. 79).

The entrepreneurial stage (equivalent to birth or the infant stage) is an exciting time for
staff of an organization because at that time, the organization is nonbureaucratic and
informal. There are very few established policies and procedures. Employees spend
considerable amounts of their time and effort in productive activities relative to clients’
needs. The organization rushes ahead in full speed without actually knowing its strengths
and weaknesses. The staff are generally enthusiastic and vigorous, which comes from the
belief in the organization and its success. The Cooperative Extension Service may have

been at this stage when it was first established in 1914 by the Smith-Lever Act.

The cc
mition
people. .1
the need i
eminent.
some star
systems ‘
trough
commit '
then a c

The 1
H1195 am
become.
develop
111V01t'e.
organiz
1116 Spi
Snecesg

The
rethan.

emerge

The collectivity stage (equivalent to Adolescence or the growth stage) is a critical
transition point for any organization partially due to the lack of sufficient and well trained
people. As the organization moves from infancy to adolescence, rapid growth occurs and
the need for delegation of authority, change of leadership, and goal displacement becomes
eminent. At this stage, departments and other important units are established along with
some standard policies and procedures. Jobs are defined and fully described. New formal
systems with a hierarchy of authority appear. Clear goals and directions are formulated
through a strong leadership. At this point, all employees identify with the mission and
commit time and talent to the cause. Extension was probably at this stage in the 19405,
when a committee was set up to review its programs, policies, and goals in 1946.

The formalization stage (equivalent to aging or the stable stage) is the level where all
rules and procedures are formally established. The structure and climate of the organization
becomes more formal including communication procedures. A significant increase or
development of mid-level managers occurs as top level management becomes increasingly
involved with development of strategy and planning instead of the day to day running of the
organization. At this juncture, the organization will start to lose its strengths and flexibility.
The spirit of creativity, innovation and encouragement to change that made the organization
successful would start to disappear.

The final stage, elaboration, leads to the recognition that the organization needs

revitalization and renewal. Rule-driven behavior is questioned and a call for teamwork

emerges.

 

Managers 1
get people
168).

The C 00
Snot alreac
constant fac
around us si
structure an
orgartizmion
and circumg
Engage 111 pm
influences (1

S‘stem has it
>1.th (1110. or
In order {C
and grou- intc
killing “11h 1
For the pat
an{113111311131}in
1* meanest.

Managers review bureaucracy and try not to add to it, as well as begin to problem solve and
get people to work together again (Goens & Clover, 1991, p. 79-80; Daft, 1992, p. 163-
168)

The Cooperative Extension Service appears to be approaching the elaboration stage, if it
is not already in it: a level which require a fundamental organizational change. Change is a
constant factor, and therefore, inevitable in human and organizational existence. It has been
around us since the beginning of time, and has affected the policies, procedures, roles, rules,
structure and culture of our institutions and organizations. Change occurs within an
organization-or it should occur if survival is to be achieved - as from time to time its goals
and circumstances vary. These variances cause the organization’s human resources to
engage in problem solving as they seek reorientation and try to adapt to new environmental
influences (Lippitt, 1966, p. 6). Evidence exists which suggests that every organizational
system has within it the potential for either bringing about its own death, maintaining the
status quo, or growing into maturity (Lippitt, 1966, p. 12).

In order for any organization (private or public, profit or non-profit) to survive, flourish
and grow into maturity, the people within that organization must face each other openly in
dealing with the problem(s) under consideration.

For the past few years, the Cooperative Extension Service has been criticized severely
and publicly attacked by its and general public. As a result of these criticism, the image of
the organization may have been negatively affected. At all levels (national, state, and

local), the organization started to experience political, budgetary, and institutional pressure.

1n the mid
Seniee to c
1n respe
tCES Adrr
and rebirth
organizatit
recent get
hating th
Strategic
can be t
cOmpetit
Cox-in. 1
As p‘
the C00
and the
(Mgr
Exteng
Policy

00mm

In the mid 19808, various committees and groups called on the Cooperative Extension
Service to change.

In response, the organization is changing. This change, according to Myron Johnsrud
(CES Administrator), "is a positive sign of a dynamic organization experiencing transition
and rebirth". It is a change that is different from any other changes ever experienced by the
organization due to its nature and scope. In fact, these changes can be classified among the
recent generation of new changes known as transformational which are characterized by
having the changes:- (1) initiated by leaders of the organizations, (2) closely linked to
strategic business issues, not just to questions of organizational process and style, and (3)
can be traced back rather directly to certain external events such as new sources of
competition, new technology, changes in fundamental market structure, etc. (Kilrnan &
Covin, 1988, p. 66).

As pressure fiom both internal and external groups continued to increase, the leaders of
the Cooperative Extension Service initiated a change process. The Secretary of Agriculture
and the president of the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges
(N ASULGC) formed a joint committee to scrutinize Extension. The Cooperative
Extension’s highest policy making body (Extension Committee on Organization and
Policy) also formed two national committees to evaluate Extension. These two national
committees were:

(1) the future task force

(2) the national program initiatives task force

 

0122

”min?

ton

Pre

The future task force was charged with the responsibility to examine the need for
organizational and structural changes of the Extension system. The national program
initiatives task force was asked to review the direction of Extension's programs. These
parallel efforts clearly reflect a system proactively concerned with effectively working
toward a positive future (Future Task Force Report, 1987).

In 1983, the joint study committee, set up by the Secretary of Agriculture and the
President of the National Association of State University and Land-Grant Colleges
(NASULGC), issued a report entitled "Extension in the 80’s: A perspective for the future”.
The report reinstated the value and need of the land-grant system, including the Cooperative
Extension Service (p. 4). However, Extension was criticized for its inadequate job of
reporting or relating with the general public or state, county and national decision makers.
In 1987, the future task force, a committee formed by the Extension Committee on
Organization and Policy (ECOP), issued its report entitled "Extension in transition:
Bridging the Gap Between Vision and Reality." The 32 recommendations report called for
a system wide change from the mission of the organization to its program planning and
delivery. The change was a profound and fundamental change that was similar or equal to
what Kuhn referred to as a paradigm shift. According to Lawler in Kihnann & Covin
(1988), a paradigm is basically a set of assumptions about how the world works; these
assumptions produce a congruent and often tightly interconnected system of policies and
practices in an organization. And usually when new paradigms arise, they have to compete

with the older, more established ones for acceptance.

Typically, for a new paradigm to succeed and triumph over an old one, there must be a
fundamental restructuring of people's thought processes and the way they operate (Kilmann
& Covin, 1988, p. 46-47).

Getting an organization to change or shift its paradigm is a very difficult, challenging,
and time consuming task. It is like changing the course of a large ship. The pilot turns the

wheel, but it takes a long time to see the results.

Theoretical Foundations of the study

One of the primary purposes of establishing theoretical foundations for a study is to
relate it with other theories and concepts that are relevant to the research. Merriam &
Simpson (1984, p. 8) indicated that "recognizing and discussion of theories, concepts, and
factors that are part of the study are essential to developing a useful problem statement".
Thus, establishing theoretical foundations in general helps to bring into focus the theoretical
basis upon which the study is based.

Extension is an interdisciplinary field. Its fundamental concepts, theories, and principles
are drawn from the concepts of the social sciences, including sociology, anthropology,
human psychology, economics, education, community development, political science,
organizational development, management, etc. (Blackburn, 1989, p. vii-vii). It has linkages

and relationships with other disciplines. This underlying principle of Extension as well as

its programming concept, is closely related to the principle of the General Systems Concept.

 

There

Gene

intro

Chic.

form

11111

led

Therefore, the theoretical foundations of this study were derived primarily fiom the field of
General System Theory, a relatively new discipline as well as concept. The idea was first
introduced by Ludwing von Bertalanffy (a theoretical biologist) in 1937 at the University of
Chicago (Bertalanffy, 1968, p.32, 38, & 90). Bertalanffy's statement of the late 1920’s
forms the foundation of the discipline, as well as the concept.He wrote:
“Since the fundamental character of the living thing is its organization, the
customary investigation of the single parts and processes cannot provide a complete
explanation of the vital phenomena. This investigation gave us no information
about the coordination of parts and processes. Thus the chief task of biology must
be to discover the laws of biological systems (at all levels of organization). We
believe that the attempts to find a foundation for theoretical biology point at a
firndamental change in the world picture. This view, considered as a method of
investigation, we shall call "organisrrric biology" and, as an attempt at an
explanation, "the system theory of the organism" (Bertalanffy, 1975, p.152)”.
The underlying notion of the concept and its discipline is the Aristotelian principle of the
whole being more than its parts. In order to understand an organized whole we must know

both the parts and the relations between them (Bertalanffy, 1975, p. 152-153). The general
system theory is a general science of wholeness which states:
(1) There is a general tendency towards integration in the various sciences, natural
and social.
(2) Such integration seems to be centered in a general theory of systems.

(3) Such theory may be an important means for aiming at exact theory in the
nonphysical fields of science.

(4) Developing unifying principles running "vertically" through the universe of the
individual sciences, this theory bring us nearer to the goal of unity of science.

(5) This can lead to a much-needed integration in scientific education
(Bertalanffy, 1968, p. 38).

 

The c
including
organiza‘
broadly
manager
technolc
manage:
resource
1211310111:

lint
underst
identify

or can

The concept of general systems has found its use and application in various fields
including engineering, education, economics, management, etc. In general and
organizational management, the concept has been used under the name of “systems” to
broadly look at organizations. The need and importance of the concept in organizational
management becomes apparent as the complexities of our society, organizations, and
technology increase. Today's organizations are becoming increasingly complex. Their
management requires the coordination and management of technical, physical, and financial
resources to produce and deliver products and services suitable to the needs of their
customers.

Lippitt (1982) describes the concept of general systems as a necessary idea for
understanding and renewing complex organizations. It is an interdisciplinary concept
identifying developments in other areas, and showing how these developments can be used
or can be useful in other fields. For example, Extension uses concepts from sociology,
management, education, economics, etc. Management science utilizes concepts fiom
mathematics, statistics, engineering, and information. The concept does not prescribe
concrete terms or techniques for resolving problems, but rather, it provide conceptual
suggestion, or idea that the multidisciplinary approach might be useful for solving today's

problems. Its possible contribution to the solution of multivariable, socioeconomic

problems facing many organizations today is attracting a great deal of attention.

 

The ore
on the brc
1ehat'ioral

of people.

The overall concept and philosophy of the general system (shown in figure 1-1) is built
on the broader traditional view of the management process, management science, and
behavioral science, so as to provide an integrated approach to managing the basic elements

of people, techniques, information, structure, and purpose (Lippitt, 1982, p. 32-48).

 

mane-ZIUWb |\

  
    
 
 
 
 
  
     
   

Information function

    
  
  
      
  

Induarial
WWW

Scientific

 

Planning

General
MANAGEMENT BEHAVlgflAL mama
PROCESS I N dreary
Implementation
control
. THE
SYSTEMS
PHILOSOPHY
3'
5
Micro. Q

 

Figure 1-1 General Systems Philosophy

(Source: Organizational Renewal, Lippitt, G.L.1982)

 

Statement

Image is
impacts 3
customers :
institutions
popularlyc
1101s the pt
lithat ima;

The C(
Contact {1:
1984. p, .;
dePendent
“Valuer &
test “1111i

Today,
1116 CrOSS]
eXTStenCe
and Clare
Manage“
are quest

OTg 3111231

 

11

Statement of the Problem

Image is important to all organizations. If the image of an organization is negative, it
impacts a variety of aspects of that organization including staff morale, clients and
customers support and commitment just to a mention few. Any responsive organizations,
institutions, or agencies have a strong interest in their reputation, or "image" as it is now
popularly called. They are always making concerted efforts through various means to know
how the public (both internal and external) views the organization, its products and services.
If that image is negative, the effects could be devastating.

The Cooperative Extension Service has an image which evolved overtime through
contact and familiarity with the organization and its programs (Warner & Christenson,
1984, p. 43). As a publicly funded organization, the future of Extension is very much
dependent on how the public (both internal and external) perceives the organization.
Warner & Christenson (1984), also stressed that "the Extension's vitality in the future will
rest with its ability to develop, maintain, and enhance a positive and viable public image".

Today, the entire Cooperative Extension Service at national, state, and local levels is at
the crossroads and so is the image of the organization. Its reasons for continuing its
existence at all levels (federal, state, and local) have been seriously challenged by its clients
and customers, including Farm Organizations, the Congress, White House, Office of
Management and Budget, and Land Grant Colleges. Nationwide, the cohorts of Extension

are questioning the validity of the organization’s mission and objectives. Currently, the

organization is struggling to redefine itself.

 

 

 

As the org:
society. th
the most e
adequate 5
To cor
lCESl at
its polici
concerns
Strategic:

are not 1

As 1

TTTEmSe

12

As the organization struggles to define its proper function and purpose in a rapidly changing
society, the issues of defining appropriate target audiences, delivering quality programs in
the most efficient manner, projecting a positive organizational image, and maintaining an
adequate support base have been discussed openly (Warner & Christenson, 1984, p. 1).

To convert these multiple problems (of which image is a among them), the organization
(CES) at the national and state levels embarked on a multiple efforts of restructuring itself,
its policies and programs to effectively and efficiently address issues of wide public
concerns through the process of issues programming. Issues programming was a
strategically designed process capable of achieving several objectives that may include, but
are not limited to, the following:

(1) public image enhancement of the Cooperative Extension Services;
(2) improvement of efliciency and productivity; and
(3) increment of visibility and viability of the organization

As Extension organizations throughout the country were reorganizing and restructuring
themselves to adjust to the challenges of the let century, it was therefore consequential to
study the image of the organization (CES) as it continued with various processes of change
through issues programming and others. There were indications from staff surveys
conducted in many states, where issues programming and other organizational changes
were implemented, which showed that changes actually occured especially in the roles and

responsibilities of staff members.

But

011

Pu

01'

13

But, do these organizational changes and restructuring have any impact on the image of the

organization, its mission, programs, and services? - this was the main question of this study.

Purpose and Objectives of the Study

The purpose of this study was to assess the image of Michigan State University
Extension as perceived by County Extension Advisory Committee Members and Extension
field staff who participated in the issues programming process. The areas assessed were the
organization structure, mission, personnel, services, delivery methods, and issues
programming. The specific objectives of the study were to:

(1) Determine the perceptions of County Advisory Conunittee Members regarding
the image of Michigan State University Extension.

(2) Determine the perceptions of Extension Field Staff regarding the image of the
Michigan State University Extension.

(3) Identify demographic variables among Advisory members and Extension staff
that are important predictor(s) of image of the Michigan State University
Extension.

Research Hypotheses and Question
This research was guided by the following three hypotheses and one research question.
The alpha level was set at .05 percent

(1) There were significant differences in the perceptions of County Extension

Advisory Committee Members towards the image of Michigan State

University Extension based on the demographic variables of gender, age, level
of education, occupation, place raised, and income per annum.

14

(2) There were significant differences in the perceptions of Extension Field Staff
towards the image of Michigan State University Extension based on the
demographic variables of gender, age, position with Michigan State University
Extension, programming area, duration in occupation, place raised, and place of
living.
(3) There were significant differences between the perceptions of County Extension
Advisory Committee Members and Extension Personnel regarding the image of
Michigan State University Extension.
(4) What demographic variables among Advisory members and Extension staff are
important predictor(s) of image of Michigan State University Extension?
Importance of the Study
This study focused on one of the major concern of the Cooperative Extension Services -
its image. As Kotler (1985) mentioned that any responsive organization has a strong
interest in how its publics see the organization, its services and programs. And in most
cases, organization's leaders have a different view of the image of their organizations than
their own publics.
This study hoped to investigate and report the current image of the organizational
structure, mission, personnel, services, delivery methods, and issues programming of the
Michigan State University Extension as perceived by two of the most important groups of

its publics. The identification of the perceptions of these groups of people was particularly

important considering the fact that they were all involved with issues programming, a key

piece of the restructuring process in Extension.

 

15

Assumptions and Limitations
This study was based on the following assumptions and limitations:
Assumptions:
(1) Respondents have sufficient knowledge of Extension in order to make
meaningful responses.
(2) Respondents will respond objectively to the questionnaires.
(3) Respondents perceptions will yield useful and valid information.
Limitations
(1) The findings of this study are limited to the Michigan State University
Extension only.

(2) The study will be limited to the information seek in the questionnaires

Definition of Terms Used
For the purpose of this study, definitions of key words and concepts used throughout the
study included:
Life cycle
A series of changes in form undergone by an organism in development from its

earliest stage to the recurrence of the same stage in the next generation (Webster,
1976 1957)

Organization
The pattern of way in which large numbers of people, too many to have immediate
face-to-face contact with all others, and engaged in a complexity of tasks, relate
themselves to each other in the conscious, systematic establishment and
accomplishment of mutually agreed purpose (Pfiffner & Sherwood, 1960).

 

 

Ch

16

Change
Any planned or unplanned alteration of the status quo in an organism, situation, or
process (Lippitt, 1969).

Image
Is the sum of beliefs, ideas, and impressions that the Extension Advisory Members,
Extension Directors, and Agents have on the Cooperative Extension Service.

Cooperative Extension Service
A unique publicly funded, informal adult education and development organization.

Pubfic
A distinct group of people and/or organizations that has an actual or potential
interest in and/or effect on an institution (Kotler & Fox, 1985).

Perception
The mental grasp of objects, qualities, etc. by means of the senses; awareness;
comprehension (Webster, 1988)

County Extension Advisory Committee
A group of locally selected people who advise in planning local extension

programs.

County Extension Advisory Committee Member
Any selected individual who served in the county advisory committee during the
issues identification process.

Extension Field Staff
Those persons employed by the Michigan State University Extension and work
primarily in the county.

County Extension Director
The administrative head incharge of all extension programs, personnel, and budget
of the county extension office.

Issues programming
An extension program development process that focus on issues.

Issues
Matters of wide public concern arising out of complex human problems
(Dalgaard et al, 1988).

 

Prt

17

Programming
The development of the plan for implementing and evaluating educational
programs directed toward a particular clientele of the Cooperative Extension
Service.

 

CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter is divided into four major Sections. Each section covers a specific literature
on the theories and concepts relevant to the two most important subjects of this study - these
are: (1) Extension image and (2) Issues programming.

The theoretical background and concepts of issues programming and organizational
image are rarely found in the literature of Extension. Most, if not all, of the literature on
image and issues programming concepts are found in the literature of issues management,
public policy, strategic management, long range planning, marketing, etc. Therefore, most
of the literature reviewed for this study is not fiom the traditional main stream literature of
Extension and other related fields such as Adult Education, Continuing Education, Outreach
etc. It is from the area of corporate management, strategic and long-range planning, and
public policy.

The four major sections are: (1) innovation and change, (2) organizational
transformation and renewal, (3) image: definitions, theories and concepts, and (4) issues

programming: general background, concepts, and theories.

l8

du

1hr

19

Section 1: Innovation and Change

The Cooperative Extension Service is an industrial-age organization established in 1914
during the formative era for the traditional industrial corporation. Kanter (1983), described
the traditional industrial-age organization as any organization that was established in the
1890’s through the 1920’s. According to Rowe and Boise (1973), most of these
organizations were segrnentally structured and designed to be innovation and change
resistant. The traditional industrial-age organizations such as the CES, IBM, General
Motors, the US. Department of Treasury and the US. Department of Defence, were large
and successful organizations (Stanley, 1989, p. 76). Most of these types of organizations
(large, old, and successful) have been the most difficult to change (Lippitt, 1982, p. 7).
Today, the environment within which these types of organizations exist or operate has been
rapidly changing as a result of numerous economic, social, and technological factors. The
change these organizations have been facing is more extensive, more far-reaching in its
implications, and more fundamental in its transforming quality than anything since the
"modern" industrial system took shape (Kanter 1983, p 37).

The environmental change has caused a change in what these organizations must do to
be successful - in the tasks they must perform to survive and prosper. Society, in general, is
non-static. It is constantly changing and being rejuvenated. Organizations designed to
provide goods and services in yesterday's world are discovering that what made them
successful in the past no longer applies. The most important question now and in the firture
is, what does this constant change mean to organizations in general, and Extension in

particular?

20

Can the Cooperative Extension Service (a 1914 industrial-aged organization) make the
adjustments necessary to survive the rapid and pervasive changes occurring in American
society? According to Margulies and Wallace, the lesson is clear for any modern
organization. Given the facts of rapid, unplanned change, a static organization cannot
survive. Yesterday's success mean very little in a world of rapidly changing markets,
customers, products, values, life-styles and so forth (Margulies & Wallace 1973, p 1).
Today's organizations must to regularly evaluate themselves in relation to their present
environment. They must change, renew, and transform themselves by examining where
they are, what they are, what they need to be, and how to make the required changes.

Dillrnan (1985) noted that within this century, the American society has gone through
two eras of significant social change, and is now entering a third era that has profound
implications for how society is organized and the social arrangements that govern the use of
available technology.

The first era called "community control" started in 1900 and remained dominant until the
19403. Within this period, the Cooperative Extension Service was established by the
Smith-Lever Act of 1914.

The second era called the "mass society" started around 19203 and continued through the
late 19803. This was a period of unprecedented economic and social growth as a result of
the impact of the Industrial Revolution of the early 18003. In this period, emphasis was
placed on building larger organizations and corporations such as IBM, General Motors, etc.

And finally, the new era called the "information age", just started in the early 19803.

21

This era is expected to dominate and overshadow the two previous eras as well as the social
and technological organization of society at the turn of the century.

Clearly, society is gradually shifting from a traditionally industrialized society to what
many authors sometimes label as either the post-industrial era, post-modem era, information
age, new age or simply the next age. Each one of these terms describes a society which de-
emphasizes agriculture and manufacttu'ing, although these sectors exist, and emphasizes
information processing instead. For a society to achieve post-industrialism, Quilling states
it must go through various stages of development with a change in emphasis from one stage
to another. The five stages with their predominant emphases are identified by Quilling as:

Stage 1: Mining, forestry, agriculture, foodstuffs
and raw materials

Stage 2: Manufactured goods

Stage 3: Transportation, commtmication, and public
utilities

Stage 4: Banking, finance, and commerce

Stage 5: Abstract activities, which include education

Currently, the American society seems to be approaching Stage 3, a stage in which
communication and information are among the major emphases. In 1950, Harvard
Sociologist Daniel Bell predicted that the most important products of the post-industrial
society would be information, knowledge, and service. His prediction proved to be
accurate. Drucker (l 98 8) states we have moved away from the "command and control"

phase that was prevalent in the 19203 through the 19503 and are moving toward an

"information bond" in organizations.

22

Information sharing and availability can alter the structure and responsiveness of
institutions in profound ways (Goens & Clover 1991 , p. 5).

As the society gradually moved into the well predicted information age, the traditional
industrial-age organizations, such as the Cooperative Extension Service, often found their
structures, approaches, and practices incompatible with the infonnation-age era of the 213t
century. Their organizational structures, and their old approaches and practices were
becoming obsolete and therefore no longer as effective in solving today's problems as they
could be. For most of these organizations, the challenge was not only that of their survival,
but also their relevancy to the age or period in which they now lived (Lippitt 1982, p. ix).

Many organizations were now simply overwhelmed. They were adrift, unable to adjust
and respond to change and the challenge of the information age era. However, what each
organization needed to adjust and respond appropriately to the changing environment, of
course, varied from one organization to another, with the exception of one thing -
innovation. This point is perhaps captured best by Kanter R. Moss, who stated:

“The total scope of what needs to be done is, of course, highly variable, in large part
because it depends on the particular organization and industry. What is clear,
however, is the need for innovation at every levelninnovation not merely in the
traditional sense of new products and services, but in the very ways that
organizations operate, in their view of themselves, and in the mechanisms that can
develop and engage their resources to the maximum extent possible. Most
important, organizations need innovation to shift from the present tendency to deal
with their tasks in a relatively single-minded, top-directed way and to a capacity to

respond innovatively, locally, and promptly to a whole variety of organizational
contingencies--to change shape, so to speak” (Kanter 1983, p 41).

 

23

The term "innovation" has been defined and used widely and ambiguously. It is
important at this juncture to review some its definitions to see how it relates to the entire
scope of organizational changes of the Cooperative Extension Service and the issues
programming process.

In Rowe and Boise's Organizational and Managerial Innovation (1973), Thompson
defined innovation as "the generation, acceptance, and implementation of new ideas,
processes, products, and services". This definition suggested an organization with a
successful process of invention, proposal, review, decision, and utilization. In arguing that
innovation implies a capacity to change or to adapt, Thompson stated: "an adaptive
organization may not be innovative (because it does not generate many new ideas), but an
innovative organization will be adaptive (because it is able to implement many new ideas)".
Generally, innovations are not safe, bound, or easy. They involve extreme amounts of
resources, risk, time, commitments and challenges.

In a comparative study of innovative accomplishments versus basic nonentrepreneurial
ones, Kanter found that people involved with innovative accomplishments perceive them as
being riskier and more controversial - they generate stronger feelings around the
organization both pro and con (Kanter 1983, p 214). Lundstedt and Colglazier (1982), give
the operational definition of a technical innovation as a complex activity which proceeds
from the conception of a new idea (as a means of solving a problem) to the solution of a
problem, and then to the actual utilization of a new item of economic or social value. These
authors stress the importance of distinguishing the difference between innovation, scientific

discovery, invention, and diffusion of technology.

24

A scientific discovery, according to Lundstedt and Colglazier, involves the observation of a
previously unknown or unobserved phenomenon, or the acquisition of new knowledge;
although relevant discoveries may be incorporated into an innovation. An invention is the
creation of a novel product or process, or the concept of a means of satisfying a need. And
finally, diffusion of technology which is the evolutionary process of replacement of an old
technology by a newer one (Lundsted and Colglazier 1982, p. xxi).

In their definition of organizational and managerial innovation, Rowe and Boise (1973),
refer to organizational innovation as the successful utilization of processes, programs, or
products which are new to an organization and which are introduced as a result of decisions
made within that organization. Rowe and Boise define managerial innovation as those
decisions and tasks which are new to an organization which result in the successful solution
of one or more problems related to management's responsibilities. In describing the word
innovation and how people think of its meaning, Kanter concluded that, typically, the word
"innovation" creates an image of an invention, a new piece of technical apparatus, or
perhaps something of a conventionally scientific character. In fact, very few people could
imagine or consider the new tax laws, enterprise zones, quality circle, and the proposed
empowerment zones as innovations. Kanter refers to innovation as the process of bringing
any new, problem-solving idea into use. Ideas for reorganizing, cutting costs, putting in
new budgeting systems, improving communications, or assembling products in teams

(Kanter 1983, p. 20).

25

Innovation, no matter what type it is, whether in products, market strategies, technological
processes, or work practices, is designed not by machines but by people. Thus, the human
resources of an organization working together collaboratively are responsible for the
thinking, generation, and developing new ideas and responses. Together, they push for
change before the opportunity disappears and disappears for good.

From all sides, come are reminders about the rapidity of change, the need to adapt to
new conditions and the exhortations to try new things (Pattom 1985, p. 4). Organizations
simply must poise themselves to innovate, to change, or they risk decline and death.
Resources are finite not infinite. The extent to which organizational structures and policies
encourage people within the organization to participate in solving problems, to seek new
ideas, to challenge established wisdom, to experiment, and to innovate is crucial to the
survival of today's organizations, more especially, the publicly funded organization like
Extension.

Studies have shown that during the past decade, interest in organizational and managerial
innovation has increased rapidly. Organizational scholars are actively engaged in
developing concepts, building models, formulating hypotheses, and conducting empirical
studies for the purpose of identifying the correlates of innovation in formal organizations
(Rowe and Boise 1973, p 2). In their book entitled, In Pursuit of Excellence, Peters and
Waterman assert that excellent organizations are characterized by the ability to change.

They were “continually innovative”, geared to “quick action and regular experimentation”:

 

26

“Innovative companies (organizations) are especially adroit at continually
responding to change of any sort in their environments...As the needs of their
customer shift, the skills of their competitors improve, the mood of the public
perturbates, these companies tack, revamp, adjust, transform, and adapt. In short, as
a whole culture, they innovate” (Peters and Waterman 1982, p 12).

In discussing the general characteristics of an organization with a high capacity to
innovate (innovative organization), Thompson, in Rowe and Boise (1973), stated that the
innovative organization will be or must be characterized by structural looseness, with less
emphasis on narrow, non-duplicating, non-overlapping definitions of duties and
responsibilities, freer communication, and less stratification. Group processes will be
highly encouraged and openly practiced leading to fi'eer communication within the
organization. The freer communication system, broader work assignments, lack of pre-
occupation with overlap and duplication, and lessened emphasis on authority will all work
toward a greater amount of interpersonal communication, team work and multiple group
membership. Multiple group membership will facilitate innovation by increasing the
amount and diversity of input of ideas and stimulation (Thompson, in Rowe & Boise, 1973,
pp.23-2 8).

An organizational environment which permits, encourages, and legitimizes multiple-
group membership will reduce the risk of innovation by a single individual. The credit for
generating new ideas will then be or should be shared by all the people involved, and
likewise the burden of promoting them (new ideas) will be shared as well. The more people
are involved in the process, the wider the acceptance, participation, and implementation of

the new ideas will be.

 

27

Section II: Organizational transformation and Renewal

In their definitions and antecedents, the terms transfonnation and renewal show some
firndamental differences in scope and focus (Goens & Clover, 1991, p. 10). However, the
two words have been used synonymously for reform and change. These terms are also
closely related to organizational change, the type that the Cooperative Extension Service
has undertaken. In Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, transformation is defined as "a change
in the shape, structure, nature of something". On the other hand, the academicians and
practitioners view transformation as a systemwide change in an organization that demands
new ways of perceiving, thinking, and behaving by all its members (Kilmann & Covin,
1988, p. 2).

