v

, ""v\ M" I"

 

fifl—vau

 

v .w-- u

 

 

 

‘1
ll ,,.
aw.

.

 

J
'23".

,.
’3".
..
h.-
. m- _

~
.~
Vow

 

;
1
3;
I
b

. *3
hi

'-

a

1?;

o
.
—

 

t!

“’"X!
a
u

. '1‘ ‘73. ‘ V‘. ‘ . , K ~ 1' fix ‘   ‘ ‘ “a" 5". \
“Vii": fig! 7 - ‘ . ‘ . V I - an: v 31‘2‘ _ ”3%“. f

‘Bsfib. ' ‘ ' - 1 ' ‘ , ' '7 St - " a. i“; '

‘ $1 ‘ u

. i: . ‘

.3 g 3 ‘
“ )5

 

f:

 

THESlS

MICHIGAN STA

 

LIB nAnv ‘l‘lll‘a‘llllllllll
Michigan State
Unlversity

llllllll

”fill
“Md
6 7977

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is to certify that the

dissertation entitled

The Roles of Stakeholder, Process, and Facilitation
Variables in the Collaborative Activities and Climate
of School—to-Work Coalitions

presented by

Raymond E. Legler

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

 

Ph . D . degree in Psychology

 

 

W“ A/zxic/LL,

Major professor

 

Date 7/97/7J

 

MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-12771

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINE return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE I DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

Md?” 0 2 200‘

 

 

 

 

 

mmm%qm‘

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

use WWpGS-QM

 

THE ROLES OF STAKEHOLDER, PROCESS, AND FACILITATION VARIABLES
IN THE COLLABORATIVE ACTIVITIES AND CLIMATE OF
SCHOOL-TO-WORK COALITIONS
By

Raymond E. Legler

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Psychology

1998

ABSTRACT
THE ROLES OF STAKEHOLDER, PROCESS, AND FACILITATION VARIABLES
IN THE COLLABORATIVE ACTIVITIES AND CLIMATE OF
SCHOOL—TO-WORK COALITIONS
By

Raymond E. Legler

Factors thought to influence collaboration in school-to-work (STW) coalitions are
investigated. Literature from the field of organizational theory that examined
collaboration is reviewed. Hypotheses predicted that stakeholder diversity,
interdependence, written agreements, and communication would influence climate,
while partnership size, resource sharing, planning, and coordination would affect
activities. Path analysis of the data revealed the primary importance of planning and
coordination. Diversity and resource sharing predicted activities, written agreements
and communication predicted climate, and interdependence influenced both activities

and climate. Implications for collaboration and future research are discussed.

This dissertation is dedicated to my mother, Barbara Joan Legler, and to children living

in poverty.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would not have been able to complete my graduate studies and this dissertation
without the help of many family members, friends, faculty, and other students. Thanks
to my siblings Andrew, Jean Marie, Kathleen, and many other family members for
their support and encouragement. I greatly appreciate the assistance of my committee
chair, Tom Reischl, my "co-chair" , Gloria Kielbaso, and committee members Bob
Caldwell and Ralph Levine, who helped me formulate and clarify my ideas and
believed in the importance of the work. Thanks to David Loveland for his assistance
with data analysis. Finally I'd like to thank my undergraduate research assistants
Andrea Crosthwaite, Jill Huppenbauer, Heather Klouda, and Karen Mueller for their

efforts in helping collect the data for this study.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES .......................................... vi
LIST OF FIGURES .......................................... vii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................... viii
CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION AND LITERATURE REVIEW ............ 1
Background ........................................... 5
Historical Precursors of STW ........................... 5

The Scope of the Problem ............................. 8

The STW Solution ................................. 11

STW Coalitions ................................... 14

Collaboration in Coalitions ................................ 18
Theoretical and Review Literature ....................... 18

Empirical Literature ................................ 24
Organizational Climate ................................... 40
Definition ....................................... 4O
Dirnensionality ................................... 41

Independent vs. Dependent Variable ..................... 42

Levels of Analysis and Methodology ..................... 45

Summary ............................................ 47

The Present Study ...................................... 49
CHAPTER 2 - METHOD ...................................... 54
Design .............................................. 54
Sample Size and Power ................................... 54
Sampling Procedure ..................................... 54
Respondents .......................................... 55
Measures ............................................ 58
Procedure ............................................ 59
CHAPTER 3 - RESULTS ...................................... 63
CHAPTER 4 - DISCUSSION ................................... 71
APPENDICES ........ g .................................... 87
REFERENCES ............................................ 106

V

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 - Summary of Key Variables Identified in Theoretical and Review Literature 25

Table 2 - Summary of Hypotheses, Variables, and Items .................. 52
Table 3 - Demographics of the Partnerships .......................... 57
Tables 4 and 5 - Scale Statistics .................................. 60
Table 6 - Zero-order Correlations Among Predictor and Outcome Variables ..... 62
Table 7 - Regression of Predictor Variables on Outcome Variables ........... 64

vi

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 - Full Model ......................................... 67
Figure 2 - Second Model ....................................... 68
Figure 3 - Final Model ........................................ 7O

vii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ECD ................................. Early childhood development
FOC ........................... Fractionated organizational community
GAO ................................... General Accounting Office
PIC ...................................... Private industry council
STW .......................................... School-to-Work

viii

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION AND LITERATURE REVIEW

Introduction

The past fifteen years have seen increasing attention paid to the inability of the
United States to adequately prepare non-college-bound youth for employment. Several
significant publications such as A Natiow Risfik (US. Commission on Excellence in
Education, 1983), The Forgotten Half (Grant Foundation Commission on Work,
Family, and Citizenship, 1988), and America's Choice: High Skills or Low Wages
(Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce, 1990) have sounded the alarm
to educators, industry, government, parents and students that the US. must
dramatically change the way it goes about educating and preparing young people to
compete in an increasingly global economy. AS Hoyt (1994) States, "In no other
industrialized country are the transitions from school to work left so much to chance as
in the United States" (p. 189).

The failure of the US. education system to adequately prepare students,
particularly non-college-bound youth, to enter the world of work occurs for several
reasons. High school curricula typically do not include subject areas or activities that

1

2

relate material to potential employment requirements and experiences (U. S. General
Accounting Office (GAO), 1993). Teachers are seldom aware of the specific skills and
abilities required in the private sector; this is perpetuated by the fact that employers
rarely have input on school curricula and have no formal channels through which to
familiarize school personnel of job requirements (Hoachlander, 1994). Finally,
inadequate career exploration and preparation usually leave non-college-track students
without the necessary knowledge or skills to compete for high-wage jobs after
graduation (GAO, 1993). Students not headed for college are not provided assistance
in understanding the need for school—to-work opportunities (Bishop, 1988).

We cannot expect schools to solve a problem of such magnitude on their own.
In order to prepare students for the world of work, the world of work has to be
involved in the preparation of students. School-to-work (STW) transition programs
hold the promise of involving businesses and other key stakeholders in the secondary
education system to assist students in preparing for employment or further education
after graduation.

School-to-work transition programs are intended to change the way Students
learn, and to clarify for students the relationship between their high school education
and future employment (Whiting, 1993). These programs attempt to integrate
traditional academic courses and career education that involves real-world work
experience (Goldberger, Kazis, & O'Flanagan, 1994). Through school-based activities
that are applied and experiential, work-based activities that relate employment training

to academics, and connecting activities that link education to employment, STW

3

programs are part of an education reform movement that has the potential to
dramatically improve students' skills and opportunities (School-to—Work Opportunities
Act, 1994).

Along with substantial changes in educational curricula, collaborative alliances
that involve schools, businesses and other key stakeholders are the defining component
of the school-to-work approach. Extensive research exists in the areas of experiential
learning and career exploration, yet little analysis has been done of the collaborative
processes within these alliances (Legler, 1997). STW programs are gaining increased
attention and use, and this could lead to substantial changes in educational policy
throughout the United States. If this country is planning to make school-to-work
programs the norm, it is essential that the collaborative process be thoroughly examined
so that these alliances will function as intended. This will ensure that the time and
money invested in the STW approach will be spent effectively, and enable young people
to make smooth transitions into employment.

This study examined the impact of several factors thought to influence the
processes and outcomes of collaboration that occur within STW coalitions. Based on
reviews of STW literature and literature generated through analysis of collaboration
from an organizational theory perspective, this study collected data from 150 STW
coalitions in order to examine the relationship between critical variables in the
collaborative process.

Analysis of collaboration in the STW field, using information about effective

coalitions developed in organizational theory literature, has several important potential

4

benefits. The ideas that have been generated on collaboration from an organizational
perspective can help guide theory and research on STW coalitions. This work could
aid existing STW programs in identifying and addressing gaps in their coalitions -
allowing them to become more effective and improve outcomes for Students. New
coalitions could benefit by incorporating necessary components from the beginning.
Finally, by borrowing concepts that have already been developed, STW programs can
avoid having to 'reinvent the wheel' when Shaping their coalitions and can focus on
improving the transition process for students.

The next sections review literature on STW transition, collaboration, and
coalitions. First is a review of background literature on the history of the STW
movement. Then the need for STW programs is documented, and the promise of STW
programs to solve these problems is described. After this, a review of research on
coalitions is presented. Next is a review of literature on organizational climate, and the
present study is described.

This review begins with a brief history of the career and vocational programs
that have preceded STW efforts. Following this is a discussion of the issues that
precipitated the need for school-to-work transition programs, and a description of the
underlying philosophies of the STW movement. Then a review of theoretical, case
study and quantitative literature on coalitions is presented. Finally, a review of
literature on organizational climate examines the utility of this variable in analyzing the

relationship between ecological factors and organizational outcomes.

Background

Historical Precursors of School-to-Work Progra_ms_._ School-to—Work programs
evolved from several different types of career education programs including vocational
and technical education, tech-prep, apprenticeships, cooperative education, and
internships, among others. The following section presents a brief history of the STW
movement, and presents definitions of these preceding programs.

The roots of the school-to-work transition movement are found in the long
history of vocational and technical education. As far back as the late 1800s, trade
schools were offering the first formal vocational training (Hoachlander, 1994). A
series of Federal laws, beginning with the Smith-Hughes Act of 1917, has supported
the growth of vocational education programs. The most important Federal acts since
then have been the Vocational Education Act of 1963 and the Perkins Vocational
Education Act of 1984. This program of legislation provided substantial Federal
funding to support the growth of vocational programs and institutions, and led to the
development of several different types of programs designed to assist students in
preparing for jobs.

In addition to vocational education, the concept of STW transition is based on
the idea that career-oriented experiences should compliment traditional academic
preparation. In order for young people to fully understand the benefits of education,
they Should have the chance to observe and take part in activities both inside and

outside the classroom that demonstrate the application of what they learn in school.

AS Dewey (1959) observed:
"How many students, for example, were rendered callous to ideas, and
how many lost the impetus to learn, because of the way in which
learning was experienced by them? How many acquired special skills by
means of automatic drill so that their power of judgement and capacity to
act intelligently in new situations was limited? How many came to
associate the learning process with ennui and boredom? How many
found what they did learn so foreign to the situations of life outside the

school as to give them no power of control over the latter? " (p. 248)

STW programs attempt to avoid the criticisms of education leveled by Dewey by
providing students with opportunities to connect education in the school setting to
future career activities.

STW programs build upon strategies and techniques that have been used by
schools for several decades to help prepare students for employment. One approach,
vocational education, refers to a broad category of secondary education programs that
attempt to prepare students for a specific occupation after high school. These programs
frequently offer training in a particular field during one part of the school day, and
students also take regular academic courses such as math and English. Examples of
such programs include those that prepare students for jobs as nursing assistants, auto
mechanics, or secretaries. Vocational education courses often operate in isolation from

the rest of the academic curriculum, are frequently not linked to post-secondary

7

programs, and generally involve limited private sector participation (Hoachlander,
1994).

Cooperative education is another approach to preparing youth for employment,
and involves students attending school for part of their day and Spending the rest of the
day working at a business or organization in the community. This work is paid and
students usually earn academic credit at the same time. However there is usually little
linkage between what is studied at school and the tasks performed at work, and students
rarely acquire credentials that can assist them in obtaining employment after graduation
(Choy, 1994).

Tech Prep and apprenticeship programs are the two programs that most closely
resemble school-to-work programs. Tech prep (also known as 2+2) is a coordinated
program that links secondary education, usually the last two years, with a community
college program that leads to an associate's degree in a particular field. The high
school classes are usually applied vocational classes and employers are generally
involved in shaping the curriculum of the entire program. Apprenticeships involve the
integration of academic and vocational training, with students working and learning on
the job. These programs typically lead to credentials that are accepted throughout a
particular field.

While most of these vocational education programs involve some cooperation
between schools and other agencies or employers, the amount and extent of cooperation

are usually quite limited. These vocational efforts have been unable to prepare the vast

8

majority of young people for the job market. The consequences of inadequate
preparation are severe for individual young people and the country as a whole.

The scom of the problem. The US. General Accounting Office (GAO), among
others, has published a series of reports documenting the severe negative personal and
social consequences of inadequate career preparation for the majority of young people.
Two reports in particular highlight the problems that the United States is facing
regarding the issue of STW transition.

The first GAO report (1990) documents the results of a study that examined the
United States' efforts to prepare non-college youth for the labor force, and compared
them to those of other countries. For this report the GAO reviewed literature on how
the US. attempts to prepare its youth for work, as well as literature on the work force
preparation strategies of England, Germany, Japan and Sweden. GAO investigators
then visited those countries, observing education and training systems and meeting with
individuals knowledgeable on those systems. In addition the GAO consulted with
experts on US. and foreign job training efforts.

The findings of this report indicated that "US. education and training often
provide inadequate preparation for employment " (GAO, 1990, p. 2). The GAO
estimated that almost 30% of young people age 16-24 (nine million) lacked Skills for
entry level jobs. In addition they found that the US was lagging behind some of its
primary international competitors in guiding school-to-work transition and having
Students acquire academic and occupational skills that employers need. The GAO

concluded that our inability to provide young people with skills that will facilitate

9

employment continues to lead to increased social spending on unemployment, welfare
and crime.

A second GAO report (1993) arrived at similar conclusions. For this study the
GAO reviewed literature on STW transition, consulted with experts in the field and
conducted a telephone survey of all 50 states and the District of Columbia. GAO
investigators then conducted sight visits of five model STW programs operating in
Florida, New York, Oregon, Tennessee and Wisconsin. The investigators contacted
school district officials, principals and teachers as well as business and labor
representatives.

The GAO (1993) confirmed conclusions from the earlier report, finding that
"the US. secondary education system. . .increasingly does not serve youth effectively "
(p. 4). The best students are college-tracked, a few are in vocational education, but the
rest are not well prepared to enter the job market. The report also states that while
15% of high school freshmen end up graduating and going on to obtain a bachelor's
degree within six years of graduation, 85 % do not. This means that if they receive no
specific skill training in high school, which most students do not, then the vast majority
of young people face a difficult time finding quality employment.

In addition, the report points out that in the past many people could obtain semi-
skilled, high-wage manufacturing jobs - but today there are fewer of these jobs and the
ones that exist require higher skills. Finally the report reiterated the earlier finding that
"Experts often find school-to-work transitions in the US. to be lacking in comparison

with some of our principle foreign competitors" (p. 1).

10

Other literature corroborates the findings of the GAO that the US. does a poor
job of preparing young people for employment. Fifty percent of adults in their late
twenties still have not found steady employment (Osterman & Ianozzi, 1993).
Inadequate preparation for life after high school leaves young people without the ability
to obtain jobs that will provide sufficient wages (Cochrane, Mattai, & Huddleston-
Mattai, 1994). Catterall (1985) states that one year's cohort of unprepared youth,
including unprepared high school graduates and high school dIOp—outs, may loose an
estimated $150-$300 billion in income over their lifetimes, or about $135—$300
thousand per individual. Left on their own, this group has a difficult time in the job
market and are either unemployed or are working in jobs with little chance of
advancement (Grant Foundation Commission, 1988).

