AN ANALYSIS OF MRI-BUSINESS MANAGEMEN? FUNCTIONS AND- EMPLECATWNS FGR PERSONNEL TRAINING “t’hesis for the Degree of P31. 3. MSQHIGAN STATE UNEVERSIEY VICTOR L. STINE 1969 Theste This is to certify that the thesis entitled An Analysis of Agri-Business Management Functions and Implications for Personnel Training presented by Victor L. Stine has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Pl'l.D. degree in Education /, 4 Date November 10, 1‘. 0-169 ,3 amomc Iv "OAS & SUNS' 800K BINUERY INC. LIBRARY amoe‘ F; men-92» ‘ -u-v"- ABSTRACT AN ANALYSIS OF AGRI-BUSINESS MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PERSONNEL TRAINING BY Victor L. Stine This dissertation has been focused on the agri- business manager. The major objective has been to identify and classify the more-or-less common activities, compe- tencies and characteristics of a selected group of such managers with a view toward the development of suitable training curricula. Because the agri-business manager's position exists within a business organization hierarchy and because of certain company, function and product differences inherent in the situations studied, the position was examined from three different vieWpoints and within three basic frames of reference. The perceptions of a set of role definers made up of the focal manager himself, his superior and a randomly selected subordinate were used to assess the positions and personnel under consideration. The judgments of the role set members were secured in regard to: (a) the relative amount of time allocated to certain competency areas and to certain activities by the '1 . fl ‘ -—1'1 ”IV. I 'JJJ 1 Essa. manage: Q . o CI'lESS 139a. ' | A.l re chnzgan-cwx sperating ir. guessing a P“5‘ 9‘ V‘bty.s, “tar @Jestionnai: was develO:d C C‘ examinati field. Victor L. Stine focal manager, (b) the importance of said competencies and activities as indicated by a cruciality-to-success rating, and (c) the expected role activity or behavior under more— or-less ideal conditions. All respondents in the study were employed by three Michigan-owned and operated agri-business firms which were operating in four general functional areas of endeavor: processing and manufacturing, single company branch retail outlets, marketing and service, and local multi-service operations with parent firm management. The research instrument, a survey made up of three questionnaires and containing 188 activity related items, was deve10ped by the author from current literature and adapted to agri-business management situations on the basis of examinations of job descriptions from participating firms and personal experience in the agri-business management field. The two major questionnaires were divided according to competency categories of: (a) personnel supervision and evaluation, (b) operations and coordination, (c) planning and research, (d) merchandising, (e) finance and control, (f) public relations and community affairs, (9) purchasing and inventory maintenance, and (h) personal demands and improvement. The individual activities within each grouping were rated and ranked according to specified criteria and subsequently a ranking of the categories was made. categories E: actlvxzes c szte evalua: Within th 1 S Quential to StudiECl . '3'; finance and .: w a MEthanHS and Many : k a l | I | | Victor L. Stine Compilation and analysis of data, with the assistance of the Computer Laboratory at Michigan State University, resulted in the definition of the important competency categories and the identification of the more important activities of the agri-business managers studied. Oper— ations and coordination was ranked, according to a compo- site evaluation of the responses, at the top of the list of competency categories. In other words, the activities within this category were deemed to be the most conse- quential to the satisfactory fulfillment of the positions studied. The other top listed competency categories were: finance and control, planning and research, and personal demands and improvement. Many rank-and-file activities found to be important to the success of the focal manager are not usually con- sidered to be management-type activities but are of a nature that could be routinely handled by other employees. Ap- parently agri-business managers operate on a less sophisti- cated level than do many industrial managers. It must be concluded that the successful agri-business manager needs certain technical as well as management skills. On the whole, these persons seem to be current-operations oriented thus leaving little time for long range planning and development. The techniques used in this study plus the data compiled and results obtained permitted a description of the job requirements of a population of Michigan "far“.é" 3"» A; ~- r' - :crncn and ; S'JCCESS 0!". f situation c training neJ Victor L. Stine agri-business middle managers; they provided a set of common and identifiable competencies judged necessary to success on the job; and they revealed differences in position requirements and training needs by position or situation of the managers. They permitted inferring of training needs for such managers. ““o l' ,\ rbo‘r‘.“ ‘\' an 4. ‘\" It.