This new concept of transformation was actually based on ten areas perceived or
envisioned by the scholars, consultants, and executives who study, facilitate, and direct
corporate transformation (Kilmann & Covin, 1988, p. xiv-13). These ten agreed upon areas
follow:

(1) Transformation is a response to environmental and technological change by
different types of organizations.

(2) Transformation is a new model of the organization for the future.
(3) Transformation is based on dissatisfaction with the old and belief in the new.

(4) Transformation is a qualitatively different way of perceiving, thinking, and
behaving.

(5) Transformation is expected to spread throughout the organization at
different rates of absorption.

(6) Transformation is driven by line management.

 

28

(7) Transformation is on going, endless, and forever.
(8) Transformation is orchestrated by inside and outside experts.

(9) Transformation represents the leading edge of knowledge about
organizational change.

(10) Transformation generates more open communication and feedback
throughout the organization.

As a large scale systemwide process, organizational transformation requires a new
perspective. And to embark on it, organizations must examine themselves in relation to
their environment, -thus evaluating critically where they were, what they are, what they
need to be and how they will make all the required changes (Goens & Clover, 1991, p. 10).
These changes are not just in one section or unit of a section of the organization. They
involve all the elements or pieces of the organizational system (strategy, work, people,
formal and informal processes and structures) over a long period of time. One of the major
assumptions underlying the concept of transformation was that "transformation is expected
to spread throughout the organization at different rates of absorption". The best, and
probably most preferred approach is to start the process in all parts of the organization at the
same time. However, it can also be approached through a pilot project as well, to test the
chosen strategies and methods, and later, to transfer the results of the pilot project to the
remaining units of the organization. The difference in the rate of absorption each unit may
require must be recognized. Some units within the organization may have capable
individuals who can learn and change quickly, and others who may not. Failure to
recognize and understand these differences can lead to unhappy results (Kilman & Covin,

1988, p. 5).

 

29

According to Belgard et a1. (1988), transformation occurs in two phases: (1) the formal
phase, and (2) the informal phase.

The formal phase of transformation consists of a sequential process that is managed in a
top-down manner and requires a clear understanding of three unique states of
transformation: the current state, the desired future state, and the transition state. Needed
along with the defined states are clear strategic plans that outline major steps in the
transition. The plans must reflect necessary steps which will lead to the creation of the
future state. This is the most effective and efficient process when implemented rightly
because of the support from top leadership it usually receives in addition to the strategic
planning nature of the process which ensures its sequentiality.

The informal phase of transformation is unlike the systematic, sequential planning
process associated with top-down change. It is an approach often used by change
influencers (people with limited hierarchical power e.g. lower level staff). Their goals are:
first, to get their change initiative into the agendas and discussions of the leaders of the
organization; second, to make sure, to the greatest extent possible, that there is at least a
change of direction or some movement toward the desired future state that they envision
(Kilmann & Covin, 1988, p. 131-134).

Renewal on the other hand is the process of initiating, creating, and confi'onting needed
changes so as to make it possible for organizations to become or to remain viable, to adapt

to new conditions, to solve problems, to learn from experiences, and to move toward greater

 

 

 

30

organizational maturity (Lippitt, 1982, p. xiv). In a similar definition, Goens & Clover
(1991) define renewal as a process designed to restore, reestablish, recreate, or rebuild (p.
10).

The focus of the process is the renewing of vigor through reorganization and renovation
of the human, financial, and technical resources of the organization. It is a process most
suitable for those organizations that have been viable, creative, and relevant, and who intend
to, or want to remain as such. The Cooperative Extension Service has been a viable,
creative, and relevant organization. It is, without a doubts, an organization that intends to
remain viable and relevant to people whom it has served diligently for over eight decades.

Renewal is similar to transformation in that its process is also holistic involving three
levels (individual, group, and total organizational levels) of human systems. The process
does not occur by chance. It has to be initiated, planned and carried out by the organization
itself, due to the commitment, energy, time, money, skill, feedback, practice, competence,
and professionalism required (Lippitt, 1982, p. ix-x). Organizational renewal cannot be
achieved at any level without achieving an opened-system orientation and practice. A
closed-system oriented organization cannot successfully implement a renewal process.

According to Lippitt (1969), the expected results of renewal are:

(1) Continuous examination of the growth of the organization, together with a
diagnosis of the multiple internal and external influences affecting its state of
being.

(2) Improvement in the manner in which problems are solved at all levels of the
organization.

(3) Development within the organization of formal and informal groups that are
effective and communicative.

3l

(4) Development of leadership that is appropriate to the situation facing the
organization at any giving time.

(5) Maturity of individuals and groups within the organization, as well as maturity
of the organization itself.

(6) A way for people within the organization to learn from their experiences of
success
and failure.

(7) Development of a climate that encourages and channels creativity by people
throughout the organization.

(8) Development of a system to which all employees of the organization feel
committed, thereby securing their motivation ...... (p.6).

32

Section 111: Image: Definitions, Theory, and Concept

The English word "image", which comes from the Latin word irnago, is related to the
Latin word imitari, which means "to imitate". According to common American dictionary
definitions, an image is an artificial imitation or representation of the external form of any
object, especially of a person (Boorstin, 1961, p. 197). The image, according to the ancient
Romans, is an imitation, copy, likeness, picture, conception, thought, or idea. More
abstractly, they defined it as "a mental representation of something not by direct perception,
but by memory or imagination; a mental picture or impression; an idea, conception". On
the other hand, the Greeks defined “image” as a "phantom", or a "likeness" (Stuart, Jones,
and McKenzie, 1951, p. 51).

Boorstin (1962), views image as a pseudo-ideal. An image, according to Boorstin's
theory, is composed of six dimensions: synthetic, believable, passive, vivid, simplified, and
ambiguous (Boorstin, 1962, p. 185 - 197).

(1 1 An g age is smthetic. It is planned and created to serve a purpose, or to make a
certain kind of impression. For example, trademarks and brand names have both become
very important in the twentieth century. As the use and importance of image continue to
increase with time, more and more abstract images are becoming commonly accepted. An
abstract image, in this sense, is not simply a trademark, a design, a slogan, or an easily
remembered picture. It is a studiously crafted personality profile of an individual,

institution,

corporati
fabricate
term "in
really th
visible 1
term. it
synthes
entire!)
(3)
mm 11‘
image
Origin.
image
ll
PTOdL
(Clier
PBSSi
SubjE
and 5
orga

idea

 

 

33

corporation, product, or service. It is shaped in three dimensions of synthetic materials; it is
fabricated and reinforced by new techniques in the graphic revolution. When one uses the
term "image" in this new sense, one admits a distinction between what is seen and what is
really there, and one expresses a preferred interest in what is to be seen. Thus, an image is a
visible public "personality" distinguished from an inward private "character". By using the
term, it is implied that something can be done to it. Thus it can be more or less successfully
synthesized, doctored, repaired, refurbished, and improved, quite apart from (though not
entirely independent of) the spontaneous original of which the image is a public portrait.

(2) An image is believafla, Image serves no purpose if people do not believe it. In their
own minds, they must make it stand for the institution, organization, agency, or the person
imaged. Yet, if an image is to be vivid and to succeed popularly in overshadowing its
original, it must not outrage the ordinary rules of common sense. The most effective
images are usually those that are simply designed for believability.

(3) An mg’ e is passive. Image is supposed to be congruent with reality. Both the
producer of the image (organizations and institutions) and the consumer of the image
(clients and customers) are expected to fit into the image. These relations are basically
passive. The "projection" of an image is itself a way of touting reputed virtues. Both the
subject (organization) and the object (customer) will assume that a portrait so persuasive
and so popular must be taken fiom real life. In the beginning, the image is a likeness of the
organization, and then the organization becomes a likeness of the image. It is the kind of

ideal which becomes real only when it becomes public.

34

Traditionally, the ideal image of an organization is very much dependent on the inward
convictions and decisions of the inner executives of the organization. But now this is not
sufficient. Because of its passive nature, the image has very little to do with the activities of
the organization itself. In old-fashioned language, image building is the building of
reputations, not character. It can represent on the organization by itself, as was the case for
the Brunswick Corporation, or it can represent the chief executive, like Charles Luckrnan,
President of Lever Brothers.

(4) An image is vivid and concrete. Image serves its purpose best by appealing to the
senses. The key point to understand here is that image is limited. An institution,
organization, or an individual may have many qualities, but only one, or a few, of those
qualities should be selected for vivid portrayal. It must be more graspable than any specific
lists of objectives. Today's commercials are filled with appeals to the senses, e.g. “Meijer
the store built on common sense", "KFC we do chicken right", etc.

(5) An image is simplified. Image must exclude undesired and undesirable aspects, and
therefore must be simpler than the object it represents. An effective image design must be
simple, distinctive and have the capacity to become hackneyed. In other words, it must be a
strong, vigorous symbol that can be easily remembered.

(61An image is ambigaous. Image floats somewhere between the imagination and the
senses, between expectation and reality. It is ambiguous, for it must not offend. It must suit
unpredictable future purposes, unpredictable changes in taste, and receptacle to different

wishes of people.

35

Boulding (1961), uses different analogies (analogies of location in space, location in
time, location in a field of personal relations, location in the world of nature, location in the
world of how things operate, etc.) to abstract the concept of image. Based on his
knowledge and beliefs, Boulding describes his experiences and activities, which explain his
image of the old. For example, in his analogies of location in space and time, Boulding
writes:

"As I sit at my desk, I know where I am. I see before me a window; beyond that
some trees; beyond that the red roofs of the campus of Stanford University;
beyond them the trees and the red tops which mark the town of Palo Alto; beyond
them the bare golden hills of the Hamilton Range. I Know, however, more than 11
see. Behind me, although I am not looking in that direction, I know there is a
window, and beyond that the little campus of the Center for the Advanced Study in
the Behavioral Sciences; beyond that the Coast Range; beyond that the Pacific
Ocean. 1 am not only located in space, I am located in time. I know that I come to
California about a year ago, and I am leaving it in about three weeks. I Know that I
have lived in a number of different places at different times. I know that about ten
years ago a great war came to an end, that about fourty years ago another great war
came to an end. Certain dates are meaningful: 1776, 1620, 1066. I have a picture in
my mind of the formation of the earth, of the long history of geological time, of the
brief history of man. The great civilizations pass before my mental screen. Many of
the images are vague, but Greece follows Crete, Rome follows Assyria" (p. 3 - 5).

Each of these different analogies describe the process of image formation - the mental
pictures in the minds of people which govern their behavior. This process of creating
mental pictures (image) is found in all human activity. It is based on someone's knowledge

and beliefs. In other words, the image that people have of an object, be it an institution,

person, or organization, is developed through knowledge and experience.

 

 

36

According to Boulding (1961), image is what we believe to be true. It is a subjective
knowledge that largely governs our behavior. In describing the concept of image and the
process of building it, Boulding states:

“The image is built up as a result of all past experiences of the possessor of the
image. Part of the image, I suppose, consists of little else than an undifferentiated
blur and movement. From the moment of birth if not before, there is a constant
stream of messages entering the organism from the senses. At first, these may
merely be undifferentiated lights and noises. As the child grows, however, they
gradually became distinguished into people and objects. He begins to perceive
himself as an object in the midst of a world of objects. The conscious image
begun...(p. 6)”.

In discussing image causation, Kotler asserts that there are two opposite theories of
image formation. The first theory holds that image is largely obj ect-determined, and the
second theory holds that images are largely person-determined. In the first theory (obj ect-
determined), the persons are simply perceiving the reality of the object. Their view of
images assumes that:

- People tend to have first-hand experience with the object.

- People get reliable sensory data from the object.

- People tend to process the sensory data in a similar way in spite of having -
different backgrounds and personalities.

Their assumptions, therefore, suggest that organizations cannot easily create false images
of themselves. In other words, they carmot hide their true images. They cannot create

images that are different from their real images. People usually form their image of an

organization on the basis of the actual behavior of that organization. If an organization is

37

responsive, it will be seen as responsive. Conversely, if it is non-responsive and inefficient,
it will be perceived as such.

In the second theory (person-detennined), people holds the view or opinion that:

- People have different degrees of contact with the object.

- People placed in fiont of the object will selectively perceive different aspects of
the object.

- People have individual ways of processing sensory data leading to selective
distortion.

The assumptions here suggest that people are likely to hold different images of the same
object. Therefore, due to the variances in experience and ways of processing sensory data
by people, organizations have little control over the image that people hold. This indicates
further that there is a weak relationship between the image and the actual object.

Both theories are extreme, the truth therefore lies in the middle. So, an image is
influenced by both the objective characteristics of the object and the subjective
characteristics of the perceiver. When the object is frequently and directly experienced,
fairly stable in its characteristics, and simple, one might expect people to hold similar
images of the object. On the other hand, when the object is complex, infrequently and
indirectly experienced, and its characteristics keep changing with time, one might expect
people to hold different images of the object (Kotler, 1975, p. 137 - 138; Kotler & Fox,
1985, p. 41 - 42).

The concept of image has been introduced and well defined in the business world. Its

meaning is basically the same. It is merely the picture which an organization has created in

 

38

the minds of its public (Bristol, 1960, p. xiii). The word "image", according Kotler, came
into popular use in the 19503. Presently, it is used in a variety of contexts: organization or
corporate image, national image, brand image, public image, self image, etc. It has also
been used to describe products (Ford Mustang, MacIntosh Computer), institutions (Harvard,
McDonalds, the United Way, IBM), individuals (Donald Trump, George Bush), and places
(San Francisco, Thailand, Brooklyn)... (Kotler, 1975, p. 130; Kotler & Fox, 1985, p. 38;
Kotler & Andreasen, 1989, p. 202).

In this study, the concept of organizational image, corporate image, institutional image,
corporate personality, and public image are important because, image is the main subject of
the study. Organizational image, or what is sometimes labeled as corporate image, or
corporate personality, is defined by Marquis (1970, p. 2), as the sum of all impressions of
the organization in the public consciousness. It is formed by the combined opinions of the
general public, employees, customers, competitors, etc. Marketing experts have persistently
emphasized the importance of an organization's publics. What or how these groups of
people think about their organization have numerous effects. In fact, what they think may
even have more effect than what they realize.

The concept of corporate image is not new. It has been around for some time. It is
recognized as one of the most powerful and effective concepts that can be used as a tool in
clarifying relations with others. It allows one to view these relationships in a much larger
perspective than what one is used to - the more limited, departmental point of view. It also
helps us to understand or pick up other unrelated pieces of our operation and put them

together in a more meaningful and effective manner (Bristol, 1960, p. xiii).

39

In defining the meaning of the concept of corporate personality (corporate image,
organizational image), Bristol defines it in terms of an analogue with individual personality.
It sounds complex, diverse, and abstract. Bristol writes:

“Basically, most people like or dislike other persons for the same kinds of reasons
they are attracted to, or repelled by, a corporation. And just as most people judge
other individuals on the basis of the clothes they wear, the car they drive, their
home, their personal appearance, diction, manners, and various physical attributes,
so does the public form opinions of stores based on their window displays, size,
location, credit personality, fiiendliness of clerks, counter displays, and the physical
appearance of their advertising. Most people are likely to judge a book by its
cover, a product by its packaging, and a corporation by their personal knowledge of
its employees, products, services, profit-and-loss statements, or of the content and
appearance of its advertising, public relations, and other communications. The most
important point to keep in mind when considering individual or collective attitudes
is that most of these judgments are formed on the basis of symbols rather than facts.
People do not react with reality. Rather, they react with their subjective knowledge
of reality.”..(p. 5)

This abstract definition is in congruent with Kotler's object—determined theory and
Boulding's image theory and definition. In general, all the theories and definitions seem to
indicate that every organization, institution, or corporation has an image. And that image
consists of many facets.

For large organizations and corporations that have multiple divisions, programs,
services, and publics, it is almost impossible for them to have a single image. As Pierre
Martineau points out in Bristol, 1960, there cannot be a single corporate image, because
every corporation has a different public. However, Marquis believes the opposite. He
describes a single image of a corporation or an organization as the sum of all impressions of

the firm in the public consciousness (Marquis, 1970, p. 2). It is a conglomerate of attitudes

the various publics have toward the organization.

40

These aptitudes and impressions are based upon the functional meanings that some
aspect of the organization has for individuals who make up the various publics the
organization makes contact with - as well as the emotional overtones carried by the

messages the organization communicates to these persons (Bristol, 1960, p. 6).

Previous Studies on Extension Image

The Cooperative Extension Service has always been concemed about its image. As a
publicly firnded organization, its continuing success depends very much on its image. Since
its establishment, various studies have been conducted to assess the image of the
organization and the awareness level people have with the Extension programs. However,
the scope of these studies has been narrow, focusing mostly on a particular state or county,
or on a particular program of Extension such as 4-H, Home Economics, Agriculture,
Community Development, or the Extended Food and Nutrition Program.

The first, and probably the only, comprehensive national research that extensively
assessed Extension including its image and program areas was the Warner and
Christenson's study of 1984 entitled "The Cooperative Extension Service: A National
Assessment”. The study addressed some of the most fundamental questions important to
Extension. The study responded to the questions: - What ought to be the role of Extension
in the 213t century?, How should the Extension mission be redefined? (narrow or broad),
What is Extension's public image?, Who should be the primary audience of Extension?
(rural, urban, farm or nonfarm people), What should be the primary means of

communicating Extension programs?, and who will lead Extension in securing solid

41

support for the future. Obviously, all these questions were important to the organization as
it approached the new information age.

The overall study was important to this study, particularly the findings fiom the question
about image and awareness of Extension and its programs. On that subject (image and
awareness), the Warner and Christenson’s study revealed that Extension, like any other
large complex organization has a diverse publics. Its public includes clients and customers
(user), non-users, and cost-bearers. The clientele and customers of Extension, according to
that study, were the individuals being served directly by the organization. These groups of
people know and make use of the organization, its programs and services. The non-users
include individuals who are aware of the Extension Service, but who do not use it, as well
as individuals who may be completely unaware of the organization. The cost-bearers are all
the taxpayers who contribute to Extension through taxes.

The organization has a very high visibility. Approximately 87% of the US. population,
or 9 out of 10 adults in the US, are aware of, or recognize Extension and its programs.
Even though the level of awareness varies from one region to another and from one person
to another, there seems to be a uniform level of awareness across the country. The
organization is known by about 47% of the population. This group of people (47%)
recognize Extension by the name of either the Cooperative Extension Service or the
Agricultural Extension Service. However, there are a few other individuals who identify
the organization by descriptors such as:

- Agricultural Agents

42

- The county Extension office
- The 4-H agent
- Name of the county Extension staff
This indicates that Extension is known by many different names. One of the most
surprising findings of the Warner and Christenson’s study was that people were more
cognizant of the core program areas (agriculture, 4-H, home economics, and community
development) of Extension than the organizational name (the Cooperative Extension
Service). Among the core program areas, the study showed that the 4-H program had the
highest recognition, with 77% of the population indicating that they had heard of the name.
They associated the high level of recognition of 4-H with the consistency of the name and
its shortness which makes it easy to remember. It is then followed by agriculture with 52%
recognition, and home economics and community development with 45% and 46%.
Through a well developed profile of the individuals who were knowledgeable of
Extension, the researchers found that half of the people who were aware of the Extension
Service had a family income between $10,000 and $30,000, with a small percentage having
lower or higher incomes. Approximately 8% of the knowledgeable people had a grade
school education, 50% had a high school education, one third had some college, and 9%
had advanced college degrees. About 86% were white, 9% black, and 5% were from other
racial groups.
Some selected sections of the summary of major findings of the Warner and
Christenson study relevant to this study are presented in figure 2:1 below. This summary

provides a brief and concise information about the major findings of the study.

43

Extension's diverse image

- High level of visibility (87% of the public)
- Multiple identity

- 4-H program most visible

Americans use Extension

- One-quarter of households have used Extension

- Over 11 million households used Extension in 1981
- Many clients are multiple users

Extension serves urban and rural mople
- Two-thirds of clientele reside in urban areas

- Higher proportion of rural and farm residents are users
- Many urban users have rural roots

Users are highly satisfied
- Satisfaction fairly constant throughout U.S.

- Satisfaction uniformly high across all programs
- Satisfaction with Extension higher than most public agencies

Non-users have mixed sentiments
- One-half are satisfied
- One-third are "holding their vote"
- Most unsure reside in urban areas
- One out of seven is negative
- Rural non-farm somewhat negative

Agg' cultural prom
- Largest program-one-third of staff and budget

- More fi'equent users
- Greatest support for Agriculture

Home Economics progra_m
- Almost one-third of staff and budget

- One-quarter of clients are male
- Support for Home Economics Lowest of four programs

4-H progan

- Highest visibility

- Serves more upper-middle class persons

- Greatest number of contact

- Previous 4-H involvement increases present use

Communig Development proggarp
- Smallest program (6% of staff)

- Serves greater proportion of minorities

Public supmrt present
- Most want support to remain unchanged

- Few want funding cut
- Use closely related to support
- Heavy users most supportive
Or anizational su rt ile
- No unified voice speaking for Extension
- Loss of rural congressional seats
- Dependence upon agriculture
- Fragmented farm bloc
Figure 2-1 Selected Summary of Major Findings from the National Study

(Source: Warner and Christenson, 1984).

These findings suggest that the Cooperative Extension Service does not have a single
image. It has multiple images which provide a base that is not dependent on a single client
group. The organization has been communicated to the public as - "The Cooperative
Extension Service", "Extension Service", "4-H", "Ingharn County Cooperative ‘Extension
Service", "Michigan Sate University Extension", etc. These different names have
contributed to some misunderstanding over the name of the organization.

The Cooperative Extension Service has the potential to improve upon its existing image
and overall awareness since the findings indicate that most segments of the US. population
are at least aware of the organization and its programs. The most important task at hand is
to consolidate the identity of the organization. This effort to consolidate Extension’s image

can only be achieved with the support and commitment of the organizational leadership of

 

45

the Extension Service. In the private sector, consolidating image was successful. Various
corporations consolidated and built single images for their organization. They achieved this
by using either a single corporate name or brand name along with an extensive media
campaign. The consolidation of the multiple identities will reduce the complexity and or
multiple images of the organization by:

(1) avoiding the proliferation of different identities, and

(2) establishing closer ties between the different programs and the organization.

A statewide survey conducted by the marketing committee of the Cornell Cooperative
Extension Service showed that the organization was projecting numerous images, a similar
finding to Warner and Christenson's nationwide study. In an effort to address this problem,
the marketing committee recommended that the new statewide name become Cornell
Cooperative Extension, followed by the county name. Cornell was included in the new
name to represent or identify the state land-grant college (Cornell University), Cooperative
Extension was included to identify with the national system (the Cooperative Extension
Service), and the name of the county was included to identify the local funding partner. The
program areas (4-H, Agriculture, Home Econorrrics, and Community Development) were
asked to display the new name prominently along with their own name on all outreach
materials. A vague graphic "E" logo was designed which replaced the old logo (Cornell
University emblem) of the New York Cooperative Extension Service. Figure 2-2 below

depicts the new and old logos of the Cornell Cooperative Extension.

 

46

 

Figure 2-2: New and Old logo of Cornell Cooperative Extension
(Adopted from William, Bodt., Journal of Extension,

Spring, 1988)

The new “E” logo ties Extension visually to the land-grant university. Alon with the
new name and logo, the committee recommended the development of outreach materials
and training programms that projected a unified, consistent, and unique image of the
Cornell Cooperative Extension Service (Journal of Extension, Spring 1988, pp.27 - 28).
The committee’s recommendation was in line with what Warner and Christenson (1984)
suggested because it consolidated the identity of the New York Cooperative Extension
Service by establishing ties between the organization at all levels (federal, state, and
local) with its programs. Besides New York, several other states like Oregon, North
Dakota, Montana, Minnesota, etc. have adopted similar ideas.

Comett (1958) conducted a study in Michigan to assess the public understanding of

the Cooperative Extension Service. The objectives of the study were to determine:

 

47

(1) how well Extension is known and used by urban leaders and farm people ;

(2) some of the things people think the Extension Service should be doing;

(3) the attitude of the available public on how well they appreciate and support
Extension work; and

(4) some pointers for improving Extension program planning.

At the beginning of the study, Cornett assumed that financial support for the Cooperative
Extension Service depended on the understanding of more than just those engaged in
agriculture. Expanded use of mass communication methods made it possible for the general
public to know more about publics affairs. Increased awareness of tax dollar use could be
expected to curtail any public program that was not understood by the voters. A favorable
feeling toward a tax-supported program was helpfirl for support, but understanding and
appreciation of its usefirlness were needed for a firm foundation that would hold support
against competition.

All these points indicated a need for the Cooperative Extension leaders to know and
understand people's awareness and use of the programs as well as factors which may
influence its support.

Comett’s study consisted of general groups (farmers, social clubs, businesses and
professional clubs) in Jackson County and non-agricultural faculty at Michigan Sate
University. Comett's findings revealed that most people were aware of some sort of
program in agricultural Extension. Approximately all farmers, 82% of the city clubs, and
78% of the non-agricultural faculty were aware of Extension programs. 4-H and home

economics were the most popular programs. Despite these high statistics, there were some

 

48

indications of misunderstanding of Extension and its programs among people. In other
words, there were people who did not know what Extension does or what services are
available to people through Extension.

Both rural and urban people seem to feel that extension work is basically a rural program
and any other usage is secondary. Approximately one fourth of the questionnaires returned
showed a feeling of approval for Extension work in the city, and about the same number
opposed city service. In terms of support, the study showed that 65% of the respondents
felt that Extension is definitely helpful, 19% considered it probably helpful, 8% considered
it doubtful, and 8% had no opinion. The strongest support came fiorn those who actually
participated in Extension programs, and the support increased as awareness and use of
Extension programs increased.

Another study whose findings have direct implications for this study is the 1986
Hanenburg study which assessed the public awareness, perception and use of the Michigan
Cooperative Extension Service. The overall purpose of the Hanenburg study was to
determine the image of the Michigan Cooperative Extension Service by assessing the
awareness and perception of residents in two Michigan counties (Kent and Ottawa).

Based on the completed telephone interviews of a random sample of 388 residents of
Kent and Ottawa counties, Hanenburg found that 98.5% of the respondents were aware of
the Michigan Cooperative Extension Service and its programs. The organization and its
programs were highly visible. The most widely recognized name was the 4-H program,
which was identified by 96.1% of the respondents. The Cooperative Extension Service was

the second most widely recognized name with 39.9% recognition, followed by home

49

economies with 38.4%, then agriculture with 21%, and natural resources-public policy at
the bottom with 13.7% (p. 81 - 83).

Hanenburg found that, similar to the national system, the organization in Michigan was
also struggling with the problem of multiple images. The findings revealed that more
respondents recognized the 4-H program area name (96.1% of the respondents) than the
organizational name (Michigan Cooperative Extension Service). More individuals (39.9%
of the respondents) recognized the organization name "Michigan Cooperative Extension
Service" than the other three program areas (agriculture 21.9%, home econorrrics 38.4%,
natural resources 13.7%). These findings suggest that ties between the programs and the
organization do exist.

The respondents who had contacted or used Extension according to Hanenburg’s study
indicated their awareness of the mission of Extension. More than 65% of these individuals
agreed or strongly agreed that the Cooperative Extension Service should rank agriculture
and marketing programs as first priority. The most frequently used program area was home
economics, followed by agriculture and marketing, then 4-H, and finally, natural resources.
The largest group of respondents (47.8%) agreed or strongly agreed that Extension is an
agricultural agency for farmers and rural people, while 42% disagreed with that statement.
Over 94% of the same group of individuals agreed to the following two statements:

(1) The job of Extension is to get practical, university-tested information into the
hands of people who need it; and
(2) The Cooperative Extension Service provides educational programs to bring

research findings to the people of the United States.

50

Hanenburg’s study also revealed that respondents were satisfied with the educational
services and programs offered by the Michigan Cooperative Extension Service.
Approximately 51.5% of those who responded to this question were satisfied, 36.8% did
not know enough about Extension to respond to this question, and 11.8% were dissatisfied.
Both rural and urban respondents viewed the organization as a primarily agricultural agency
designed to help farmers and rural residents.

In general, most of the findings of Hanenburg’s study are closely related with the
findings of Warner and Christenson (1984). In both studies, respondents had a very high
level of awareness of the organization and its programs. Among the four program areas, the
4—H program was recognized as the most visible program. People fiom rural areas, farms,
and small towns were the most loyal and supportive customers of Extension.

The summarized data from Hanenburg's study comparing the awareness of the Michigan

Cooperative Extension Service and its programs with that of the National Extension Service

 

 

and its programs follow:

Michigan National

Survey Survey

Cooperative Ext. Service 39.9% 40%
Agriculture-marketing 21 9% 5 2%
Home economics 38.4% 45%
Natural res. public policy 13.7%
Community development 45%
4-H youth 96.1% 77%

Combined total 98.5% 37%

 

 

51

The recommendations from these previous studies, specifically Hanenburg's which
suggests that a more comprehensive study be conducted, provided the impetus for this
study. According to Hanenburg, a second study should be statewide in scope, with a
sample population consisting of residents from each Michigan county. A survey of
Extension staff members should also be conducted to assess their image of the Michigan
Cooperative Extension Service. The data should then be compared for similarities and
differences between how the public views Extension and how its members view the

organization.

52

Section IV: Issues Programming: general background, concept, and theories.

Issues programming is a new program development concept in Extension, often
described as Extension's paradigm shift. Issues programming is a major change in
Extension programming. According to Boyle, a major change program is a programming
effort in which resources are focused on important needs or problems. It requires an
interdisciplinary approach because most of today's important problems are complex and
interrelated with each other, and therefore, need the cooperative efforts of diverse
professionals and resources from various disciplines, agencies, and organizations (Boyle,
1981, p. 14).