In addition to the economic consequences of inadequate career preparation, the
deleterious psychological effects of unemployment have been confirmed by many
researchers (Brenner, 1973; Catalano, Dooley & Jackson, 1981; Dooley & Catalano,
1980; Johnson & Abramovitch, 1987; Turner, Kessler & House, 1991; Dooley,
Catalano, & Wilson, 1994). School-to-work programs are designed to prevent
unemployment and its subsequent psychological and economic consequences by
equipping students with the skills they will need to obtain employment after high
school.

Although student outcomes are the main focus of STW efforts, the results of
inadequate student preparation for employment have implications for the communities

in which these youth live and the country as a whole. The Committee for Economic

11

Development (1987) estimated that the unprepared youths from meg could cost the
government at least $10 billion in expenditures on social issues such as unemployment,
welfare and crime. Beyond budget implications, insufficient skill preparation affects
the United States' ability to compete economically with other countries. If the United
States wishes to maintain its economic Strength, we must respond to the challenge of
preparing youths with the skills currently needed by employers.

Issues such as these have driven those concerned with students' transitions to
work to propose dramatic changes in how we conceptualize the education process in
this country. The STW movement is a major paradigm shift for the education system,
changing the role of the student from a passive recipient of information to an active
participant in the educational process. This involves a dramatic transformation of
teaching methods, and the inclusion of the private sector in shaping curricula.

While the STW approach is starting to Spread, the consequences of our failure to
move more quickly to address the issue of school-to-work transition are enormous. The
next section describes in detail how STW programs can address the individual and
social consequences of inadequate career preparation.

The STW solution. School-to-work programs are intended to facilitate the
transition from secondary education to employment or higher education by changing
academic curricula, and linking school-based learning and work-based experiences.
The STW approach to preventing unemployment focuses on the interaction of the
student and his or her environment when addressing issues of school curriculum and

teaching methods. These environmental factors affect how students learn, and how they

12

perceive the usefulness of education. In addition the inclusion of school-based
experiential learning techniques and work-based experiential activities creates an active
and challenging environment in which students are engaged participants in their
learning.

Although about 30 percent of high school students experience some type of
vocational education, these vocational classes and programs are often criticized for
being outdated, for paying too little attention to academic skills, and for training
students for occupations that are not in demand (GAO, 1990). The aim of STW
programs is to change the general curriculum - making academic courses applied and
experiential, and offering all students the opportunity to gain Skill training, and
experience in the job market. Essential to this effort are coalitions of key stakeholders
in the school-to-work process that combine their resources and coordinate their efforts
to help students move smoothly from high school to employment.

As stated in the School-to—Work Opportunities Act of 1994, the main
components of the STW approach include school-based activities, work-based activities
and connecting activities. This involves actual training in employment activities both
inside and outside the school building, along with activities that connect the two.
School-based activities refer to changes in curricula and teaching methods that make
learning more experiential, including the use of different work-related examples and
assignments. These activities can also include problem solving and working in groups.

Work-based activities refer to experiences outside the classroom that provide

students opportunities to discover how their academic skills might be applied in

13

employment settings. Bailey and Merritt (1992) argue that it is important to supplement
classroom instruction with meaningful experiences in workplace environments through
activities such as internships, apprenticeships, and cooperative education. This allows
students to observe and understand the linkages between what they learn in school and
how it can be used on the job.

Activities that can connect school-based and employer-based in STW programs
ideally include (but are not limited to) employer participation on policy and advisory
boards, employer activities in the classroom, and teacher internships in industry (GAO,
1991). In addition collaborative activities often include the sharing of resources such as
funding, equipment, facilities and personnel - usually on the part of employers.

School-to—work systems strive to change the way students learn, by employing
experiential learning techniques and using real-world examples throughout the
curriculum. The ultimate goals of these approaches are to make students active
participants in their education, to teach young people how to think rather than to simply
regurgitate facts, and to assist them in choosing a path that will lead to employment.

Within the education community, teachers and administrators are beginning to
realize that outdated methods of instruction usually involving lecture, memorization,
and testing are insufficient to impart the knowledge and skills students need to become
competitive in the marketplace (Choy, 1994; U.S. General Accounting Office, 1993).
Experiential learning has received increased attention recently as one method that can
make students active learners and participants in their education (Kolb, 1984; Atkinson

& Murrell, 1988).

14

Experiential learning consists of moving away from text and lecture-based
approaches to instruction, and involving students in activities and tasks that are based
on real-world examples. These techniques are extremely well suited for STW efforts
because they enhance classroom learning, and embody the goal of exposing Students to
real-world job situations before graduation. The main goal of the experiential learning
approach is to actively involve students in the process of education. By employing
experiential learning techniques, actively involving students in their education and
equipping them with the skills they need to succeed on their own, school-to-work
strategies have the potential to empower young people and give them control over their
future.

Along with school-based changes in curricula, work-based experiences can
provide opportunities for students to see how the knowledge they learn in school can be
applied in the real world. Experiences for Q students - such as paid employment,
internships, apprenticeships and job shadowing - give students a chance to understand
the usefulness of their academic training. This can be extremely valuable in impressing
upon young people the need to stay in school and excel academically. In addition it
provides valuable job experience and training, while linking academic and employment
skills.

STW Coalitions. The School-to-Work Opportunities Act of 1994 mandates the
inclusion of connecting activities in STW programs. These typically involve the
inclusion of workplace examples in school curricula, academic instruction during

worksite training and collaborations between schools and employers. School-to-work

15

programs are usually based on extensive partnerships between schools, businesses, and
other key stakeholders. Partnerships comprised of representatives from business and
education for the purpose of preparing Students for employment began to arise in the
19708. The Comprehensive Employment and Training Act of 1973 led to the creation
of private industry councils (PICS) that continue to operate under the Job Training
Partnership Act of 1983. While PICS and other similar coalitions form the basis of
cooperation for the purpose of moving people into employment, they rarely involve the
extensive collaboration on curricula changes that STW programs promise.

STW coalitions are intended to go beyond this initial stage of collaboration,
allowing schools, businesses and other groups with a stake in the school-to-work
transition process such as parents, students and community members to work together
in a coordinated effort to fundamentally change school curricula and teaching methods.
In addition these coalitions can allow the private sector formal channels through which
they can provide schools with input on job requirements, share resources and provide
opportunities for students to gain employment experience.

Coalitions are defined in several ways. One recent review of coalition literature
(Butterfoss, Goodman, & Wandersman, 1993) notes two particularly useful definitions:
"an organization of individuals representing diverse organizations, factions or
constituencies who agree to work together in order to achieve a common goal"
(Feighery & Rogers, 1989, p. 1); and "an organization of diverse interest groups that

combine their human and material resources to affect a specific change the members are

l6

unable to bring about independently" (Brown, 1984, p. 4). These definitions are very
similar to those found regarding collaboration.

Collaboration has been described as "The pooling of resources. . .by two or more
Stakeholders to solve a set of problems which neither can solve individually" (Gray,
1985, p. 912); "Collaboration occurs when a group of autonomous stakeholders of a
problem domain engage in an interactive process, using shared rules, norms, and
structures, to act or decide on issues related to that domain" (Wood & Gray, 1991, p.
146); "Collaboration is a temporary social arrangement in which two or more social
actors work together toward a singular common end requiring the transmutation of
materials, ideas and/or social relations to achieve that end" (Roberts & Bradley, 1991 ,
p. 212). These definitions of 'coalition' and 'collaboration' share much in common.
For the purposes of this review coalitions are seen as organizations of key stakeholders
in the STW process that work together to facilitate students' transitions from education
to employment. Collaboration is the process through which these stakeholders act to
change the education system and provide opportunities for businesses, parents, students
and others to participate in improving STW transitions.

Coalitions of key stakeholders that operate to improve the school-to-work
transition process are important for several reasons. Since the primary goal of these
programs is to prepare students for employment, the inclusion of employers in the
coalitions creates opportunities for students to visit businesses and acquire actual
experience in the private sector. Coalitions allow businesses formal opportunities that

they do not currently have to share information with schools about job requirements, to

17

share resources such as supplies, equipment, and funding, and to participate in
decisions regarding the student transition process - facilitating increased commitment by
business to the STW process. Active involvement of community members in the
decision-making process can lead to participative ownership (Kelly, 1988), and the
inclusion of faculty, parents and students in decisions on STW issues can broaden
support for STW programs, and allow input from these interested parties that can
facilitate a sense of ownership and strengthen the coalition.

In light of the fact that the collaborative process within STW coalitions is so
essential to their effective functioning, it is crucial that we understand the collaborative
activities within these alliances in order to ensure cooperative collaboration that leads to
positive student outcomes. An examination of these coalitions using ideas and theories
borrowed from organizational theory and research will be helpful in identifying
weakness in STW alliances, and will provide the basis for a theoretical model of an
effective school-to-work coalition. By strengthening the collaborative process, STW
coalitions can mature and focus their attention and energy on facilitating the transition
process for students.

The next section of this paper reviews literature on collaboration and coalitions.
First, theoretical and review literature is analyzed. Next a series of case studies is
discussed. Finally several quantitative analyses of coalitions and interorgauizational

structures are reviewed.

18

Collaboration in Coalitions

The use of collaborative alliances to address a variety of social issues has been
growing (Logsdon, 1990), largely due to the fact that organizations have failed to
"conceptualize problems and organize solutions at the domain level" (Gray 1985, p.
914). By this, Gray refers to the usual practice of most organizations of viewing
problems and solutions primarily in terms of their own organization, without taking into
account the role of the environment and other organizations in problem causation and
solution.

A review of the literature on coalitions by Butterfoss, Goodman and
Wandersman (1993) documents several ways in which coalitions can be useful.
Coalitions can allow organizations to become involved in issues without having sole
responsibility for solving problems, develop public support for issues, expand the
power of groups and individuals through collective action, and decrease the duplication
of efforts. In addition coalitions can bring resources from multiple areas to focus on an
issue, can recruit more members to assist in solving problems and allow the flexibility
necessary to identify and employ new resources. The following section presents and
discusses theoretical and review literature regarding coalitions.

Theoretical and Review Literature. In a review of organizational literature,
Schermerhorn (1979) defined interorgauizational development as "the application of
social science knowledge to the creation of planned, systematic and mutually beneficial
cooperative relationships between otherwise autonomous organizations ".

Interorganizational cooperation and interorgauizational systems are terms used in

19

organizational theory in much the same ways that the terms collaboration and coalition
are used.

Schermerhom (1979) found substantial evidence that the incidence of
organizations engaging in cooperative relationships was growing quickly. He sighted
cases in both the private and public sector, but noted that the literature did not provide
sufficient information to guide practitioners regarding the application of
interorgauizational theories. Schermerhorn's synthesis of the literature led to the
generation of an interorgauizational development intervention model comprised of four
action goals. These goals included: 1. Actions designed to raise mutual awareness of
and trust among organizations, as well as to identify common interests; 2. actions
designed to convince organizations to cooperate; 3. the design of interorgauizational
structures and processes; 4. evaluation of interorgauizational performance. Several of
these ideas are found throughout the literature on interorgauizational and coalition
development.

In a theoretical article that discussed the development of interorgauizational
domains, Trist (1983) described these domains as "functional social systems that occupy
a position in social space between the society as a whole and the single organization"
(p. 270). The author argued that referent organizations are crucial for domain
development. A referent organization is a group of stakeholders that come together
voluntarily to regulate and develop actions directed toward dealing with a common
issue - in other words, a coalition. Trist goes on to suggest that domain formation

occurs through a process of shared appreciation regarding an issue, and is followed by

 

 

20

domain identification and the setting of an agreed-upon direction for a development
pattern.

Referent organizations have three general functions. These include: 1. The
regulation of relationships and activities by setting rules, determining membership and
maintaining values from which goals and objectives are set; 2. Appreciation of issues
and the development of a shared image of the future; 3. Infrastructure support such as
the sharing of resources and information (Trist, 1983). The author argues that resource
mobilization may be a particularly significant issue.

Finally the article pointed out the importance of proactive individuals who can
identify and connect with others who share an appreciation of the issue at hand. Citing
terms such as "reticulist" and "novelty detectors", Trist (1983) states:

"In such individuals new appreciations of emerging meta-problems

originate and build up as they interact with other network members who

tend to form a selectively interdependent set. They learn the art of

walking through walls. Without carriers of this kind it is difficult to see

how the process of appreciative restructuring can take place fast enough

or go far enough to permit emergent domains to be organized in time and

on a scale that will allow the oncoming meta-problems to be contended

with. " (p. 280)

21

Trist and Schermerhom appear to concur on the importance of agreement among
organizations regarding their mutual problems and interests, as well as on the necessity
of structure and regulation of coalition activity.

In a comprehensive examination of over 100 pieces of literature, Cummings
(1984) reviewed work on transorganizational development. Based on this analysis the
author proposed an integrative framework for transorganizational system functioning.
Cummings suggested an input-processing-output model, stipulating that interaction
processes are affected by inputs such as "organizations' motivations to interact and
organizations' assessments of each other" (p. 375). Interactive processes, such as
coordination of effort, in turn affect collective performance. The author argued also
that environmental influences such as resource scarcity can affect organizations'
motivations to interact.

Cummings (1984) went on to cite literature documenting the influence of
communication on the ability of organizations to understand the extent of their mutual
problems and identify resources for solving them. In addition, the author stated:

" . . .studies have found that recognition of the scale and complexity of shared problems
and awareness of organizations' common interests and interdependence are precursors
to engagement in joint problem solving" (p. 378). Other findings of this review
included the importance of leaders who can promote communication, coordination, and
structure that includes the formalization of rules, policies and procedures.

Other literature reviews also suggest that mutual goals and the potential to Share

resources are two key determinants to collaborative activity (Butterfoss, Goodman, &

22

Wandersman, 1993; Hord, 1986; Oliver, 1990). In addition, coordination of efforts
has been linked to successful collaboration (Butterfoss, et a1. , 1993; Oliver, 1990), as
have communication and planning (Butterfoss, et al., 1993; Hord, 1986). Finally,
Butterfoss, et al. argue that diversity among stakeholders, a convener and the
formalization of rules and procedures can be instrumental in facilitating and maintaining
coalitions.

Arguably the most influential theoretical contributions to the field of
collaboration have been made by Gray and her colleagues (Gray, 1985, 1989; Gray &
Hay, 1986; Gray & Wood, 1991; Wood & Gray, 1991). Gray (1985) stated that the
primary factors that lead to the need for collaborative alliances include increasingly
turbulent environments, problems that are too large or difficult for single organizations
to deal with and an increasing degree of interdependence within organizational domains
or fields.

In a proposed process model of collaboration, Gray (1985) expanded on
McCann's (1983) model that included problem-setting, direction setting, and
structuring. Problem setting is comprised of the identification of key stakeholders and
mutual acknowledgment of shared problems. In direction setting, "stakeholders
articulate the values which guide their individual pursuits and begin to identify and
appreciate a sense of common purpose" (Gray, 1985, p. 74). Finally, structuring
involves negotiations aimed at an agreed-upon regulative framework for the problem

domain.

23

Gray ( 1985) generated 12 propositions that She argued would facilitate the three
processes described above. Among the most important are: The stakeholder set needs
to reflect the complexity of the problem; problem-setting efforts are enhanced when
stakeholders expect that the benefits of collaborating will outweigh the costs; the greater
degree of recognized interdependence among Stakeholders, the greater the likelihood of
initiating collaboration; collaboration will be enhanced by conveners who possess
legitimate authority and who can serve as reticulists to rally other stakeholders to
participate.