“ artme: nu; AN ANALYSIS OF AGRI-BUSINESS MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PERSONNEL TRAINING BY Victor LfJStine A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Administration and Higher Education 1969 (0 (0/552? 9/; :u [0 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS No doctoral dissertation is the result of the efforts of a single individual. Although it is impossi— ble to recognize all of those who were so kind in their assistance, it would seem appropriate to name a few. The author is particularly indebted to Professor Russell J. Kleis. Not only has he served as chairman of the doctoral guidance committee in a very scholarly fashion, but he has performed admirably as professional advisor, personal confidant and inspirational beacon. His patience, unselfishness, encouragement and pro- fessional zeal have been major factors in completing this doctoral program. Acknowledgment is also due the members of the doctoral guidance committee. Sincere appreciation is hereby eXpressed to doctors Duane L. Gibson, Vandel C. Johnson and George R. Myers for their direction, assistance and advice. Mention should also be made of the helpful suggestions offered by Dr. Raymond M. Clark. To the management personnel and other participants who responded to repeated requests for their time by supplying the raw data for this project, a genuine thank ii t'O--,r .- , ' ‘ g: 11.. . .. ,. " "tratal. 1.. 3‘45... -l- ‘ . '- "P‘f‘ .C‘AOIS “InJ '5 'C'CFF"G‘ . ' ”um...” .. ' 7 I . .0 P‘fl 'v --_ _ nu r“. ' .sr ‘ .. tat- ‘ ‘ 0" ‘ ‘ i . uni ““3”: :1- | . .. "7-13 H v.“\‘l.‘ VM you is extended. Their confidence and COOperation reflects an awareness that for the business and the academic communi— ties to mutually assist one another requires more than lip service. This study would not have been possible without the generous and enthusiastic cooperation of the agri-business firms who allowed us to minutely examine their management programs. Special mention should be made of the executive personnel in these organizations who contributed their time and know—how to the study. Finally, and most importantly, I wish to acknowledge and thank my wife, Chris, without whose patience, under- standing, c00peration and sacrifice this thesis and an entire doctoral program would not have been possible; Holly, my youngest daughter, who often had to give up play periods, weekend trips and many other things so important in the life of a six year old, but who exhibited an under— standing far beyond her years and an uncommon interest in her father's success in this venture; and my mother and late father, who were a source of inspiration and con— tinued encouragement. iii ‘q..‘.'.," ,_,_ fl‘ -\ ' ‘ | ..v.t.\ . “bu“ '.~P f‘H In.-. \ p I -.\-‘ \. ‘V. 35*; "wt-b... . .1 -a4 a p. Al»: I? '1 T L ’I" TABLE 01" ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . LIST OF LIST OF Chapter I. II. III. TABLES . . . . . FIGURES . . . . . INTRODUCTION. . . . Background . . . The Problem . . . Definition of Terms Overview . . . . THEORETICAL BASIS AND CONCEPTUAL FOR THE STUDY . . . Introduction. . . CONTENTS FRAMEWORK Role Theory in Relation to Management . Role as a Basis for Training The Operations or Middle Manager . . . Training for Agriculturally Related Occupations . . Techniques Used in Other Management Studies . . . Summarization . . Assumptions Relative to the Study. . . Limitations of the Study. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY . Introduction. . . The Subjects. . . Instrumentation. . Questionnaire Administration Data Collection. Data Analysis . . The Questions . . iv Page ii vi xi 11 ll 12 17 21 24 26 32 35 36 39 39 42 47 49 50 ti“ - 3. mat-anal. V‘- "’C‘ ‘- " 'II .¢L, Y" ". " ‘0 \- l", mu.“ vo'. - 00.; b-4 '1 P K (D H Chapter IV. THE FINDINGS . . . . . Time Allocation of Activ Cruciality Ratings of Ac Role Expectation Ratings The Composite Picture of Criteria of Significa Variations in Activities Managers According to Summary. . . . . . V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . The Problem . . . . The Respondents . . . Procedures. . . . . Summary of Findings. . Limitations . . . . Summary of Conclusions. Conclusions Relative to ities . . tivities . the Three nce . . . of Focal Firm . . the Training of Agri-Business Managers. . . Implications for Curricu ment. . . . . lum Develop- Recommendations for Further Research BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . APPENDIX. . . . . . . . Page 56 57 79 102 130 132 137 140 140 140 142 142 146 146 152 154 156 161 .3 .3 Cc .1. : ... an . i , t V. at. «d ”a V ‘ "I . A v ”1.. n M]. OIL ad AM.» HI ”n v A L 0.. RNA. w 1.1. Q» .1 Y. _.. w“ L” a». ; 1. a _ “V. m . MA A: . . u. o t a «EL .11- s)... .4; . . as. :,'______-— a- » LIT? r. Fl. Table 1.] SiW' ()l" flT/\lilalifi Page Characteristics Profile of Respondent Managers . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Percentage of Total Time Allocated to Major Areas of Managerial Competence by Agri-Business Managers as Perceived by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . . . . 59 Time Allocation of Selected Operations and Coordination Activities of Agri-Business Managers as Ranked by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates. . . . . . . . . . 