The idea of issues programming was developed in the mid 19803 by a group of experts
from a variety of fields that include agronomy, agricultural education, agricultural
economics, agricultural extension, rural sociology, home economics, clothing and textile,
animal science, and computer science (Ladewig, ...., p. 226, and Moore & Harrison, 1990-
1991, p. 7). It is a well-defined, soundly conceptualized idea which focuses on broad and
complex societal issues, nontraditional audiences, and interdisciplinary faculty involvement
(Baker & Varma, 1993, p. 20; Task Force Report, 1987; Dalgaard et.al., 1985). The
theories and concepts of issues programming were also drawn from a wide variety of
literature fiom the fields of education, public policy, issues management, corporate
management, public relations, and strategic planning. The interdisciplinary nature of issues
programming, its theories and philosophy, is similar to a systems concept from the field of

General Systems pioneered by Ludwig von Bertalanffy and James G. Miller.

53

The fundamental ideas of the General Systems was built on the traditional views of the
management process, management science, and behavioral science to provide an integrated
approach to managing the basic elements of people, techniques, information, structure, and
purpose (Lippitt, 1982, p. 29).

To comprehend the General Systems concept, a conceptualization and understanding of
the meaning of a system is essential. The dictionary definition of the term “system” is "a
group of things or parts working together or connected in some way so as to form a whole;
an established way of doing something; method; procedure, etc." (Webster, 1972, p. 760).
A system is made up of parts called subsystems. It denotes plan, method, order, and
arrangement. Consequently, system means both the structure and the process of the
association of people with which we work - not only the components of an organization, but
also the interrelationships among those components.

Its fundamental theory rests on the view that the system is a whole that functions as a
whole by virtue of its interdependent parts. Unlike the physical sciences, which tend to
isolate phenomena and classified variables, General Systems theory, which applies to the
biological and social sciences, observes phenomena within the context of whole systems
(Lippitt, 1982, p. 27-31). As a holistic concept, it deals with the management process as a
unified whole by attempting to conceptually model a set of theoretical constructs that
describe and explain general relationships within the real world.

Issues programming is a well planned change effort that draws fi'om the theories of

planned change, a concept that is also synonymous with Extension and Extension work.

 

 

54

For decades, the concept has been used and proved to be effective in changing individuals
and group situations in Extension. However, it is now becoming increasingly clear that the
idea of systematic planned change can also be applied to change, transform, and renew an
organization. Gordon Lippitt confirmed this by saying that, "in the last half of the twentieth
century, we have seen the emergence of both research and action in applying planned
change efforts to organizations, whereas in the past, planned change was directed mainly
and specifically on either individuals or group situations" (Lippitt, 1969, p. 26). The issues
programming process in Extension is an example of that effort. Essentially, issues
programming is Extension's planned response to issues (Dalgaard et. al., 1985; Maurer et.
al., 1990). And any well planned response is a well orchestrated effort usually directed
toward change.

Boone (1985) defines planned change as, “a purposeful decision to make improvements
in a system, usually with the help of a change agent”. Similarly, Bennis et. al. defines
planned change as a "conscious, deliberate, and collaborative effort to improve the
operation of a system, whether it be a self-system, social system, or cultural system,”
(Boone, 1985, p. 10). As a planned response, issues programming is therefore a strategic,
conscious, deliberate, and collaborative process designed to improve the operation of the
Cooperative Extension System. Its concepts, theories, and principles are robust, and solidly
built on sound educational and managerial theories that have proved to be effective. The
proponents of the issues programming process strongly believe that it reinforces the
concepts and principles of the nine major programming models in adult education proposed

by Beal et al., 1966; Boone et al.,

 

55

1971; Boyle, 1981; Freire, 1970; Houle, 1972; Kidd, 1973; Knowles, 1970, Lippitt et al,
1958; and Taylor, 1971 (Boone, 1985, p. 20; Dalgaard et al, 1985, p. 4).

As mentioned previously, issue was the foundation of the Extension’s issues
programming concept. Its literature is outside the main stream literature of Extension,
consequently, understanding the meaning of this interdisciplinary term in its totality is
crucial to all Extension professionals. The understanding of the concept and theories of
issue as written in the literature of corporate management and public policy, should help
extension professionals: (I) understand the different meaning of the term and the rationale
of its concept, and (2) see how the concept was applied in the corporate world to forecast
and anticipate social and political concerns that could impact their external environment.

The concept of issue which provides fundamental bases for Extension’s issues
programming, can be said to have been born out of need when the external environment of
business started getting complicated in the 19603 and 703 due to the effects of certain socio-
political issues. According to Stanley, (1985, p. 185), "the list of whole industries (not just
businesses) crippled, laid waste, or dramatically transformed by issues is a long one: steel,
automobile, nuclear power are among the most important. As more and more businesses
and industries a affected by issues outside their own environment than inside, many
questions were raised such as: How can businesses and industries avoid unpleasant
surprises and threats of potentially dangerous issues?, Can the business leaders be able to
anticipate issues with sufficient lead time to effectively and efficiently manage their

resources to create a strategic vision for their organizations?.

 

 

————-r

56

Ostensibly, it may not be an over statement to say that the birth and development of the
concept of issue was an effort to respond to those questions and others similar to them.
Renfro (1993) stressed this point by mentioning that the

premise of the concepts of issues and issues management was to improve an organization's
ability to anticipate and manage issues.

In the literature of public policy and corporate management, the word “issue” has been
used widely and ambiguously. Some of the reasons for the ambiguity of the term is
probably associated with the characteristics of the word (issue) itself. Issues takes many
different forms ranging from those with an extremely narrow, limited focus that affect only
few people, to those with a broad general focus that affect large numbers. Heretofore, a
single definition inclusive of all issues has not been developed in the professional literature
and may not be necessary (Renfio, 1993, p....). However, a working definition of issues is
essential. Among the workable definitions commonly found in the literature includes, but
is not limited to, the ones developed by Howard Chase, The Conference Board, Guy
Stanley, Buchholz Rogene, and Raymond Ervving. According to Howard Chase, who has
been broadly considered as the "father" of issues management, the term “issue” is “an
unsettled matter which is ready for decision" (Chase, 1984, p. 38). The Conference Board,
a body which periodically studies corporate issues management practices, defines issue as
"a condition or pressure, either internal or external to an organization, that, if it continues,
will have a significant effect on the functioning of the organization or its future interests",
(Stanley, 1985, p. 50-51). Their studies indicate that all issues are divided into three

categories (current, emerging, and strategic) based on their stage of development.

 

57

In his definition, Stanley (1985) states that "issues are matters of public dispute in which
the public interest is unclear". Similar to the Conference Board, Stanley also classifies
issues into three levels: current issues (those now before us); emerging issues (issues, the
traces of which are now discernible and which are likely to be current issues in two or three
years); and the strategic issues (those which can be predicted with trend analysis, scenario
generation and other techniques) that will likely emerge as issues three to four years from
now (Stanley, 1985, p. 18, 185-187).

Buchholz et al. (1985) describe issues as concerns that affect many individuals and
groups which require some kind of collective action to be resolved successfully. They
categorize issues as latent, emerging, current, or institutionalized issues. A latent issue is
one that is not widely discussed in the media or by public interest groups or other
stakeholders. But one might detect that pressures are building with respect to the issue or
that trends are developing that may make the issue important in the future. It is to the
advantage of organizations to anticipate issues and catch them in this stage.

An emerging issue is a public policy question with three essential characteristics: (1) its
definition and contending positions are still evolving; (2) it is likely to be the subject of
government action in the next three to five years; and (3) it can be acted on by affected
corporations. At this level, the issue is not firlly politicized, but it is the subject of
discussion by many groups and affected parties. This is the best stage at which businesses
can have a direct impact on the issue by participating in the discussion to help shape the

outcome of the discussion.

 

58

A current issue is one that is being debated or otherwise acted on in local, state, or
federal government institutions. The issue is fully politicized at this point, and specific
public policies to address the issue are being formulated and debated. At this level, there
are very limited things a business can do to change the policy that may result.

Finally, the institutionalized issue refers to issues for which public policy has already
been formulated, and the approved policy is now being implemented. There are no options
available for businesses to consider (p. 1-8). The idea of an issues’s life cycle was
developed in 19703, and has grown in acceptance, utility, and complexity. It is based on the
recognition that issues move and develop within a given framework, whether they are major
national or international issues, state or local issues, or specific industry or product issues;
they pass through particular stages regardless of their subject or content (Renfro, 1993,
p....). In anticipating issues, much effort in terms of financial, human, and other resources,
should be directed to current issues because these are considered to be the most important
by businesses and organizations. An estimated 30-55 % of the resources are spent on this
area Emerging issues follow in importance accounting for about 15-30 % of the resources.
Finally, the strategic issues consume 0-15 % (Stanley, 1985, p. 185-187). This is depicted

in Figure 2-3.

 

59

   
     
   
  

0- l 5%
resources

 

1 5-3 0%
resources

emerging
issuses

 

30-55%

resources
Current lssuses

Figure 2-3: Issues and Resources

(Adopted from Stanley, Guy DD, 1985)

The above categories of an issue’s life cycle are in fact more applicable and useful to
businesses, industries, and other organizations.

Society also has a different perspective on issue. From the society's point of view, an
issue develops through four different stages of life a cycle - (1)the discussion stage, (2)the
political stage, (3)the legislative stage, and (4)the litigation stage (Buchholz et al., 1985, p.
7-8). Erwing (1987) names these the societal expectation stage, the political development

stage, the legislative action stage, and the regulation/litigation stage.

 

 

60

The first stage, which is usually considered as the beginning of an issue, starts with
changing public expectations which creates a gap between corporate performance and what
the public expects fi'om its institutions. The issue starts to grow when the gap increases to
affect large numbers of people and leads to dissatisfaction with the performance of the
corporation/organization. Grassroots discussions increase and opinions start forming. At
this point, if not resolved, an issue will move to the second stage.

At the second stage, the issue has already become completely politicized through
extensive open discussion in the media. At this point, it will become a concern to interest
groups and some politicians. It will then be introduced into the formal public policy
process, then to the public policy agenda where official action will be taken.

The third stage involves the enactment of legislation on the issue and its implementation.
This stage signals a peak in public attention to the issue, when it is defined in operational or
legal terms and solutions, and frequently results in the passage of law and promulgation of
regulations. The fourth stage is the implementation stage. It is described as a plateau in
public attention, when the actual laws are put to the test. Enforcement of the laws become
routine and violation leads to prosecution (Buchholz et al, 1985, p. 7-8; Erwing, 1987, p.
49-50; Renfro, 1993, p....).

From the preceding discussions, it is apparent that issues are categorized into different
levels and stages according to timing or development. They go through different stages in
their life cycle as they evolve. And it is of great importance for any manager or
organizational leader to understand, or at least, to have an idea of where an issue is with

respect to its life cycle because that will help him or her know what type of actions or

 

61

strategies should be considered in response to the issue. There are at least four different
types of response patterns or strategies identified by Buchholz et al. These are: (I)the
reactive response pattern, (2)the accommodative response, (3)the proactive response, and
(4)the interactive response. The selection of either of these strategies will be based on the
analysis of the issue or issues at hand by using different matrix models. In summary, the
selection of a reactive strategy by a corporation or organization suggests fighting change,
while accommodative strategies favor adopting change; proactive strategies indicate
influencing change, and interactive strategies lean toward adjusting to change (Buccholz et
al., 1985, p. 53-55).
The literature in the corporate and public policy sectors seems to suggest that issues:
(1) exist mostly in the external environment, affecting large numbers of diverse
individuals and groups,
(2) are complex, and difficult and subject to shifting public opinion and or
perceptions;and
(3) are often controversial.

In Extension and Extension programming, issues are defined as mattes of wide public
concern arising out of complex human problems (Dalgaard et el., 1988, p. 5). They are
conceived as topics of wide public concern because of their broadness, complexity, and
extensive impact on large numbers of people that include both traditional and non-
traditional audiences of Extension. Issues cannot be acted on single handedly or

individually; collective action is needed to deal with them.

62

Across the country, the Cooperative Extension leaders have come to conclude and agree
upon the fact that the organization must be able and capable to respond quickly and
effectively to a broad set of issues important to the economic, social, and environmental
progress of its public. For example, at the national level, the Cooperative Extension Service
selected nine areas (altemative agricultural opportunities, building human capital,
competitiveness and profitability of American agriculture, conservation and management of
natural resources, family and economic well-being, improving nutrition, diet, and health,
revitalizing rural America, water quality, and youth at risk) as national priority initiatives.
These were areas which the National Extension Service (ES-USDA) planned to concentrate
its programming for the next three to five years. In each of these areas, there were critical
issues that were identified for action (Rasmussen, 1989, p. 231, CES National Initiatives,
1988). For example, under the area of alternative agricultural opportunities, the issues of
maintaining profitability while protecting the environment were identified as critical; under
family and economic well-being, the issue of family financial instability was identified as
being critical (CES National Initiatives, 1988).

At the state level (for example, in Michigan), the issues of the environment, economic
development, and children, youth and families were identified as the three top issues of
wide public concern in the state. Maurer et al. (1990) identified food quality and safety as
another example of major Extension issue because of its multiple problems such as food
pathogens, fat and cholesterol content, spoilage, and chemical and hormone residues. Each
of these issues and their problem areas require different skills and knowledge, both inside

and outside of the agricultural and extension disciplines, in order to solve them.

63

The adoption of the concept of issue fiom the corporate sector and public policy, allows
Extension to apply, link, and integrate the concept into the issues prograrnnring process.
This new concept of issue programming in Extension identifies complex human problems
(issues) in their own context - that is, outside the organization - without prior regard for
traditional Extension subject matter, audiences, and methods of program delivery (Dalgaard
et al., 1985, p. 5). The function of issue programming in Extension may be similar to the
one envisioned for issues management processes in the Corporate sector - to provide crucial
intelligence on social, economic, political, and technological trends, events, and
developments affecting the corporation's current success and future viability (Ewing, 1987,
p. 48). Issues programming is basically an organized Extension effort to respond
effectively to issues of wide public concern at the national, state, and local levels by
applying the elements of programming process.

Like any other living organisms, all issues have definite life cycles - birth, maturity, and
death. In other words, they all begin, flourish, and end. The challenge to all Extension
professionals is therefore, not only to decide when to begin programming around an issue,
but also (and perhaps more importantly) to know and decide when to conclude or end the
program (Dalgaard et al., 1985, p. 15). In a paper, “entitled the Integration of Issues
Programming into Program Development”, Maurer et al. identified the following three

stages of an issue’s life cycle:

64

Phase I (identification of issue) is of course the stage where issues are born. They begin
to appear as people become aware of the problem(s). As time goes on, the importance, as
well as the intensity of these problem(s) increases as more people become aware of the
problem(s) and start forming opinions. At this stage, the issues programming process starts
by identifying those emerging issues that seem to be of concern to the public, and have the
potential of gaining wide public support such as - teenage pregnancy, drug abuse, and
school dropout under the broad issue of youth at risk, and food pathogens, fat and
cholesterol content, spoilage and chemical and hormone residues under a broad issue of
food quality and safety. After all the emerging issues have been identified, they must then
be prioritized to select those that programming efforts will be directed toward before the
issues reach their peak. This stage resembles the planning component of Boone's
conceptual programming model, and the problem/need definition level found in most of the
traditional models of program development.

Phase II (prom desigp & implementation) is the maturity level where issues reach
their highest peak. It is the level where most of the issues programming process will take
place in terms of designing and implementation of the program(s) for selected issue(s) of
wide public concern. This is similar to the design and implementation subprocess of
Boone's conceptual programming model.

Phase III (future prom direction) is the dying level. After a period of time, the
popularity and support of issues usually starts to decline. At this point, programs that focus

around such issues should either be integrated into ongoing programs or discontinued.

65'

Issues are either solved or they decline in importance as others begin to appear. This is

depicted in Figure 2-4.

Intensity ————--

     

 

   

Teena 6 Pregnancy

Ongoing
Programs
Selection of Issue
(Youth at Risk)
(<— _- — —' _ -—
\
| \
I \ P . .
l rogrammlng is
. ' \ Phased Out
Emergiy Problems | ' \
1 l r
l ' \\
8 s l | \
3 o
< 3 l l
8 0 2' l
s s “i '
‘3 o m l
a) (I)
Phaaell
P1188. I Program Design amtl Phase III
ldentltlcatlon of Issue Implementation Future Program Dlrectlon

Time ———.-.

Figure 2-4 Life Cycle of an Issues
(Source: Integration of Issues Programming into

Program Development, Maurer et al., 1990)

 

 

 

et’alua
payer'
and ed
organi.
actit'iti
Aftertl
prograr
and cor
nxnt
and p01;
or com;
Cons
Exitnsjc
Constant
attacks a]
hlSlory.
Begin)
Called {Or
PresidenI 1

66

Genesis of Issues Programming

According to Kosecoff and Fink (1982, p. 19), the growth and development of program
evaluation, both as a field as well as a process, can be linked to the commitment to use tax
payer’s money to establish and maintain programs for alleviating economic, social, health,
and educational problems. The Cooperative Extension Service is an educational service
organization established: to design and implement various educational programs and
activities to improve the social and economic well-being of families and communities.
After the second world war, there was a sudden increase in the number of human service
programs throughout the United States. This rapid increase alerted both the government
and concerned citizens alike to request comprehensive evaluations of these programs to
assess their impact, merit or worthiness. As a result of these evaluations, many programs
and policies in health, education, and other related social services have either been changed
or completely stopped.

Constant evaluation, change, and criticism are not all that new to the Cooperative
Extension Service. Since its establishment in 1914, the organization has been subjected to
constant criticism, and regular evaluations and reviews. However, the recent criticisms and
attacks are different. They are more intense and much wider in scope than any other time in
history.

Beginning with the Carter and Reagan administrations, their budget recommendations
called for substantial cuts in the Extension budget. For example, in his 1986 budget plan,
President Reagan called for a 47% reduction in Smith-Lever funds and nearly 60% overall

(Dilhnan, 1986; Vitzthum, 1991). His administration’s attitude toward the Extension

67

budget was, in short, suggesting "Do we really need an Extension service?". Other attacks
from farm organizations, the United States Department of Agriculture, the Office of
Management and Budget, the General Accounting office, Congress, and Land-Grant
Universities called for Extension to review its mission, structure and programs (Task Force
Report, 1987). Prior to these recent requests for evaluation and change, the Cooperative
Extension Service, as mentioned earlier, was involved in examining itself, its structure and
programs on a regular basis.

According to the 1987 Task Force Report, approximately every 10 years since the 19403
the C00perative Extension Service re-examined its organizational structure and programs,
and recommended modifications to effectively cope with the future (p. 31). In all of the
evaluation reports, Extension leaders continue to discuss and attempt to find answers to the
fundamental questions:

(1) What kinds of new problems, issues, needs, or concerns will Extension clientele
be facing in the years ahead?

(2) Which of those problems, issues, needs, or concerns will fall within the charter
and resources of Extension?

(3) What should Extension be doing now to anticipate and prepare for the
changes that will influence its programs for the future?

Consistently, the analyses fiom these reports have led to the broadening of the mission

of Extension.

 

68

The first in-depth long range evaluation of Extension was conducted in 1948 by a joint
committee. In the first report entitled, “Joint Committee Report on Extension Programs,
Policies, and Goals” three traditional programming areas of extension such as agriculture, 4-
H, and home economics were identified as important. In addition to these three areas,
community and rural leadership were also identified as important.

In 195 8, a second evaluation was conducted and a report entitled "A statement of scope
and responsibility, the Cooperative Extension Service today", was issued by the committee.
The mission of Extension was further broadened by adding farm and home management,
conservation of resources, community development and public affairs (Baker, 1992, p....).
Extension clientele were also expanded to include urban, non-fann rural residents, related
farm organizations, and those who supplied services and produce to farm people (Future
Task Force, 1987, p. 31).

A third evaluation report of extension entitled: “People and A Spirit” (1968) was written
during the time when the United States community was undergoing massive economic and
social change. The committee members felt that Extension had a duty and responsibility to
help people solve these problems. For this reason, the committee recommended a major
expansion of activities in programs and activities dealing with social and economic
development and quality of living (People and Spirit Report, 1968, P. 89).

A fourth report on the evaluation of the economic and social consequences of
cooperative extension programs in 1980 showed the organization as local and responsive to
local needs. Two factors (networking and referral) were identified as important in meeting

the needs of the local people (Future Task Force Report, 1987, p. 31-32).

 

69

In 1983, a fifth evaluation report entitled, "Extension in the 803: A perspective for the
future of the Cooperative Extension Service,” re-emphasized the mission of the
organization as educational and identified individuals, families, and communities as the
main clientele groups. In response to this evaluation, the mission of Extension programs
did not broaden per sec, nor did it retreat from those expressed in the former reports
(Ratchford, 1984, p....).

And finally, a report by the Future Task Force entitled " Extension in transition:
Bridging the gap between vision and reality” was written after an evaluation in 1987. This
report contained 32 recommendations for change in the structure, mission, programs and
programming, training, and funding of Extension. In fact, they can be viewed as laying a
firm foundation for issues programming in Extension, specifically recommendation #4
which states:

“The compelling issues facing people must drive the system. These issues must
constitute the basis upon which all decisions regarding programs, training, delivery
methods, firnding, and audience selection are made”...(ECOP report, 1987, p. 6).

This was in view of the fact that times had changed, and Extension Service could no
longer afford to continue with the fi'agmented, discipline-oriented approach to educational
programming. The organization must transcend and focus on issues of wide public concern

which tend to be broad, complex, and interdisciplinary in nature.

70

The Process of Issues Programming in Extension

The summative definition of programming or program development in Adult Education
literature is, "a comprehensive, systematic, and proactive process encompassing the total
planned, collaborative efforts of the adult education organization, the adult educator in the
roles of change agent and programmer, representatives of the learners, and the learners
themselves in a purposive manner and designed to facilitate desirable changes in the
behavior of learners and the environment or system in which they live" (Boone, 1985, p.
41). Boyle (1985) defined programming as, "a deliberate series of actions and decisions
through which representatives of the people affected by the potential program are involved
with a programmer to:

(1) Develop an organizational structure for analyzing, interpreting, and making
decisions about problems or situations that should be changed;

(2) Establish priorities for the problems and situations in which desirable changes
should be identified in the plan of action;

(3) Identify resources and support for effective promotion and implementation of
the program;

(4) Design and instructional plan that provides for extensive involvement of the
learners in appropriate learning environment; and

(5) Develop appropriate accountability approaches so as to make effective
judgments about the value of the program, among others.

In Extension, program development is defined as a process that delineates the
educational work of the Cooperative Extension Service. It encompasses a series of steps
involving planning the program, preparing plans for teaching, carrying out the plans, and

evaluating to determine accomplishments (Pesson in Sanders, 1966, p. 94). Maurer et al.

7l

refers to programming as a complex process of forming representative groups to assist in
analyzing situations, identifying community needs, establishing program priorities,
determining long-range and short-range goals, designing and implementing specific
activities and evaluating overall program effort. These suggest that programming and its
processes are similar across education and education related fields.

Issues programming is an educational programming of matters of wide public concern.
Its process resemble that of core programming (described above) and is consonant with
established Extension program development processes (Dalgaard et al., 1987; Maurer,
1990). Since its adoption, Extension systems throughout the country have used different
processes; however, its basic principle and process (similar to issues management process)
is still the same. According to Dalgaard et al. 1988 and Maurer, 1990; the fundamental
process of issues programming involves the following sequential stages:
(1 ) Identification of issues

This is the stage where relevant issues are identified by using different environmental
scanning techniques and procedures. In the corporate sector, most of the scanning is done
by reading current periodicals, books, newsletters, and reports, and by attending meetings
and conferences (Erwing, 1987, p. 55-56). Others may include surveys, interviews,
nominal group processes, and delphi processes. The environmental scanning process is
reliable and can produce more credible results, especially if two or more techniques are
employed (Dalgaard, 1988, p. 13).

In Extension, issues are mostly identified through group processes such as the delphi

process. The Extension, staff along with planning/advisory groups, lay volunteers,

72

representatives of private and public organizations, and others with expertise are grouped to
form what is called an issues task force or an issue team. These groups have been the
vehicle for change. The most important thing at this stage is to make sure that a broad cross
section of the public is included in the process. Members must reflect all segments of the
population.

The primary task of this group is to identify and recognize issues, particularly emerging
issues, and to make constructive brief statements about the issues. Dalgaard et al. called the
issue statement the starting point of issues programming. And all issue statements must
contain the following three essential elements: -(1)who is involved or affected; (2)what does
the problematic situation consist of; and (3) what are the consequences of the situation
(Dalgaard et al, 1988, p. 12).

12) Issues prioritization

Because of the fact that there are many issues that could be identified during the
identification process, and Extension does not have sufficient resources to focus on all of
them, therefore, the number of issues to program on should be limited by prioritizing and
selecting the top rated ones. The number of issues recommended varies from a rrrinimurn of
three issues to a maximum of five (Dalgaard, 1988; Erwing, 1987). These top issues are
selected from the identified issues in stage one after they have been prioritized on the basis
of importance, availability of resources, and perception of issues impact. Prioritization
allows Extension to divert its resources (both human and financial) on major issues of wide

public concern.

73

(3) Identification of audiences

The term “issue” by its definition and nature, involves more than one audience. An issue
may have two, three, or five different audiences, each of them having a different program
thrust (Maurer, 1990). For example, the issue of improving health may interest family
members, health officials, and individuals as audiences, or the issue of solid waste may
interest homeowners, business owners, and industries as audiences. The audiences are not
determined prior to the identification of the issue but after it has been fully identified and
described, because by that time, the scope and nature of the issue to be addressed is known.
The audiences should include all people who are affected or who expect to be affected by
the problems, as well as others who will be helpful in providing solutions to the problems.
In other words, all of the public which may have a stake in the issue (Dalgaard, 1988).

(4) Desigm'pg the proggrp

Issues programming means developing educational programs for a variety of relevant
audiences that are impacted by an issue. At this stage, the focus is on designing a series of
interrelated educational programs and activities suitable for each target audience, and their
delivery methods. In developing these leamer-centered educational programs, all
characteristics of the audience such as age, education, place of residence, learning style,
needs, motivation, etc., must be considered (Boone, 1985; Dalgaard et al, 1988; Boyle,
1981). These factors help programmers establish objectives and instructional strategies for
providing meaningfirl learning experiences to the learners or participants. Of critical
importance is the statement of objective(s). It or they must be stated in a clear and

measurable form to provide a benchmark for evaluation later.

74

Because issues programming involves multiple audiences and focuses mainly on
problem solving skills, different instructional methods with emphases on experiential
learning should be employed. All available resources (financial and human) inside and
outside the community must be explored.

(5) Evaluation of the outcome

The overall purpose of any educational program is to produce changes in the knowledge,
skills, and attitudes of the learners (Boone, 1985, p85). In order to know whether changes
have actually occurred as a result of a program, evaluation must be conducted throughout to
review progress. Preferably, all groups involved in issues identification processes should be
involved in the evaluation. In issues programming, both types of evaluation (impact and
process evaluations) are needed.

The process evaluation is performed during the program to monitor general progress or
direction of the program and its accomplishment of goals on an issue. An impact evaluation
is performed at the end of a program to see the effects of the program. In both evaluations,
the issue statement guides the process. Evaluations of different programs should be
conducted separately focusing on observing or identifying changes in knowledge, skills,
attitudes, and aspiration of the participants. The results are then shared with all stakeholders
and, thus, serve as a means of accountability. It also helps to determine the end point of a

program. The process is depicted in Figure 2-5.

 

 

Audience 1

l

 

(same procedure
astor
Audience 2)

1

Evaluation 1

 

 

 

75

 

Planning Groups

 

 

if

 

Needs Assessment

 

i

 

 

Selection of Issues

 

 

l

 

Audience 2

 

 

 

l

 

Designing Program

 

 

it

 

 

Subject Matter

 

 

6

 

 

Teaching Methods

 

iv

 

 

 

Resources

 

 

6

 

 

Evaluation 2

 

 

 

 

Impact on issue

Figure 2-5 Issues Programming Process

(Source:

Audience 3

l

(same procedure
as for
Audience 2)

Evaluation 3

 

i/

 

 

Integration of Issues Programming into

Program Development Process, Maurer et al., 1990)

 

 

 

76

Issues Programming in Michigan: Background and Process

The concept of issues programming can be said to have been officially introduced to the
then Michigan Cooperative Extension Service in 1991 by its Director at the fall conference
of the Michigan Extension. In presenting this new idea which came primarily from the
"Framework of Recommendations", the Director considered and drew upon all inputs she
received fiom the public leaders, individuals, groups, Extension personnel, and other faculty
members outside Extension (V lasin & Fear, Working Document, October 1992).

Consequently, the incentive for issues programming in the state of Michigan can be said
to have come primarily from two sources:

(1) The "Framework of Recommendations", and
(2) The 1987 Future Task Force Report (a national report introduced earlier in the
introduction section).

The "Framework of Recommendations" is a multi input, locally generated, strategic
report of the Michigan Cooperative Extension Service. The report consists of numerous
components and focuses on changing the Cooperative Extension Service into a values-
based, vision-driven organization. In general, the components of the "Framework of
Recommendations" centers on change through the strategic process of issues programming.
It is believed that by re-focusing Extension programs on major issues of wide public
concern, all Extension stakeholders (new and old) would be empowered, participation and
involvement would increase and broaden, and linkages and support for the organization and

its programs would increase.

77

In a summarized statement of the strategic vision of the Michigan Cooperative Extension
Service, Ray Vlasin highlighted some of the key points of the major components of the
"Framework of Recommendations" as follows:

- Re-focus Extension on locally-determined problems and issues.