Further explication of the collaborative process by Gray (1989) included
discussion of the need for collaborators to identify and Share resources and to establish
specific, formal ground rules. Also important is the need to set an agenda, one that
outlines what the goals and objectives of the coalition will be.

An overview of several school-business partnerships (Otterbourg & Timpane,
1986) affirms the applicability of many of the above findings to the STW process. A
discussion of 8 school-business partnerships asserted that schools and businesses are in
the process of realizing that they need each other in addressing their mutual problems,
and that collaboration could be beneficial. Resource sharing was seen as advantageous,
as was an individual organization that could provide leadership for the partnerships. In
this context, schools may desire financial and in-kind resources from businesses, while
businesses are attempting to improve the pool of human resources available to them
when seeking employees. Lastly, planning, coordination and communication were cited

as important aspects of partnership functioning.

24

Several common themes run throughout the theoretical and review literature.
These include the importance of a comprehensive and diverse set of stakeholders. As
much as possible, coalitions should attempt to include all individuals and organizations
that have a direct stake in the issue or issues being addressed by the coalition. Perhaps
as important is the need for stakeholders to believe that they share a common interest,
and that they need to work together in order to solve their mutual problems. Other
factors that can positively affect the collaborative process include the active presence of
a convener - a person or organization that can galvanize stakeholders and convince them
of their interdependence, as well as agreement upon and formalization of rules and
policies. Finally, the sharing of resources and processes such as communication,
coordination, and planning help to organize and activate coalition operations. These
findings are summarized in Table 1.

The above review revealed several factors that could influence coalition
development. The next portion of this review discusses empirical case studies that
provide further evidence of the importance of these variables to coalition effectiveness.
Several authors have noted that the majority of research on coalitions consists largely of
anecdotal reports and case studies (Butterfoss, et al., 1993; Cummings, 1984;
Schermerhom, 1979). This is an accurate assessment, although there are a few
quantitative studies that are relevant to the discussion and those are reviewed also.

Empirical literature. In an examination of a fractionated organizational
community (FOC), Selsky (1991) described a coalition of social service organizations

that formed in response to the decrease in resources that many such agencies

25

Table 1- Summary of Key Variables Identified in the Theoretical and Review Literature

 

Key variable Authors identifying the
variable

 

Mutual understanding of Butterfoss, et al. (1993),

problem/ interdependence Cummings (1984), Gray
(1985), Hord (1986), Oliver
(1990), Otterbourg &
Timpane (1986),
Scherrnerhorn (1979), Trist
(1983)

Convener/leader Butterfoss, et al. (1993),
Cummings (1984), Gray
(1985),Otterbourg &
Timpane (1986),Trist (1983)

Formalization/rules Butterfoss, et al. (1993),
Cummings (1984), Gray
(1989),Schermerhorn
(1979), Trist (1983)

Resources/sharing Butterfoss, et al. (1993),
Cummings (1984), Gray
(1989), Hord (1986), Oliver
(1990), Otterbourg &
Timpane (1986),Trist (1983)

Communication Butterfoss, et al. (1993),
Cummings (1984), Hord
(1986), Otterbourg &
Timpane (1986),Trist (1983)

Planning Butterfoss, et al. (1993),
Hord (1986), Otterbourg &
Timpane (1986)

Stakeholder diversity Butterfoss, et al. (1993),
Gray(1985)

\

26

experienced during the 19803. The coalition was comprised of 148 organizations that
addressed a variety of social issues involving the disabled, senior citizens, women and
youth services, housing and many others. The primary functions of the FOC were to
facilitate a resource-sharing network, a bulk purchasing program, educational programs
and advocacy.

The author sent surveys to a stratified sample of half the organizations,
performed a content analysis of board minutes and employed participant observation.
Of the 74 members to whom surveys were sent, 50 completed and returned them
(68%). Over half (52%) of the respondents cited cost savings as one of the main
reasons they joined the FOC, and 52% also stated the opportunity to exchange or share
information. When asked to cite the two most important services of the FOC, vendor
discounts and information were each cited by 17 respondents (34 %). The resource
exchange program was the third most important program, stated as most important by
13 respondents (26 %).

Considering that the primary reasons for the formation of the coalition were
shrinking funding and the formation of a resource-sharing program, these results are
not too surprising. However they do provide evidence for the ideas that resource
sharing, interdependence and communication are key factors in the formation and
operation of coalitions. Based on this case study, Selsky (1991) formulated several
guidelines for collective networks. Among them is the proposition that networks "must
be m, with attention paid to explicit policies, an independent resource base, and

active engagement" (p. 109). The author also stressed the importance of identifying

27

and working with the essential resources needed by the organizations, as well as the
presence of a development activist who can procure the participation of organizational
leaders.

In a case Study that focused on the role of interdependence in the formation of
alliances designed to solve social problems, Logsdon (1991) discussed the formation of
two coalitions. The first was a successful effort at cross-sectoral collaboration designed
to improve a regional transportation system, and the second was an alliance formed to
create comprehensive regulations for underground chemical storage tanks.

Logsdon (1991) hypothesized that the interaction of perceived interdependence
and the stakes for a potential participant in a coalition determine whether or not an
organization will participate in a coalition. Specifically he felt that both perceived
interdependence and the stakes of a situation have to be high for collaboration to occur.
If one or the other are low, an organization will either work on the problem alone or
allow others to solve it.

The first case involved the highway system in the Silicon Valley. Initially, both
stakes and interdependence were low among stakeholders in the area. As the region
grew and traffic became a greater problem, a task force was set up and it concluded that
the transportation issue was a regional problem that could not be dealt with by
individual companies. Interdependence was acknowledged. However no action was
taken for several years. Traffic continued to increase to the point where employees

experienced Significant commuting problems and the recruitment of new employees

28

became difficult. Productivity began to decline as absenteeism and morale problems
rose.

Finally the stakes had grown to the point where action was necessary. The
firms worked together through the transportation task force to raise money and
campaign for tax increases to fund new highway projects. A ballot measure was then
passed by the voters to provide the funding necessary to begin dealing with the
problem. In this case, both interdependence and stakes Started out low.
Interdependence grew, but it was not until the stakes also rose that the organizations
collaborated actively to solve their shared problem.

The second case Logsdon (1991) examined concerned hazardous chemical
storage by high-technology firms. Initially the companies took pride in their safety
records. Then five companies separately discovered leaks in their tanks. Tests of
drinking water in the area showed no problems until a well near one plant was closed
due to contamination. The stakes rose dramatically as the public learned of the problem
and began to pressure public officials.

As each of the other companies revealed that their tanks were leaking tanks also,
officials and the companies realized that regulation by individual cities could not
prevent pollution from leaking across municipal boundaries. At this point
interdependence had increased as well, and the need for regional regulation of the
problem became clear. A task force of public and private participants formed and

created region-wide regulations for chemical storage tanks.

29

These two cases point out the importance of acknowledged interdependence in
the formation and operation of coalitions. The author presented evidence that an
organization must feel a certain problem is important enough to act on, and that the
solution requires cooperation with other organizations, if coalition participation is to
occur.

In an analysis of a coalition formed for the purpose of recommending changes to
a state school system, Roberts and Bradley (1991) outlined five elements of the
collaborative process. First, a transmutational purpose is necessary that involves
shared, goal-directed activity among stakeholders in order to shape a set of objects,
ideas or relations into a developed product. Second, voluntary, mutually agreed-upon
membership is required. Third, organization is essential. The authors state: "Because
work is complex and elaborate, involving a creative, transmutational process, planning
and coordinating task-specialized activities is required. Mutual interdependence
necessitates joint decision-making and an agreed-upon set of norms and rules to
determine direction, organization, and action" (p. 212). The fourth element of
collaboration is an interactive process. Roberts and Bradley (1991) stressed that due to
the nature of collaborative activity - that it typically involves ongoing technical,
organizational and process difficulties - sustained, self-critical interaction and
communication among participants is essential. Finally, the authors posited that
collaboration has a finite life span and ends once the goal has been achieved.

The researchers collected data on the collaborative process within the education-

reform coalition through interviews, observation and the analysis of archival records

30

and responses to a survey of 61 participants. They found that, while there were some
disputes regarding the appropriateness of the participation of some stakeholders, all
stakeholders did continue to participate. In addition, the coalition established a
planning model that included group process procedures and technical guidelines, and
agreed upon norms and rules to govern behavior. In terms of interaction, Roberts and
Bradley (1991) found that members explored and discussed differences, worked
collectively and built relationships. Participants continually evaluated and reexamined
their work, and scheduled retreats and special sessions to assess their progress.

The authors concluded that in general the data were consistent with their
hypothesized elements of collaboration. The main problem they found was that
although specific roles and rules were established, adherence to them was sometimes
inconsistent and this occasionally caused friction and problems with decision-making.
In summary, common goals, broad stakeholder membership, planning and coordination,
and extensive communication appeared to facilitate the collaborative process.

The above case studies provide further substantiation of the findings of the
theoretical and review articles presented earlier. Components such as the presence of a
convener, formalization of rules, the importance of resources, and the role of
communication were highlighted in Selsky's (1991) study of a social service coalition.
Roberts and Bradley (1991), in their examination of an education reform coalition,
stressed the importance of planning, coordination, and the inclusion of a broad base of
stakeholders. Finally, the Significance of acknowledged interdependence among

stakeholders was emphasized in all three case studies. The next section presents an

oil".

. “‘I
must

disc:

r:

lob
CIlI:

‘ .1
Nil

C/I
,__.

(to '

gr:

31

analysis of several quantitative studies that provide further evidence of the significance
of the variables described so far. The first is a study of a single organization, but is
included because it provides important data on the relevance of several of the factors
discussed above.

A study by Campion, Medsker and Higgs (1993) examined the relationship
between work group characteristics and effectiveness. Group characteristics included
job design, interdependence, group composition, context and process. Effectiveness
criteria included productivity, satisfaction and manager judgements. The researchers
collected data from 391 employees, 70 managers and archival records from 80 work
groups in a large organization.

The authors found a correlation of .22 (p < .05) between task interdependence
and potency (belief by a group that it can be effective). Task interdependence refers to
the interaction and dependence that employees experienced in accomplishing their
work. Task interdependence was also significantly correlated (.28) with
communication/ cooperation within group. In addition the researchers found a
significant relationship (.18) between potency and communication/cooperation between
groups.

This study also found significant correlations between a composite measure of
interdependence and variables such as productivity (.20), employee satisfaction (.20)
and manager ratings of effectiveness (.18). A composite measure of group composition
that included heterogeneity and relative size of the group also correlated significantly

with productivity (.21), employee satisfaction (.19) and manager rating of effectiveness

32

(.36). Finally, communication/cooperation within group was significantly related to
productivity (.18) and effectiveness (.18).

Campion, et al. (1993) acknowledged several limitations of their study. They
Stated that statistical power was only moderate for small effect sizes and the reliability
of some scales was low. Also, they noted that since they used aggregated data, passive
observation and a static research approach, they could not make causal inferences or
examine change over time. Therefore they concluded that the findings of their study
should be seen as propositions for future research.

The findings of this research provide some empirical evidence for several of the
relationships described in the theoretical and case study literature. Further evidence is
found in the following study that examines the relationships among independent
organizations within the same field. While these organizations do not form a coalition,
this study moves a step closer to providing quantitative data relevant to collaboration.

Research exploring patterns of interorgauizational relationships and the role of
coordination (Hall, Clark, Giordano, Johnson & Van Roekel, 1977) examined dyadic
relationships among organizations that served troubled youth. The investigators
examined relationships among a total of 76 organizations in 12 cities. They distributed
3,853 questionnaires to the staff of these organizations, of which 2,311 (60%) were
returned.

Initial examination of correlations among the variables found that frequency of
interaction between organizations was strongly related to coordination (r = .60), and

person-to-person interaction was also Significantly related to coordination (1': .51). A

33

series of step-wise multiple regressions was performed with coordination as the
dependent variable. Positive assessment of the other organization had a Significant
regression coefficient (.41), as did frequency of contact (.19). Conflict had a
significant negative coefficient (-.29). In situations where formal agreements were in
place, regression analysis with coordination as the dependent variable found the
coefficient for frequency of contact rise to .23, and the negative coefficient for conflict
grow to -.83. It may be that formal agreements improve communication and its impact
on coordination, and limit the extent of conflict.

In contrast with the relationship between frequency of contact and coordination
was the positive relationship between frequency of contact and conflict (r = .30). The
authors hypothesized that coordination and conflict could Simultaneously be results of
frequent contact. Another inconsistent finding was that while a formal agreement led to
a stronger relationship between coordination and frequency of contact, as well as a
strong negative relationship between coordination and conflict, positive assessment of
other organizations dropped out of the regression equation. Hall, et al. (1977)
suggested that this could be due to the fact that the issues related to positive assessment
had been resolved before the agreement was reached and were no longer important
issues.

Other issues with this study included the fact that organizational dyads were
studied, and not the relationships among members of a coalition designed for
collaboration. In addition, the researchers explained that since they were asking each

organization about its dyadic relationship with several other organizations, their

34

instrument used only one item for each of the 14 variables of interest. While reliability
was impossible to assess objectively, the authors stated that the observational and
archival data that they gathered suggested that they had obtained valid information.

This study provides evidence of the importance of coordination in
interorganizational relationships. It also lends support to the theory that coordination is
related to communication and positive interorganizational relations, and can moderate
conflict. Finally, the study by Hall, et al. (1977) strengthens the claim that formal
agreements can have a positive impact on interorganizational relationships.

Another early quantitative study of interorganizational relationships (Schmidt &
Kochan, 1977) examined the connections between U.S. Training and Employment
Service offices and community organizations with which they interacted. The
researchers hypothesized that both exchange and power-dependency theories could be
used to conceptualize interorganizational relationships. Specifically, they proposed that
the greatest frequency of interaction would occur when both organizations perceived
benefits from interacting.

The investigators obtained questionnaire data from the directors of 157
community organizations and 23 employment service district offices on ten dimensions
of organizational relationship. After constructing a correlation matrix of all dyadic
interactions, factor analysis of the correlations provided evidence to support the
hypotheses. Three factors emerged, two of which accounted for 56% of the total
variance. The first factor described cooperative relationships in which members

interacted because of the perceived benefits from collaboration. This factor included

35

frequency of interaction, benefits from interaction, formalization of agreements,
influence of the other organization, importance of the other organization and
compatibility of goals. The other main factor characterized conflictual relationships
and included variables such as extent of tension and conflict, and bargaining. The
authors also found that the highest frequency of interaction occurred among
organizations that mutually perceived high benefits to interactions.

While this Study only examined interorganizational dyads and not a true
coalition, Schmidt and Kochan (1977) provided further empirical evidence for the
importance of acknowledged interdependence in interorganizational relationships. They
demonstrated that variables such as perceived benefits of interaction, shared goals and
formalization of agreements are related to frequency of interaction.

A longitudinal study by Van de Ven and Walker (1984) described dyadic
relationships among child care and health organizations. It examined the mobilization
coordination efforts of 14 early childhood development (ECD) organizations, and the
dyadic relationships among those organizations and 110 other agencies. The
investigators hypothesized several relationships, among them: 1. that resource
dependence and domain similarity (the degree to which organizations have the same
services, clients and personnel skills) at time 1 would determine communication at time
1; 2. that communication at time 1 would affect formalization of the relationship at time
1; 3. resource dependence, formalization and domain similarity at time 1 would predict
monetary transactions at time 2; 4. communication and domain similarity at time 1

would affect consensus at time 2.

36

Three waves of questionnaires were administered to the directors of the 14 ECD
organizations and the directors of the other organizations over three years. Analysis of
the data using LISREL confirmed many of the hypothesized relationships, but the
overall fit of the model was not strong. After dropping insignificant paths and variables
with poor measurement properties, and adding modification indices, the model was
retested.