- Vest local communities or advisory groups with enlarged roles for identifying
issues to be addressed cooperatively by citizens and organizations, MSU
Extension and other knowledge sources.

- Empower local leaders through leadership development.

- Create an issues assessment process, linking communities, regions and campus.

- Create issue-based educational programs to respond to priority issues that are
within Michigan State University's capabilities.

- Reorganize Extension’s structure to facilitate interdisciplinary programming.

- Adjust Extension operations to enhance issues based programming, increase
program support and improve campus/off-campus linkages.

- The clientele of MSU Extension will be identified through a process that selects
the most critical issues within the scope of expertise available to the system.

This indicates the willingness and readiness of the organization ( Michigan Cooperative
Extension Service) to commit itself to change through the process of issues programming.
The Extension organization is an agency of change and for change. It has both the tradition
of change, and the ability to change. Over the years, the organization at all levels (Federal,
State, and Local) has demonstrated its capacity to change during periods of major crisis and
challenge, such as World War II, the Great Depression, drought, and the Farm Depression

(Rasmussen, 1989, p. 14).

78

The adoption of issues programming by the Cooperative Extension Service of Michigan
State University is yet another indication of the organization’s continuing commitment to
public service. It is not in anyway an indication of withdrawal from its traditional audiences
and programs (Agriculture, 4-H, Home economics, and Community Development). As
Vlasin clearly stated in the section about the future expectations of a 1992 working
document of the Extension, "In addition, Extension will focus on the larger, most
compelling issues facing people, which tend to be broad-based and cross-disciplinary in
nature and within the scope of the land grant system. And at the same time, Extension will
continue to be responsive to more specific problems, needs and opportunities of clientele
who now look to it as their educational resource," (Creating a 21 st Century Extension
Service, p. 6). The entire effort of issues programming resulted from a realization of change
in the scope and nature of the problems of Michigan citizens who Extension has served for
over eighty years. The modern social, economic, and educational problems of the citizens
of Michigan were complex and diverse. Their solutions required the expertise of numerous
disciplines and the collaboration of many partners, both inside and outside Extension and
University.

At the foundation of the overall change effort that was expected to transform the
Michigan Cooperative Extension Service into the best Extension organization in the country
are:

(1) A change in name from the Cooperative Extension Service (CES) to Michigan
State University Extension (MSUE) signifying that the organization is willing to
draw upon the resources of the entire university and work jointly in a new and

different way with colleagues and partners on and off campus to address
Michigan citizens' concerns (MSU Extension Helps People, 1993, p. 4);

79

(2) A change in the guiding mission fi'om the old one which stated, "to help people
to help themselves through education", to a new which states " to helps people
improve their

lives through an educational process that applies knowledge to critical issues,
needs and opportunities";

(3) A new set of values that comprise excellence, diversity, integrity, openness,
accessibility, collaboration, and balance, and

(4) A new set of guiding principles that are customer/issue-focused, anticipatory,
community-based, knowledge-driven, and empowering/building in capacity.
Several different processes exist in issues programming. Across the country, different states
have used different processes. At the top of the Michigan processes are:
(1) Comprehensive identification, clarification, and prioritization of local, regional,
and state issues, and
(2) The design and conduct of programs and technical assistance.

The first step of the process started with the identification, clarification, and
prioritization of the most important local issues in each county. The purpose was to identify
and determine current and emerging issues (Focus on Michigan's Future, p. 1). All issues
that the local leaders and citizens believe will have an impact on young people, families,
agriculture, natural resources, business, communities, organizations, and government were
identified, discussed, and stated in the form of an issues statement. In accomplishing this
goal, each county Extension office facilitated its own local process. Counties across the
state used their already established local advisory committees which reflected their county's

population, a critical factor in establishing issues teams or any other planning groups in

Extension programming.

80

Members of the county Extension advisory committee were opinion leaders, Extension
users and non-users, volunteers, agency representatives, teachers, farmers, parents, and
business peOple who share a common concern for the future of their respective communities
(Focus on Michigan Future, p. 1).

At the end of the local process, one representative from each county advisory committee
submitted their locally identified issues (in a form of issue statements) to their respective
regions for further deliberation and consideration by their respective multicounty and
regional issues teams. Each county was allowed to identify up to ten issues.

For efficiency and better management, the state was partitioned into six regions:
Southwest, Southeast, West, East central, Upper peninsula, and North regions. With the
help of the County Extension Directors, each region established its own multicounty
regional issues teams comprised of key community leaders, faculty from colleges and
universities in the region, business communities, etc. Their task was to review and
aggregate those issues statements by identifying their main themes, e.g. economic
development, drug abuse, the environment, etc. (Southwest Regional Issues Report, 1993).
The six regions identified their issues as follows:

(1) Southwest Region
- Economic development
- Environment

- Children, Youth, Adolescents & Families
- lntergovemmental & Community Collaborations

81

(2) Southeast Region
- F amily Stability & Community Supports
- Economic Development/Poverty & Employment
- Environmental Qualities
- Youth Development Opportunities
- Quality Education/Workforce Preparation
- Future Agriculture
- Community Development/Crime & Violence
- Leadership Development/Local Government
- Health Care
- Diversity/Multi-Culturalism

(3) West Region
- Economic Development and Jobs
- Education - Quality & Financing
- Environment
- Family Stability & Youth
- Affordable Housing
- Agriculture Support/Concems
- Health Care - Costs & Access
- lntergovemmental Cooperation/Funding of Public Services
- Leadership, Citizenship & Community Development

(4) East Central Region
- Economic Development (Job Diversification)
- Economic Development (Agricultural Viability)
- Education (Systemic Change)
- Environment
- Youth-at-Risk

(5) Upper Peninsula Region
- Community Development
- Economic Development
- Youth & Family
- Education and Training
- Infrastructure

82

(6) North Region

- Local Govemment/Finance & Administration

- Environmental Quality/Land Use/Planned Community
Growth/Waste Management

- Health Care

- K-12 Education/Quality & Funding

- Economic Development/Employment/Housing

- Children, Youth & Families

At the end of the regional process, the lists of prioritized issues themes with their
comprehensive statements which briefly highlighted the situations were developed and
submitted to a state review team for further deliberation and consideration.

Members of the state review team consisted of members of the county advisory
committees, Extension agents, university faculty and administrators. Their task was to
review the findings of the six regional teams by identifying and prioritizing issues that the
citizens of Michigan through their representatives, said are important to them. The state
team reviewed the findings, and recommended that economic development, environment,
and children, youth and families form the basis for Michigan State University outreach
initiatives. As a result of this comprehensive process, the organization (Michigan State
University Extension) therefore committed itself to focus special attention over the next two
to three years on these three issues (economic development, environment, and children,
youth, and families) identified as statewide issues of public concern. The results of the
entire process were expected to serve Michigan State University Extension at all levels

(county, region, and state) - thus counties and regions had the liberty to initiate their own

local programs based on issues that were most important to their communities.

83

It was also expected that citizens and other human service organizations in the state could
use the results in solving problems.

To facilitate the process of turning the identified issues into programs, three
interdisciplinary state issues response teams were created for each of the three issues areas
(environment, economic development, and children, youth and families). Their primary
responsibilities were to explore, analyze, and develop responses in terms of educational
programs and activities around these three issues. They also had to identify and involve all
possible stakeholders inside and outside Michigan State University, as well as all funding

sources and other programs that were important to the issues.

84

Difl’erences between Issues Programming and Disciplinary Programming

A change in organizational paradigm is a fundamental change involving the underlying
structure, values, and mission of an organization. The Cooperative Extension Service was
undergoing a paradigm shift, changing from disciplinary programming to issues
programming. As the Cooperative Extension Systems nationwide were gradually changing
into their new paradigm (issues programming), changes were also taking place in the
structures, values, and missions of the organizations.

Differences existed in a fundamental way as to how Extension work should get done
under the two paradigms despite the fact that problems, disciplines, program delivery
methods, audiences, and teamwork among people from the same and different disciplines
were central in both of them (Dalgaard et al, 1988, p. 6). in a 1990 paper entitled, "The
Integration of Issues Programming Into Program Development", Maurer, et al. seems to
support Dalgaard’s views on the differences between the two paradigms, stating that,
"generally speaking, the same programming processes apply to both issues programming
and core programming". However, these elements (planning groups, needs assessment,
selecting issues, identifying target audiences, designing programs, selecting subject matter,
selecting educational methods and activities, securing resources, and evaluation) were
implemented differently (p. 7 - 11).

Both Dalgaard and Maurer acknowledged that there were differences between the two
paradigms. However, the differences were slight and lead many people who briefly
skimmed the concepts to come to the conclusion that there were in fact few differences of

consequence between the issues and disciplinary paradigms (Dalgaard, 1988, p. 6).

85

The differences were obvious in the way the major elements of programming were
operationalized in disciplinary programming as compared to issues programming. The
selection of issues and problems, audiences, resources, delivery methods, and organization
of resources were operationalized and /or implemented differently in the two paradigms
(Dalgaard et al., 1988, p. 6 - 10; Maurer et al., 1990, p. 7 - 11), beginning with:

(1) Selection of Issues and Problems: Under disciplinary programming, the needs and
problems on which Extension programs focused on were centered on traditional disciplines
mainly from the College of Agriculture and specifically from the four traditional areas of
Extension - Agriculture, 4-H, Home Economics, Community Development. Established
program delivery methods, existing audiences, and ways of organizing resources were all
pre-established and kept in tack. All problems were "owned" by a discipline, department,
or program area (Dalgaard, 1988, p. 7; Richardson, 1989, p. 1). While in issues
programming, the focus of programming is on issues conceived as topics of wide public
concern. They may or may not have originated from the traditional discipline areas. Thus,
issues programming focuses on the public, which includes but extends beyond existing
Extension structures and concerns (Richardson, 1989, p. 2). The resources, delivery
methods, audiences are not predetermined. They were selected strategically on the bases

of the issues to be addressed.

86

(2) Audiences: Under disciplinary programming the audiences were predetermined and
were mostly clients, customers, and supporters of Extension and Extension Program. For
example, programs of Agriculture were designed to fits the needs of farmers, and those of
Home Econonrics were directed to toward farmer’s home makers. All decisions about
needs/problems which Extension focused on were based on what was important to these
traditional audiences. While under issues programnring, the concept of traditional
audiences is no longer used in defining the clientele for programs (Dalgaard et al. 1988).
The audiences are not predetermined on the basis of discipline. Their composition varies
depending on the issues to be addressed by the program. Therefore, traditional and non-
traditional audiences are likely to be served.

(3) Resources: Under disciplinary programming, human resource skills and knowledge
fi'om other departments and collges across the land-grant university and outside the
university were lirnitedly sought in developing disciplinary programs. The programs were
deliberately tailored to fit the skills, knowledge, and interest of the faculty fi'om the fields of
Agriculture, Rural Sociology, Extension Education, Home Economics, etc (Dalgaard et al.,
198 8, p.7).

While in issues based programming, programs are developed on the basis of issues of
wide public concern. Because various issues affect large numbers of people, some of them
will therefore require the skills and knowledge of people beyond the traditional fields of the
College of Agriculture. Depending on the issue, human resource skills from outside the

land-grant university may be sought to collaboratively and cooperatively develop issue

87

orientated programs. The key is that resources for addressing specific issues are selected to
make an effective difference on the issue (Dalgaard et al., 1988).

(4) Deliveg Methoda: In disciplinary programming, the traditional methods of delivering
information and knowledge such as home study, group study, demonstrations, and
meetings, were used. They were linked to the traditional disciplines and audiences of
Extension.

While in issues programming, different innovative techniques of delivering information
are used such as computers, satellite, and other experiential learning techniques to meet the
diverse needs of different audiences. Delivery methods are not fixed. Their overall
selection is based on the issue to be addressed, the characteristics of the audiences, and their
learning needs.

(5) Organization of Resources: In disciplinary programming, an emphasis was placed on
individual activity rather than on team effort. Human resources from the same and different
disciplines (multidisciplinary team) work together occasionally on problems. There was a
very limited interaction and communication among the individuals. While in issues
programming, the emphasis is on teams rather than on individuals. The teams are
interdisciplinary, working together on solving problems. There is a high interaction and
synthesis among individuals during the process of planning, implementation, and evaluation

of programs (Dalgaard et al., 1988, p. 9).

88

Summary

In this chapter, the researcher reviewed literature that was pertinent to the subject of this
study. To provide broader, deeper, and better conceptual and theoretical understanding of
some of the underlying reasons for the current organizational changes in the Cooperative
Extension Service, the researcher started with presenting the general concepts and theories
of innovation and change, and organizational transformation and renewal in sections one
and two. In general, these theories suggest that change, despite its inevitability in the life
history of an organization, is still very difficult to achieve. However, today's environment is
forcing many organizations, especially the traditional industrial-age organizations like the
Cooperative Extension Service, to change through organizational and managerial
innovations like issues programming. Most organizations need innovation to shift from old
paradigms to a new ones. The shift not only helps the organizations to revive, renew, and
revitalize themselves but also help to improve their public image.

From the general theories in section one and two, the researcher then moved to the more
specific subject areas of importance in sections three and four. In section three, the theories
and concepts of image as they relate to organizations were presented. The theories
mentioned that the image of an institution, person, or organization is built as a result of the
collective past experiences and contacts of the processor of the image. Therefore, people
usually form their image of an organization on the basis of the actual behavior of that
organization. If an organization is good, people will perceive it as good. Likewise if it is

bad, people will perceive it as such.

89

Finally section four focused on the concepts, theories, and process of issues
programming. This is a new interdisciplinary programming concept in Extension that
focuses on issues of wide public concerns rather than on the traditional discipline areas of
agriculture. As an interdisciplinary concept, the theories of issues programming are drawn
from the literature of corporate management, issues management, public relations, and
education. Issues programming is a deliberate, well planned change effort involving the
identification of issues, prioritization of the issues, identification of the issues audiences,
designing and implementation of programs around the issues, and evaluation of the impact

of the programs.

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

This chapter contains a description of the methods and procedures used in conducting

this study in order to attain its major purposes and objectives.

Research Design

The research design was descriptive, employing sample survey methodology. According
to Ary et al. (1972, p.295), descriptive research studies are designed to obtain information
conceming the current status of phenomena. They are directed toward determining the
nature of a situation as it exists at the time of the study. In other words, the main purpose of
descriptive research is to describe systematically the facts and characteristics of a given
population or area of interest, factually and accurately (Isaac & Micheal, 1971, p. 46).
Moving a step further, Long and Heiss (1975: p.81), posit that descriptive research both

describes and interprets what is.

Population

In any research, the identification of the population is critical. A researcher must start
with careful identification and specification of his or her population. Glass and Hopkins
(1984, p. 174) defined population as any large collection or aggregation of things that we
wish to study or about which we wish to make inferences. According to Ary et al. (1972, p.

130), there are two types of populations: a target population and an accessible population.

90

91

The target population is the collection of elements (people, events or objects) that a
researcher would like to study. While the accessible population, or survey population as
sometimes called, is the portion of the population to which the researcher can have access.
It is the population that is actually sampled and from which data may be obtained. In his
definition of target and survey populations, Babbie (1983) defines the target population as
all the numbers of real or theoretical and hypothetical sets of people to which we wish to
generalize the results of our research, and the survey population as the aggregation of
elements from which the survey sample is actually selected (p. 146). Figure 3-1 below

summarizes the concept of population and sample in social science research.

Target Population : Accessible PopdaKSayle
F ' dings

Figure 3-1: Concept of Population and Sample

 

 

 

(Adopted fiom Introduction to Research in Education, Ary

et al., r972)

For this study, the target population consisted of all County Extension Advisory
Committee Members and Extension Field staff in Michigan. However, because of the time,

money, and effort required, it was not possible to deal with or study the whole of the target

92

population (Ary et al., 1972, p. 130). A researcher must therefore identify the portion of the
target population to which he or she can have access. As mentioned earlier, it was beyond
the scope of this study to cover the target population due to insufficient time and scarce
resources. Therefore, the accessible or survey population for this study consisted of all
members of the Michigan County Extension Advisory Committee (1636 subjects) who
participated in the issues programming process and all Field Staff of the Michigan State
University Extension (298 subjects) excluding 10 staff from the Kellog Biological Station,

Kuttunen Center, and North and Southeast MSU Lifelong Education.

Sample and Sampling Technique

According to Glass and Hopkins (1984, p. 174), a sample is a part, or subset, of a
population. It must be selected, assigned, and thoroughly defined by the researcher. The
size and quality of a sample is of primary concern to all researchers. Because of time,
effort, and cost considerations, a sample should be as small as possible; but, at the same
time, it should be representative of the population fiom which it is drawn (Long and Heiss,
1975, p. 98). Various techniques are available for estimating sample size. It can be
estimated based on the size of the population (# of target population), or it can be calculated
algebratically using a standardized equation. Sample size is also influenced by the type of
analysis to be performed by the researcher. Each one of these techniques takes into
consideration the researcher's willingness to tolerate certain errors in accepting or rejecting

the null hypothesis (Long and Heiss, 1975 p. ).

93

According to Ary et al. (1972, p. 135), authors generally suggest that one should include
at least thirty subjects in a sample since this number permits the use of large sample
statistics. However, this is more ideal in experimental research. In descriptive research,
generally, large samples are used. Usually 10 to 20 percent of the accessible population is
recommended. According to Sudman (1976, p. 30), the general rule is that the sample
should be large enough so that there are 100 or more units in each category of the major
breakdowns and a minimum of 20 to 50 in the minor breakdowns.

For this study, the sample size was determined by the size (#) of the population using a
standardized table for determining sample size for +3%, +5% and +10% precision levels
where confidence level is 95% (Smith, M.F., 1983). The sample of County Extension
Advisory Committee Members was drawn from the list of County Advisory Committee
Members in Focus on Michigan's Future: An Identification Process, May 1993. For the
Extension Field Staff, the sample was drawn fi'om the 1995 Directory of Field and Campus
Staff obtained from the personnel office of Michigan State University Extension.

To guarantee representation of the two groups (County Extension Advisory Committee
Members and Extension Field Staff) in the study, a stratified, systematic random sampling
technique was used. So, after all the lists of the accessible population (Sampling frames)
were secured and closely examined, they were then organized into two homogeneous
groups (strata) from which each sample was randomly drawn. This method decreased a
probable sampling error since sampling error is reduced by two factors: (1) large sample
size and (2) homogeneous population. In drawing a sample from a population some

sampling error is

94

always expected to occur. As Ary et al. (1972) indicated, some sampling error (difference
in value between a population parameter and a sample statistic) can always be expected
when a sample mean is used to estimate a population mean (p. 136-137). Small samples are
more susceptible to sampling error than large ones. For this study, the sample size was
estimated for 10 percent sampling error with a 95 percent level of confidence. Based on the
table used for determining sample size, the estimated sample size for the two groups in the
study were: 95 subjects for the County Extension Advisory Committee and 76 subjects for
the Extension Field Staff.

The use of a stratified random sampling technique in this case permits every element in
the target population to have an independent and equal chance of being selected into the
sample. Levin (1984, p. 274) emphasizes that stratified sampling is appropriate when the
population is already divided into groups of different sizes, and such is the case in this
study. The stratified random sampling has more advantages than simple random sampling.
The respondents of the study will constitute all the individuals randomly drawn from each

gmup (strannn).

Instrument Development

The instrument for the study was developed based on the review of literature and the
purpose and objectives of the study. Some of the questions were newly developed, and
some were adopted fiom the studies of Crunkilton et al. (1986); Hanenburg (1986); and

Warner and Christenson (1984).

95

The questionnaire consisted of structured (Likert scale) questions comprised of a few
statements about the Michigan State University Extension organization, its mission,
personnel, services, delivery methods, and issues programming. The Likert-scale is one of
the most commonly used rating scale formats that provide respondents with an opportunity
to pinpoint their opinion or perception within a range of possible responses. Thus, a
researcher can derive the intensity of the respondent's perception, view, opinion, or practice
(Andrews, 1978 p.). It has also been shown to assess image adequately (Crunkilton et al.,

1 986).

The researcher chose the questionnaire, not only because it is widely used in social
science research, but it is also the most efficient and practical means of collecting data for
research purposes (Ary et al., 1972, p.174). The questionnaire and the cover letter that
accompanied each of the questionnaires were reviewed and approved by the University
Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects (U CRIHS) before using it for data
collection. Copies of the questionnaire, cover letter and approval letter from the University

Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects can be seen in Appendix C.

Validity and Reliability

Research is always dependent upon measurement (Ary et al., 1972, p. 196). And it is
generally agreed that " good" measures must be both reliable and valid. According to Ary et
al., every measuring instrument (test, questionnaire, interview guide, etc.) should possess

these two important characteristics: reliability and validity. Reliability is the extent to

it"?

mt

 

 

\i‘h;

que:

 

YEVli

Ext:

the
hon
Con
Cot
me;

liar

96

which a questionnaire, or any other measuring tool, is consistent in measuring whatever it
measures.

Validity is the extent to which a questionnaire measures what it is intended to measure. In
other words, reliability is concerned with consistency and stability of response, while
validity is concerned with whether or not the information elicited through the response is
what was intended. A researcher must investigate the reliability and validity of his or her
questionnaires and report the results in a research report (Ary et al., 1972, p. 196).

To ensure validity (content and construct) of the instrument, the questionnaire was
reviewed by a panel of experts and graduate students in the Department of Agricultural and
Extension Education at Michigan State University. Changes were made based on the
suggestions and comments made by these individuals.

To ensure reliability of the instrument for this study, the questionnaire was pre-tested in
Jackson County using subjects that were in the population of the study, but not among the
selected sample. The administration of the pre-test was done by Jackson County Extension
Director, Mr. Lester Schick, and changes were made accordingly.

The reliability of the instrument was statistically assessed using Cronbach‘s alpha, one of
the intemal-consistency measures of reliability. This procedure measures the inter-item, or
homogeneity, of the items. The more heterogeneous the domain, the lower the inter-item
consistency, and conversely, the more homogeneous the domain, the higher the inter-item
consistency. For this study, Cronbach’s alpha was the most suitable because it is used when
measures have multiple scored items, such as attitude scale or essay tests (Ary et al., 1990).

The results of the reliability analyses are reported in Table 3.1.

97

Table 3.1: Cronbach’s Alpha Reliability Results

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Section Construct Measured Reliability
1 Organizational Structure 0.79
2 Mission 0.79
3 Personnel 0.85 I
4 Services 0.88
5 Delivery Methods 0.57
6 Issues Programming 0.97
Data Collection

in this study, a self-adrninistered mail questionnaire comprised of a series of statements
describing the organizational structure of Michigan State University Extension, its mission,
personnel, services, delivery method, and issues programming was used to collect the data.
On a five point, Likert-type scale, respondents were asked to rate their level of agreement or
disagreement with the statements. The five point scale used was: 1 = strongly agree, 2 =
agree, 3 = disagree, 4 = strongly disagree, and 5 = uncertain.

To maximize the quantity and quality of the responses, Dillrnan's total design method

(TDM) was employed in administering the questionnaire. The Total Design Method has a

98

specific set of mailing/contact procedures which, if followed correctly, will increase
response by about 70 to 90 % as compared to 25 to 40 % in regular mail surveys. In
summary, Dillrnan's procedure involves:

(1) Sending a pre-card or telephoning the individuals in the sample informing him
or her of being selected to participate in the study.

(2) Making the initial mailing of the questionnaire.

(3) Sending a follow-up postcard or telephoning the non-respondents after the
deadline in the cover letter. In this study, the researcher did (postcard and
telephoning).

(4) Sending a second mailing of questionnaire to all non-respondents.

(5) Sending another follow-up postcard at the second deadline.

(6) Using all means of communication possible to remind non-respondents.

After the sample was drawn, a memo was sent to all County Extension Directors
affected requesting them to provide the addressees of the advisory members (who
participated in the 1993 issues identification process) in their county whose name(s) fall
into the sample for the study. For the Extension field staff, their current local office
addresses in the 1995 staff directory were used.

On August 16, 1995, the first contact letter was mailed to all participants notifying them
of being selected to participate in the study. First class mail was used for advisory members
and campus mail was used for extension field staff. This first letter substituted for the pre-

card or telephone call suggested in Dillrnan’s Total Design Method (TDM).

99

The initial mailing of the questionnaire was done on September 21, 1995, using first class
mail and campus mail. And the follow-up post cards were sent to all respondents on
October 2, 1995, to thank those that already responded and to remind those that didn’t to do
30. Approximately three weeks after the initial mailing of the questionnaires (October 18,
1995), a second follow-up letter with a replacement questionnaire were mailed out to all
non-respondents. The letter basically reminded non-respondents of the absence of their
response, and an appeal was made to them to fill out the questionnaire and return them
back. And finally on November 7, 1995, the third and final follow-up letter with
replacement questionnaire were mailed out to advisory members using registered mail and
to Extension staff using regular campus mail. Copies of memos, cover letters, post cards,
and questionnaires are in Appendix A-F.

All completed questionnaires were checked thoroughly prior to entering the values in the
computer for analysis. Out of the 171 questionnaires mailed out, 142 (83%) were returned.

The breakdown of the response rates on a group basis are summarized in Table 3.2 below.

Table 3.2: Summary of Response Rate by Group.

 

# of Questionnaires # of Questionnaires Response Rate

 

 

 

Mailed Received
Advisory Group 95 75 78.94%
Extension Field 76 67 89.33 %

Staff

 

 

 

 

 

100

Non-response was controlled in a two-fold manner. First, a careful and well designed
process of getting as much responses as possible through the total design method (TDM)
was followed. Secondly, early and late respondents were compared on twelve selected
demographic variables using a t-test. No significant differences were found at .05 level of
significance, except in the educational level of the respondents. This permits the results to

be generalized to the survey population.

Data Analysis

Collected data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Science Research.
First, the assumption that the data came from a normal population was tested using explore
procedures to visually examine the distribution of values for various groups, and to test for
normality and homogeneity of variance. This basic preliminary procedure in data analysis is
important because of the fact that normal distribution is central to statistical inferences , and
many statistical procedures require that all groups come from normal populations with
equal variance (N orusis, Marija J ., 1993). All tests indicated that the data of this research
came from a normal population.

In the second part of the analysis, basic descriptive statistics using frequency and
crosstabulation tests were performed to describe the demographic characteristics of the
respondents. Mean, median, mode, variance, standard deviation, etc. were generated. These
analyses also helped in identifying and locating miscoded data. The demographic
characteristics of gender, race, age, occupation, duration in occupation, position,

programming area,

101

education, place raised, place of residence, income, and marital status were used in

describing the respondents.

In the third part of the analysis, t-tests and one-way analyses of variance were used to

test the following three null hypotheses:.

Hozl

H022

Ho:3

There were no significance differences in the perceptions of County
Extension Advisory Committee Members towards the image of Michigan
State University Extension based on the selected demographic variables of
gender, age, level of education, occupation, place raised, and income per
annum.

There were no significance differences in the perceptions of Extension
Field Staff towards the image of Michigan State University Extension based
on the selected demographic variables of gender, age, position with
Michigan State University Extension, duration in occupation, place raised,
and place of living.

There were no significance differences between the perceptions of County
Extension Advisory Committee Members and Extension Field Staff
regarding the image of Michigan State University Extension.

In the fourth and final part of the analysis, a multiple linear regression analysis was
performed to answer the research question:

What demographic variables among Advisory members and Extension staff
were important predictor(s) of image of Michigan State University
Extension?

CHAPTER IV
FINDINGS
This chapter presents and discusses the findings of the data collected from a random
sample of the Advisory Committee Members and the Extension Field Staff from the state of
Michigan pertaining to their perceptions of the image of the organizational structure,
mission, personnel, services, delivery methods, and issues programming of the Michigan
State University Extension. The findings are arranged according to: (a) demographic

characteristics of respondents, (b) three major hypotheses, and (0) one research question.

(a) Demographic Characteristics of Respondents
SL623:
Respondents were asked to identify their gender. Table 4.1 below revealed that the
majority of respondents in both groups (Advisory Members and Extension Staff) were
females. Among Advisory Members, 40 (54.1%) were females and 30 (45.9%) were males,

while 40 (61.5%) were females and 25 (38.5%) were males among Extension Staff.

Table 4.1: The Gender of Extension Advisory Committee Members and Michigan State
University Extension Field Staff

 

 

 

Gender Adv. Members (n=74) Ext. Staff (n=65)
Number (%) Number (%)
Male 34 (45.9) 25 (38.5)
Female 40 (54.1) 40 (61 .5)
TOTAL 74 (100.0) 65 (100.0)

 

102

103

M9

Data in Table 4.2 confirmed that an overwhelming majority of respondents were whites.
The other group classified as non-whites was comprised of blacks, Hispanics, Orientals, and
native Americans. Whites constituted 91.9 % of Advisory Members and 89.1 % of
Extension Staff, while non-whites consisted only 8.1 % of Advisory Members and 10.9 %

of Extension Staff.

Table 4.2: The Distribution of Race of Extension Advisory Committee Members and Michigan
State University Extension Field Staff

 

 

 

 

Race Adv. Members (n=74) Ext. Staff (n=64)

Number (%) Number (%)
Whites 68 (91.9) 57 (89.1)
Non-Whites 6 ( 8.1) 7 (10.9)
TOTAL 74 (100.0) 64 (100.0)
Ass

Respondents were collapsed into five age groups (23 to 33 years, 34 to 44 years, 45 to 55
years, 56 to 66 years, and 67 to 77 years). According to the data in Table 4.3, the modal age
for both Advisory Members and Extension Staff is 45 to 55 years. The age category of 45
to 55 years was comprised of 53.1% of Advisory Members and 42.2% of Extension Staff.
Approximately 5% of both groups (Advisory Members and Extension Staff) were between
the age of 23 to 33 years. About 5 (6.8% ) of the Advisory Members were between the ages
of 67 to 77 years, while this age category was absent among Extension Staff because of

retirement.

104

Table 4.3: The Distribution of Age of Extension Advisory Committee Members and Michigan
State University Extension Field Staff

 

 

 

 

Age Category Adv. Members (n=74) Ext. Staff (n=65)

Number (%) Number (%)
23 to 33 Years 4 ( 5.4) 3 ( 4.7)
34 to 44 Years 15 (20.3) 19 (29.7)
45 to 55 Years 26 (35.1) 27 (42.2)
56 to 66 Years 24 (32.4) 15 (23.4)
67 to 77 Years 5 ( 6.8) - -
TOTAL 74 (100.0) 64 (100.0)
mm

The data in Table 4.4 below describes the occupations of the respondents. The data
showed that 27 (37.5%) of the Advisory Members were business people, 22 (30.6%) were
in other professions such as home makers, and approximately 11 (15.3%) each were either
government employees or farmers, respectively. Of the 64 Extension Staff who responded
to this question, 58 (90.6%) identified themselves as government employees, 2 (3.1%) were
business persons, and 4 (6.3%) were others.

Table 4.4: The Distribution of Occupation of Extension Advisory Committee Members
and Michigan State University Extension Field Staff

 

 

Occup. Cat. Adv. Members (n=72) Ext. Staff (n=64)
Number (%) Number (%)

Farmer 12 (16.7)

Government Employee 11 (15.3) 64 (100.0)

Business Person 27 (37.5)

Other 22 (30.5)

 

TOTAL 72 (100.0) 64 (100.0)

 

105

Duration in occupation

Table 4.5 below describes respondents’ duration in their current occupation. Among
Advisory Members, majority 17 (23.9%) spent over 30 years, followed by 15 (21.1%) who
spent 12 to 17 years, and approximately 10 (14.1%) spent 0 to 5 years. Most of the
Extension Staff 18 (28.1%), spent approximately 12 to 17 years in their current occupations,
followed by 17 (26.6%) who spent 6 to 11 years, and only 1 (1.6%) person spent over 30

years.

Table 4.5: The Distribution of Duration in Occupation of Extension Advisory Committee
Members and Michigan State University Extension Field Staff

 

 

 

Dur. in Occup. Adv. Members (n=71) Ext. Staff (n=64)
Number (%) Number (%)

0 to 5 years 10 (14.1) 13 (20.3)

6 to 11 years 14 (19.7) 17 (26.6)

12 to 17 years 15 (21.1) 18 (28.1)

18 to 23 years 7 ( 9.9) 8 (12.5)

24 to 29 years 8 (11.3) 7 (10.9)

Over 30 years 17 (23.9) 1 ( 1.6)

TOTAL 71 (100.0) 64 (100.0)

 

Position with Michigan State Upiveraity Exten_sir_rp_

Position was classified into five categories: Advisory Committee Member, District
Extension Director, County Extension Director, Extension Agent and others. The data
reveals that 74 (100%) identified themselves as Advisory Members. This is not a regular
paid position within the Michigan State University Extension. Among the Extension Staff,

45 (70.2%) were Extension agents, 16 (25%) were County Extension Directors,(3.2%)

106

were District Extension Directors, and 1 (1.6%) classified himself or herself as “other” such

as paraprofessionals.

Table 4.6: The Distribution of Position of Extension Advisory Committee Members and
Michigan State University Extension Field Staff

 

 

 

Position in MSU-E Adv. Members (n=74) Ext. Staff (n=64)
Number (%) Number (%)
Advisory Member 74 (100.0)
Dist. Extension Director 2 ( 3.2)
County Extension Director 16 (25.0)
Extension Agent 45 (70.2)
Other 1 ( 1.6)
TOTAL 74 (100.0) 64 (100.0)

 

Programming Area

Michigan State University Extension conducted its programs in four core areas:
Agriculture and Natural Resources, 4-H Youth, Community Development and Home
Econonrics. Extension staff were asked to identify the area in which he or she worked.
The data in Table 4.7 below reveals that out of the 65 Extension Staff who responded to the
questionnaire, the largest percentage, 21 (33.3%), were from Agriculture and Natural
Resources, 17 (27.0%) each from 4-H Youth and Home Economics, and 8 (12.7%) were

from Community Development.

107

Table 4.7: The Distribution of Michigan State University Extension Field Staff by

 

 

 

Programming Area
Programming Area Number Percent
Agric. & Natural Resources 21 33.3%
4—H Youth 17 27.0%
Community Development 8 12.7%
Home Economics 17 27.0%
TOTAL 65 100.0%

 

Educational Level

The data in Table 4.8 presents the level of education of the respondents by groups. The
data revealed that the majority of respondents were well educated. Approximately 18
(25.4%) of the Advisory Members had a graduate education, 21 (29.5%) had finished two
year colleges, and only 13 (18.3%) had high school education. The level of education was
higher among Extension Staff than among Advisory Members. Nobody with only a high
school education was found among Extension Staff. And only one person with a two year
college education was found. An overwhehning majority 43 (67.1%) of Extension staff had

finished graduate school and 20 (31.3%) had a four year college education.

108

Table 4.8: The Distribution of Educational level of Extension Advisory Committee
Members and Michigan State University Extension Field Staff

 

 

 

 

Educ. Level Adv. Members (n=71) Ext. Staff (n=64)
Number (%) Number (%)

High School 13 (18.3)

2 Year College 21 (29.5)

4 Year College 19 (26.8) 21 (32.9)

Graduate School 18 (25.4) 43 (67.1)

TOTAL 71 (100.0) 64 (100.0)

Place Raised

The distribution of respondents based on the place where they were raised is shown in
Table 4.9 below. According to the data, the majority of respondents were raised on farms.
For Advisory Members, 28 (39.5%) of them were raised on farms, followed by 19 (26.8%)
in cities, then 15 (21.1%) in rural but non-farm areas, and finally 9 (12.7%) in towns. For
Extension Staff, 22 (34.3%) were raised on farms, followed by 20 (31.3%) who were raised

in rural, but non-farm areas.

Table 4.9: The Distribution of Extension Advisory Committee Members and Michigan State
University Extension Field Staff by Place Raised

 

 

Raised Place Adv. Members (n=7l) Ext. Staff (n=64)
Number (%) Number (%)
Farm 28 (39.4) 22 (34.3)
Rural Non-F arm 15 (21 .1) 20 (31.3)
Town 9 (12.7) 9 (14.1)
City 19 (26.8) 13 (20.3)

 

TOTAL 71 (100.0) 64 (100.0)

 

109

Place of Residence

Sometimes the place where one was raised is different fi'om where he or she is currently
living. Respondents were asked to tell where they were currently residing be it on a farm, a
rural non-farm, a town or a city. The data in Table 4.10 show that the majority of
respondents were living in rural but non-farm areas. Among Advisory Members, 27
(37.0%) were residing in rural but non-farm areas, followed by 20 (27.4%) who were living
on farms. Among Extension Staff, 30 (46.2%) were residing in rural but non-farm areas,

followed by 20 (30.8%) who lived in cities.

Table 4.10: The Distribution of Extension Advisory Committee Members and Michigan State
University Extension Field Staff

 

 

 

 

Place of Residence Adv. Members (n=73) Ext. Staff (n=65)

Number (%) Number (%)
Farm 20 (27.4) 5 (7.7)
Rural Non-Farm 27 (37.0) 30 (46.2)
Town 16 (21.9) 10 (15.4)
City 10 (13.7) 20 (30.7)
TOTAL 73 (100.0) 65 (100.0)
W

Annual income varied from one socio-economic group to another. Table 4.10
smnmarized the income of respondents in both groups. Among Advisory Members, the
model group was making over $48,000 and half that number, 11 (16.7%), were making

under $17,000 per annum.

110

Among Extension Staff, the majority, 18 (30.5%), were earning $36,000 to $41,000, and

only one person was identified as making under $17,000.

Table 4.11: The Distribution of Income of Extension Advisory Committee Members and
Michigan State University Extension Field Staff

 

 

 

Income Level Adv. Members (n=66) Ext. Staff (n=59)
Number (%) Number (%)
Under $17,000 11 (16.6) 1 ( 1.7)
$18,000 - $23,000 4 ( 6.1) 4 ( 6.8)
$24,000 - $29,000 6 ( 9.l) 7 (11.9)
$30,000 - $35,000 12 (18.2) 12 (20.3)
$36,000 - $41,000 5 ( 7.6) 18 (30.5)
$42,000 - $47,000 6 ( 9.1) 6 (10.2)
Over $48,000 22 (33.3) 11 (18.6)
TOTAL 66 (100.0) 59 (100.0)

 

Marital Status

Data in Table 4.12 shows that most of the respondents were manied. Among Advisory
Members, married people numbered 62 (85.9%) of the respondents, and the remaining
categories ( single, divorced, separated, and widowed) combined accounted for the other 11
(14.1%). Of the Extension Staff, married people consisted of 48 (76.1%) of the
respondents, and single, divorced, separated, and widowed together made up the remaining

15 (23.9%). These data reflect the background of the respondents.

111

Table 4.12: The Distribution of the Marital Status of Extension Advisory Committee Members
and Michigan State University Extension Field Staff

 

 

Marital Status Adv. Members (n=73) Ext. Staff (n=63)
Number (%) . Number (%)
Married 62 (85.9) 48 (76.1)
Single 5 ( 6.9) 10 (15.9)
Divorced 2 ( 2.7) 3 ( 4.8)
Separated 1 ( 1.4) 1 ( 1.6)
Widowed 3 (4.1) 1 ( 1.6)

 

TOTAL 73 (100.0) 63 (100.0)

 

112

(b) Findings Relevant to the Hypotheses

The findings presented in this section are results of statistical tests performed on the
data collected. The hypotheses were tested through the use of t-tests and one-way
analyses of variance with tukey-b test procedure at 0.05 level of significance to
determine where differences exist.

A five-point likert-type scale was used and coded as follows: 1 = Strongly agree, 2 =
Agree, 3 = Disagree, 4 = Strongly disagree, and 5 = Uncertain. The values of the scale
were reversed in all negatively stated statements/questions, and the response category of
Uncertain, which was assigned a value of 5, was not used in computing the mean scores.
In the final analysis, four point scale was used ranging from 1 to 4 (1 = strongly agree)
and (4 = strongly disagree). A composite mean score for the overall (total) and for each
of the six sections were computed and used to measure and interpret the image
perceptions. A low mean score near 1 would indicate strong positive image while a high
mean score near 4 would indicate a strong negative image. Figure 4.1 presents

graphically the scale used graphically.

 

 

l 2 2.5 3 4

I. I. l l |
SA A D SD

,___Positive Image :: Negative Image A

 

Figure 4.1: Scale of image measurement

113

The analysis of the composite mean scores for the overall (total) and for each of the
six sections (organizational structure, mission, services, personnel, delivery methods, and
issues programming) gives a description of the overall image of the organization and
those particular sections. A similar method of analysis of institutional and program
image was done by Huddleson and Karr (1982), Struckman-Johnson and Kinsley (1985)
and Crunkilton, Miller, and Lee (1986).

The reported findings of this study, represent only the perceptions of those who
participated in this study. It may be related to a human tendency towards cognitive
dissonance rather than to any absolute measure of the status of image of the Michigan

State University Extension. However, perceptions are the closest thing there is to reality.

Findings relevant to Hypothesis 1

Hypothesis 1 stated that there were significant differences in the perceptions of
Advisory Members regarding the image of the organizational structure, mission,
personnel, services, delivery methods, issues programming, and overall (total) image of
Michigan State University Extension when grouped by selected demographic variables.
For statistical analysis, the hypothesis was converted to a null hypothesis which stated
that there are no significant differences in the perceptions of Advisory Members
regarding the image of the organizational structure, mission, personnel, services, delivery
methods, issues programming and the overall (total) image of Michigan State University

Extension.

114

The selected demographic variables used in testing the null hypothesis were: gender, age,

level of education, occupation, place raised, and income per year.

Perceptions of Advisory Members by Gender

A t-test was performed to determine the differences of perceptions between male and
female Advisory Members. Table 4.13 presents the data pertaining to the respondents
perceptions toward the image of the organizational structure, mission, personnel, services,
delivery methods, issues programming, and the overall (total) image of Michigan State
University Extension based on their gender. No statistically significant differences were
detected at .05 percent level of significance in either the overall (total) score or in any of
the subsections based on the observed significance levels associated with the t-values. In
general, the mean scores across the table were below 2.50. This indicated that both male
and female Advisory Members who participated in the issues identification process of
1993 held relatively positive perceptions of the overall (total) image of Michigan State
University Extension, its organizational structure, mission, services, personnel, delivery
methods, and issues programming.

The mean scores in Table 4.13 firrther revealed that female Advisory Members, with
the mean score of 2. 1 3, were slightly more positive regarding the overall (total) image of
Michigan State University Extension than male Advisory Members with a score of 2.1 1.
And in the rest of the six sections studied, Section 2 which deals with the image of the
mission of Michigan State University Extension was the most positively rated section

with females indicating the most positive image (1.79), than did males (1.81).

115

The most negatively rated section was Section 5 (delivery methods) with a mean score of
2.27 for males and 2.35 for females, followed by the section on services (Section 4) with
2.22 for males and 2.17 for females. All of the scores are below 2.50 putting them on the
positive continuum.

The null hypothesis failed to be rejected in all sections including Section 1
(organizational structure), Section 2 (mission), Section 3 (personnel), Section 4
(services), Section 5 (delivery methods), Section 6 (issues programming), and the overall

image of Michigan State University Extension.

'116

as. “828 8. a .3685 ....

58.3% 235.» H mm .50... n N 558.... u n

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.5. on. «N. on. ...N M; 8 en 38H

en. 2.. an. 3. o..~ .3 mm .m wEEEEwoa 83,... .o
«2. 3. NM. 3. new R.” an ..m 32:2: bog—on .m
«S. a... 3. mm. ta N3 3 m... 822% v
N2. 3.- on. .N. ..2 N3 9. 2 35.85.. .m
2... a. 5.. mm. a: a... 3 mm cones. .m
3.. 3. mm. 3. 5.. 8.. 9. X 2338 3833590 ..
...... ...... ”.....M ._...m ...”... a“... ......

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

is: if. .... .25.... 3...". 62.13.23

.... ... 0.8. . .... b2......» 3 £526 8.335. £2.25 3% 59.1.2... 8...: ._....an .
.3596; :23... .8325» 7.35.3593 2: no emu—=— .2= 3.338 23502 EMU—WM”. ”ES—”PEPE 8:2 £552: baht—9 52:8
. he 55 8.2:: 82. .

0.3.5.. 2: ...... 3.38.. «89.. "nus. 03-h

117

Perceptions of Advisory Members by Age

There were five categories of age in the study. Category 1 included respondents
between the ages of 23 to 33 years, Category 2 between 34 to 44 years, Category 3
between 45 to 55 years, Category 4 between 56 to 66 years, and Category 5 between 67
to 77 years. An analysis of variance using tukey-b post hoc procedure at .05 level of
significance was used to determine where the differences were among and between the
categories of respondents. The mean scores of the Advisory Members are presented in
Table 4.14. There was a disparity in the number of respondents among these categories.
Therefore, caution must be exercised when interpreting the results. The number of
respondents in category 1 (aged 23-33) and category 5 (aged 67-77) were small compared

to the rest of the three categories.

The overall (total) perceptions of the image of Michigan State University Extension
across all age categories of Advisory Members were positive, with those aged 56 to 66
indicating the most positive perceptions (2.10). It should also be noted that the mean
scores were all below 2.50 making them fall within the positive continuum. The section
On organizational structure (section 1) was the most positively rated section with the
meat: score of 1.78 for those aged 23 to 33 years, l.95 for 34 to 44 years, 1.88 for 45 to
55 y ears, 1.96 for 56 to 66 yeas, and 1.92 for 67 to 77 years. These scores were also
below 2.50 confirming their positive perceptions of the image of the organizational
Structlne. On the other hand, the least positively rated section was personnel (Section 3)

With those aged 23 to 33 years scoring least positive (2.47), followed by those aged 34 to

118

44 years with (2.42), then ages 45 to 55 years and 67 to 77 scoring 2.38 and 2.31
respectively, and finally those aged 56 to 66 years with 2.21. These scores all fall within
the range of the positive region.

A review of the F-Probability statistics in Table 4.14 showed that there were no
statistically significant differences detected in the overall (total ) image of Michigan State
University Extension. Similarly, no significant differences were found in Section 1
(organizational structure), Section 2 (mission), Section 3 (personnel), Section 5 (delivery
methods), and Section 6 (issues programming). However, statistically significant
differences were present in Section 4 which dealt with the image of the services of
Michigan State University Extension. The youngest age category (23 to 33 years) was
significantly different from the rest of the categories. That category had a mean score of
1 .33, the most positive, as compared to 2.09 for those aged 34 to 44 years, 2.30 for those

aged 45 to 55 years, 2.22 for those aged 56 to 66 years, and 2.25 for those aged 67 to 77
years. This led to the rejection of the null hypothesis in Section 4 (services) and the
acceptance of the alternative hypothesis that there was a difference in the perception of

Advisory Members regarding the image of services of Michigan State University

Extension.
On the other hand, the null hypothesis was not rejected in Section 1 (organizational

Structure), Section 2 (mission), Section 3 (personnel), Section 5 (delivery methods),

Section 6 (issues programming), and the overall image of Michigan State University

EXtel'lsion.

.96. 823 3. ... 28555 ._.. 5.83% “5.353 n Gm .508 H Xi .885... u 2

 

 

 

 

'119

 

 

 

 

 

N.. .N. 2. NN. an. .u. .5
as. ..2. N..N ....N 2N ...N 2N i mm .33
n ..N 8 n. v i z
. . . . . i an
N. a 9. 3 N i
amp. 0%. EN EN. vmd 3N SN 1 M wEEEEmoE 8:9..— .0
m .N a. 2 N u z
N. an. N. am. on. N am .
a... New. nNN SN .2 SN ....N M 852.. $3.5 n
m ..N N n. N i 2
NM. em. 2. .... S. M 9m .
:8... ”Na NN.N NN.N 3N SN 2.. M museum v
m ..N N n. N u z
as. N. .N. N. e... H 5 .
EN. on. .3 NN.N ..NN N...N SN R .0558“. m
n ..N N n. .. u z
..N. n... .m. 2. 8.. H .5 .
an. RN. NM... 8.. N... 3... SN M 8.3.: N
n ..N «N n. v i z
N. ..N. ..N. ..N. 3. H .5 .
2.... 3.... Na. 8.. ...... 8.. ..2 M 05032283830 .
n ..N 3 n. v i z
52...... 9.3....— ss.» 2...... as: 8.3. 9...: man. as: 3.3. a: SAN 5:25

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A8535 3:25.415 .353 r .83 r ...
.m.moo....._oo.anuhflqanuamflamfiuflwufiw 5.32.5 saw 53.32 ... «was: =23: 05 ._. .u :1». <4 62: Egg-Q
_ 35...»... .5 s “as... 2: c 52252 .23 .83.... b3...

u ..a
a BS Eon—=0: bong—5C9 55:09.2— .—e 023...: he numb-at. ...—.9 03.;

 

01

W:

120

Perceptions of Advisory Members by Educational Level

An analysis of variance using tukey-b post hoc test with .05 percent alpha level was
performed to determine the differences in perceptions between and among the categories
of Advisory members who have either a high school, 2 year college, 4 year college, or
graduate level of education. Table 4.15 presents the data Based on the F-Statistics, there
were no statistically significant differences found in the perceptions of Advisory
Members pertaining to the overall image of the Michigan State University Extension, its
organizational structure, mission, personnel, services, delivery methods, and issues

programming.

A review of the mean scores across the table indicated that the overall image of
Michigan State University’s Extension was, in general, positive (mean below 2.50).
Those with high school and graduate educations were the most positive with a mean score
of 2.06, while those with 2 year and 4 year educations were the least positive with a close

mean scores of 2.17 and 2.15, respectively. The mean scores in Section 1 (Organizational
Structure) and Section 2 (Mission) were significantly lower than the rest of the scores in
the other sections. This indicateed that, the Advisory Members held a slightly more
Positive image of the organizational structure (Section 1) and mission (Section 2) of the
orgarlization than of its personnel, services, delivery methods, and issues programming
(Secti 011$ 3, 4, 5, 6, and overall image of the organization, respectively). But, it should be

noted that most of the mean ratings were below 2.50 putting them on the positive side of

the continuum.

121

The most positively rated section was Section 2 (mission) showing mean score ratings
of 1.68 for those with a high school education, 1.97 for those with a 2 year degree, 1.83
for those with a 4 year degree, and 1.63 for those with a graduate school education. It
should be noted that respondents’ scores were below 2.00. The least positively rated
section was Section 3 (personnel) showing a mean score of 2.25 for those with a high
school, 2.46 for those with a 2 year degree, 2.21 for those with a 4 year degree, and 2.38
for those with a graduate school education.

In the overall image of the organization and in the rest of the six sections

(organizational structure, mission, personnel, services, delivery methods, issues

programming), the resulting F -Probability revealed that the null hypothesis failed to be

rej ected.

 

122

.26. .822. 2. a anemia ..

.8325“. 2.6.33 H mm duo... u k £38.... u z

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

t. 8. n. 2. M. WM
.3. an. 8.. 2.. 2.. 8.. l .82.
2 2 .N 2 n z
. . . u ..m
... X 2. mm .. .
m3. .3: SN an 2d Sam I R wsagoa 8.5.. e
2 2 2 2 u z
3. 8. a. 2.. H ..m b .
8w. 2... and a... 3.. on. M. 2352.. 02.8 m
2 2 .N 2 n z
m. an. on. S. H ..m .
8.. 8.. 2 .N NN.N ...N . ..N M .833 v
2 2 2 2 u z
8. mm. a. 8. H am .
23. .8. m2 2.. on... 2... mm .0552». m
2 2 8 2 u z
.... on. m. 2.. N am .
8o. .3 no. a... 8.. .3 M 8.2.2 N
2 2 cm 2 u z
8. «M. a... a. H .5 .
2:. 8.. N... 8.. 8.. 2... W. geogrgozfifiwE .
2 2 ... 2 n z
52..-... 9.3.... .85 32.2.5 «3:8 23> v 52.5 23> a .83 ._.—... .533m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

a .... 533.60 .0 .95. .3 AHA—mg .3353”.— .Eflozan 88m aunt—om
.35. ._....E... .23... .25.... .2552... .5... ...... .__

A8335 .293...an a... .oouuanEMn §u<ua 683.. @9356": v.5? 9‘3»

2 ... 0...: =2... 2.. E.
5:33 23...: 29......

23.5.2. .22 .82.... SE
4. he 3238.2. 3 8.5.5. me sub“: .2... 935—.

 

123

Perceptions of Advisory Members by Occupation

The analysis of variance of the perceptions of Advisory Members toward the overall
(total) image of the Michigan State University Extension, its organizational structure,
mission, personnel, services, delivery methods, and issues programming based on their
occupation is presented in Table 4.16. According to the F-statistics, no statistically
significant difference was observed in the overall (total) image of the organization, nor in
its organizational structure (Section 1), services (Section 4), delivery methods (Section 5),
and issues programming (Section 6). On the other hand, significant differences were
found in Sections 2 and 3 which dealt with the image of the mission and personnel of

Michigan State University Extension, respectively.

In Section 2 (mission), which was also the most positively rated section, significant
differences were found between respondents in other occupations such as home makers
and those in business. With a mean score of 1.63, respondents in the “other” category of
occupations, such as homemakers, indicated more positive perceptions of the image of
the mission than those in business professions, who scored 1.98. In Section 3
(Personnel), significant differences were found between government employees with the
mean score of 2. 14, and all others (2.39), and likewise between government employees
(2- 1 4) and gusiness persons (2.42). According to the data of Section 3 (personnel), the
Advisory Members who were government employees perceived the image of personnel
Slightly more positively than business people and all others.

In general, the section regarded least positively was Section 5 (delivery methods)

Showing a mean score of 2.25 for farmers, 2.46 for government employees, 2.21 for

 

124

business persons, and 2.38 for those in other professions. Among the respondents
categories in this section, business persons, whose mean score was 2.21, seemed to held a
slightly more positive image of the delivery methods than did farmers who scored 2.25,
government employees at 2.46, and others at 2.38.

The null hypothesis was not rejected in four sections: Section 1 (organizational
Structure), Section 4 (services), Section 5 (delivery methods), Section 6 (issues

programming) and in the overall image of Michigan State University Extension.

 

.125

.26. 2.88.. no. s 2.89.25 ....

 

.8222... .2352 n Gm .58... u N 22.62. .I. z

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2. ... ... 2. H ...mm
2.... 8.. 2... .... o... 8.. | .28.
.. R : 2 u z
. u ..m
.... 3. mm. 3. u .
2... 2.. 2.. 2.. o... 8.. n W. 25.55.on 83.2 o
.. .. . : u z
n.. ... .... ... H Wm be .
3.... .... .... .... 3... n... l 2652.. 2.2. n
.. R : 2 u 2
R. o... ... 2. M Wm .
E. 2... 8.. 2.. mm. m... | “8.20m .V
.. o. 2 2 u z
... ... .... .... H ....w .
:2... 8... 2... 2... 2.. o... l .8820. m
.. .. o. 2 n z
.... ... 2H. ... H WM. .
:2... 8.. 8.. .3. .... .... I 8.2.2 .
.. R o. 2 u z
... ... ... ... H ...w w .
2... .... 2... 2... 2... 8.. I 2325. .8232... 5 .
.. .. : 2 u z
......qu— coho-mam
£95....— ounld ..2—5 32......— geU ..oE.....— :emuoum
-— ._.. 0.3. a ..e .332...er .3 «H.995 flea—.83— »..flozgp 85m .. «Encam— buaebmnv ...... den-wanna g<fl~ .oeuv. bugb "a V

63.38 22:39.2. 523.... .05—52...?

.2333...an 05 .3 on

5382 no cane: =u..o>e o... a... $553939... 8:3. .u
...... o... 2:33 9.2.5:. .2833... 5.2.8.2. ... om...

.85.... has...
at...» we €5.34. .2... 03:.

 

126

Perceptions of Advisory Members by Place Raised

In Table 4 .17, data pertaining to the analysis of variance of perceptions of Advisory
Members toward the overall image of Michigan State University Extension and its
organizational structure, mission, personnel, services, delivery methods, and issues
Programming based on place raised, can be found. The analysis was based on the place
Where respondents were raised, either on a farm, in a rural but non-farm area, in a town,
or in a city. As the F-Probability statistics on the table reveal, a statistically significant
difference existed with regard to the perceptions of Advisory Members on the image of
the mission (Section 2) of Michigan State University Extension. All together, two
categories were found to be different in the way they perceived the image of the mission
of the organization. Advisory Members who were raised on farms differed significantly

from those raised in rural but non-farm areas. As expected, those raised on farms with

the mean score rating of 1.65 were more positive about the image of the mission of
Michigan State University Extension than those raised in rural but non-farm areas. Those
Who had rural but non-farm backgrounds were less positive (2.05) about the image of the
organization than those raised on either farms (1.65), in towns (1.92), or in cities (1.75).

This section (Section 2) was also a positively rated section, followed by

organizational structure (Section 1). Section 3 (personnel) was the least positively rated
section VVith the mean scores of 2.32 for those raised on farms, 2.38 each for those raised
in “11' 31 but non-farm areas as well as in towns, and 2.36 for those raised in cities.
HOWeVer, the scores were all below 2.50 which put them on the positive side of the

continuum. Overall, the scores illuminate a positive image of the organizational

 

127

structure, mission, personnel, services, delivery methods, issues programming and overall
image of Michigan State University Extension. Based on the F-Probability statistics, the
null hypothesis was not rejected in Section 1 (organizational structure), Section 3
(personnel), Section 4 (services), Section 5 (delivery methods), Section 6 (issues
Programming), and the overall image of the Michigan State University Extension.
However, significant differences were found in Section 2 (mission) which led to the
rejection of the null hypothesis and the acceptance of the alternative hypothesis, that there

is a difference in the perceptions of Advisory Members regarding the image of the

services of Michigan State University Extension.

 

.128

 

.26. 2.8.2. no. .. .50....cwfi ......

gang“... .2353. u Gm .52.. u N .2585: u 7.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

... ... ... ... H Wm
o... .... 8.. 2.. .... 2... I .59.
2 a 2 .. u z
. . . n ...
.. ... .. 3. u .
.2. .... .... 2.. .... 2.. n R 3.5.2.2.. 3:... .
... . 2 o. u z
.... ... ... ... M. ... .
8.. .2. .... .... .... v... R .85.... 2.2.02 m
2 . ... .. u z
... 3.. 2.. .... H a. .
8.. .... .... 8.. 2.. o... mm 82>... v
2 a 2 .. u z
... ... ... .... .uu. ... .
2.. .... .... .... .... .... M .2282... m
2 . ... .. u z
... .... ... .... H ... .
tn... 8.. ...... .... 8.. 8.. M 8.2.2 .
2 . ... .. u z
... .... ... ... .uu. Wm .
.2. 2 .. .... 2... 8.. .... | 238... 3.8.3.2520 .
2 a 2 .. n z
2.95...— ozamé 5.0 53... 8.5.232 .23. 8...... aozuom
if
..e 9.3. a ._e .82.... 8a... .3 GT: .— Aoouunua ...uaobmuv ....- ghuuan—nm .8.u<u~ .08»... 29.9.5“: .1—
.8238 .3522. £28.... 6W5. 22.8... 3.9.02.5 88m 535.: .... ones. ......93 2.. ...—c

52...: 7.3.53.5»... 2.. .... on

2:33.23... 8:... .. a
a5. 2.. nun-.83 £2.30: ...-3.33.. we 23.2.3.2. ..e 3 e 52: bpsg.