The final model revealed that resource dependence at time one was a Significant
predictor of communication at time one, and consensus and monetary transactions at
time two. Communication at time one influenced formalization at time one and
consensus at time three. Finally, domain similarity at time one determined consensus at
time three, and formalization at time one affected monetary transactions at time two.

The primary finding of this study was that resource dependence was a central
issue in interorganizational collaboration. The authors stated: "First, the perceived
need for resources to achieve organizational goals is clearly the most important factor
that stimulates interorganizational coordination" (Van de Ven & Walker, 1984, p. 617).
Also, the study documented the importance of communication, formalization of
agreements and domain similarity. The investigators conclude by noting that while the
longitudinal nature of the study strengthened their ability to make causal inferences, the
fact that they revised their model in an exploratory manner suggests that caution be
used in any attempts to generalize their findings. None the less, they suggest that parts

of the model may be considered valid topics for further research.

37

These quantitative studies provide more substantial evidence of the importance
of several key components of coalitions. Several studies found that acknowledged
interdependence was a significant factor (Campion, et al. , 1993; Schmidt & Kochan,
1977), as was the role of formalized rules and procedures (Hall, etal., 1977; Schmidt
& Kochan, 1977; Van de Ven & Walker, 1984) and the Sharing of resources (Van de
Ven & Walker, 1984). In addition, communication appeared to be a fundamental
component (Campion, et al., 1993; Hall, et al., 1977; Schmidt & Kochan, 1977; Van
de Ven & Walker, 1984), and Hall, et al. supported the idea that coordination was
related to positive coalition outcomes. Finally, Campion, et al. , suggested that
diversity among group participants was related to productivity, satisfaction, and
effectiveness.

An analysis of school-to-work literature that examined the extent to which STW
coalitions include these essential elements for collaboration (Legler, 1997) found
several important components missing. This study began with an extensive search of
the PsychINFO and ERIC data bases, and examined 524 abstracts that contained key
words such as 'school to work’, 'collaboration,’ 'coalition' and 'evaluation.‘ A review
of 524 abstracts revealed 24 case studies that contained information about the
collaborative process.

The researcher then used a qualitative approach (content analysis) to code the
articles on critical dimensions of collaboration such as stakeholders, conveners,
acknowledged interdependence, written agreements, communication and coordination.

Results indicated that while many coalitions included several primary components for

38

successful collaboration, many were missing key stakeholders such as faculty, parents
and students. In addition, only 25 % of the cases reported the involvement of a
convener, and only 33 % discussed the use of written agreements. Less than half of the
cases attended to the issues of communication (42%) or planning (37%).

Legler (1997) performed a cluster analysis of the cases to determine patterns
among the coalitions. The analysis revealed three clusters. The first consisted of cases
that included many of the key components of collaboration, and these cases also had
high levels of coalition activities — the outcome variable for the study. The second
cluster appeared to be a group of cases in a pre—collaborative stage. This group
reported a large amount of planning, communication and written agreements, but were
low on all other variables. The third cluster included cases that were low on variables
such as agreements, a convener, communication and planning, but reported large
amounts of coalition activities. The author hypothesized that this group included
communities involved in extensive vocational education efforts for several years, but
had not yet built a collaborative infrastructure.

The author acknowledged several weaknesses of the Study. First, it was likely
that many of the items that were coded less often may have been present in the
coalitions but were simply not mentioned in the articles. This possibility was
particularly likely for items such as communication, a process that often takes place
informally and may not have been seen by the authors of the articles as important to
discuss. Regardless, the fact that certain items were not mentioned may have indicated

that they were not receiving the attention they deserved.

39

Another issue was that frequently research that does not demonstrate
effectiveness does not get submitted for publication. In addition, there may have been a
number of studies that did demonstrate extensive efforts at collaboration, but were
reported to school districts or states and were never published.

The researcher suggested that an ideal STW coalition would include not only
schools and businesses, but teachers, parents, students and community groups as well.
Also, acknowledged interdependence, a convener and written agreements would
facilitate the collaborative process. Finally, Legler (1997) suggested that coalitions
should pay greater attention to processes such as communication and planning in order
to strengthen collaboration.

The literature reviewed above revealed a general pattern of essential elements
related to successful interorganizational collaboration. First, a broad base of
stakeholders brings together parties with the ability to influence the success of the
coalition. This allows for the largest possible pool of ideas and resources, broadens
support for the coalitions efforts and reduces the need for a few organizations to bear
the burden of problem-solving on their own.

Second, several factors appear to influence the creation and development of
coalitions. They include the presence of a leader or convener, an individual or
organization which can convince stakeholders of the need to collaborate and provide
direction for the coalition. Equally important is the belief by stakeholders that their
participation in the coalition will result in positive outcomes, and that their interests are

interdependent with the other stakeholders - that is, they can not solve the problem on

[iii

40

their own. This interdependence is typically related to the need to Share resources,
including financial, human and natural resources. The extent to which collaborative
relationships are formalized, typically in the form of clearly outlined rules, policies and
goals, also appears to be critical for coalition development.

Third, the collaborative process itself seems to be facilitated by frequent and
effective ggmmunication, and by coordination and pLann__ipg of interorganizational
objectives and activities. All of these variables can affect coalition functioning and
outcomes such as participant satisfaction and consensus, and the effectiveness with
which coalition goals are addressed and achieved.

In considering the extent to which the goals of STW coalitions are met, the
Federal legislation that currently funds coalitions throughout the country identifies
school-based, work-based, and connecting activities as essential outcomes. Evaluating
the implementation of school-based and work-based activities could be accomplished
through the use of objective measures of student activities outside the classroom and
curriculum changes in the classroom. Assessing connecting activities (including
collaboration) could be more difficult. One construct that has been used to evaluate
organizational process in business and education is organizational climate.
Organizational Climate

Definition. One of the earliest definitions of organizational climate
characterized it as a set of characteristics that describe an organization, that distinguish
it from other organizations, that are relatively stable over time, and that influence the

behavior of members (Forehand & Von Gilmer, 1964). Other definitions emphasize

41

the fact that climate is a perceptual variable, one that reflects organizational members'
subjective impressions of their environment (Dastmalchian, Blyton, & Adamson, 1989;
Glick, 1985; Lawler, Hall, & Oldham, 1974; Schneider & Snyder, 1975). One
assumption about climate is that individuals in a particular work group, level, or
organization will have fairly similar perceptions of their shared climate (Hellriegel &
Slocum, 1974).

The concept of organizational climate is rooted in basic ecological theory, and
has been fundamentally influenced by Lewin and Murray (Joyce & Slocum, 1979).
Phenomenological psychology and field theory address the relationship between an
individual and his or her environment. Organizational climate is a particularly useful
construct when attempting to understand the relationships between environmental
factors in a particular organization and the behaviors and attitudes of the members
therein. Schneider and Reichers (1983) note that climate provides an alternative to
motivation theories by adding the role of perception.

There are several aspects of organizational climate that have been somewhat
controversial. This includes debate about the dimensionality of the construct, whether
it is an independent, dependent, or mediator variable, and the appropriate level of
analysis. These topics are addressed in the next sections.

Dimepsionality. Several authors have discussed the extent to which climate is
multidimensional, and the literature is inconsistent on whether it duplicates factors
such as satisfaction. In a study of 522 insurance company members, Schneider &

Snyder (1975) found correlations between climate and satisfaction for some groups, but

42

not others. They argued that a logical distinction between climate and satisfaction is
possible if the variables are properly conceptualized and assessed at the appropriate
level. A later review of theory and research found support for the idea that climate and
satisfaction can be separated (Schneider & Reichers, 1983). The authors went on to
suggest that climate is multi-dimensional, and that climate perceptions Should be
descriptive and not evaluative. In contrast to the idea that climate and satisfaction are
separate constructs, a study of 8938 non-supervisory employees of a large utility
(Schnake, 1983) found that partialing job satisfaction out of responses to organizational
climate questionnaires improved the dimensionality of the climate instrument.

Much of the literature does agree that climate is multi-dimensional. A review of
the literature by Joyce and Slocum (1979) supported the idea of a 'core set' of climate
dimensions, not all of which are relevant in all settings. These authors suggested that
organizations contain multiple aggregate climates due to the nature of perception and
because of real differences in what individuals perceive. Other reviews of the literature
also support the proposition that climate is multi-dimensional and that organizations
may have climates _fo_r something like service, achievement, or safety (Schneider &
Reichers, 1983) or may include dimensions such as communication, conflict, warmth,
and leadership (Glick, 1985).

Climate as indep_endent vs. dependent variable. In addition to a lack of
consensus on the dimensions of climate, research and theory are not clear on whether
climate is fundamentally an independent variable capable of affecting individual and

organizational performance, a dependent variable that is caused by organizational

£0

 

43

characteristics, or an intervening variable that mediates the relationship between
organizational traits and outcomes. Literature reviews that have examined the
usefulness of climate as an independent variable have found substantial evidence to
indicate its affect on other variables. Hellriegel & Slocum (1974) found research
evidence indicating that organizational climate was related to job satisfaction in terms of

interpersonal relationships, group cohesiveness, task involvement, and other variables.

1‘

They stated that a relationship between climate and job performance was found in
numerous studies. Similarly, Schnake (1983) reviewed the literature and also
concluded that the research supported links between climate and satisfaction,
performance, and quality of work group interaction.

More recent empirical studies have further substantiated the relationship
between climate and important organizational outcomes. A longitudinal study of 63
employees of a new hotel franchise (Jackofsky and Slocum, 1988) indicated that climate
affects job satisfaction, perceptions of leader behavior, and intention to leave the
organization. Further, these authors found no relationship between demographic
variables and the formation of climate. Ostroff (1993), in her study of 533 teachers in
29 secondary schools, found that while both organizational climate and personal
orientation (individuals' preferences and beliefs about their work environment) were
significantly related to work attitudes and behaviors, there was no interaction between
these variables. Finally, a study of biographical and climate factors in 4 public sector
organizations (Gunter & Furnham, 1996) found climate factors were better predictors

of satisfaction and pride than were demographic factors. While these studies have

44

examined the impact of climate on individual and organizational variables, other
research has focused on climate as a dependent variable.

The review by Hellreigel and Slocum (1974) mentioned above also analyzed
literature on climate as an outcome of other factors. They found that evidence that level
of organizational hierarchy, perceived degree of bureaucratization, decision-making,
and other variables can affect climate. Other authors have similarly argued that climate
could be the result of organizational Size, centrality of decision making, and technology
(Payne & Pugh, 1976), and physical location within the organization (Joyce & Slocum,
1979).

Schneider and Reichers' (1983) classic review of theory and research on climate
etiology concluded that symbolic interactionism, selection/attraction/attrition, and
structural views are all useful in attempting to explain the causes of climate. Other
authors have also found support in the literature for the importance of symbolic
interactionism, physical setting, and culture (Ashforth, 1985), as well as organizational
structure and departmental affiliation (J ackofsky and Slocum, 1988).

Since there is considerable research that demonstrates climate as both an
independent and dependent variable, several authors have argued that it is in fact an
intervening or mediating variable - one that both influences and is influenced by several
organizational factors (Dastmalchian, et al., 1989; Gunter & Furnham, 1996; Helriegel
& Slocum, 1974; Schneider & Hall, 1972). Climate can affect leadership style and
group process, and can in turn be affected by technology, organizational, and individual

variables - making it useful in understanding the relationship between organizational

45

structure and job attitudes (Joyce & Slocum, 1979). Conceptualizing climate as an
intervening variable reconciles much of the debate regarding the use of climate in the
understanding of organizational processes. While researchers have debated the
dimensionality and operationalization of climate, perhaps the most contentious aspect of
this construct is the appropriate level of analysis.

Levels of analysis and methodology. Shortly after climate started gaining
attention in the literature as a useful tool in organizational theory, discussion began on
whether climate is an organizational or individual-level variable (Guion, 1973). This
topic has received much attention in the literature, with several authors emphasizing the
psychological aspect of climate (Glick, 1985; James & Sells, 1982; Joyce & Slocum,
1979; Schneider & Reichers, 1983). Possibly the most often-cited review of literature
on climate focused specifically on this issue (James & Jones, 1974). In this article the
authors grouped Studies into three categories: (a) multiple-measurement/ organizational
attribute, (b) perceptual measurement/ organizational attribute, and (c) perceptual-
measurement/ individual attribute. Most of the discussion centered on the wisdom of
using perceptual/individual-level measures to assess organizational-level variables. The
authors submitted that this approach might have been logically inconsistent and used
simply as a matter of convenience.

James and Jones (1974) suggested the term psychological climate when taking
an individual attribute approach, and organizational climate when climate is regarded as
an organizational attribute. They also proposed that, for organizational variables that

can be measured objectively as well as perceptually, measures of individual perception

46

may be validated by demonstrating a substantial relationship between objective and
perceptual measures. Finally, the authors argued that, from a methodological
standpoint, variables more amenable to subjective measurement be validated by
exhibiting small within-group variance, and that variance should be related more to
differences in situations than individuals. Other authors have also addressed these
methodological issues.

As discussed above, the level-of-analysis issue can lead to difficult
methodological decisions. Attempting to study system/organizational-level variables
through the use of individual-level data may be a logical inconsistency. Research on
the aggregation of climate scores has been mixed (Joyce & Slocum, 1979), but some
have concluded that research supports the aggregation of climate scores and that
aggregation allows for description of organizational settings in psychological terms that
have meaning for individuals (Jackofsky & Slocum, 1988).

A review of this issue by Glick (1985) emphasized that choice of level of
analysis should be determined by the researchers' question(s) of interest. The
individual level of analysis is appropriate for studying psychological climate, but does
not provide accurate estimates of organizational-level processes. The author suggested
that aggregation of psychological climate should only occur if the aggregate level of
analysis - the organization - is the level of interest. "Over-reliance on composition
rules to define organizational climate as a simple aggregation of psychological climate
negates the traditional criteria of construct validity and measurement reliability for

organizational climate at the organizational level of analysis" (p. 605).

47

Glick (1985) goes on to propose that individual perceptions about organizations
can be used to assess organizational climate, and that accurate informants should report
on the organization's climate and not their psychological or work-group climate. The
reviewer concludes by stating that, unless individual-level perceptual agreement is very
low, the aggregate perceptual measure of organizational climate may be reliable and
valid.

To review, research on climate has included analysis of a variety of related
issues - several of which have yet to be clearly resolved. The literature contains
discussion of climate's multi-dimensionality, and debate on its distinctiveness from
other constructs such as satisfaction. Organizational climate has been studied as an
independent, dependent, and intervening variable, and has been employed in multiple
levels of research. Methodological concerns regarding level of analysis and
aggregation have also gained attention. -It appears that climate can be useful in
examining the relationships between structure, culture, and other organizational factors,
and both individual and organizational-level outcomes, if care is taken to conceptualize
and measure at the appropriate level.

Sim—1119.11

The above literature review revealed several factors that appear to be related to
the effectiveness of coalitions. Several of these factors, such as acknowledged
interdependence, the presence of a convener, written agreements, and resource sharing
have been described in the literature as conditions which can initiate and facilitate

collaboration. Equally important is a broad base of stakeholders that have a vested

48

interest in the problem domain. Other components, such as communication,
coordination, and planning, are interactional variables that can occur continually and
appear to be fundamental collaborative processes. While the literature is useful in
supplying theory and documenting case studies that highlight the importance of these
key factors, there is a substantial lack of quantitative studies that explore the
relationships among and impact of these important variables on coalition effectiveness.

In terms of school-to-work, coalition effectiveness might be measured in a
variety of ways. Federal legislation funding these partnerships outlines school-based,
work-based, and connecting activities as the essential components of the STW process.
School-based activities include practices (e. g. curriculum changes) and exercises
designed to link academics to vocational skills. Work-based activities consist of
internships, job shadowing, and other experiences designed to expose young people to
employment situations and relate their academic skills to applied examples. Connecting
activities focus on the links between school and the outside world, and include
collaborative efforts to foster these links.