5.5 ... .53... ..2... 92.:

 

129

Perceptions of Advisory Members by Income

Table 4.18 contains the results of the analysis of variance of the perceptions of
Advisory Members toward the image of the organizational structure, mission, personnel,
services, delivery methods, issues programming, and the overall image of the Michigan
State University Extension according to income. The categories of income used in the
analysis were: (1) under $17, 000, (2) $18,000 to $23,000, (3) $24,000 to $29,000, (4)
$30,000 to $35,000, (5) $36,000 to $41,000, (6) $42,000 to $47,000, and (7)0ver
$48,000. It should be observed that the number of respondents in some of these
categories were small. Caution should therefore be exercised in interpreting this data.

No significant differences were detected in any of the sections.

A close review of the data in Table 4.18 indicated the absence of statistically
Significant differences in either the overall (total) image of Michigan State University
Extension or in the other six sections studied. However, the mean scores revealed that
respondents across income categories perceived the overall (total) image of the
organization positively, with mean scores all below 2.50. The most positively rated
section Was Section 2, which dealt with the image of the mission of Michigan State
University Extension for those making $42,000 to $47,000, indicating the most positive
image (mean 1.50), followed by those making $36,000 to $41,000, with a mean of 1.71.
The least positively rated section was Section 3 which dealt with the image of the

per Sonne] of the organization. Those making $36,000 to $41,000 perceived the image of
the Personnel more negatively (mean score 2.55) than any of the seven categories. In

fact, their mean score rating of 2.55 was the first

 

130

score to be on the negative side of the continuum. A perusal of Table 4.18 will show that
all of the mean scores were below 2.50, revealing an image perception that is positive.

Also, a review of the F -probability statistics showed that the null hypothesis failed to
be rejected in the overall (total) image of Michigan State University Extension as well as
in Section 1 (organizational structure), Section 2 (mission), Section 3 (personnel),
Section 4 (services), Section 5 (delivery methods), and in Section 6 (issues

programming).

 

.3. in. 1:4::-m .vn-u ?-.--)):u t..-.'---.o—C .fi..:l.- I.-’\ ...v Inna-‘-.-.¢.¢.-uv- .5: 39:268335: 1".omun-ulx. ..z- ... oU~A~QFI

.131

.26. 2.8.2. no. .. 2.85.25 ..

 

.8222... Pats... n Gm .....o... n \N 238.... n Z

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2. 2. .N. 2. 2. ... N... H ...

o... N... ...N 8.. 8. .N.N ....N ...N ..2 1 M ....o.
NN . m 2 e v : u z
N... NN. .... .... ... ... 2. w ...

.... 8.. ...N 8.. 2N ...N 2.. .... ...N 1 R 2.8888... .8... ..
2 e . o. o . . u z

. . . . . . . 1 ...

o. .N 2. ... .N .. .. 1

8... .N.. ...N ....N 2.N .... .N.N ...N ..NN 1 M .85.... 2.3.8. ..
NN . . N. o v 2 n z
... ... ... ... ... ... ...... n ...

...... ...... NN.N oNN 5N .N.. ...N .N.N 8. 1 R .83... ...
N. e . 2 m .. 2 n z
..N. .N. .N. ... 8. 2. .N. H ...

.... .... .... .N. .... .....N ...N ....N ...N 1 R .282... ..
NN . . N. . .. : u z

. . . . . . . u ...

.. .. e. .N .N ..N E 1

...... 8o. .... .... .... N... .... 8.. N... 1 M 8.....2 .N
..N. .N. N... .N. .N. NN. 8. H ...

.... .3. 8.. .... .... 8.. 8.. SN N... 1 W 28322828820 ..
NN . n 2 e v : u z

.8... ...... 88.... .85. 88.... 8...... 88.8. 8...... 8......

.. .. .26 ... 88.2.. 8 8...... 3 8...... .. 8...... o. 8...... 3...... 8:8.

a ..e .3. ..2. 2:8... .... ...—.395 5.2.8..— .o...o>.._ A929...— bueobmuv ...... .8..u...nun .8.a<nu .09.»... baseman. Y— .e 0.3.

.8938. 42:39.2. 52...... 6.5.2....

7535...»...

D 88w gauze—2 .... once: =29... o... ...... 62389.3...— 8..... .. o o
. . . . . E
o... .... 09:... o... .2338 ..2. .52 2.3.2.3... 33:09.0.— ..e 8 b 5 buuwtb

3...... ... ......uev. £3. «Bah

 

153
EX]
Stat

plau

Perce
“11

~ cnjfic
MT [01
dthCry
L'm'ersi
Accorc
Percem Ie'

examinatic

132

Findings Relevant to Hypothesis 2

The second hypothesis stated that there were significant differences in the perceptions
of Extension staff regarding the image of the organizational structure, mission, personnel,
services, delivery methods, issues programming, and the overall (total) image of
Michigan State University Extension when grouped by selected demographic variables.
For statistical analysis, the hypothesis was converted to a null hypothesis which stated
that there are no significant differences in the perceptions of Extension staff regarding the
image of the organizational structure, mission, personnel, services, delivery methods,
issues programming, and the overall (total) image of Michigan State University
Extension. A total of seven demographic variables (gender, age, position with Michigan
State Umversity Extension, programming area, duration in occupation, place raised, and

Place of‘ living) were used in testing the null hypothesis.

Perceptions of Extension Staff by Gender

The first analysis performed on the responses of Extension staff to determine whether
Significant differences existed between the perceptions of male and female Extension
staff tOWard the image of the organizational structure, mission, personnel, services,
delivery methods, issues programming, and the overall (total) image of Michigan State
University Extension, was a t-test. The results of the analysis are presented in Table 4.19.

According to the F-statistics, no statistically significant differences were found at .05
Percent level in either the overall image, nor in any of the six sections. Nevertheless, an

exaffiliation of the mean scores across the table show that the scores were below 2.50

 

133

indicating a positive perception of the image. Beginning with the overall (total) image of
the organization, the mean scores for male and female staff were about even, 2.25 and
2.26 respectively. In Section 2 (mission) and Section 4 (services), male staff members
rated these sections more positively than did female staff members. The mean scores
were 1.67 and 2.36 for males and 1.74 and 2.42 for females.

The least positively rated section was Section 5 which dealt with the image of the
delivery methods of Michigan State University’s Extension. The mean scores were 2.49
for males and 2.50 for females. The most positively rated section was section 2 (mission)
with a mean score of 1.67 for males and 1.74 for females.

The observed significance levels associated with the t-values in Table 4.19 showed
that the null hypothesis failed to be rejected in the overall (total) image of the
organization as well as in the image of its organizational structure (Section 1), mission

(Section 2), personnel (Section 3), services (Section 4), delivery methods (Section 5), and

issues programming (Section 6).

 

 

If
i . 1.1.34“! 1:: .99L3..1:-Nm‘ .QOLudxflN .06..fo K~3=OL~W7~V

... l ....ua-Gm—fi ha 932:; ==LO)G 9.: 3:! .N=mE-=-LM=LE Orv-ant. £333.03. .ALQ.»=.U= .r..d.u~>.~.vv.

...... «a .I:.~.~..\:...u.:. 61.5: anus-.2. it. 2..LI.$C-.=2..l. Can‘t-fauna...» 2.0:.5695915.» v.0

.v-ufikndtuuv 5C. Lg... ls-~l5L hubs!- uAvu .‘v 0~A~InF

134

 

_o>o_ 8023 no. “a “50535 ._. ..

8:226 2356 u Gm .505 n \4 Jonas: n a

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

was. 3.. 2. 2. and n2 8 R Eek

a8. 8.- 3. N3 _ in am vm wEEEEwoa 83% .o
a.

«3. 2.- a. 8.” gm 8 «N £552: bo>=oa .m
on.

as. R. NM. «2 can 3 a 822% v
NM.

.3. 3.. 2. SN m3 3. a 3588“" .m
8. -

8a.. 3.- 2. ..2 a: S n 923:2 .N
3.

3. a; 8. 8a :.~ 2. 3 2385 3833530 .—
2.

.3m 0...th 0...: ”flu—Eu..— .“g 0.25%

._.: 2....1 3. am 5 am e M c M ... a «..2 ... a 538m

 

A8535 banana"... E... iguaanun 623$" §u< 298.5le

«J ._o 0.3. a .3 .32—cm .3 AHA-mg 3.2—Sun.— EE03=D 88m .32—.32 a: van—... :39»: 2: 1:.
405.352. 53$:— .o..=«u=.=u ...—333.59.. 2: ._.. owns: 05

65339.3... 8=£ £352.. .923. $8.58
.233 cam Saga—m ... 23.38.03: 888%.... 2: 3.. £32 3.. ..2... 3a.:

 

Ci

1‘ {III

135

Perceptions of Extension Staff by Age

Table 4.20 contains the results of the analysis of variance of the perceptions of
Extension staff toward the image of the organizational structure, mission, personnel,
services, delivery methods, issues programming, and the overall image of the Michigan
State University Extension according to age. Age was categorized into five categories as
follows: (1) 23 to 33 years, (2) 34 to 44 years, (3)45 to 55 years, (4) 56 to 66 years, and
(7) 67 to 77 years. It was found that no Extension staff member was older than 66 years
and, therefore, Category 7 (67 to 77 years) was eliminated from the analysis. It should
also be noted that the first category (23 to 33 years) had very few respondents. So
caution should be exercised when interpreting this data.

There were no statistically significant differences detected in the overall image of
Michigan State University’s Extension. And the mean scores across the age categories of
the staff were below 2.00. This showed that the Extension staff were generally positive
about the overall image of the organization. On the other hand, one significant difference
was found in Section 4 pertaining to the image of services of Michigan State University
Extension. As the data in Section 4 (services) revealed, Extension staff aged 23 to 33
years scored significantly different from those aged 45 to 55 years. Younger Extension
Staff aged 23 to 33 years rated the image of the services more positively (1.97) than did
any other age category. Those aged 45 to 55 years were the least positive (2.50)
regarding the image of the services.

Section 5, which focuses on the image of the delivery methods of the services, was the

leaSt positively rated section showing a mean score of 2.33 for those aged 23 to 33 years,

 

 

0‘.

OIL’

E

the]

136

2.41 for those aged 34 to 44 years, 2.51 for those age 45 to 55 years, and 2.60 for those
aged 56 to 66 years. On the other hand, the most positively rated section was Section 2
(mission) with all the mean ratings below 2.00 in all age categories. It should be noted
that respondents in the age categories of 45 to 55 years and 56 to 66 years rated the image
of the delivery methods very negatively with mean scores of 2.51 and 2.60, respectively.
A review of the F-statistics in Table 4.20 showed that the null hypothesis was not
rejected in the organizational structure (Section 1), mission (Section 2), personnel
(Section 3), delivery methods (Section 5), issues programming (Section 6), and the
overall image of Michigan State University Extension based on age. Significant
differences were observed in section 4 which dealt with the image of the services of the
organization. This led to the rejection of the null hypothesis and the acceptance of the
alternative hypothesis that there is a difference in the perceptions of Extension staff

regarding the image of services of Michigan State University Extension.

 

it: non-u b: away-a... at... '-.-oq.tr:- 5:. ---7. nu.-cia~u¢bifl.- h: I-.-.-.-ovrv,huvnh.‘nv 99:11....) .... I‘l.§.--~ I\ uqu.‘ 35-h}...

-137

as. .522. 8. a 502.25 .. ..

 

.5225“. Emu—Em u Gm .52: u \4 558:: n Z

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2. 2. R. 8. H am
New. Rn RR RR RR _ 3 .N. .33
2 R 2 m u z
. u am
R. R. 3. 2 1
Sn. Re. RR 2R 2R RR u R manage; 832 e
2 R 2 N u 2
R. R. R. 8. H mm .
at. 2: 8R RR :R RR R meofioa 23:5 m
2 R 2 m u 2
R. 2. cm. 2. H WM .
.38. RR RR 3R ..2 8.. | 822% v
2 R 2 m u 2
R. R. R. 8. M 8 .
eR. RR. 2R SR 3R RR R 35820.2 m
2 R 2 m u 2
R. on. 2. 2. .uu. am .
Se. Rm. «3 R2 e: 2.2 M 8:22 R
2 R 2 m u 2
R. R. R. 3. H mm .
so. 23. ER 2R 2 .R 2 .R M 0503:. 38.2.3520 _
2 R 2 m u z
52...... 23: =82 8.3 2.2 2.9 2.2 3.3 :8» RR 528m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A0953:— buaobmnv e..- .oouuanaun .08u<u~ 699‘ 293.5":

 

I ... 2.8 a .3 on. .3 £596 8.2.35 $23.5 8.5 5.2.32 ._.. 92...: =52 o... ...: $538283 8.5. .2352: boy—2%
53:8 .3582. ..3_a_a .2325. .3355»... 2: .... own—5 2: 2:38 .93 5.2.85 .3 .5383: 2. 8.5.5 .3 2.2.342 SN... 22.:

imag-

of M

The d

secu'm
Direcu
method
SeCII'Ons
Sections

I {orgam'

138

Perceptions of Extension Staff by Position

Initially, position was categorized into four groups: District Extension Director,
County Extension Director, Extension Agent, and all others. However, after exploratory
analyses were performed, the number of District Extension Directors, and all others were
very few in some cases and none in others. So, the categories were collapsed into two, as
follows: (1) District Extension Directors and County Extension Directors were grouped
into Extension Directors, and (2) Extension Agents and all others were collapsed into
Extension Agents.

The analysis of variance of the perceptions of these two groups (Extension Directors
and Extension Agents) toward the image of the organizational structure, mission,
personnel, services, delivery methods, issues programming, and the overall image of
Michigan State University Extension are presented in Table 4.21. According to the F-
statistics, no significant differences were found in all sections including the overall
image. Extension Directors and Agents were moderately positive about the overall image
of Michigan State University Extension, with mean scores of 2.23 and 2.26, respectively.
The data further revealed that Extension Agents had a higher mean score (2.52) in the
section dealing with delivery methods of services (Section 5) than did Extension
Directors (2.48). This indicated that Directors held more positive images of the delivery
methods than did Agents. However, in general, Extension Agents rated most of the
S¢Ctions more positively than did the Directors, with the exception of the first two

se<3tions (organizational structure and mission) in which they were about even. In Section

1 (Organizational

 

139

structure), the mean ratings were 2.24 for Directors, and 2.10 for Agents, while in Section
2 (mission), the mean ratings were 1.73 for Directors, and 1.71 for Agents.

Based on the F-Probability statistics, the null hypothesis was not rejected in Section 1
(organizational structure), Section 2, (mission), Section 3 (personnel), Section 4
(services), Section 5 (delivery methods), Section 6 (issues programming), and the overall

image of the Michigan State University Extension.

 

. .. ..-.a: nu:- —~=I .N.
.uiii Inn-1:: 3:. ruuhurxnubt

... ... :- lkuauh
3a.}... nun-.tn-Gs I

Eula-Chs7f1- V min .55 9.2.89.
mi ...: lunau~un9avb

an tbflln— .?.—v3=~.d:- Khnvé‘sbz
LO-nho UQII‘LSBHC 2~IK~€§< «.N.-.. 5.4!...

‘1110

.22 883.. 2.. a 2.82:»... . .

5.33% P3286 u Om .52.. u k £35.... u z

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3. 3. H Gm
RR. ..2. RR RR M .58.
2. 2 u z |
.m. um. .I... Gm
n3. .3. 3R own i W manage... 83.... .o
2. 2 n 2
cm. R. W Gm .
Sn. 8.. N2 2R I M .850... 202.5 m
2. ... u 2
mm. on. M Gm .
3... R... ER ..2 M 80.28 v
2. 2 u z -
2. mm. H Gm .
2.. 2R RR ..2 R .0552“... m
2. 2 .... z
3. mm. M Gm .
Ra. R... z... 2... R 8.3.2 m
2. ... u 2
mm. 2. W Gm
R... 2... 2R ....R u R 05.38.223.520 ..
2. 2 u z
.83.:—
...2..... 23.... .83 .3. ...... 5.80m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A8335 busehwuv E... Johanna—um .8..u<nn .083. 29.9.5": v.— ..o 0.3»
.. .... ...:mz ...... 32.2. .. 3.32. 8.231... £23.... 3...... 525.2 ... 3...... =22... 2.. ...... ages-ac... 8.5. £352.. 29......
.....Ea .2522. .53... £52.. .2533... ......e as... 2.. 353...... 5.32.”... 25.5.... ears... 22...... ".3. ...:

so;
org.
posi
those
form

a few 1
Perceiv
mmplc‘
methods
Commun
”Milan.
aUdAgn'cu

r“Penna;

l4l

Perceptions of the Extension Staff by Programming Area

The four core programming areas of Michigan State University Extension are: (1)
Agriculture and Natural Resources, (2) 4-H Youth, (3) Community Development, and (4)
Home Economics. The analysis of variance of the perceptions of Extension staff based
on these four programming areas are reported in Table 4.22. In general, the data showed
no statistically significant difference in the organizational structure, mission, personnel,
services, delivery methods, issues programming, and the overall image of Michigan State
University Extension.

Despite the absence of statistically significant differences, the mean scores revealed
some interesting findings. Respondents’ perceptions of the overall image of the
organization were positive with those in 4-H programming (2.22) indicating the most
positive perceptions of the image, followed by those in Home Economics (2.230), then
those in Agriculture and Natural Resources programming (2.30), and finally those in
Community Development programming (2.30). The data also showed that there are quite
a few means that were above 2.50. This indicated that respondents were generally
perceiving the image of Michigan State University Extension more negatively. For
eXample, in the most negatively rated section (Section 5) which dealt with the delivery
methods of services, three of the four means were above 2.50. Extension staff with
Community Development programming expertise held the most negative image of the
organizational structure, with a mean of 2.61 , followed by those with Home Economics
and Agriculture and Natural Resources programming expertise scoring 2.52 and 2.51,

respectively. Only those with 4-H programming expertise perceived the image of the

142

delivery methods positively (2.46). The most positively rated section was Section 2
(mission) with those in Home Economics indicating the most positive perceptions (1.65)
about the mission of the organization, followed by those in Community Development and
4-H with the mean scores of 1.72 and 1.73, respectively, and finally those in Agriculture
with 1.75.

Since the resulting F -Probability did not detect the presence of statistically significant
differences, the null hypothesis was not rejected in the overall image of Michigan State
University Extension. Similarly, the null hypothesis was not rejected in Section 1
(organizational structure), Section 2 (mission), Section 3 (personnel), Section 4,

(services), Section 5 (delivery methods), and Section 6 (issues programming).

- .Iluhlihc

I - -1: <HN ...-.ahfldx >.~l::.:7.ua-v Vu~ h: 2.7:.
.I I i -. lien-n: =3L9>° go:- fiv-u-u tan-m-::~'Lu:h= Urdu-29.. .lfiv:-~.U=~ Kin-i=9.»
9.: bay 93-2.: nu:- luubnugnuutluz Ea.‘n:bulv.~ 5° lznv:-OU.-On~h¢ 90::7-83u: r..lb.~2§a\ "NW-.. 9.335.

.143

as. 282 8. a .5335 :

c2833 “528m n Gm .508 n N 598:: u z

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

E. 2. 2. E. n 5
80. an. NN.N o2 NN.N ”2 M 38,

t o t a n 2 l

. . . u 8

n 2. 8 a. u .
New. man. SN SJ end and I W 9:888on 83%— e

t n S 8 n 2

mm. 8. NM. 3. H nm b .
:3. m3. N3 3N SA EN R 8508 3:5 m

t e 2 a u 2

on. on. 2. x. H mm .
30. as. 3.” c2 and a.” R 825m v

t e 2 a u z

a. 2. 2. R. N am .
8m. 82 RN n3 3% 2..” M 398.com m

: e t .N n z

8. a. :H. mm. H 5 .
as. ME. 8; NS MS 2... M 86a: N

t e t a u z

a. a. S. cu. m cm .
a2. a: 3.” *2 SN EN I R caugmaaozfifiwco _

t e S a u 2

8.8233— 28532959 53> 32.33:

52.5— ozamé 33: .855 I... ....z i ...: 533w

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A8385 buaohmuv a... anemia—um Johu<nn .8._u< 29.9.5": Y— a: 0.3»
a :o no... unis—Ema...— 3 £595 3.2—am 3203.5 35m ..aqum-z we own—... ...—~26 2: a... 6558939:— 853 .32—«2.. E052.
.83.»..8 ..2—=35.— .a28_fi 532...: 153.3593 2: .3 once. 2: 33:8 ham aefiuuoum we 383082. ..e 85:: .3 39:23.. "and. 033—.

 

per

year.
33 ye
3 to
mam
POSiIm
Score ra

“jib 12:

We the (

144

Perceptions of Extension Staff by Duration in Occupation

It was hypothesized that years of service would make a difference in the way
Extension staff perceived the image of the organizational structure, mission, personnel,
services, delivery methods, issues programming and the overall image of Michigan State
University Extension. To test this assumption, an analysis of variance was performed and
the results are presented in Table 4.23.

At .05 percent alpha level, no statistically significant differences were observed in the
overall image of Michigan State University Extension, nor in Section 1 (organizational
structure), Section 2 (mission), Section 3 (personnel), Section 4 (services), Section 5
(delivery methods), or Section 6 (issues programming). Respondents perceived the
overall image of Michigan State University Extension as positive, with those who have
been in their current occupation for 18 to 23 years indicating the most positive
perceptions of the image (2.17), followed by those with 0 to 5 years (2.19).

The most positively rated section was mission (Section 2), with those having 0 to 5
years of service indicating the most positive image (1.61), followed by those with 18 to
23 years (1.63), then 1.75 for those with 6 to 11 years and 12 to 17 years, and those with
24 to 29 years scored 1.94. The least positively rated Section was section 5 (delivery
methods) with two categories (6 to 11 years and 18 to 23 years) indicating the least
positive perceptions with mean scores of 2.52 and 2.58, respectively. An equal mean
score rating of 2.47 for those with O to 5 years and 24 to 29 years followed. Those
with 12 to 17 years scored the lowest (2.45). It should be noted that the first two means

were the only ones that fall on the negative side of the continuum.

 

145

The second most positively rated section was organizational structure (Section 1) with
those who have served between 18 to 23 years having the most positive image of the
organizational structure (1.99), while the most negatively rated section was Section 6
which dealt with the image of issues programming. Those who served between 6 to 11
years indicated the most negative image (2.57). One of the most interesting, but not
surprising, findings were the perceptions of the image of issues programming. It had
more of a positive image among those with most years of service as compared to those
with the fewest. The mean scores on the section of issues programming for respondents
with 6 to 11 years was 2.54, while those with 24 to 29 years of service scored 2.26.

The null hypothesis was not rejected in the overall image of the organization as well as
in the organizational structure (Section 1), mission (Section 2), personnel (Section 3),

services (Section 4), delivery methods (Section 5), and issues programming (Section 6).

.5! I12: anaemia-nu. l

... u~1un~inuE >159.'.-.v§u
...- .uau ...-:3-139L0-n s5 orb-uou‘L-th: lwlkuczs f. unrfli. .3481!

146

.32 :82 8. a 280235 :

caustic“. 95288 n Gm .52: u x con—.5: n 2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2. 2. 2. 2. 2. H WM
23. 22. RN EN 22 22 2a | 3o...

5 a 2 2 2 n z

. . u 3

an. a. a. 2 an n .
SN. 22 8a 2a EN *3 m2 1 M 3882on 832 c

a w 2 2 : u 2

em. 2. .m. cm. X. M WM .
2:. an. $.N an.” 2% N2" SN | 82:08 22:5 m

a. w 2 2 2 u z

2. X. 2. a. 2.. H mm .
an. .8. SN and 3a 2a com mm 82:2 4

h a 2 2 2 u z

a. on. 2. an. I. H a .
8m. 8». 22 com 3; NE Sam M 35822 n

a w 2 2 2 u z

2. an. on. on. NM. m cm .
Sn. .5. 32 2: 2.2 n: 5.. u M 8:22 m

a m 2 2 2 u z

z. 2. «N. a. 2. m cm .
8... 3: SN 82 2.~ 2.” SN .. mm 828328223520 _

a a 2 2 2 u z

23»

52...... 33.-..— ci a..." :8» 2.2 2.2 2-2 :6 2.2 m... Steam

 

A8535 29.9.53. 2:. Johnna—um 69.3.3 .0232 banana“:
Y— ._e 0.3» a .3 552.32. E 559:5 .3 aim—2V not—.35— Efiozaa 88m nag—.22 .«e own—._. :20; 2: a... $583.59:— 853 .32—«2: fez—cu
.98.an ..2—322. 638.... 6532...: ...—933.399 2: ._e omen: 2: “...—{6. ham 3.2.81..— 59 322.922. he 85...: .3 395.23. "an... 033—.

 

147

Perceptions of Extension Staff by Place Raised

On the basis of the place where one was raised, the differences in perceptions of
Extension staff toward the image of the organizational structure, mission, personnel,
services, delivery methods, issues programming, and the entire image of Michigan State
University Extension were examined using analysis of variance. Data from this analysis
are presented in Table 4.24. At .05 percent alpha level, no statistically significant
differences were observed in the overall image of the organization or in the rest of the six
sections tested. The mean scores of the overall image of Michigan State University
Extension showed that Extension staff who were raised in rural but non-farm areas were
more positive about the overall image of the organization (2.23), followed by those raised
on farms (2.25), and finally those raised in towns and cities (2.28 and 2.29).

The first and second most positively rated sections were Section 2 (mission) and
Section 1 (organizational structure), respectively. in Section 2 (mission) which was the
most positively rated section, the mean scores were all below 2.00. Extension staff who
were raised on farms and scored of 1.62, had a most positive perception of the image of
the mission of Michigan State University Extension than did those who resided in rural.
but non-farm areas (1.77), towns (1.86), and cities (1.71). On the other hand, the first and
second least positively rated sections were Section 5 (delivery methods) and Section 6
(issues programming), respectively. Respondents who were raised in towns and cities
rated the image of the delivery methods and issues programming less positively than did
those raised on farms and in rural but non-farm areas. The mean scores for those raised

in towns and cities were 2.51 and 2.54 for delivery methods, and 2.37 and 2.52 for issues

148

programming. The mean scores for those raised on farms and in rural but non-farm areas
were 2.50 and 2.36 for delivery methods, and 2.43 and 2.35 for issues programming.

The null hypothesis failed to be rejected in the overall image of the organization and in
the organizational structure (Section 1), mission (Section 2), personnel (Section 3),

services (Section 4), delivery methods (Section 5), and issues prograrmning (Section 6).

.‘AVIJ

nInvn

0‘ :Av avaluah
rough-)5“!

hi

until-Inc

Una—n-

ulhiflh

ill
I slifliu'l

 

.149

.26. .822. 2.. ._. 2.82.25 :

3.3.3.. .2356 u Gm .538 n N 22.8.... n z

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.... 2. 2. 2. .u. ..m
8.. S... 2.. ....N .N.. 3.. n W .29.
2 a on N. n z
. . . . u ..m
S. ... mm 2
2n. 2.. 2. 2.. 2.. 2... n M 38838.. 83.. ...
2 a 8 .m u z
.N. .N. .... 2.. H ..m .
on... a... ....N .2. on.” an. R 82.8... 222.5 m
2 ... o. N. u z
2. 2. 2.. on. H .5 .
2... 2.... 2... ..2 2... 3.. M 822% v
2 ... o. N. n z
2. 2. 2. .N. H ..m .
8... 2.... 2... .....N 2... 2... R 39.8.2. m
2 a ... N. n z
.2. 2. mm. a. M ..m .
8... 2... .... 2... F. 8.. M 8.2.2 N
2 o 8 N. n z
8. .... ..N. 2. M a .
..2. ..2. 2 .N 8.. . ..N 2 .N R 2325... 2.2.2.520 .
2 3 cm 2 n z
59...... 3.3”...— b.U 53,—. 8.3.7.37. .95: E3..— .3295

 

39.329 223...? ....a gunman». 69.3fm 69.3. 293.5": Y.
.3 ...-8 a 3 can... 8.... .3 £592. 3.2.3um b.9329: 85m 335.2 .3 03.... :23: 2.. ....- .u.........a..uo.:. 8:8. £352.. bot—ow
.8933» .3322. 23.8.... 6.32....» 7.3.25.3»... 2.. .3 once. 2.. 3.3.3. .35 3.2.83. 3 23.2.8.2. .3 83...: .3 253‘. 3n... 0......

 

 

150

Perceptions of Extension staff by place of Residence

Presented in Table 4.25 are results of the analysis of responses of Extension staff
toward the image of the organizational structure, mission, personnel, services, delivery
methods, issues programming, and the overall image of the Michigan State University
Extension based on the current place of residence. The data indicated that not many
Extension staff reside on farms, however, many were living in rural but non-farm areas.

The resulting F-statistics indicated the absence of statistically significant differences at
.05 percent level of significance in the overall image of the organization and in the other
six subsections. However, the mean scores in the table provided some useful insight
regarding the overall direction of the perceptions of the stafi‘. Beginning with the total
image, the mean score (below 2.50) indicated that regardless of where they were living,
Extension staff were positive about the image of the organization. However, those who
were residing on farms were the most positive with a mean score of 2.20, followed
closely by those living in towns (2.22). The most positively rated section was Section 2
which dealt with the image of the mission of the organization. Respondents who were
living on farms showed a more positive impression (mean 1.58) about the image of the
mission of Michigan State University Extension, than did those who were residing in
rural but non-farm areas (1.72), towns (1.69), and cities (1 .75). Section 1 (organizational
structure) was the second most positively rated section with most of the mean scores
being slightly above 2.00.