The literature reviewed to this point suggests several variables that could be
important to STW coalitions, and the research by Legler (1997) implied that these
coalitions may be missing several components essential to effective collaboration. What
is needed is field research that investigates the extent to which these factors influence
the collaboration and effectiveness of STW coalitions. This is the subject of the present

study.

lE’

Cl:

C0

ii

iii:

COR
bl!

of

pa:

 

49

The present Study

This investigation builds on existing theory and research by collecting and
examining data from currently-operating STW coalitions. Information is compiled on
the key variables described above, as well as on several measures of coalition
effectiveness such as school and work-based activities. In addition, organizational
climate is examined in an attempt to measure the collaborative process. This allows an
analysis of the extent to which key variables identified in the literature affect STW
coalition functioning.

The predictor variable domains in this study are stakeholders, facilitating
conditions and processes. Stakeholder variables include Number of Stakeholders (item
1), Stakeholder Involvement (item 1c), School Inclusion (item 1d), and Stakeholder
Diversig (total organizations from item la and lb). Number of Stakeholders is the
total number of participants in the coalition. Extent of Stakeholder Involvement is the
average rate of participation of the top ten most active stakeholders, as measured on a
1-5 scale. School Inclusion is measured as the percentage of high schools in the
community that are actively involved in the coalition. Diversig is a measure of the
breadth of representation in the partnership, and reflects the number of different types
of stakeholders (e.g. , businesses, parents, community organizations) involved in the
partnership out of a total of 13 possible types.

Facilitating condition variables include Written Aggeements (sum of items 2a-
2d), Acknowledged Interdependence (sum of items 4-6), and Resource Sharing (sum of

items 7a-7f). Written agreements reflect the extent to which partnerships have

50

produced written documents that outline such things as the mission of the partnership
and rules of operation. Acknowledged interdgpendence is a measure of the extent to
which members felt that they shared similar goals and that their involvement in the
partnership would serve their interests. Resource Sharing is a measure of the number of
different types of resources shared among members.

Process variables include Communication (items 8-1 lb), PlpanLing (items 12—14)
and Coordination (items 15-17). Communication is measured by the sum of a 5-item
scale designed to assess the extent of information sharing and openness to opinions.
Pm is a 4-item scale that measures the extent to which planning has been used in
the implementation of partnership activities. Coordination is a 3-item scale that
measures the extent to which the partnership was able to organize its activities.

The outcome variable domains for this study are Partnership Activities (items
18a-19h) and Organizational Climate (items 20-30). Partnership Activities measures
the number of different types of activities in which students participate outside the
classroom, as well as the number of different types of curriculum changes that the
partnership has instituted. Organizational Climate attempts to measure the quality of
interpersonal interactions and internal functioning in the partnership. While climate is
conceptualized here as a dependent variable, it is also a measure of the collaborative
process and as such is also seen as an intervening variable that can affect the activities
of the partnership. The hypotheses, variables, and items are shown in Table 2.

Hypothesis 1: Among stakeholder variables, the Number of Stakeholders will

predict Partnership Activities. The literature reviewed in the previous section supports

51

the argument that more student activities and curriculum changes will take place if there
is a greater number of stakeholders. The more stake holders involved, the greater the
amount of resources, ideas, and opportunities should be available to carry out activities.
This should allow more students to participate in work-based activities, and for more
resources for curriculum development and teacher training.

Hypothesis 2: Stakeholder Diversity will be positively correlated with
partnership Climate. Theory discussed in the above review suggests that if a broad
range of stakeholders is represented, members will feel they have more support, there
will be more ideas generated in solving problems, and stakeholders will be able to share
costs. In addition, inclusion of a broad range of stakeholders reduces the possibility
that important issues will be overlooked, and that important stakeholders not included
in the coalition might create barriers to the progress of the coalition. Broad
representation of interests should facilitate a climate more conducive to collaboration.
Hypothesis 3: Among facilitator variables, Written Agreements and Acknowledged
Interdependence will predict partnership climate. A clear understanding of mutual
problems and goals, which are explicitly delineated in writing, will lead to more
positive interpersonal interactions and sense of togetherness. This should be reflected

in a more positive partnership climate.

Table 2- Summary of Hypotheses, Variables, and Items

52

 

 

Hypothesis Variables Items
1. Partnership size Number of stakeholders Total item 1
will predict level of
activities Partnership activities Sum 18a-19h
2. Stakeholder diversity Diversity of stakeholders Total orgs.
will be positively (types of orgs represented) from la & lb
related to climate

Climate Sum of 20-29
3. Facilitating conditions Written agreements Sum of 2a-2d
will predict climate

Acknowledged interdependence Sum of 4, 5,6

Climate Sum of 20-29
4. Resource sharing will Resource sharing Sum of 7a-7f
be positively related to
activities Partnership activities Sum 183-l9h
5. Processes will predict Planning Sum of 12-14
activities

Coordination Sum of 15-17

Partnership activities Sum 18a-l9h
6. Communication will be Communication Sum of 8-1 lb
positively related to climate

Climate Sum of 20-29

 

53

Hypothesis 4: Resource Sharing will be positively correlated with Partnership
Activities. Sharing resources should allow partners to combine their funds, supplies,
and equipment - creating a larger pool of resources than any one partner could marshal
alone. A greater amount of resources will aid partnerships in enacting more curriculum
changes and creating more opportunities for student activities.

Hypothesis 5: Planning and Coordination will predict Partnership Activities.
Partnerships that engage in greater a quantity and quality of planning and coordination
will have better success at implementation. This should increase partnerships' abilities
to engage in activities such as curriculum changes and sustain work-based activities for
students.

Hypothesis 6: Communication will be positively correlated with Partnership
Climate. A greater quantity and quality of communication will allow members to
understand each other's problems, needs, and goals, and this will facilitate
collaboration. This high-quality collaboration should be evidenced in a more positive
climate.

The next section of this study outlines a plan to evaluate the relationships among
the variables described above. The methods section includes a description of the
sampling procedure, research design, an explanation of the instrument and the data

collection procedure.

Chapter 2

METHOD

Men

The study employed a cross-sectional design, collecting information from a
representative sample of partnerships over a six-week period.
Sample size and power

According to Cohen's (1988) procedures for determining power and sample size
for correlations, expected effect size and level of significance are critical. Empirical
evidence from the literature reviewed above provided support for hypothesizing
conservative correlation sizes of approximately .20 for this study. In order to achieve
power of approximately .80 (p < .05), a sample size of 150 is needed. For the
hypotheses with multiple predictors, regression with expected R2 of approximately .20
and 3 predictor variables requires a sample size of at least 54. The sample size for this
Study is 150.
Sampling Procedure

Under the Federal School-to-Work Opportunities Act of 1994, eight states were
initially funded with awards totaling $43 million. These states - Kentucky, Maine,

54

 

1h:
pri
inc
3dr
par

felt

 

55

Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, and Wisconsin - have been
operating the longest under the legislation and have had the most time to implement
their partnerships. In addition, eight other states have been identified by the national
STW evaluator (Mathematica Policy Research) as also having made significant progress
in implementing their programs. These states are Arizona, Florida, Maryland, North
Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Utah, and Vermont.

Partnerships were selected from each of the 16 states listed above. In order to
ensure a representative sample from within each state, a combination of purposive and
random sampling was used. The goal was to include partnerships of varying sizes and
complexities, therefore the 3 largest partnerships (by population) in each state were
selected, and then a random selection of other partnerships was made. In order to
ensure a sample size of 150, 12 partnerships were selected from each of the 16 states

for a total of 192.

Resppndents

The respondents consisted of the individual in each coalition that was the most
knowledgeable about the collaborative processes and activities in their partnership. In
the majority of cases this person was the primary administrator of the partnership. The
primary administrator was asked if he or She was the person in their coalition most
knowledgeable about collaboration and STW activities in that partnership. If the
administrator acknowledged that they were the most knowledgeable person in their
partnership regarding these issues, then he or she was interviewed. If the administrator

felt that there was another partnership member who was more knowledgeable, then that

 

 

llli

Ill:

pa

 

56

person was contacted and interviewed. This situation occurred 7 times. The vast
majority of interviews were completed by the primary administrator of the partnership.

Characteristics of the sample of partnerships are presented in Table 3. Age is
the number of years each partnership was in existence at the time of the interview. M
is the number of people involved in the partnership. Number of Businesses is the
number of businesses reported as participating in the partnership. Diversig, as
described previously, is a measure of the breadth of representation in the partnership of
different types of stakeholders (types of schools, agencies, and organizations). The
maximum possible for this variable is 13. Finally, Percent of hi schools involved is
the percent of the total number of public high schools in the community that
participated in the partnership.

Of the 150 interviews that were administered, 137 contained complete data on
all the variables involved in 5 of the 6 hypotheses. One of the variables, partnership
size, was problematic. Respondents were asked how many people were involved in
their partnership. Only 100 respondents were able to provide data on this variable.
Many respondents could not answer because they did not posses the information or
were unable to estimate the number of members. The average size of the partnerships
for which data was available (N: 100) was 29.69, and ranged from 5 to 90 participants.
The average age of the partnerships was 2.37 years, and ranged from a minimum of 1
year to a maximum of 8 years. Respondents were also asked how many businesses were
involved in the partnership. The mean number of businesses involved in each

partnership was 180, and ranged from 3 to 3000.

57

Table 3- Demographics of the Partnerships

 

 

 

Variable Mean SD Minimum Maximum
Age 2.37 1.27 1 8

Size* 29.69 17.09 5 90
Number of businesses 180 400.88 3 3000
Diversity 10.77 1.73 5 13
Percent of high schools 89% 22.63 10% 100%
involved

N = 137

*N=100

58

Breadth of representation in the partnership is measured by the variable
Diversity, and as described previously consists of the number of different types of
Stakeholders (e.g. schools, business organizations, community agencies) represented in
the partnership with a maximum possible of 13. In the current sample, the average
diversity was 10.77, and ranged from 5 to 13. Respondents reported that the
percentage of high schools in the community that were involved in the partnership
averaged 89%, with a low of 10% and a high of 100%.

Respondents were also asked if school-to-work activities were taking place in
their community before the 1994 legislation that provided Federal support for STW
partnerships. Slightly more than half of the respondents indicated that STW activities
were taking place in their communities prior to the 1994 legislation. For these
partnerships, the average number of years that STW activities were taking place was
8.25, and ranged from 1 to 30 years.

Finally, respondents were asked about their background and about the
perspective with which they more closely identified - that of business, education, or
both equally. The majority of respondents (48.3 %) felt they understood both the
education and business sides of the issue. Of the rest, 41.5% felt they understood
better the education side of STW, while only 10.2% identified with the business
community.

Measures
Data was collected through the use of structured, closed-ended survey questions

(see Appendix A). The instrument was designed specifically for this study, and

59

included new items generated from the literature as well as items used in previous
research (Dastmalchian, Blyton, & Adamson, 1989; Schnake, 1983). Table 4 shows
statistics for each of the scales included in the measure. All of the scales had acceptable
levels of internal consistency, ranging from .67 for the planning scale to .84 for the
climate scale.

Confirmatory factor analysis was used to check colinearity. Analysis of the
scales using LISREL revealed a substantial problem with colinearity. so the scales were
refined by deleting items from each scale that were highly correlated with items from
other scales, or revealed extreme skewness or curtosis. For reasons described in the
Results section, the Planning and Coordination scales were combined into
Planning/ Coordination. Even after the scales were refined the chi-square of the CFA
was still 145.96, indicating a continued coliniarity problem. Given the exploratory
nature of this study and the creation of these measures for it, the following results
should be viewed with caution pending further research and refinement of these scales.

The final scales used in the analyses are shown in Table 5.

Procedure

Telephone interviews were administered to key informants from partnerships in
16 states. Undergraduate research assistants, enrolled as Psychology 490 students,
were trained to assist the primary researcher in conducting the interviews. Research
assistants received readings and instruction regarding STW concepts and telephone

interviewing techniques. They met weekly with the primary investigator to receive

60

Table 4 - Initial Scale Statistics

 

 

 

 

 

Scale # Items Mean Variance SD Alpha
Interdependence 3 1 1.52 3 .24 1.80 .76
Communication 5 21.20 6.99 2.64 .73
Coordination 3 l 1 .08 4.65 2. 15 .70
Planning 4 14.08 8.52 2.92 .67
Climate 1 1 45 .27 29.59 5 .44 .84
Table 5 - Refined Scale Statistics
Scale Items Mean Variance SD Alpha
Interdependence 4,5,6 11.54 3.13 1.77 .75
Communication 9,11,11b 12.87 2.88 1.70 .61
Planning/ 13,14, 14.13 8.14 2.85 .70
Coordination 15,16
Climate 20,21 ,24 20.92 7.93 2.82 .74

25,28

 

61

training and practice in interviewing skills, and then to review progress and address
problems in the interview process. Before students were allowed to begin interviewing
they conducted mock interviews until they achieved a 90% accuracy rate. This was
determined by having students perform mock interviews, comparing the information
they recorded to the predetermined answers of the interviewee, and then calculating the
percentage of correct recorded responses. See Appendix B for an outline of the student
training and data collection procedure.

After training, the primary researcher and 4 research assistants conducted
telephone interviews with coalition members to collect the necessary data. Each
partnership was assigned a call sheet that logged the contact attempts and dispositions of

each attempt (see Appendix C).

Chapter 3

RESULTS

This study hypothesized relationships between three sets of predictor variables
(stakeholder, process, and facilitating) and two outcome variables (Activities and
Climate). Correlations between all of the predictor variables and each of the outcome
variables were calculated in order to evaluate bivariate relationships. Regression
analyses were performed to explore relationships between groups of predictor variables
and each of the outcome variables. Finally, path analyses using LISREL were
done based on the findings of the regression analyses. These analyses allowed
inspection of multiple relationships while simultaneously accounting for measurement
error.

Analysis of the data began with an examination of the zero-order correlations
among the predictor and outcome variables Shown in Table 6. The first hypothesis of
this study had to do with stakeholder factors and their relationship to Partnership
Activities. A significant correlation was expected between Partnership Size and
Activities. AS can be seen in Table 6, this relationship was small (r=.14) and not
statistically significant.

62

63

OSHZ...

 

 

Runz
move ..
o._ *3. .3. En. Lb. 4mm. *NN. *mm. 2. E. 8250
o; 3m. *mm. 2. LN. *3. sea. son. 3. 82>uo<
o._ *8. am. LN. sow. «mm. saw. 8.. mandar—
cos
o; *9”. 2. *mm. 3m. *3. 3. -nBEooU
nova”:
o._ LN. 2. 43. mo: no. .5500
3588um<
o; *8. 2. Km. 8.. coat?
mega
o4 son. ...em. *3. 8580M
vengeance
c; mo. .2. L85
3 8. eaten
c; cam
Sac88cw< wgnm 882.399
SEED 83:63.4 wag—m :euaEESU 8338:8860 cost? 858cm ASS 3?on +36

 

833:; 08830 65 38:55 macaw gown—ebony BEOOHDN - 0 03¢.

64

The next step in the analysis was to regress all of the other predictor variables
on each of the outcome variables. This was done in order to examine the relative
contribution that each predictor variable made in explaining variance in each of the
outcome variables. The results of each of these regressions are shown in Table 7. In
regressing the predictors on the outcome variable Partnership Activities,
Interdependence, Resource Sharing, and Diversity were significant predictors.
Regression of the predictors on Climate revealed that Interdependence, Written
Agreements, and Communication significantly predicted this outcome variable.

While bivariate correlations between Planning, Coordination, and each of the
outcome variables were substantial, these variables were not strong predictors of either
of the outcome variables when entered into the regression equations. Planning and
Coordination were also correlated with each of the other predictors, and strongly
(r = .60) with each other. These results, along with a reexamination of the items in each
scale, suggested that the two scales might be measuring the same construct. Based on
this information, these two variables were combined into one new variable,
Planning/Coordination. The reliability of this new scale (a= .78) was higher than the

reliabilities of the two individual scales (Planning a= .67; Coordination a= .70).

65

Table 7 - Regression of Predictor Variables on Outcome Variables

 

 

 

 

 

Predictor Variables Standardized Beta t—value
Interdependence .27 3. 19*
Resource sharing -.02 -.22
Written Agreements .16 2.13*
Coordination .08 .89
Planning .09 1.01
Communication .35 4.46*
Diversity .04 .47
Outcome Variable: Climate

* p < .05

Predictor Variables Standardized Beta t-value
Interdependence .21 2. 19*
Resource sharing .22 2.45*
Written Agreements .09 1.00
Coordination . 1 1 1. 12
Planning .03 .28
Communication -.05 -.56
Diversity . 18 2. 10*

 

Outcome Variable: Activities

*p<.05

66

After the regression analyses, a series of path analyses was conducted using
LISREL. In the first analysis all of the main predictor variables, except the stakeholder
variables discussed previously, were used to predict each of the two outcome variables
(see Figure 1). Fit indices for this model indicated a good fit (chi-square= .89;
agfi= .94), but this initial model provided little explanatory power in terms of
understanding the relationships among the variables. This analysis confirmed that the
Planning/Coordination variable was not a statistically significant predictor of either of
the outcome variables. However, given the high correlations between the individual
Planning and Coordination variables and the other predictors observed in the initial
zero-order matrix (Table 6), a second path analysis was performed with
Planning/ Coordination predicting each of the other predictor variables and the outcome
variables (Figure 2).

This second path analysis revealed statistically significant relationships between
Planning/ Coordination and the other predictors, but not between Planning/Coordination
and either of the outcome variables. The direct path from Planning/Coordination to
Activities was .09, and the path from Planning/Coordination to Climate was .06. The
small size of these paths provides further evidence that planning and coordination affect
activities and climate indirectly through the other predictor variables. This analysis
also provided information on which of the other predictors was related to the outcome
variables. Figure 2 shows that Diversity, Interdependence, and Resource Sharing were

significantly related to Activities. In addition, Interdependence, Written Agreements,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Planning] [
Coordination

 

 

I Diversity

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Communication

 

 

Planning/
Coordination

 

 

68

 

again—8800

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*hm. mo. ow.
fl. m 588%
85820 / *m H 5.523 <
o. . *bm
#0 *mm.
3.- noumEEooU
concuscmoucccfi ion. as magma
/\ No.1
8338a. DWMWHMWW *mv.
mm.
9225

 

 

332 vacuum - N Cami

69

and Communication significantly predicted Climate. Goodness of fit indices (chi-
square=65.49; agfi= .68) indicated that this model fit the data less well than the first
model. However, the second model was more useful in understanding the relationships
between the predictor and outcome variables. The findings of the second LISREL
analysis suggested the final model, shown in Figure 3.

The final model revealed that Planning/ Coordination predicted Diversity,
Resource Sharing, Interdependence, Written Agreements, and Communication. In
turn, Diversity, Resource Sharing, and Interdependence predicted Activities. Climate
was also predicted by Interdependence as well as by Written Agreements and
Communication. In order to examine the possible influence of Climate on Activities, a
path between these two outcome variables was also included in this model. The model
revealed no relationship between these variables. Diversity, Resource Sharing, and
Interdependence accounted for 29 % of the variance in Activities, while
Interdependence, Written Agreements, and Communication explained 35 % of the
variance in Climate. Goodness of fit indices for this final model (chi-square= 115.0;
gfi= .86) indicated a poor fit statistically. This model does, however, does provide a

picture of the relationships that makes sense from a theoretical standpoint.

7O

 

538258800

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

e . Hm.
m 588%
038:0 H noun—EB <
. S
H H .- 8326800
85230985 Wm? um magma
4\
@925 .
mcEZD< ooh—08% Hm
2.
mm -
©6530

 

$82 25 - m 2:5

Chapter 4

DISCUSSION

This study was designed to test six hypotheses regarding collaboration in school-
to-work coalitions. Data was collected from 136 partnerships on their size, diversity of
representation, written agreements , interdependence, resource sharing, planning,
coordination, and communication. This data allowed examination of the relationships
between the above mentioned factors and the activities and climate of the partnerships.
The hypotheses outlined expected relationships between the predictors Size, Resource
Sharing, Planning, and Coordination and the outcome variable Activities. The
hypotheses also delineated relationships between the predictors Diversity, Written
Agreements, and Interdependence and the outcome variable Climate. This chapter
begins by discussing the hypothesis regarding Size, and then examines the impact of
Planning/Coordination on the other predictors and the outcome variables. Next the role
of Interdependence is addressed. The effects of Diversity and Resource Sharing on
Activities are considered, followed by an evaluation of the roles that Written
Agreements and Communication played in predicting Climate. The chapter concludes
with discussions on the implications of these findings for STW and other coalitions, and

for future research.

71

72

The first hypothesis of this study was that the size of the partnerships (total
number of number of stakeholders) would predict partnership activities. The
correlation between Size and Activities was small, and failed to support the hypothesis
that Size would predict Activities. It is possible that this lack of relationship was due to
the problems mentioned earlier in attempting to collect data on Partnership Size and the
resulting small sample size for this analysis. Many respondents were unable to provide
information on the size of their partnerships because that information was not
immediately available during the interview. While many respondents knew the size of
their partnership, others would have had to spend time collecting the information from
records or other members. Given the limited resources available for this study, and the
limited amount of time most respondents were able to devote to the interviews, it was
impossible to collect good data on this variable. Future studies that attempt to examine
the effect of size on partnership outcomes may wish to write participants in advance of
interviews or examine partnership records directly.

While not hypothesized, one might expect to find a relationship between size
and diversity. It seems logical that as the size of a partnership increases, the number of
different types of stakeholders might also increase. In fact, the correlation between
Size and Diversity was small (r= .08). It may be that, while partnerships work to
increase the number of participants (particularly businesses), they fail to think about
recruiting in terms of breadth of representation. In particular, attention to the
recruitment of parents, non-profit organizations, labor unions, and colleges could

broaden community support for school-to—work coalitions. This in turn could lead to

73

increased financial support, as well as an increased number of work-based experiences
for students.

Examination of the final model of the data (Figure 3) allows analysis of the
other five hypotheses. One of those was that Planning and Coordination would predict
Partnership Activities. While these individual variables were significantly correlated
with Activities, regression and path analyses showed that in fact their combined effect
actually influenced Activities indirectly through Diversity, Resource Sharing, and
Interdependence. Similarly, Planning/ Coordination affected Climate through
Interdependence, Written Agreements, and Communication.

Strong planning and coordination appear to be the foundation for positive
partnership outcomes. These findings support the conclusions of several theoretical and
review articles that planning and coordination are essential to the formation of effective
coalitions. The results of the present study demonstrate that planning and coordination
are not simply important for successful collaboration, but influence all of the other
factors thought to facilitate collaboration. Planning/ Coordination was a significant
predictor of Interdependence, Diversity, Resource Sharing, Written Agreements, and
Communication.

Several authors have suggested that planning and coordination are important to
the effective implementation of coalitions. Trist's (1983) theoretical discussion of the
development of inter-organizational domains suggested that domain formation includes
the setting of an agreed-upon direction for development. In this case the author saw the

creation of a coalition and planning for the development of the coalition as connected.

74

Cummings' (1984) literature review argued that interactive processes such as
coordination of effort affect collective performance. This author felt that the ability of
a coalition to achieve its goals depended on coordination of participant activities.
Similarly, other authors' reviews of the literature (Butterfoss, Goodman, &
Wandersman, 1993; Hord, 1986; Oliver, 1990) have linked coordination and planning
to successful collaboration. The findings of the current research add further evidence to
support the primacy of planning and coordination in the formation and success of
coalitions.

The results of the current study also suggest that planning and coordination may
go hand-in-hand with the ability of participants to understand the extent to which their
problems and goals are interdependent. Results described above demonstrated a
significant relationship between Planning/ Coordination and Interdependence. This
supports the findings of past research that emphasized the influence of interdependence
among coalition members. For example, Schermerhorn's (1979) review of inter—
organizational literature led to the generation of four action goals for inter-
organizational development that included the dLsigg of structures and processes.
Another goal in this model included actions designed to raise mutual awareness, trust,
and identify common interests - i.e. interdependence. So two of the model's four goals
(the others being recruitment and evaluation) focus on planning and interdependence.
The current study’s findings support this link between planning and interdependence.

In addition, the findings of the present research on the importance of planning

and coordination provide evidence for Gray's (1985) position that partnerships need to

75

engage in direction setting and structuring when forming a coalition. Gray defined
structuring as negotiation aimed at an agreed-upon regulative framework for the
problem domain. Planning and coordination certainly involve negotiation designed to
reach consensus on how to approach mutual problems. Gray described direction setting
as the explication of the values of the participants and the identification of a sense of
common purpose. This definition mirrors that of interdependence. The present
findings support Gray’s position that direction setting and structuring are central to the
effectiveness of a coalition. These data provide evidence that planning and coordination
can facilitate acknowledged interdependence, and, as discussed below, that
interdependence can influence the activities of coalitions.

It appears that planning and coordination, in addition to helping participants
realize their interdependence, can also help to increase the diversity of the group.
Results of this study indicate that Planning/ Coordination was related to Diversity. This
link may occur as the participants plan their goals and objectives and realize that key
players have been left out - compelling them to approach potential members and
persuade them to join the coalition. Also, high levels of planning and coordination
could make participation in the coalition a more attractive option for potential new
members. Most people would probably avoid joining a group that is seen as
disorganized.

As mentioned above, this study also found significant relationships between
Planning/ Coordination and Communication, Written Agreements, and Resource

Sharing. The process of planning and coordinating coalition activities necessitates

76

communication, and this could explain the link between these two variables. As the
planning stage allows participants to confirm their interdependence, it may also allow
them to become more acquainted and begin to understand each other’s communication
styles. Interpersonal familiarity and appreciation of mutual issues might facilitate
communication.

In addition it is reasonable to expect that as the planning and coordination
process facilitates interdependence and communication, it could facilitate the production
of written agreements. As stakeholders plan their approaches to the problems they face
and move toward agreement on goals, objectives, and strategies, the products of this
process might be written agreements that clarify the mutual understandings at which the
participants have arrived. This could explain the relationship between
Planning/ Coordination and Written Agreements.

Similarly, a planning and coordination process that results in an increased sense
of interdependence, improved communication, expanded diversity of representation,
and written agreements on cooperation may lead participants to the realization that
immediate goals may require them to combine resources. By definition, the formation
of a coalition is the result of a problem or problems that are too big for any one
stakeholder to address individually. Situations such as this usually require participants
to share resources in order to achieve multi-lateral goals. The planning and
coordination process that facilitates mutual understanding and trust could lead
stakeholders to decide to relinquish some control of their resources in order to reach a

goal that they could not achieve alone.

77

In summary, Planning and Coordination were initially expected to have direct
effects on Activities. While there were significant correlations between these predictors
and Activities, the current findings suggest that Planning/Coordination actually affect
Activities and Climate through their impact on Interdependence, Diversity, Resource
Sharing, Written Agreements, and Communication. It appears that substantial attention
to the organization of the partnership early in its development can affect several factors
that influence partnership outcomes. The next section of this chapter focuses on
evaluation of the last four hypotheses.

The effect of Interdependence on Activities was not one of the hypotheses of this
study. Rather, it was expected that Interdependence would predict Climate. The
results show that Interdependence influenced both Activities and Climate. As the
processes of planning and coordination allows participants to appreciate their
interdependence, the members may begin to develop a sense of understanding and trust.
Understanding and trust can lead to a positive and supportive working environment, and
that could explain the influence of Interdependence on Climate. Also, acknowledged
interdependence may provide members the motivation they need to commit time,
energy, and other resources to the implementation of coalition objectives. If members
believe that commitment of their personal and organizational resources will benefit
them, they might be more inclined to devote those resources to the partnership, and this
could explain the relationship between Interdependence and Activities.

It is possible that the process of planning the coalition's goals and objectives,

and attempting to coordinate their activities, facilitates the ability of participants to

78

understand each other's positions. This may force the stakeholders to realize that their
problems and goals are indeed interdependent. Once that interdependence is faced and
acknowledged, the participants may become motivated to collaborate and work toward
mutual goals. In this view, the process starts with planning and coordination of
potential actions aimed at addressing perceived mutual problems, moves through a stage
of increased realization of interdependence, and results in positive climate and increased
motivation to collaborate and take collective action toward multi-lateral objectives.

The hypothesis that Diversity would predict Climate in the coalitions was not
supported. In fact, it was found that Stakeholder Diversity affected Partnership
Activities and not Climate. It may be that a diverse group of stakeholders generates a
broad range of ideas about the implementation of partnership objectives, and this leads
to larger numbers and types of activities than would be realized by a more
homogeneous group. A diverse group of stakeholders in a STW partnership may also
provide more opportunities for students to participate in work-based and other types of
vocational experiences.

These findings provide evidence for the assertions of Butterfoss, Goodman, and
Wandersman (1993) and Gray (1985) that stakeholder diversity can be instrumental in
facilitating and maintaining a coalition. This research also supports the findings from
Roberts and Bradley's (1991) study of a coalition formed to change a state school
system. That investigation found that broad stakeholder membership facilitated the
collaborative process. By including a broad range of stakeholders that involves those

with a vested interest in the issue, members of a coalition will be in a better position to

79

understand all facets of the problem. This could assist the coalition in generating
possible solutions that address all of the main factors of the mutual problem. Involving
those stakeholders with the power and resources necessary to achieve partnership goals
can increase the capacity of the partnership to initiate change and decrease the
possibility of alienating a stakeholder with the ability to impede its progress.

While there was a small (r=.11) bivariate correlation between Diversity and
Climate, this relationship all but disappeared in the regression and path analyses. The
variance in Climate was better explained by Interdependence, Written Agreements, and
Communication. The initial hypothesis that greater diversity would lead to a more
positive climate was based on the assumption that a greater variety of representation
would bring more ideas and perspectives to the partnerships, and that this in turn might
enhance climate. In fact, greater diversity, and its accompanying perspectives and
interests, may actually lead to conflicts and friction. It is possible that, while these
conflicts may be necessary to the growth of the partnership in terms of working through
important differences among participants, this friction may contribute to a less positive
climate. This is one possible explanation for the lack of relationship between diversity
and climate. However, Interdependence and Written Agreements were significant
predictors of Climate. Along with Communication, these variables accounted for 41%
of the variance in the Climate variable.

The present research also supported the hypothesis that Resource Sharing would
predict Activities. Theoretical and review articles by Cummings (1984), Hord (1986),

Oliver (1990), Otterbourg & Timpane (1986), and Trist (1983) highlighted the

80

importance of resource sharing in the collaborative process. Selsky (1991) found that
resource sharing was the primary reason for the formation of the coalition in that study.
Resources such as supplies, equipment, buildings, and money can allow participants the
ability to implement objectives and engage in activities that move partnerships toward
achieving their goals. Perhaps most importantly, resource sharing can allow
participants to achieve goals collectively that none of them could have accomplished
individually. For example, a coalition formed to increase school-based health services
may find that no individual participant could afford to pay for the cost of a placing a
nurse in a school full-time. Participants might be able to share the cost of such a
service, leading to an increase in access to health care that would have been impossible
for any one participant to afford.