On the other hand, the section regarded least positively was delivery methods (Section

5). Extension staff who were residing on farms tended to perceive the image of the

15]

delivery methods of Michigan State University Extension more negatively (2.63) than
did those living in rural but non-farm areas (2.49), towns (2.44), and cities (2.50). The
second most negatively rated section was Section 6 (issues programming). Respondents
who were living in cities rated it 2.49, slightly less positive than those who were residing
on farms (2.31), in rural but non-farm areas (2.42), or in towns (2.49).

The null hypothesis was not rejected in the overall image of Michigan State University
Extension as well as in its organizational structure (Section 1), mission (Section 2),

personnel (Section 3), services (Section 4), delivery methods (Section 5), and issues

programming (Section 6).

.152

.25. .822. 8. ... 2.8235 ..

3.3.3.. .2336 n Gm 232.. u MN 22.8.... n z

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2. .... 2. 2. u ..m
...... 2... n2 NN.N .3 ....N ....m .35

on 2 an m u z

. . . . u ..m

... an S 2 u
..2. ..2. 2...~ ....N 2... .2 n R. 2288.22.83... o

2 2 an n u 7.

R. 2. R. 3.. H ..m .
2.. 2“. on.” .....N 23 23 M 2522.. 202.2. m

2. 2 ... n u z

2. .... ..N. 2. H ..m .
2... an. 2... .....N ....N .N.. R 80.2% v

8 2 o. m u z

.N. ... 2. 2. .n." ..m .
2.... 8... ..2 2... SN 2... R 32.8.... m

2. 2 o. n u z

a. .... 2.. .... H ..m .
2... :N. 2.. 8.. 2.. ..2 R 8.2.2 N

on 2 2. m u z

.N. 2. ..N. 2.. m ..m .
.2... 2.... 2.. ....N 2.. 3.” n M u§u§.~ao..fi.§m5 .

on 2 on n u z

3.3..

23...... 3.31.... ~9.0 E3... -37. 3....»— 33... .353

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

30..»qu ...uaohmuv ...... .8..w8.nun .8..a<uu .854. ...»..obmn—v v.—
3 9.8. a .3 m...>.. .3 8a... .... .N.—5mg 3.2.03”.— b.€o>..5 035 32.3.2 .3 93.... .383 2.. ...3 $555339... 8:8. 6.3.3.... .9253
£83....» 3.388.. 23.3.... 8.52....» 3.3.32.3»... 2.. .3 03.... 2.. 3.3.3. ham .....naofim 3 23.2.8.2. 3 8.3.3.. .3 «fizz; "mm... 2.3...

 

or;

pro

pwr

slatec

Memk

missioz

image 0

In I651

Significan

groups (A(

“We deteCt

Section] (of

P fog! a171mm é
Section 1 (mi
111 an the S
Organilationa} ‘
.{dx‘jgoq Me”

me“ Secrets of

 

 

153

Findings Relevant to Hypothesis 3

Finally, Hypothesis 3 stated that there were significant differences between the
perceptions of Advisory Members and Extension staff regarding the image of the
organizational structure, mission, personnel, services, delivery methods, issues
programming, and the overall image of Michigan State University Extension. For the
purpose of statistical analysis, the hypothesis was converted to a null hypothesis which
stated that there were no significant differences between the perceptions of Advisory
Members and Extension staff regarding the image of the organizational structure,
mission, personnel, services, delivery methods, issues programming, and the overall
image of Michigan State University Extension.

In testing this hypothesis, a t-test analysis was used at .05 percent level of
significance. Table 4.27 presents the results of the analysis of the perceptions of the two
groups (Advisory Members and Extension stafi). Statistically significant differences
were detected in the overall image of Michigan State University Extension, and in
Section] (organizational structure), Section 4 (services), and Section 6 (issues
programming). The absence of statistically significant differences was observed in
Section 1 (mission), Section 3 (personnel), and Section 5 (delivery methods).

In all the sections where significant differences were observed (overall image,
organizational structure, services, and issues programming) the mean scores revealed that
Advisory Members were slightly more positive than Extension staff. In other words, the

mean scores of the Advisory Members were smaller than those of Extension staff.

Oil

all:
Adi

org;

{deli

154

Beginning with the overall image, the mean score for Advisory Members was 2.12,
while that of the Extension staff was 2.25, followed by Section 1 (organizational
structure) showing 1.92 for Advisory Members and 2.11 for Extension staff. Section 4
(services) followed with scores of 2.19 for Advisory Members and 2.40 for Extension
staff, and finally Section 6 (issues programming) scores showed 2.25 for Advisory
Members and 2.41 for Extension staff. It should be noted, however, that all the mean
scores are below 2.50, putting them on the positive side of the continuum.

The most positively rated section was Section 2 (mission), followed very closely by
Section 1 (organizational structure). Extension staff, with a mean score of 1.71, showed
that they had a more positive image of the mission of Michigan State University
Extension than did Advisory Members who scored 1.80. The least positively rated
section was delivery methods (Section 5) with a mean score of 2.31 for Advisory
Members and 2.50 for Extension staff.

The significant differences observed in the overall image of the organization and in the
other three sections studied (organizational structure, services, issues programming) led
to the rejection of the null hypothesis in these sections and the acceptance of the
alternative hypothesis that there are significant differences between the perceptions of
Advisory Members and Extension staff toward the overall image of the organization, its
organizational structure, services, and issues programming. On the other hand, the null
hypothesis was not rejected in Section 2 (mission), Section 3 (personnel), and Section 5

(delivery methods).

onhuln.n A.uca.=7.fl? 3:! data-«....A-Hmo {durum-{IN .2Lu< A—uzchulflév Vu- .~Q 0.89». I :0 «31:94.»:
36:20:5— Aznbacrtu.‘ Oaaafi =.-u.-.U.—). a: DES-... ...-50>O Us: 3:! .I=.EEILH¢LQ nun-tr... £33.20...- AL0>=Ufi .....ubtrhfia ...u-zuquahaam .lfimaztt .0L~:U=le
-S:n~.-~§.:Sua-.: .6:- bav 632:.- OS- anvhlxscu 55.97. ......n-ufiulni nun-I ...-933.6: \ALClcsoglxhaV agar-sn-thfinhhc lbbfiflhfitsz 0... L...‘ ls~=tfli elm-sue ..CN... Shaun-vi.

 

.155

.05. 2.020.. m... ... 352.22% ... ..

5.330.. .5232 u Gm .50... u N ..2—8.... H ....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:8... a..- 2. .N. .N.. 2.. 8 .. .Soh
.88. 8.... mm. 2. ....N 2.. 8 8 w2822wo... 8:2. ...
.8. S..- .N. 2. 8.. ...N S 2 82.62 23...... .m
: .8. 2..- 2. 2.. 8.. 2 .N 8 N. 2.0.20.0. v
.8. a..- «N. .N. 2.. m... 8 m. .8820. .m
.8. 2.. .... 2.. .... 8.. 8 2. 5.2.2 .N
:88. .N.... 2. 8. . ..N 8.. S m. 2325. 3823.530 ..
23m .252 mu...” 3w”...
.5 .2... $3. .3. 3. 25m .252
2.... 2...... .... am .3. ..m M R .2... ... a ...... ... a ......00m
.00..»35 buuebmuv .23 .00..»«2A—un §u<un .0034. ...unebmnfi v.— 3 030. a ..o AHA—ma
5.2.03... .5.202....— 035 3M...0.E .... 03.... .332. 2.. ...3 $585.32.. 8.3». .3050... bog—0.. £00.30... ..2...8..2. 23.3.... .0252...»
3.3.23.3»... 2.. ac 09:... 2.. 3338 Exam 3.2.03... ...... 22.302 2.3.2... .3 23.2.3.2. ... 80:205.. 0... .3. 8.30.. «8... "on... 0.3...

 

“Tn

prec

prec
{Inf
ushw
vafi
int}

[Ice

anal
inde
resu

Pres.

levej
Imari
Dom
Varia

\‘an‘a

156

(c) Research Question
What demographic variables among Advisory Members and Extension staff are important

predictor(s) of image of Michigan State University Extension?

The purpose of this research question was to identify demographic variables that could
predict whether or not an individual held a positive or negative image of Michigan State
University Extension. In responding to this question, multiple linear regression analyses
using backward method were performed on the dependent variable. The dependent
variable was created by computing the composite mean scores of the entire 66 questions
in the study. Multiple linear regression was selected because of its capability to predict.
It can be used to make predictions by investigating the dependence of dependent variable
(Y) on the independent variables (X1 X2 X3...Xp). Prior to running the regression
analyses, a dummy variables coding technique was employed so that each category of the
independent variables could be entered in the regression as an independent variable. The
results of the regression analyses for both Advisory Members and Extension staff are
presented and discussed accordingly in Table 4.27.

For Advisory Members, ten independent variables (gender, race, age, educational
level, occupation, duration in occupation, place raised, place of living, income, and
marital status) were entered into the regression equation. Seven of these variables were
norminal variables and therefore, coded and entered into the regression as dummy
variables. The results of the regression analyses presented in Table 4.27 showed that one

variable ( place raised) was the only variable that appeared to be an important predictor of

Us

2151

Wide

AdVi:

157

image of Michigan State University Extension among Advisory Members. However, this
variable was not statistically significant at .05 percent level. The variable (place raised)
was coded as: (0) = rest and (1) = farm, (0) = rest and (1) = rural non-farm, and (O) =
rest (1) town, and (O) = rest and 1 = city.
The multiple linear regression incorporate multiple independent variables, and its
model can be expressed as:
f’ = a +13,X, +13,X,+-~+I3,,X,
Where:
)9 : dependent variable
a" : the constant
b,b2 - - -bp : regression coefficients
Using the above general linear regression model as a guide, the predictor model of the
image of Michigan State University Extension for Advisory Members could be expressed
as follows:
f’ = c? +I;,X,....+132X2

MSU-E image = 2.15 -.10(place raised).

The variable “place raised” with the reported beta coefficient of (.23) was the only
variable left in the equation. It was therefore predicted that “place raised” was the only
important predictor of image of Michigan State University Extension among the

Advisory Members. Also, the coefficient (.23) of this variable was positive, this

158

indicated that Advisory Members who were raised in rural but non-farm areas were
predicted to have a negative image of the Michigan State University Extension.
Remember that: (1) the category for rural non-farm in the variable “place raised” was
coded l and all other categories of that variable were coded 0; and (2) the scale of the
measurement used ranged from 1, being strongly agree, to 4, being strongly disagree.

For Extension staff, eleven independent variables (gender, race, age, duration in
occupation, position with MSU-E, programming area, educational level, place raised,
place of residence, income, and marital status) were entered into the regression equation.
Eight of these variables were nominal and therefore, coded and entered into the
regression as dummy variables. The results of the regression analyses reported in Table
4.27 revealed that two variables (race and place raised) were predicted to be the most
important predictors of image of Michigan State University Extension among Extension
staff. One of these variables was statistically significant at .05 percent level while the
other was not. These variables were coded as : 0 = non-whites, 1 = whites for wand O
= rest and 1= farm, 0 = rest and 1 = rural non-farm, O = rest and l = town, and O =
rest and l = city for place raised.

The predictor model of image of Michigan State University Extension for Extension
staff can be expressed as:

Y: 6+5IX1+132X2

MSU-E image = 1.98 + .16(race) - .O9(place raised)

Ba.
predic
image
raised
poufix
negafi
coeffic
“h0\&
lhfive
\x‘ariab
Variab.

Snongf

159

Based on the weight of the reported beta coefficients of these variables, it was
predicted that “race”, with the coefficient of (.16), was the most important predictor of
image of Michigan State University Extension among Extension staff, followed by “place
raised”, with the coefficient of (-.09). The coefficient of the variables “race” was
positive, this indicated that Extension staff who were whites were predicted to have a
negative image of Michigan State University Extension. On the other hand, the
coefficient of the variable “place raised” was negative, this showed that Extension staff
who were raised on farms were predicted to have a positive image of Michigan State
University Extension. Also, remebering that: (1) the categories for whites and farms in
variables “race” and “raised place” were coded 1 and all other categories in those
variables were coded O; and (2) the scale of measurement used ranged fiom 1, being

strongly agree, to 4, being strongly disagree.

160

.26. 2.3.0.. no. ... 2.353% ..

8.38.9 ....wnobm n v 3.38.9 u m 8.»... .I. m 83¢. ...waobm n .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

on . . ..otm 93.235 mom. .obm. 63.235
Sn: 8 .. 2.3.... M. 3.3.? Eu: 8.... 23% M. 3.3.?
v2. 032cm M. mmo. 032cm M.
8m. .. 2......2 ..2. M. 2......2
8.. .5588.

...... ... .- .N.- 8.- Gas... 8.3. 8a... ...N .8988.
.....8. ..~ 8. ... .233. 08M. .8. 8.. mm. m.. .83.-..8 .88. 68.5. 8a...
h ...m h 59.. .. 33.9.8... 9 ”a ... 30.. m .8228...

......m 5.25.3H 9.2.83). 5.8235.
8.82. 8.23....

5.2.5.5 035 53.5.3. .... omen: .3 3.0.2.6.... .3209... wfififibSQ 8.. $9.39.. 8.8.933. 0.2.33. 8N... 2.3...

 

Prob

State
was

Exte
idem
imag
orgal
and (
dem(

studi

Meth.

A I
stratifi
pOSiIig
SubjeC

Samph‘

CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
Problem

For the past few years, the Cooperative Extension Services throughout the United
States have undergone tremendous amount of changes. The main purpose of this study
was to assess the image of Michigan State University Extension as perceived by County
Extension Advisory Committee Members who participated in the 1993 issues
identification process and Michigan State University Extension field staff. The overall
image of the organization was examined along with its six subsections that include: (1)
organizational structure; (2) mission; (3) personnel; (4) services; (5) delivery methods;
and (6) issues programming. Differences between and among different categories of
demographic variables of the two groups (Advisory Members and Extension staff) were

studied and important predictor(s) of image were determined.

Method and Design

A mail survey using Total Design Method (TDM) was used to collect data from a
stratified, randomly drawn sample of 171 respondents. The sample was stratified by
position or rank (Advisory member and Extension stafi) of the participants. Of the 171
subjects in the study, 95 were Advisory members and 76 were Extension staff. The

sampling error was 10 percent with 95% confidence interval.

161

Some
dark
expen
LTnjVe
accorc
each s
for Se

Sectic

Statist
statisi
in thef
analyg
"arian

Ba
the res
use of
Stud}. ,

will-ch

162

Some of the Instruments were adopted fiom previously related studies and some were
developed from the literature review. The content validity was checked by a panel of
experts from the Department of Agricultural and Extension Education at Michigan State
University. The instruments were pre-tested in Jackson county and changes were made
accordingly. To ensure reliability, the Cronbach alpha reliability test was performed on
each section of the instrument and the following alpha coefficients were established: .79
for Section 1, .79 for Section 2, .85 Section 3, .89 Section 4, .57 Section 5, and .97 for
Section 6.

Coded questionnaires and cover letters were mailed to 171 subjects on September 22,
1995. A total of 142 (83.04%) responses were received, out of which 75 (78.94%) were
from Advisory members and 67 (89.33%) were from Extension staff. All responses were
checked for error before being compiled for final analysis. Non-response was handled
statistically by comparing early and late respondents demographic characteristics. No
statistically significant differences were found between early and late respondents, except
in their educational level. This permits generalization of the study findings. Further
analyses were conducted on the data to check for error, normality, and homogeneity of
variance.

Basic descriptive statistics were used to describe the demographic characteristics of
the respondents of the study. The three null hypotheses proposed were tested through the
use of t-tests and one-way analyses of variance. And the final research question of the
study was answered through the use of multiple linear regression analyses to determine

which

F.

01

163

demographic variables among Advisory members and Extension staff were important
predictor(s) of image of the organizational structure, mission, personnel, services,

delivery methods, and issues programming of Michigan State University Extension.

Findings

The findings indicated that there were very few significant differences found in the
perceptions of Advisory members and Extension staff toward the image of the
organizational structure, mission, personnel, services, delivery methods, issues
programming, and the overall image of Michigan State University Extension based on the
selected demographic variables used. In general, the mean score ratings indicated a
highly strong to moderately strong positive image. Most of the mean score ratings were
below 2.50 putting them on the positive continuum. This is an indication of positive
perceptions of the image of the organization.

In the Advisory Committee group, six demographic variables (gender, age,
educational level, occupation, raised place, and income) were used to test the null
hypothesis that there are no significant differences in the perceptions of Advisory
members regarding the image of the organizational structure, mission, personnel,
services, delivery methods, issues programming, and the overall image of Michigan State
University Extension. At .05 percent alpha level, no statistically significant differences

were found in the categories of three variables (gender, educational level, and income).

Howey
\‘ariabl
membc'
perceii
mean 5
Signif:
image
categc
sectio:
mean
Were 1
missic
in the

F0
pro gr
the m
EXter
Sewic
Univ.

164

However, significant differences were detected in the categories of the other three
variables that include age, occupation, and place raised. Among age categories, Advisory
members perceived the image of the services (Section 4) differently. Younger people
perceived the image of the services slightly more positively than did older people. The
mean score ratings were 1.33 for age 23 to 33 years and 2.33 for age 67 to 77 years.
Significant differences were also observed in the way Advisory members perceived the
image of the mission and the personnel (Sections 2 and 3) of the organization in the
categories of their occupations and places raised. Government employees rated both
sections (mission and personnel) slightly more positively than any other categories, with
mean scores of 1.71 and 2.14 in both sections, respectively. Advisory members who
were raised on farms were strongly positive about their perceptions of the image of the
mission of the organization (1.65). Surprisingly, it was followed closely by those raised
in the city (1.75).

For the Extension staff, seven demographic variables (gender, age, position,
programming area, duration of service, place raised, and living place) were used to test
the null hypothesis that there are no significant differences in the perceptions of
Extension staff toward the image of the organizational structure, mission, personnel,
services, delivery methods, issues programming, and the overall image of Michigan State
University Extension. At .05 percent alpha level, no statistically significant differences

were found in all but one (age).

165

Among the age categories, younger Extension staff in the age categories of 23 to 33
years and 34 to 44 years rated the image of the services (Section 4) relatively lower than
those aged 45 and above. This indicates that younger staff were more positive about the
image of the services of Michigan State University Extension than older staff.

When the two groups (Advisory members and Extension staff) were compared in the
overall image and the six subsections (organizational structure, mission, personnel,
services, delivery methods, and issues programming), differences were observed in the
overall image as well as in three of the six subsections. At 5% alpha level, no significant
differences were found in the way the groups perceived the image of the mission (Section
2), personnel (Section 3), and delivery methods (Section 5) of Michigan State University
Extension. However, significant differences were observed in the ways they perceived the
overall image of the organization, as well as the image of the organizational structure
(Section 1), services (Section 4), and issues programming (Section 6). In all of the
sections where significant differences were detected, Advisory members tended to
indicate a more positive image than Extension staff. This indicates that Advisory
members hold a relatively more positive image of the organizational structure, services,
issues programming, and the overall image than do Extension staff. However, it must be
noted that the mean scores of both groups were below 2.50. Thus, they all perceived the
image of those areas positively, but the Extension staff were slightly less positive than the

Advisory members.

166

The multiple linear regression analyses helped to identify some of the most important
demographic characteristics of Advisory members and Extension staff who may hold a
positive image of the organization, as well as those who may hold a negative image. Of
the ten variables used in the analyses to predict the variables of the Advisory members,
only one appeared to be the most important predictor of the image of Michigan State
University Extension. The variable is place raised. Based on the coefficient of this
variable (being positive) and the scale of measurement used in the study (1 being strongly
agree and 4 being strongly disagree), it was determined that “place raised” is a positive
predictor of image of Michigan State University Extension among Advisory Members.

On the other hand, out of the eleven variables used to predict the variables for
Extension staff, two appeared to be the most important predictors of the image among
Extension staff. These two variables were race and place raised. Again, based on the
coefficients of these variables and the scale of measurement used, it was determined that
raised place is a positive predictor of the image of Michigan State University Extension

among Extension staff , and race was a negative predictor.

Thc
staff a

ln 1
statist
meml
Exten
and is
only :
Sum c
certa
of an
time
Wsii

Chili

Mic
SEn

Ofg

167

Discussion and Conclusions

The discussion of the findings among and between Advisory members and Extension
staff and the conclusions drawn from them will be presented in this section.

In general, one of the most striking findings of this study was that there were very few
statistically significant differences found in the perceptions among both Advisory
members and Extension staff regarding the overall image of Michigan State University
Extension, its organizational structure, mission, personnel, services, delivery methods,
and issues programming based on the selected demographic variables used. Even though
only few significant differences were observed, the study showed that image, being the
sum of beliefs, ideas, and impressions that one has on an object, can be influenced by
certain demographic variables. As individuals, we generally form or perceive the image
of an object based on the level of contacts and experiences we had with that object over
time. The trend produced by the mean scores showed that respondents were, in general,
positive towards the image of the organizational structure, mission, personnel, services,

delivery methods, issues programming, and the overall image of the organization.

(1) Discussion and Conclusions on Advisory members.

The findings on the perceptions of Advisory members toward the overall image of
Michigan State University Extension, its organizational structure, mission, personnel,
services, delivery methods, and issues programming based on the demographic variables

of gender, age, educational level, occupation, place raised, and income indicated that

168

statistically significant differences were present in age, occupation, and place raised.
These observed differences may be related to the background, experiences, and level of
contacts of the respondents with Michigan Sate University Extension and its programs
and services.

First in age categories, statistically significant differences were detected in the way the
Advisory members perceived the image of the services (Section 4) of Michigan State
University Extension (see Table 4.14). Younger Advisory members were more positive
toward the image of the services of the organization than older members. This may be
attributed to their level of contact, knowledge, and experiences with Michigan State
University Extension and its services, considering the fact that at this time, unlike
previous times, Advisory members were selected to reflect the diverse socio-economic
groups of each county instead of the traditional agricultural groups. The chances were
that older Advisory members may have come from rural and farm backgrounds, and
therefore know and understood more about Extension and Extension services than
younger Advisory members. These group of respondents were in a better position to
make objective assessments of the organization. While younger Advisory members
probably just read or heard about Extension and its services through their peers, relatives
and parents. They probably had no direct contact or experiences with the organization to
sufficiently make an objective assessment of the organization. This probably influenced
their responses. As Kotler (1975) mentioned, image is influenced both by the objective

characteristics of the object and the subjective characteristics of the perceiver.

Its deflr
with an
object \
experie

Sea
the my

image <

169

Its definitions also suggest that an individual’s background, needs, and past experiences
with an object produces different images of the same object. In other words, images of an
object vary from one person to another based on his or her backgrounds, needs, and
experiences with that object.

Second, in occupation categories, statistically significant differences were observed in
the way Advisory members perceived the image of the mission (Section 2) as well as the
image of the personnel (Section 3) of Michigan State University Extension (see Table
4.16). Advisory members who were in “other” categories of occupations which include
homemakers, retirees, etc., were more positive about the image of the mission (Section 2)
of Michigan State University Extension than those who were in business oriented
occupations. These differences may have certain basis associated with the historical
connection and contact Extension had with homemakers and retirees, and should be
mentioned. Homemakers have been one of the main consumers of services of Extension.
They have had a very long history of working together in two of the four core program
areas of Extension that include Home Economics and 4-H Youth. Home Economics
programs were programs normally designed to address the issues and concerns of
homemakers, while 4-H programs were for youth, with extensive involvement of the
homemakers. Similarly, in the case of retirees, they were also one of the major
supporters of the Extension service through their volunteer efforts. As a major source of
volunteers in local communities, Extension depends very much on them in running its
various local programs. These relationships may have been a factor in observing such

differences.

170

A difference in the perceptions of the image of personnel (Section 3) was also observed
among Advisory members. The difference indicates that Advisory members who were
government employees were more positive towards the image of the personnel than
farmers, business persons, and others. This probably reflects basic moral support and an
understanding that normally exists among peers in various public service agencies,
organizations, and institutions.

Third, in the category of place raised, statistically significant differences were
observed in the way Advisory members perceived the image of the mission (Section 2) of
Michigan State University Extension (see Table 4.17). Advisory members who were
raised on farms were more positive about the image of the mission of Michigan State
University Extension than those raised in rural but non-farm areas, towns, or cities. This
could also be the result of the historical connection and contacts between farmers and the
Extension service. As a public organization, Extension was established in the early
1900’s with the purpose of extending research information to farmers and their families.
This remains the most fundamental purpose of the Extension service today, and farmers
and their families have understood this fundamental purpose of the organization.

The findings regarding the question of what demographic variables among Advisory
members are important predictor(s) of the overall image of Michigan State University
Extension showed that “place raised” was the only most important predictor (see Table
4.27 left hand side). The multiple linear regression analyses further revealed specifically

that Advisory members who were raised in rural but non-farm areas were predicted to

haw
res;
wer
thar
cau‘
Ext
mar
rurz
0rd

SCI"

Mi.
861'
Of!

dur

Sig]

rE‘le

171

have a negative image of Michigan State University Extension. This indicated that
respondents whose backgrounds were rural but not necessarily had farming backgrounds
were likely to perceive the image of Michigan State University Extension as negative
than those respondents who were raised on farms, in towns and or in cities. Therefore,
caution should excercised in selecting people with such backgrounds to serve in
Extension Advisory Committee positions. These findings was surprising and contrary to
many peoples’ beliefs. Traditionally, most people tie or relate Extension and its usage to
rural areas and people. No one would have suspected such category of people who would
ordinarily be considered as Extension loyalists to have such views about the Extension

service.

(2) Discussion and Conclusions on Extension Staff

The findings on the perceptions of Extension staff toward the overall image of
Michigan State University Extension, its organizational structure, mission, personnel,
services, delivery methods, and issues programming based on the demographic variables
of gender, age, position with Michigan State University Extension, programming area,
duration in occupation, place raised, and place of residence indicated the presence of
statistically significant differences in only one variable: age.

Younger Extension staff were found to have more a positive image of the services
(Section 4) of Michigan State University Extension than older staff (see Table 4.20). The
significant differences observed may be due to the influence of peers, parents, and

relatives

who

it me

imp<

l€\'€

(.,- 16
line:
raise
Erie
and
mor
rais:
“h

EXlI

hay
th
Den
\th

Sin-I

172

who might have had positive experiences with Michigan State University Extension. Or,
it may not be due to any direct contact or experiences with the organization at all.

The findings on the question of what demographic variables among Extension staff are
important predictor(s) of the overall image of Michigan State University Extension,
revealed that two variables: “race” and “place raised” were the most important predictors
among Extension Staff (see Table 4.27 right hand side). Race with the coefficient of
(.16) was the most important predictor and then place raised with (-.O9). The multiple
linear regression analyses further revealed specifically that Extension staff who were
raised on farms were predicted to have a positive image of Michigan State University
Extension than those with rural but non-farm backgrounds as well as those from towns
and cities. This indicated that Extension staff who were raised on farms were likely to be
more positive about the overall image of Michigan State University Extension than those
raised in nrral but non-farm areas, towns, and cities. The analyses also showed that
Whites Extension staff were likely to perceived the image of Michigan State University
Extension in a most neagtive manner than non-whites.

The first part of these findings is as expected. It is perhaps what many people could
have predicted knowing the tie between extension and farm and rural families. People
who come from farming families, areas, and communities are expected to have positive
perceptions of the Extension service simply because they have a better understanding of
what Extension is all about. On the second part, the findings was unexpected. It was

surprising to find out that whites staff were likely to be more negative toward the image

of th

com

Exte
orga
prog
imag

SCH'Z

prog
were
obse
lakir
Exte
miss
facir
Exte
matc
and 1

Were

173

of the organization than non-whites. However, this could be due to the racial

composition of the respondents being overwhehningly whites.

(3) Discussion on the Findings between Advisory Members and Extension Staff

The findings of the comparison of the perceptions between Advisory members and
Extension staff regarding the overall image of Michigan State University Extension, its
organizational structure, mission, personnel, services, delivery methods, and issues
programming showed the presence of statistically significant differences in the overall
image of Michigan State University Extension as well as in its organizational structure,
services, and issues programming.

In all of these four areas (overall image, organizational structure, services, and issues
programming) where statistically significant differences were observed, Extension staff
were slightly less positive than Advisory members. The likely explanation to these
observed differences is probably associated with the organizational changes that were
taking place in the Extension system nationwide and Michigan State University’s
Extension, in particular, at the time of this study. Changes were being made in the
mission, purpose, and objectives of the Extension in light of the new challenges that were
facing Extension. New programs out of the four traditional programming areas of
Extension were being planned to meet those challenges. Jobs were being consolidated to
match the shrinking budget of Extension as well. Many staff, especially among junior
and mid-level management who constituted the majority of the respondents in this study,

were unhappy about the changes that were taking place.

h

perc:

struc

 

posh
liou*
Secu
deah
berm
cnhe
(Sec
nicc
the (
serv
Sect
issu
SCor
Wen

We'd

174

In general, these would tend to support the overall conclusions that respondents
perceived the overall image of Michigan State University Extension, its organizational
structure, mission, personnel, services, delivery methods, and issues programming as
positive. Most of the mean scores were below 2.50, falling within positive continuum.
However, when the trend of the mean scores were viewed section by section individually,
Section 1 which dealt with the image of the organizational structure, and section 2 which
dealt with the image of the mission of Michigan State University Extension, appeared to
be perceived more positively by both Advisory members and Extension staff than any
other section including the overall image of the organization. These two sections
(Sections 1 and 2) were the most positively rated sections, with mean scores below 2.00
in comparison with the rest of the other sections examined. These were then followed by
the overall image of the organization and Section 4 which dealt with the image of the
services of Michigan State University Extension at a distant second place. And finally,
Sections 3, 5, and 6, which dealt with the images of personnel, delivery methods, and
issues programming of Michigan State University Extension placed third. The mean
scores of these three sections were not in anyway indicating negative perceptions. They
were below 2.50, but considerably higher than the previous sections. This indicated a

weakness in those three sections as compared to the rest.