The hypothesis of this study that predicted a relationship between Written
Agreements and Climate was supported by the data. These findings strengthen the
position of Butterfoss et al. (1993), Cummings (1984), Gray (1989), Schermerhorn
(1979), and Trist (1983) that the formalization of rules through the production of
written agreements facilitates collaboration. These results also reinforce the findings
from Selky's (1991) study of a coalition of human service agencies that networks should
spend time developing specific policies during their design. By producing written
documents that clearly outline the goals, objectives, and procedures of the coalition,
members can decrease the likelihood of confusion and uncertainty about these issues in
the future. Written agreements provide a common reference point for participants, and

help ensure that work done in the planning and coordination stage provides stability to

81

member relationships. If every one is “on the same page” , the possibility of conflict
may be reduced. This could explain why Written Agreements are related to Climate, as
opposed to Activities.

Finally, the hypothesis that Communication would be related to Climate was
also supported by the data. This closely mirrors the finding by Van De Ven and
Walker (1984) that communication, as measured during the first year of the study,
predicted consensus during the third year of the study. Good communication allows
members to understand each others’ needs, constraints, and concerns. By addressing
these issues openly and honestly, members can begin to trust each other and feel
confident that their concerns are being heard and understood. This can contribute to a
positive climate in a coalition.

While not an initial hypothesis of the study, I expected that there would be a
relationship between Climate and Activities. The literature on climate, while not
completely clear on the exact role of this construct, has found connections between
climate and organizational outcomes such as productivity. The zero-order correlation
between these variables was statistically significant, but disappeared when entered into
the model. In this particular set of data, the initial link between Climate and Activities
is explained by the relationships among the other variables in the model. There are
several possible explanations for this.

It may be that problems in measurement prevented an accurate assessment of the
role of climate in this data set. Another possibility is that positive climate is not

necessary for partnership activities, but is important in other ways. Positive climate

82

may influence factors such as the longevity of the coalition, allowing it to stay together
over a longer period of time. This may in turn affect factors such as stability of
membership, and the ability of the coalition to attract new members, public support, or
resources. The correlation between Age of the partnership and Climate in this study
was small (r= .12, p < .1), so this explanation requires further research. Finally, the
lack of a strong, positive relationship between Climate and Activities may mean
something completely different. It may be an indication that positive partnership
climate is simply insufficient for the implementation of activities, and that in fact a
climate that is very positive inhibits partnership activity. A moderate level of conflict
may be a positive sign that divergent stakeholder interests are being considered and
important issues are being addressed rather than avoided or glossed over. Therefor a
coalition that prides itself on pleasant working relationships should not become
complacent. Partnerships with positive climates should take care to ensure that they are
addressing all important issues, even controversial ones, and continue taking actions
designed to achieve mutual goals.

The findings of this study have several implications for school-to-work
partnerships. Most importantly, participants need to spend the necessary time planning
how the partnership will go about accomplishing its goals, and coordinating the
activities of its members. These two factors could have significant effects on the rest of
the partnership’s activities and its ability to achieve its goals. As the analyses above
demonstrated, planning and coordination affected every one of the other predictor

variables. School-to—work partnerships should spend the time necessary to plan, as

83

specifically as possible, how they will ensure diversity of representation and what their
goals and objectives will be. Attention to communication skills and channels during the
planning and coordination process can assist members in realizing that they need to
work together and acknowledging their interdependence. For schools and educators,
this means accepting the roles of the business, parents, community groups, and others
in improving the education process. For businesses, it means understanding that their
participation in the education system will ensure a pool of qualified job applicants. For
community groups, parents, students, and others it means accepting the fact that they
must be involved in the process if they wish to see quality educational and economic
opportunities for all young people.

STW partnerships need to make sure that they record, understand, and adhere to
agreements reached during the planning process. Documents such as a mission
statement, statement of goals, or rules of operation regarding curriculum changes,
internships, and apprenticeships can help ensure that members are united on their
commitment to the STW process, avoid conflicts due to disagreements on these issues,
and experience a productive climate. Making diversity of membership a priority, by
including businesses, educators, parents, students, community members, and labor
groups can increase the ability of a partnership to implement activities. Sharing
resources can also improve the ability of partnerships to implement experiential
activities in classrooms and at places of employment.

While this study provides support for the importance of the variables discussed

above in the functioning of school-to-work coalitions, these finding have implications

84

beyond STW partnerships. Coalitions are being used to address an ever increasing

number of social issues (McMillan, Florin, Stevenson, Kerman, & Mitchell, 1995).
The results of this research could be used to improve collaboration and outcomes of
coalitions formed to address a wide variety of community problems including social
services for youth, substance use prevention, violence prevention, and many others.

Much more research on these issues is needed in order to determine the relative
importance of the variables in this study. The present study had several weaknesses
that could be addressed in future investigations. First, the research design employed
here was cross-sectional. Longitudinal studies that examine the impact of the key
variables over time could provide further evidence regarding their impact on different
aspects of coalitions functioning and in different contexts. Longitudinal research also
has the potential to examine interactions, and to help sort out the question of climate as
an intervening versus outcome variable. Similarly, further examination of the role of
planning and coordination and the interaction of these variables with other predictors of
activities and climate could be facilitated by longitudinal research.

Second, this research relied on information from one key informant in each
coalition. This is problematic for several fairly obvious reasons. No one individual
could be expected to possess completely accurate information on all aspects of a
coalition. Further, even though respondents were asked about conditions of the
coalitions, by definition their responses were subjective. Personal experiences and

views could have biased their responses.

85

In attempting to control for one possible source of response error, partial
correlations were computed between Communication and Climate, Interdependence
and Climate, and Agreements and Climate while controlling for Job Satisfaction. As
discussed in the literature review (Schnake, 1983), controlling for job satisfaction can
improve the measurement of climate. The partial correlations in this case showed no
decrease in the correlations between these variables. This provides support for the
argument that satisfaction, as it was measured for this study, did not affect the
relationships between Communication, Interdependence, Agreements, and Climate.
Yet there are countless other sources of bias in many of the other relationships studied.
Future research that uses more objective measures of coalition functioning, such as
direct observation and archival data, could reduce measurement error.

The main methodological concern with this study is the apparent weakness of
the survey instrument, particularly the colinearity of the Interdependence,
Communication, Planning/Coordination, and Climate scales. Confirmatory factor
analysis revealed a high degree of correlation among items of different scales. This
makes it difficult to interpret the results with certainty. This study, and the instrument
it employed, should be viewed as first steps in the process of measuring and
interpreting the relationships among important factors in the collaboration process.
Future research efforts aimed at collecting and analyzing quantitative data on coalitions
will need improved measuring instruments in attempting to replicate the findings of this
study. A more direct approach to data collection could go a long way toward avoiding

some of the problems encountered in this study. Difficulties experienced due to the

86

participation of individual informants and a faulty measure could be avoided by direct
examination of partnership records, direct observation of stakeholder interactions, and
interviews with several or all participants.

This study examined the extent to which facilitating variables, processes, and
breadth of stakeholder representation affected outcomes in 150 school-to-work
coalitions in 16 states. These outcomes included work-based activities for students,
curriculum changes, and organizational climate. Results highlight the fundamental
importance of planning and coordination in the implementation of STW coalitions.
Planning and coordination influenced every other predictor variable, demonstrating
their primary role in the collaborative process. The results also indicate that coalitions
should work on including stakeholders that represent a wide variety of interests.
Written agreements that clearly document the mission, objectives, and rules help
participants avoid misunderstandings and share common, mutually agreed-upon goals.
This may facilitate collaboration and help partnerships accomplish activities.

Resource sharing can lead to more coalition activities, and communication
appears to be related to a more positive organizational climate in terms of cooperation,
cohesiveness, and organization. In summation, it appears that partnerships that take the
time to think ahead and attempt to organize their approach to collaboration can increase
their ability to agree, share, and cooperate. This may allow partnership members to

work together smoothly and make steps to reach their mutual goals.

87

Appendix A

Survey Instrument

STW COLLABORATION SURVEY

Survey #

 

State

 

Partnership

 

Age of partnership

 

Were ST W efforts taking place in the community before the partnership was formed?

1=YES O=NO

 

If so, for how long?

Could you please tell me a little about your background?

(CHECK THE CALL LIST TO SEE WHERE YOU'RE CALLING, I.E. A SCHOOL, A
BUSINESS, ETC. - WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT JOBS THEY DO NOW IN ADDITION
TO STW, AND WHAT JOB THEY HAD BEFORE THEIR STW POSITION

(BASED ON THEIR RESPONSE ABOVE, PROMPT TO FIND OUT WHOSE INTERESTS
THEY IDENTIFY WITH THE MOST, I.E. EDUCATION, BUSINESS, ETC.

1 = EDUCATION

2=BUSINESS

3 = OTHER

88

89

STAKEHOLDERS

1. The first t0pic I’d like to cover concerns the participants in your partnership. How many
people are involved in your partnership?

#
(IF AROUND 10 OR LESS) Could you tell me the names of the people who participate in
your partnership?
(IF MORE THAN 10) Could you tell me the names of the 10 most active people in your
partnership?
FOR EACH PERSON:
la. What organization are they affiliated with (high school, business, PTA)?

lb. What is their role in the partnership? (Do they have a title like treasurer, or do they
represent a constituency, like teachers or businesses?)

1c. How frequently do each of them participate (daily, weekly, monthly)?

CODES: 1 = LESS THAN MONTHLY
2 = MONTHLY
3 = BIWEEKLY
4 = WEEKLY
5 = DAILY

1d. What percentage of the following schools in your community does your partnership
work with:
(RECORD ON PAGE 4.)
High schools

Grade schools

Vocational schools, skill centers or trade academies

90

CHECK-OFF PARTICIPANTS; PROMPT

(Below, check off the participants from page 2. Prompt to see if other stakeholders listed
below, but not checked, are in the coalition.)

Represented?
(checlgif yes) Approx %
Education
High schools

 

Grade schools (k-8)

 

Vocational schools, skill centers,
trade academies

 

Community colleges

 

Four-year colleges/universities

 

Teachers/teacher organizations

 

Students/ student organizations

 

Businesses and Labor
Private sector companies/employees

 

Business organizations

 

Labor unions

 

Others
Parents/parent organizations

 

Community groups

 

Government agencies

 

91

WRITTEN AGREEMENTS
2. The next topic I'd like to discuss concerns the rules, policies and goals of your partnership.
Can you tell me if your partnership has any of the following written documents:

Check if they have written:

2a. Mission statement

 

[Document(s) that describe the partnership's overall purpose, philosophy, or reason for
existing]

2b. Statement of goals/objectives

 

[Document(s) that describe the specific aims or activities of the partnership]

2c. Pr0cedures for implementing
STW activities

 

[Documents that describe the methods or approaches that the partnership uses to implement
student activities, curriculum changes, or other activities]

2d. Rules of operation

 

[Documents that describe policies, regulations, or guidelines governing partnership or member
activities]

92

ACKNOWLEDGED INTERDEPENDENCE

The next section of this interview focuses on whether or not the members of your partnership
feel that their problems and goals are interconnected.

4. To what extent are members of your STW partnership convinced that their involvement in
the partnership is necessary for the success of their interests or organization?

1 = NOT AT ALL CONVINCED

2 = SLIGHTLY CONVINCED

3 = MODERATELY CONVINCED
4 = VERY CONVINCED

5 = COMPLETELY CONVINCED

5. To what extent do the individual members of your STW partnership understand that their
interests are interdependent with the other members of the partnership - that they share
similar needs, goals or problems?

1=NOT AT ALL

2=TO A SMALL EXTENT

3 =TO A MODERATE EXTENT
4=TO A SIGNIFICANT EXTENT

5 = COMPLETE UNDERSTANDING

6. To what extent are the individual members of your STW partnership convinced that their
participation in the partnership will benefit their interests and lead to positive outcomes for
their own organization/ group?

1 = NOT AT ALL CONVINCED

2 = SLIGHTLY CONVINCED

3 = MODERATELY CONVINCED
4 = VERY CONVINCED

5 = COMPLETELY CONVINCED

93

RESOURCE SHARING

. Next I'd like to know about resources in your partnership. Can you tell me which of the
following resources, if any, members have shared with the other partnership members:

7a.

7b.

7c.

7d.

7e.

7f.

Check if:

Members have shared equipment
or supplies

Members have shared rooms,
facilities, buildings

Members have shared financial
resources

Members have shared training
resources/assisted in training
of other members

Members have shared personnel/
provided for personnel time for
STW activities

Members have shared resources
for publicity/promotion of STW
activities

94
COMMUNICATION

I'd like to ask you next about communication among the members of your partnership. Please
indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements.

1 = strongly disagree

2 = disagree

3 = neither agree nor disagree
4 = agree

5 = strongly agree

8. The members exchange information freely in this partnership.

1 = strongly disagree

2 = disagree

3 = neither agree nor disagree
4 = agree

5 = strongly agree

9. The members of the partnership are afraid to express their real views.

1 = strongly disagree

2 = disagree

3 = neither agree nor disagree
4 = agree

5 = strongly agree

10. If we have a decision to make, everyone is involved in making it.

1 = strongly disagree

2 = disagree

3 = neither agree nor disagree
4 = agree

5 = strongly agree

1]. We tell each other the way we are feeling.

1 = strongly disagree

2 = disagree

3 =neither agree nor disagree
4 = agree

5 = strongly agree

95

11b. In this partnership everyone’s opinion gets listened to.
l=strongly disagree
2=disagree
3 =neither agree nor disagree
4=agree
5 = strongly agree

96

PLANNING

Now I'd like to ask you about the planning process in your partnership. By planning 1 mean

designing, organizing and outlining your goals, objectives, procedures and policies.

12. How often does your partnership spend time designing, organizing and outlining your

goals, objectives, procedures and policies?

1=NEVER -> GO TO #17
2=ONCE A YEAR

3 =ONCE EVERY SIX MONTHS
4=ONCE A MONTH

5 =ONCE A WEEK

13. To what extent has your planning process helped your partnership conduct school-based

activities such as curriculum changes?

1=NOT AT ALL

2=TO A SMALL EXTENT

3 =TO A MODERATE EXTENT
4=TO A LARGE EXTENT

5 =TO A VERY LARGE EXTENT

13b. To what extent has your planning process helped your partnership conduct work-based

activities such as job shadowing or internships?

1=NOT AT ALL

2=TO A SMALL EXTENT

3 =TO A MODERATE EXTENT
4=TO A LARGE EXTENT

5 =TO A VERY LARGE EXTENT

14. To what extent has the planning process in your partnership allowed you to anticipate

various problems and issues that have arisen?

1=NOT AT ALL

2=TO A SMALL EXTENT

3 =TO A MODERATE EXTENT
4=TO A LARGE EXTENT
5=TO A VERY LARGE EXTENT

97

COORDINATION

The next few questions have to do with coordination of efforts in your partnership.

15. To what extent are the activities, such as partnership efforts on curriculum changes and
student internships, organized and coordinated?

1=NOT AT ALL

2=TO A SMALL EXTENT

3 =TO A MODERATE EXTENT
4=TO A LARGE EXTENT
5=TO A VERY LARGE EXTENT

16. To what extent has your partnership been able to identify and address overlaps and gaps
in STW efforts and activities?

1=NOT AT ALL

2=TO A SMALL EXTENT

3 =TO A MODERATE EXTENT
4=TO A LARGE EXTENT
5=TO A VERY LARGE EXTENT

17. How well do the different parts of your STW program fit together and complement
each other?

1=NOT AT ALL

2 = SOMEWHAT WELL

3 = MODERATELY WELL
4 = VERY WELL

5 = EXTREMELY WELL

98

STUDENT ACTIVITIES
18. Now I'd like to ask you about student activities in your partnership. Can you tell me
which of the following STW activities students participate in?

Che:cl_< if students participate in

18a. Worksite visits/job shadowing

 

18b. Paid work experience

18c. Unpaid work experience/
internships

18d. Apprenticeship programs that
lead to skill certificates

l8e. Student enterprises that involve
students in marketing a product
or service

99

CURRICULUM CHANGES

19. The next part of the interview focuses on curriculum changes in the schools. Could you
please tell me, which of the following changes in school curricula has your partnership has
been able to implement?

Check if implemented
19a. Purchasing and/or implementing

experiential, contextual or applied
academic curricula

 

19b. Revising vocational classes to cover
career issues, or provide linkage to
academic material or courses

 

19c. Revising academic courses to cover
career issues, or provide linkage to
vocational material or courses

 

19d. Pairing academic and vocational teachers
for team teaching in classrooms

 

19e. Grouping secondary school teachers
together to develop or teach a joint
curricula that emphasizes a specific
career area

 

19f. Implementing block scheduling to create
more time for contextual or project-
based instruction

 

19g. Career exploration activities or courses
implemented or expanded

 

19h. The use of career majors or pathways that
determine students' courses or plans of study

 

100

ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE

The last section of this interview focuses on the attitudes and relationships among the members
of your partnership. For each item please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree
with the statement.

20.

21.

22.

23.

1 = strongly disagree

2 = disagree

3 = neither agree nor disagree
4 = agree

5 = strongly agree

The members of the partnership have respect for each other’s goals.

1 = strongly disagree

2 = disagree

3 = neither agree nor disagree
4 = agree

5 = strongly agree

The parties in this organization keep their word.

1 = strongly disagree

2 = disagree

3 = neither agree nor disagree
4 = agree

5 = strongly agree

In this organization negotiations take place in an atmosphere of good faith.

1 = strongly disagree

2 = disagree

3 = neither agree nor disagree
4 = agree

5 = strongly agree

A sense of fairness is associated with dealings between members.
1=strongly disagree
2 = disagree
3 =neither agree nor disagree
4=agree
5 = strongly agree

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

101

There are feelings among members of the partnership which tend to pull the group

apart.

1 = strongly disagree

2 = disagree

3 = neither agree nor disagree
4 = agree

5 = strongly agree

There is constant bickering in the partnership.

1 = strongly disagree

2 = disagree

3 = neither agree nor disagree
4 = agree

5 = strongly agree

People are proud of belonging to this partnership.

1 = strongly disagree

2 = disagree

3 =neither agree nor disagree
4 = agree

5 = strongly agree

The policies and goals of this partnership are clearly understood.

1 = strongly disagree

2 = disagree

3 = neither agree nor disagree
4 = agree

5 = strongly agree

Things often seem to be pretty disorganized in this partnership.

1 = strongly disagree

2 = disagree

3 = neither agree nor disagree
4 = agree

5 = strongly agree

102

29. There is a lot of warmth in the relationships among members of this partnership.

1 = strongly disagree

2 = disagree

3 =neither agree nor disagree
4 = agree

5 = strongly agree

30. This partnership knows exactly what things it has to get done.
1=strongly disagree
2=disagree
3 =neither agree nor disagree
4=agree
5 = strongly agree

30a. What percentage of the people in your partnership would agree with the ratings you just
gave about the relationships among members?

 

103

JOB SATISFACTION

These last few questions ask about how you feel about your participation in the partnership.
Please indicate how satisfied you are with each of the following aspects of your role.

1 =very dissatisfied

2 = dissatisfied

3 = neither satisfied or dissatisfied
4 = satisfied

5 = very satisfied

31. The friendliness of the people you work with in the partnership.

1 =very dissatisfied

2 = dissatisfied

3 =neither satisfied or dissatisfied
4 = satisfied

5 = very satisfied

32. The respect you receive from the people in the partnership.

1 =very dissatisfied

2 = dissatisfied

3 =neither satisfied or dissatisfied
4 = satisfied

5 = very satisfied

33. The chances you have to accomplish something worthwhile.

1 = very dissatisfied

2 =dissatisfied

3 =neither satisfied or dissatisfied
4 = satisfied

5 = very satisfied

34. The chances you have to do something that makes you feel good about yourself as a
person.
1=very dissatisfied
2 = dissatisfied
3 =neither satisfied or dissatisfied
4 = satisfied
5 = very satisfied

104

Appendix B
Student Training Outline

Psychology 490 - Assessment of School-to-Work Coalitions
Student Training Outline

Week 1 Discussion of research plan and expectations of students
Assigned reading: A Proposal to Examine the Collaborative Processes within School-
to-Work Coalitions

Week 2 Discussion of STW and the research proposal

Assigned reading: Lavrakas (1993), Telephone Survey Methods. Chapters 1, 4, & 5

Week 3 Discussion of telephone survey methods

Assigned reading: Berg (1989), Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences.
Chapter 3.

Week 4 Discussion of interviewing techniques

Week 5 Presentation of example interview; practice interviews
Week 6 Practice interviews

Week 7-9 Mock interviews; reliability checks

Week 10-15 Partnership interviews

Data entry
Weekly meetings to monitor progress & discuss problems

 

 

Appendix C

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Call Sheet
STW COALITION SURVEY
CALL SHEET
Phone # Survey #
Name Site/State
Contact attempts Date Time mun Interviewer
1
2
3
4
5
6
NOTES
1.
2.
3.

 

 

105

References

Ashforth, B. (1985). Climate formation: Issues and extensions. Academy of Management
Re_vipw, _1_Q, 837-847.

Atkinson, G., & Murrell, P. (1988). Kolb's experiential learning theory: A meta-model for
career exploration. Journal of Counseling and Development, 66, 374-377.

Bailey, T. & Merritt, D. (1992). School to work transition and youth apprenticeship in the

U.S. New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.

Bishop, J. (1988). The motivation problem in American high schools. Ithaca: Cornell
University.

Brenner, M. (1973). Fetal, infant and maternal mortality during periods of economic
instability. International Journal of filth Services, 3, 145-159.

Brown, C. (1984). The art of coalition building: A guide for community leaders. New

 

York: The American Jewish Committee.

Butterfoss, F., Goodman, R., & Wandersman, A. (1993). Community coalitions for
prevention and health promotion. Health Education Research, 8 (3), 315-330.

Cammann, C., Fichman, M., Jenkins, D., & Klesh, J. (1983). Assessing the attitudes and
perceptions of organizational members. In S. Seashore, E. Lawler, P. Mirvis, & C. Cammann
(Eds), Assessing Organizational Change. NY: Wiley.

Catalano, R, Dooley, D. & Jackson, R. (1981). Economic predictors of admissions to
mental health facilities in a non-metropolitan community. Journal of Health and Social
Behavior, 2, 284-297.

106

107

Catterall, J. (1985). On the cost of dropping out. Los Angeles: Institute for Research on
Educational Finance and Governance.

Choy, S. (1994). School—to-work opportunities: Issues in state and local governance. In
U.S. Department of Education (Ed.) School-to-work transition: What does research say about
i_t_. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Cochrane, D., Mattai, P.R., Huddleston-Mattai, B. (1994). Non—college-bound urban
minority youth: Issues of transition. In A. Pautler (Ed.), High School to Employment
Ir_a_nsition: Contemporarylssues. Ann Arbor: Prakken.

Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce (1990). America's choice: High
skills or low wagg. Washington, DC: National Center on Education and the Economy.

Committee for Economic Development (1987). Children in need: Investment strategies for
the educationally disadvantaged. New York: Author.

Cummings, T. (1984). Transorganizational development. In B. Staw & L. Cummings
(Eds), Resiarch in organizational behavior. Vol. 6. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Dastrnalchian, A., Blyton, P., & Adamson, R. (1989). Industrial relations climate:
Testing a construct. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 62, 21-32.

Dewey, J. (1959). Experience and education. NY: Macmillan.

Dooley, D., Catalano, R., & Wilson, G. (1994). Depression and unemployment: Panel
findings from the epidemiologic catchment area study. American Journal of Community

Psychology, 22, 745-766.

Dilhnan, D. (1978). Mail and telephone surveys. New York: Wiley.

108

Dooley, D. & Catalano, R. (1980). Economic change as a cause of behavioral disorder.
Psychological Bulletin, 8_7, 450-468.

Feighery, E., & Rogers, T. (1989). Building and maintaining effective coalitions. M
No. 12. How-To Guides on Community Health Promotion. Palo Alto: Stanford Health
Promotion Resource Center.

Forehand, G., & Von Gilmer, B. (1964). Environmental variations in studies of
organizational behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 62, 362-381.

Glick, W. (1985). Concepts and measurement of organizational and psychological climate:
Pitfalls in multi-level research. Academy of Management Review, 1_O, 601-661.

Goldberger, S., Kazis, R., & O'Flanagan (1994). Designing and implementing quality
worksite learning for high school students. NY: Manpower Demonstration Research
Corporation.

Grant Foundation Commission on Work, Family, and Citizenship (1988). The forgotten
h_al_f. Washington, DC: Author.

Gray, B. (1985). Conditions facilitating interorganizational collaboration. Map
Relations, 38, 911—936.

Gray, B. (1989). Collaborating: Finding common ground for multipm problems. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Gray, B., & Hay, T. (1986). Political limits to interorganizational consensus and change.

Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 22 (2), 95-112.
Gray, B. & Wood, D. (1991). Collaborative alliances: Moving from practice to theory.

Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 21 (1), 3-22.

109

Guion, R. (1973). A note on organizational climate. Organizational Behavior and Human
Performapg. 9. 120-125.

Gunter, B. & Furnham, A. (1996). Biographical and climate predictors of job satisfaction
and pride in organizations. Journal of Psychology, m, 193-208.

Hall, R., Clark, J ., Giordano, P., Johnson, P. & Van Roekel, M. (1977). Patterns of
interorganizational relationships. Administrative Science Qparterly, 2;, 457-474.

Hellriegel, D. & Slocum, J. (1974). Oragizational climate: Measures, research, and
contingincies. Academy of Management Journal, 11, 255-280.

Hoachlander, E. (1994). Industry-based education: A new approach for school-to-work
transition. In U.S. Department of Education (Ed.) School-to-workgapsition: What does
research say about it. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Hord, S. (1986). A synthesis of research on organizational collaboration. Educational
Leadership, Februag, 22-26.

Hoyt, K. (1994). A proposal for making the transition from schooling to employment. In
A. Pautler (Ed.) High school to employment transition: Contemporary issues. Ann Arbor:
Prakken.

Jackofsky, E., & Slocum, J. (1988). A longitudinal study of climates. Journal of

Organizational Behavior, _9_, 319—334.

James, L., & Jones, A. (1974). Organizational climate: A review of theory and research.

Psychological Bulletin, 8_1(12), 1096-1112.

110

James, L. & Sells, S. (1982). Psychological climate: Theoretical perspectives and
empirical research. In D. Magnusson (Ed.) Toward a Psychology of Situations: An
Intepactional Perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Johnson, L. & Abramovitch, R. (1988). Parental unemployment and family life. In A.
Pence (Ed.) Ecological research with children and families: From concepts to methodology.
New York: Teacher's College Press.

Jones, A. & James, L. (1979). Psychological climate: Dimensions and relationships of
individual and aggregated work environment perceptions. Organizational Behavior and
Human Performflpg, _2_3, 201-250.

Joyce, W., & Slocum, J. (1979). Climates in organizations. In S. Kerr (Ed.)
Organizational Behavior. Columbus, OH: Grid.

Joyce, W., & Slocum, J. (1984). Collective climate: Agreement as a basis for defining
aggregate climates in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 27, 721-742.

Kelly, J. (1986). An ecological paradigm: Defining mental health consultation as a
preventive service. In J. Kelly & R. Hess (Eds.) The ecology of prevention: Illustrating
mental health consultation. New York: Hawthorn.

Kolb, D. (1984). Expgriential learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Lawler, E., Hall, D., & Oldham, G. (1974). Organizational climate: Relationship to
organizational structure, process, and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human

Performance 11 139-155.

 

Legler, R. (1997). School-to-work coalitions: A theoretical model for effective

collaboration. Manuscript in preparation.

111

Logsdon, J. (1991). Interests and interdependence in the formation of social problem-

solving collaborations. Journal of Applied Behavioral Scienge, 27, 23-37.

McCann, J. (1983). Design guidelines for social problem-solving interventions. Journal of

Applied Behavioral Science, 19 (2), 177-192.

McMillan, B., Florin, P., Stevenson, J ., Kerman, B., & Mitchell, R. (1995).
Empowerment praxis in coalitions. American J opurnal of Community Psychology, 23(5),
699-728.

Moussavi, E, Jones, T., & Cronan, T. (1990). Explaining psychological climate: Is
perceptual agreement necessary? Journal of Social Psychology, £0, 239-248.

Oliver, C. (1990). Determinants of interorganizational relationships. Academy of
Management Review, 15, 241-265.

Otterbourg, S., & Timpane, M. (1986). Partnerships and schools. In P. Davis (Ed.),
Public-private partnerships: Improving urban life. NY: Academy of Political Science.

Osterman, P. & Ianozzi, M (1993). Youth Apprenticeships and School-to-Work Transition:
Current Knowledge and Legislative Strategy. Philadelphia: National Center on the
Educational Quality of the Work Force.

Ostroff, C. (1993). The effects of climate and perceptual influences on individual behavior
and attitudes in organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision-Making
Processes, 56, 56-90.

Payne, R., & Pugh, S. (1976). Organizational structure and organizational climate. In M.

Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Chicago: Rand

McNally.

112

Roberts, N. & Bradley, R. (1991). Stakeholder collaboration and innovation: A study of
public policy initiation at the state level. Journal of Applied Behavioral Scien_ce. 27, 209-227.

Schermerhorn, J. (1979). Interorganizational development. Journal of Management, 5 (1),
21-38.

Schmidt, S. , & Kochan, T. (1977). Interorganizational relationships: Patterns and
motivations. Administrative Science Qparterly, 22, 220-234.

Schnake, M. (1983). An empirical assessment of the effects of affective response in the
measurement of organizational climate. Personnel Psychology, E, 791-807.

Schneider, B. , & Hall, D. (1972). Toward specifying the concept of work climate: A
study of Roman Catholic diocesan priests. Journal of Applied Psychology, 56, 447-455.

Schneider, B. & Reichers, A. (1983). On the etiology of climates. Personnel Psychology,
E, 19-39.

Schneider, B. & Snyder, R. (1975). Some relationships between job satisfaction and
organizational climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, @, 318-328.

School-to-Work Opportunities Act of 1994, Pub. L. No. 105-402.

Selsky, J. (1991). Lessons in community development: An activist approach to stimulating
interorganizational collaboration. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, _2_Z, 91-115.

Trist, E. (1983). Referent organizations and the development of inter-organizational

domains. Human Relations 36 (3), 269-284.

 

Turner, J ., Kessler, R. & House, J. (1991). Factors facilitating adjustment to

unemployment: Implications for intervention. American Journal of Communig Psychology,

12, 521-542.

1 13
U.S. General Accounting Office (1990). Training strategies: Preparing non-college youth

for employment in the U.S. and foreign countries. Washington, DC: U.S. Government

Printing Office.
U. S. General Accounting Office (1991). Transition from School to Work: Linking

Education and Worksite Training. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

 

U. S. General Accounting Office (1993). Systemwide education reform. Washington,
DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

U. S. General Accounting Office (1993). Imaition from school to work: States a3;
developing new strategies to prepare students for jobs. Washington, DC: U.S. Government
Printing Office.

U. S. Commission on Excellence in Education (1983). A nation at risk. Washington,
DC: Author.

Van de Ven, A. , & Walker, G. (1984). The dynamics of interorganizational coordination.

Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 598-621.

Whiting, B. (1993). School-to-work transition: Reaching for scale in big cities. Paper

 

presented at the Linking School and Work in Urban Areas conference, Chicago.
Wood, D., & Gray, B. (1991). Toward a comprehensive theory of collaboration. Journal

of A lied Behavioral Science, 21, 139-162.

MICHIGAN STATE UNIV. LIBRARIES
m1|WWII"llHIWW||||WW1111111111le
31293017667977