Basi
recc

stall

pers
Wer
imp
that

deli

the
TEC

tEli

175

Recommendations
Based on the findings and conclusions of this study, the following general
recommendation and specific recommendations for Advisory members and Extension

staff were made:

(1) General Recommendation

In general, the trend produced by the mean scores across all the sections studied
among both Advisory members and Extension staff showed that the image of the
personnel (Section 3), delivery methods (Section 5) and issues programming (Section 6)
were the least positively rated sections. This apparently indicates a need for more
improvement in these sections than in any other section. It is, therefore, recommended
that an effective public relations campaign to improve the image of the personnel,
delivery methods, and issues programming of Michigan State University Extension,

among both Advisory members and Extension staff, be initiated.

(2) Recommendations For Advisory members

(a) As significant differences were observed in the perceptions of the image of the
mission, services, and personnel of Michigan State University Extension among Advisory
members based on their age, occupation, and place of residence, it is
recommended that strong public relations campaigns using local newspapers, radios, and

television should be initiated.

sen"

pfl'S

olde

resi

Ho

ma

prr

Cc

Lir

hi

w

d:

176

This campaign should articulate in a simple language both the old and new mission and
services of Michigan State University Extension and the skills and expertise of its
personnel. In communicating this message, emphases should be placed on targeting: (1)
older people, (2)people who are in business oriented occupations, and (3) those who
reside in rural but non-farm areas. The message must also reassure traditional audience
of Extension of continuous support of their traditional programs in Agriculture, 4-H,
Home Economics, and Community Development. This would help clear the doubts that
many traditional audiences of Extension expressed at the beginning of the change
process, especially when issues programming was adopted by the organization.
Continued communication with the public must be prioritized by Michigan State
University Extension. As Warner and Christenson also mentioned in their 1984 study, as
the size and complexity of society grows, the need for a public agency to communicate
with its public is more crucial than ever before.

(b) It was predicted among Advisory members that “place raised” play a vital role in
determining the characteristics of people who perceived the image of Michigan State
University Extension as either positive or negative. It is, therefore, recommended that
Michigan State University Extension use this information as a guide in selecting its future

members of the county Advisory committees throughout the state.

[hi

TC l
01'

sh

012

im]
Ext
ded
Ext

(Sta

177

(3) Recommendations For Extension Staff

(a) Since Extension staff data showed significant differences in the way staff perceived
the image of the services of the organization based on their age, it is therefore
recommended that further investigations into the cmrent services offered by Michigan
State University Extension be conducted to determine why these differences exist among
the staff.

(b) Orientation program for newly employed staff should de developed or reviewed
regularly if one is already in place to inculcate all minor and major changes that happened
or would happen regarding all the programs and services of the organization. All staff
should be oriented to familiarize themselves with all the services and programs of the
organization, not just the one or two areas in which they specialized.

(c) It was predicted among Extension staff that “race” and “place raised” were
important in determining who perceived the image of Michigan State University
Extension as positive or negative. In order for the organization to have a loyal and
dedicated workforce, it is, therefore, recommended that Michigan State University
Extension consider these demographic variables in hiring of its future staff at all levels

(state and local).

wr

178

Suggestions for Future Study
At the end of a study, it is always important to reflect on the entire study -- how it was
planned and conducted, how it could be improved, and what specifics recommendations
for future research could be made. For this study, the likert-type scale used to assess the
image may not, in any way, be an absolute measure of image. Nevertheless, it has been
tested and proved through many studies, including that of Fisk in 1961; Kunkel and

Barry, 1968; Crunkilton et al., 1989, etc., to be a reliable and adequate assessor of image.

These findings are, therefore, believed to be a reflection of the image of the

organizational structure, mission, personnel, services, delivery methods, and issues

programming of Michigan State University Extension. Probably the most problematic
aspect of this study was the sample size. Even though it was randomly drawn, and
therefore representative of the population, the sampling error was big. This was
understood to be, at the beginning of the study, the best option available to the researcher
due to limited resources.

For those who may be interested in conducting a similar study or replicating it, it
would be rewarding to:

(1) Develop semantic differentials for these six areas and use them to collect data and
compare the results with this study which used the Likert-type scale.

(2) Replicate the study using traditional advisory members for the four core
programming areas (Agriculture & Natural Resources, 4-H Youth, Home
Economics, and Community Development) of Extension.

(3) Conduct a similar study comparing three or four groups such as University-wide

administrators, College of Agriculture administrators, University-wide faculty,
and faculty of the College of Agriculture.

179

(4) Conduct a qualitative study such as a focus group or a combination of both
qualitative and quantitative studies, using a similar population.

(5) Conduct comparative study of image of the four traditional programming areas of
Extension.

180

APPENDICES

181

APPENDIX A
FIRST MEMO TO COUNTY EXTENSION DIRECTORS
DATE:
TO: (Director’ name)

FROM: Jake Warnhoff
Department Chair

RE: Follow up study of Advisory Members and Extension Field Staff who
participated in the issues identification process conducted in 1993.

We are hoping to contact a random sample of advisory members and field staff
across the state to get a “read” on their current image perception of Michigan
State University Extension. But, we need your help 1!

Would you please provide the address(s) of the following individuals from
your county.

(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)

 

 

 

We will make sure you receive copies of all correspondence and final results
of our research.

Please send or fax your response to:

Dr. Jake Wamhoff, Chairman

Dept. of Agricultural & Extension Education
408 Agricultural Hall

Michigan State University

East Lansing, MI 48824-1039

Fax: (517) 353-4981

Thanks.

DATE:

TO:

FROM:

182

APPENDIX B

SECOND MEMO TO COUNTY EXTENSION DIRECTORS

(Director’s Name)

Jake Warnhoff
Department Chair

Reminder about the addresses of advisory committee members in
your county who participated in the issues identification process
conducted in 1993

Our record shows that we did not receive the addresses of advisory committee
members we requested from you.

Please help us with the addresses of the following individuals in your county.

(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)

 

 

 

 

Once again all responses should be send or fax to:

Dr. Jake Wamhoff, Chairman

Dept. of Agricultural & Extension Education
408 Agricultural Hall

Michigan State University

East Lansing, MI 48824-1039

Fax: (517) 353-4981

Thank you very much for your cooperation.

 

OFFICE OF
RESEARCH
AND
GRADUATE,
STUDIES

University Committee on
Research Involving
Human Subjects

«mm

Michigan State University
232 Administration Building
East Lansing, Michigan
48824-1046

517/355-2180
FAX: 517/432-1171

The Michigm State University
IDEA is Institutional DiVEISity.
ErceI/eiice in Action.

MSU is an affinnati‘ve-acii'cn.
....iminilv institution

   
 
 
  
 
  
 

183

MICHIGAN STATE

 

U 1% I \l E 11 S I 1' Y

August 10, 1995

To: Usman Adamu
1436 J Spartan Village
E. Lansrng, MI 4882

RE: IRB#: 95-387 .
TITLE: IMAGE OF MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION AS

PERCEIVED BY COUNTY EXTENSION ADVISORY COMMITTEE
MEMBERS AND EXTENSION FIELD STAFF IN MICHIGAN

REVISION REQUESTED: N/A
CATEGORY: -I
APPROVAL DATE: 08/07/95

The University Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects'(UCRIHS)
review of this prOject is complete. I am pleased to advise that the
rights and welfare of the human subjects appear to be adequately
protected and methods to obtain informed consent are appropriate.

herefore,
above;

RENEWAL:

REVISIONS:

PROBLEMS]
CRANcEs:

the UCRIHS approved this project and any revrsions listed

UCRIHS approval is valid for one calendar year, beginning with
the approval date shown above. Investigators planning to
continue a project beyond one year must use the green renewal
form (enclosed with t e original agproval letter or when a.
project is renewed) to seek u date certification. There is a
maxrmum of four such expedite renewals possible. Investigators
wishing to continue a project beyond that time need to submit it
again or complete revrew.

UCRIHS must review an changes in Erocedures involving human
subjects, rior to initiation of t e change. If this is done at
the time O renewal, please use the green renewal form. To
revise an approved protocol at any 0 her time during the year¢
send your written request to the CRIHS Chair, requesting revrsed
approval and referencing the project's IRB # and title. Include
in our request a description of the change and any revised

ins ruments, consent forms or advertisements that are applicable.

Should either of the followin arise during the course of the
work, investigators must noti UCRIHS promptly: (1) problems
(unexpected srde effects, comp aints, etc.) involvrng uman
subjects or (2) changes in the research environment or new
information indicatinn greater risk to the human subgects than

existed when the protOcOl was previously reviewed an approved.

If we can be of any future helpé lease do not hesitate to contact us

at (517)355-2180 or FAX (517)4

Sincerely,

171.

. I"

vid E. Wright, h D.
CRIHS Chair

DEw:kaa/lcp

cc: William Bobbitt

184

APPENDIX D
NOTIFICATION LETTER TO THE RESPONDENTS
Date:
Respondent’s name & Address
Dear (First name of respondent):

I would like to inform you in advance that your name has been selected randomly to
participate in an image study of the Michigan State University Extension.

You are among the few and carefully selected individuals from across the state whose
responses are considered to be important if not critical to this study.

In a few weeks, you would receive a questionnaire through the mail from the Department
of Agricultural & Extension Education of Michigan State University. The questionnaire
is designed to solicit your perceptions on six different aspects of the organization
including its mission, personnel, services etc. Please find time to complete the
questionnaire and return it as soon as you possibly can. Findings from this study will
help us in our effort to continue to improve the structure and services of the Michigan
State University Extension to best serve the people of Michigan.

Thank you very much in advance for your cooperation and support.
Sincerely,
Dr. Carrol H. Wamhoff, Chairman

Dept. of Agricultural & Extension. Education
Michigan State University

Usman Adamu
Dept. of Agricultural & Extension Education
Michigan State University

185

APPENDIX E
COVER LETTER FOR THE QUESTIONNAIRE
Date:
Respondent’s name & address
Dear (First name of respondent):

For the past few years, the Cooperative Extension service at the national, state, and local levels
have undergone a tremendous amount of change. Opinions about Extension and Extension
programs have been openly expressed by both clients and customers of the organization. This
promoted the organization to change. In our effort to continue to understand what is happening
to Extension, the Department of Agricultural & Extension Education at Michigan State
University is conducting an image study of the Michigan State University Extension (MSU-E).
The study is designed to assess the current image of the organization across the state.

You were selected randomly to participate in this study from a list provided by the Extension
office at Michigan State University. Because of the random selection process of the few
participants, your response is very critical to this study. So please complete the questionnaire
and return it on or before October 2, 1995. It should take you approximately 30 minutes to
complete the questionnaire, and your early response will be very much appreciated.

You are assured that no one will see your answers except the researchers. The identification
number on the first page of the questionnaire is for mailing purpose only. It will help us to check
names on our mailing list when a questionnaire is returned. Your participation in this study is
completely voluntary. And you indicate your voluntary agreement to participate by completing
and returning this questionnaire.

Results of this study will be made available. If you are interested, please write your address on
the back of the return envelope provided. If you have any question about this study, please call
the department at (517) 355-65 80

Thank you very much for your cooperation.

Sincerely,
Dr. Carroll H. Wamhoff, Chairman Usman Adamu
Dept. of Agric. & Ext. Educ Dept. of Agric. & Extension Educ.

Michigan State University Michigan State University

186

SURVEY OF THE IMAGE OF
NHCHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION (MSU-E)

 

Agricultural 8 Extension Education

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL AND EXTENSION EDUCATION
410 AGRICULTURAL HALL
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
EAST LANSING, MI 48823
(517) 355-6580

tr c Jr-x

187

DIRECTIONS:

The following statements in sections 1-6 describes the Michigan State University Extension
(MSU-E) organization, its mission, personnel, services, delivery methods, and issues programming.
You are asked to relate your perception or level of agreement/disagreement with these statements
with factors related to your image of the organization currently. For each statement, please indicate
your agreement/disagreement by circling the appropriate category of:

SA = Strongly Agree

A = Agree

D = Disagree
SD = Strongly Disagree
UC = Uncertain

NB: All responses will be kept confidential. It is guaranteed that no respondent will be
identified.

Section 1: Your perception of the organization (Michigan State University Extension)

 

Statements Response Category

 

1) Michigan State University Extension (MSU-E)
is an educational service organization. SA A D SD UC

2) Michigan State University Extension (MSU-E)
is an information service organization. SA A D SD UC

3) Michigan State University Extension (MSU-E)
is a research service organization. SA A D SD UC

4) Michigan State University Extension (MSU-E)
is an organization committed to serving farmers. SA A D SD UC

5) Michigan State University Extension (MSU-E)
is an organization committed to serving urban
people. SA A D SD UC

6) Michigan State University Extension (MSU-E)
is an organization committed to serving people
in general. SA A D SD UC

k

14)

188

 

Statements Response Category

 

7) The organizational structure of the Michigan State
University Extension (MSU-E) inhibits innovation. ** SA A D SD UC

8) The organizational structure of the Michigan State
University Extension (MSU-E) prohibits freer
communication within the staff. ** SA A D SD UC

9) Michigan State University Extension (MSU-E)
encourages participation. SA A D SD UC

10) Michigan State University Extension (MSU-E)
is a highly stratified organization **. SA A D SD UC

1 1) Duties in the organization (MSU-E) are narrowly
defined. " SA A D SD UC

12) The organizational environment of the Michigan

State University Extension permits team work. SA A D SD UC
13) Overall, Michigan State University Extension
is an open organization. SA A D SD UC
Section 2: Your Perception of the mission of the organization (Michigan State University
Extension

14) Extend the resources of Michigan State
University to the people of Michigan
through community development
programs. SA A D SD UC

15) Extend the resources of Michigan State
University to the people of Michigan
through home economics programs. SA A D SD UC

16) Extend the resources of Michigan State

University to the people of Michigan
through 4-H programs. SA A D SD UC

** Donates negative statement

f.)

1‘.)

f-J

(2..)

189

 

Statements Response Category

 

17) Extend the resources of Michigan State
University to the people of Michigan
through agricultural programs. SA A D SD UC

l8) Extend the resources of the College of
Agriculture to the people of Michigan
through educational programs. SA A D SD UC

19) Extend research information of the Michigan
State University to farmers in Michigan. SA A D SD UC

20) Extend research information of the Michigan
State University to rural people in Michigan. SA A D SD UC

21) Extend research information to urban people
of Michigan. SA A D SD UC

22) Help people help themselves through
education. SA A D SD UC

23) Help people improve their lives through

educational process that applies knowledge
to critical issues. SA A D SD UC

Section 3: Your perception of the personnel of the Michigan State University Extension

(MSU-E)
24) Are professional in their appearance. SA A D SD UC
25) Are professional in dealing with problems. SA A D SD UC
26) Are professional in dealing with their
clientele. SA A D SD UC
27) Do not really care about their clientele. ** SA A D SD UC
28) Are effective problem solvers. SA A D SD UC

** Donates negative statement

I.)

DJ

190

 

 

Statements Response Category
29) Are effective teachers. SA A D SD UC
30) Are effective communicators. SA A D SD UC
31) Are good “team players”. SA A D SD UC

32) Are responsive to the problems of their
customers. SA A D SD UC

33) Lack knowledge in subject matter areas
e.g. forestry, animal science, crop science etc. ** SA A D SD UC

34) Lack skills in subject matter areas e.g.
forestry, animal science, crop science etc. ** SA A D SD UC

35) Are, overall, of poor quality. SA A D SD UC

Section 4: Your perception of the services of Michigan State University Extension (MSU-E)

36) Arc of good quality. SA A D SD UC
37) Are well designed to fit the needs of the

clientele. SA A D SD UC
38) Focused more on Agriculture. SA A D SD UC
39) Focused more on Home Economics. SA A D SD UC
40) Focused more on Community Development. SA A D SD UC
41) Focused more on 4-H Youth. SA A D SD UC
42) Focused more on social problems. SA A D SD IUC
43) Concentrated more on farmers problems. SA A D SD UC
44) Concentrated more on urban problems. SA A D SD UC
45) Concentrated more on rural problems. SA A D SD UC

** Donates negative statement

191

Section 5: Your perception of the delivery methods used by the Michigan State University
Extension (MSU-E).

 

Statements Response Category

 

46) Mostly conduct its programs using personal

contact. SA A D SD lUC
47) Mostly conduct its programs using television. SA A D SD UC
48) Mostly conduct its programs using demonstration

methods. SA A D SD UC
49) Mostly conduct its program using radio. SA A D SD UC

50) Mostly conduct its program using news paper
bulletin. SA A D SD UC

51) Is increasing the use of modern technology
(e.g. computers, satellites etc. ) in delivering

 

its programs. SA A D SD UC
52) Mostly use methods that are suitable to the
clientele groups. SA A D SD UC
Section 6: Your perception of the issues programming.
Statements Response Category

 

53) The process provided a positive experiences to
all who participated. SA A D SD UC

54) The process broadened participation of wide
spectrum of people. SA A D SD UC

55) The process identified the most important
issues in the local communities (Counties). SA A D SD UC

192

 

 

Statements Response Category

56) The process prioritized the most important issues

in the local communities (Counties). SA A D SD UC
57) The process identified the most important issues

in the region. SA A D SD UC
58) The process prioritized the most important issues

in the region. SA A D SD UC
59) The process identified the most important issues

in the state. SA A D SD UC
60) The process prioritized the most important issues

in the state. SA A D SD UC
61) Most of the participants felt that the concept of

issues programming is appropriate for Extension. SA A D SD UC
62) Most of the participants felt that the concept of

issues programming is not appropriate for Michigan

State University Extension (MSU-E)" SA A D SD UC
63) Issues programming will definitely increase

Extension linkages with other organizations. SA A D SD UC
64) Issues programming will definitely increase

public support for Michigan State University

Extension (MSU-E). SA A D SD UC

65) The adoption of issues programming by the
Michigan State University Extension (MSU-E) is
an indication of continuing commitment of the
organization to public service.

66) The adoption of issues programming by the
Michigan State University Extension (MSU-E)
is a sign of withdrawal from its traditional
audiences."

** Donates negative statement

SAADSDUC

SAADSDUC

 

‘\

193

Section 7: General background and demographic information.
67) What is your gender?

_( 1) Male
_(2) Female

68) What is your race?

_(1) White

_(2) Black

_(3) Hispanic

_(4) Oriental

_(5) Native American
____(6) Other

 

69) What is your age?

_(1) Under 23 years
_(2) 24 to 29 years
_(3) 30 to 35 years
_(4) 36 to 41 years
_(5) 42 to 47 years
_(6) 48 to 53 years
_(7) 54 to 69 years
_(8) 70 to 75 years
_(9) Over 76 years

70) What is your occupation?

_(1) Farmer

_(2) County Employee

_(3) State Employee

_(4) Federal Employee

_(5) Business man/woman (please circle one)
_(6) Other

 

71) How long have you been in that occupation?

__(1) 0 to 5 years
_(2) 6 to 11 years
_(3) 12 to 17 years
_(4) 18 to 23 years
__(5) 24 to 29 years
_(6) Over 30 years

194

72) What is your position with Michigan State University Extension (MSU-E)?

_(1) Advisory Member

_(2) District Extension Director
_(3) County Extension Director
_(4) Program Leader

_(5) Extension Agent

_(6) Other

 

73) What is your primary programming area?

_( 1) Agriculture and Natural Resources
_(2) 4-H Youth

_(3) Community Development

_(4) Home Economics

74) What is your highest level of education?
_(1) Grade School
___(2) High School
_(3) Trade School
_(4) 2 yrs. College
_(5) 4 yrs. College
_(6) Graduate School

75) Where were you raised?
_(1) Farm
_(2) Rural Non-farm
_(3) Town
_(4) City

76) Where are you living now?

_( 1) Far!!!

_(2) Rural Non-farm
_(3) Town

_(4) City

77) What is your estimated gross income per year?

_(1) Under 8 5, 000
_(2)$ 6to $11, 000
_(3) $12 to $17,000
_(4) $18 to $23, 000
_(5) $24 to $29, 000
_(6) $30 to $35, 000
_(7) $36 to $41, 000
_(8) $42 to $47, 000
_(9) Over $48,000

195

78) What is your marital status?

_(1) Married
_(2) Single
_(3) Divorced
_(4) Separated
_(5) Widowed

79) Please use the space provided below to write any additional comments regarding this survey.

Once again thank you very much for taking your time to complete this questionnaire.

196

APPENDD( G
F OLLOW—UP POSTCARD

Last week a questionnaire on the survey of the image of Michigan State University
Extension (MSU-E) was sent to you. Your name was randomly drawn from a list of
selected individuals from across the state of Michigan

If you have already completed the questionnaire and returned it to us please accept our
sincere appreciation. If not, please disregard the earlier dateline of October 2, 1995
stated in your covering letter and complete the questionnaire today. Because you are
among the few and carefully selected individual in the sample, your response is extremely
important if the results of the study are to accurately reflect the perceptions of people
from across the state.

If for some reasons you did not receive the questionnaire, or it got misplaced, please call
the Department of Agricultural & Extension Education collect at (517) 355-6580 for a
replacement.

Sincerely,
Dr. Carroll H. Wamhoff, Chairman Usman Adamu
Dept. of Agric. & Ext. Educ. Dept. of Agric. & Ext. Educ.

Michigan State University Michigan State University

197

APPENDIX H
SECOND FOLLOW-UP LETTER
Date:
Respondent’s name & address
Dear (First name of respondent):

Approximately three weeks ago we mailed you a questionnaire on the survey of the
image of Michigan State University Extension (MSU-E). As of today our record has
shown that we haven’t received your completed questionnaire.

This research is being conducted because of the fact that a regular assessment of an
organization image is a very useful step in understanding what is happening to that
organization.

I am writing to you again because of the importance each respondent is to the entire
study. As we mentioned previously in our correspondence that you are among the few
individuals from across the state whose input were solicited for this study, it is therefore
essential for each respondent to return his or her questionnaire. In order for the results of
the study to reflect the opinions of the citizens of Michigan, all responses should be
included.

I enclosed herewith another copy of the questionnaire just in case the other one is
misplaced.

Thank you very much for your cooperation and support.

Sincerely,
Dr. Carroll H. Wamhoff, Chairman Usman Adamu
Dept. of Agric. & Ext. Educ. Dept. of Agric. & Ext. Educ.

Michigan State University Michigan State University

198

APPENDD( I
THIRD FOLLOW-UP LETTER
Date:
Respondent’s name & address
Dear (First name of respondent):

I am writing to you regarding the image study of Michigan State University Extension
(MSU-E). We haven’t received your completed questionnaire yet.

The overall response has been very encouraging. However, we would like to have the
opinions of all our respondents included in the study so that we can accurately describe
the feelings of the people of Michigan on these important issues.

Your response is absolutely paramount in this study. Its entire success and usefulness
depends upon you and others who have not yet responded. This is because past
experience has shown that you who have not yet responded may be holding different
opinions than those who have already responded.

Because of these reasons, I am sending you the questionnaire this time through a certified
mail to ensure delivery. We are urging you to please complete the questionnaire and

return it as quickly as possibly.

Once again thank you very much for your cooperation and support.

Sincerely,
Dr. Carroll H. Wamhoff, Chairman Usman Adamu
Dept. Agric. & Ext. Educ. Dept. of Agric. & Ext. Educ.

Michigan State University Michigan State University

199

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adizes, Ichak, (1988). Comprate Lifecvcles: How and Whv Cormrations Grow and Die
a_n_d Wh_a:tto do About It. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Ary, Donald et al., (1990). Introduction to Research in Education. Fort Worth, TX: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston, Inc.

Blackburn, Donald J ., (1989). Foundations and Changing Practices in Extension. Guelph,
University of Guelph, Ontario, Canada

Boone, Edgar J ., (1985). Developing Proms in Adult Education. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Pretince-Hall, Inc.

Boorstin, Daniel J ., (1962). The Image or What hapmned to the American Dream. New
York, Atheneum.

Boorstin, Daniel J ., (1978). The Impge: A Guide to Pseudo-Events in America. New York,
Athenuem.

Boulding, Kenneth E., (1956). The Ime. Ann Arbor, The University of Michigan Press.

Boyle, Patrick G., (1981). Planning Better Proms. New York, McGraw-Hill Book
Company.

Bristol, Lee H. JR., (1960). Developing the Cormrate Image: A Mflagement Guide To
Public Relatirfl. New York, Charles Scribner's Sons.

Buchholz, Rogene A. et al., (1985). Mmement Resp_onse To Public Issues: Concepts &
Cases In Strategy Formulation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Buchholz, Rogene A. (1991). Public Policv Issues For Ma_n_agement. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Chase, W. Howard, (1984). Issues Mmement: The Origgs' of thg Future. Stamford, CN:
Issue Action Publications, Inc.

Cooperative Extension System Strategic Planning Council. (1991). Patterns of Change.
Washington DC: Extension Service, United States Department of Agriculture.

Daft, Richard L., (1992). Organization Theog and Desigp. Saint Paul, West Publishing
Company.

200

Dalgaard, Kathleen Albrecht et al., (1985). Issues Prom’ g in Extension. St. Paul:
The Minnesota Extension Service.

Dillrnan, Don A., (1978). Mail and Telephone Surveys: Th_e Tot_al Desigp Method. New
York, John Wiley & Sons.

Erwing, Raymond P., (1987). Ma_n_aging The New Bottom Line: Issues Management For
Senior Executivea. Homewood, IL: Dow Jones-Irwin.

Futures Task Force to the Extension Committee on Organization and Policy. (1987).

Extension in Transition: Bridging the Gap Between Vision and Reality Blacksburg:
Virginia Cooperative Extension Service.

 

Glass, Gene V. and Hopkins, Kenneth D., (1984). Statistical Methods in Education and
Psychology. Boston, Allyn and Bacon.

Goens, George A. and Clover Sharon IR, (1991). Mastering School Reform. Boston,
Allyn and Bacon.

 

Isaac, S. and Micheal, William J ., (1982). Handbook in Research and Evaluation for
Education and the Behavioral Sciences. San Diego, CA: EdITS Publishers.

Kanter, Rosabeth Moss, (1983). The Change Masters. New York, Simon and Schuster.

Kilrnan, Ralp H. et al., (1988). Comrate Transformation: Revitalizing Organizations for a
Competitive World. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Kimberly, John R. et al. (1980). The Organizational Lifecvcle: Issu_es in the Creatioa,
Transforrnatioa, and Decline of Organizations. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass
Publishers.

Kosecoff, J. and Fink, A., (1982). Evaluation Basics: A Practitioner's Manual. Newbury
Park, SAGE Publications, Inc.

Kotler, P., (1975). Marketing For NonProfit Organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall, Inc.

Kotler, P. and Fox, Karen F .A., (1985). Strategic Marketing For Educational Institutions.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Lippitt, Gordon L., (1969). Organization Renewal: Achieving Viabilig in a Changing
World. New York, Appleton-Century-Crofts (ACC).

201

Lippitt, Gordon L., (1982). Organization Renewal: A Holistic Approach to Organization
Development. Englewood Clifi's, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Lundstedt, Sven B. and Colglazier, E. William, JR., (1982), Man_aging Innovation: The
Social Dimensions of Creativity. Invention aid Technolcgy. New York, Pergarnon
Press.

Merriam, SB. and Simpson, E.L., (1984). A Guide to Research For Educators and Trainers
of Adults. Malabar, IL: Krieger Publishing Company.

Michigan State University Extension (MSU-E). (1993). F ocu_s on Michigan's Future: An
Issues Identification Process. East Lansing: Michigan State University.

Michigan State University Extension (MSU-E). (1993). Focus on Michigan's: Trends and
Perspactives. East Lansing, Michigan State University.

Moore, Eddie A and Harrison, William A., (1990-1991), "Critical Issues, Challenges Face
Cooperative Extensga", Options, Vol. 5, No. 2, Winter.

Rasmussen, Wayne D., (1989). Taking the Univeraitx to th_e People: Sweaty-five Years of
Cooperative Extension. Ames, Iowa State University Press.

Renfro, William L., (1993). Issues Management in Strategic Planning. Westport, CT:
Quorum Books.

Reynolds, Paul D., (1971). A Primer in Theory Con_struction. Indianapolis, The Bobbs-
Merrill Company, Inc.

Richardson, B., (1988). An Introduction to Issue-Based Proggmrg g. College Station:
Texas Agricultural Extension Service.

Rowe, LLoyd A. and Bose, William B., (1973). Organizational and Mgagerial Inngation:
A Reader. Pacific Palisades, CA: Goodyear Publishing Company, Inc.

Sanders, H. C., (1966). The Cooperative Extenaion Service. Englewood Cliff, NJ: Prentice-
Hall, Inc.

Stanley, Guy. D. D., (1985). Mgaging External Issues: Theog and Practice. Greenwich,
CT: JAI Press Inc.

United States Department of Agriculture - Extension Service. (1988). Coomrative
Extegion System National Initiatives: F ocu_s on Issues. Washington DC.

202

von Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General System Theog: Foundations, Developmeng,
Applications New York, George Braziller, Inc.

von Bertalanffy, L. (1975), Perspectives on General System Theog: Scientific-
Philosophical Studies. New York, George Braziller, Inc.

Vitzthum, Edward F. (1991). Cooperative Extension Proggam__m_ing: A Viflon for the Year
20(1); Paper Presented at the National Conference of the American Association for
Adult & Continuing Education. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
ED341866.

"lllillililllili