61 Time Allocation of Selected Merchandising Activities of Agri-Business Managers as Ranked by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . 64 Time Allocation of Selected Finance and Control Activities of Agri-Business Managers as Ranked by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates. . . . . . . . . . 67 Time Allocation of Selected Personnel Supervision and Evaluation Activities of Agri-Business Managers as Ranked by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates. . . . . . . . 70 Time Allocation of Selected Planning and Research Activities of Agri-Business Managers as Ranked by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates. . . . . . . . . . 72 vi . , v . . . . . . . . . . . I E 3. 5 p“ ~. 1 C . r. . i - ._ .. A. .. . . . . e I On ”x.” .W. _d ‘h“ rm.» .n Rh 1! M . Adv Cu “v m- . ch C RNA “H. C» hL S n\\4 C syn... nth: n. . n... w . u H“ PM u 1 .l . . I I I I a. . m . p . .rt C C P... e o I O O O O I O .p » Pi.- flJJ Ai. all. a/s «1d 4 9:. 11A six. 1 l l a Table Page 8. Time Allocation of Selected Purchasing and Inventory Maintenance Activities of Agri-Business Managers as Ranked by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . . . . . . 75 9. Time Allocation of Selected Public Relations and Community Affairs Activities of Agri-Business Managers as Ranked by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . . . . . . 77 10. Time Allocation of Selected Personal Demands and Improvement Activities of Agri-Business Managers as Ranked by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . . . . . . 80 11. Cruciality Rating of Major Areas of Mana- gerial Competence for Agri-Business Managers as Perceived by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . . . . . . . . 82 .12. Cruciality of Selected Planning and Research Activities of Agri-Business Managers as Rated by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . 85 I13. Cruciality of Selected Operations and Coordination Activities of Agri-Business Managers as Rated by the Managers Them- selves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . . . . . . . . 88 “14. Cruciality of Selected Finance and Control Activities of Agri-Business Managers as Rated by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . 90 15. Cruciality of Selected Personal Demands and Improvement Activities of Agri- Business Managers as Rated by the Mana- gers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . . . . . . 93 vii .. 5" e .1.. 10 ‘0 21. 23 Table Page 16. Cruciality of Selected Purchasing and Inventory Maintenance Activities of Agri-Business Managers as Rated by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . . . . . . 95 17. Cruciality of Selected Personnel Super- vision and Evaluation Activities of Agri-Business Managers as Rated by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . . . . . . 98 18. Cruciality of Selected Public Relations and Community Affairs Activities of Agri- Business Managers as Rated by the Mana— gers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . . . . . . 100 19. Cruciality of Selected Merchandising Activities of Agri-Business Managers as Rated by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . 103 20. The Most Crucial Individual Activities of Agri-Business Managers as Reflected in the Composite Responses of the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . . . . . . . . 105 21. Role Expectation Rating of Major Areas of Managerial Competence as Perceived by the Focal Managers, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . . . . . . 107 22. Expected Role Behavior of Agri-Business Managers Relative to Operations and Coordination Activities as Rated by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates. . . . . . . 110 23. Expected Role Behavior of Agri-Business Managers Relative to Personal Demands and Improvement Activities as Rated by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates. . . . . . . 113 viii B.) 1]! In; m o 2.7 N ’ LI.) 0 29 30 31. Table Page 24. Expected Role Behavior of Agri-Business Managers Relative to Finance and Control Activities as Rated by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . . . . . . . . 115 25. Expected Role Behavior of Agri-Business Managers Relative to Planning and Research Activities as Rated by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates. . . . . . . 117 26. EXpected Role Behavior of Agri-Business Managers Relative to Personnel Super- vision and Evaluation Activities as Rated by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . 120 27. Expected Role Behavior of Agri-Business Managers Relative to Purchasing and Inventory Maintenance Activities as Rated by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . 122 28. Expected Role Behavior of Agri-Business Managers Relative to Merchandising Activities as Rated by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . . . . . . 124 29. Expected Role Behavior of Agri-Business Managers Relative to Public Relations and Community Affairs Activities as Rated by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . 127 30. The Expected Performance of the "Ideal" Agri-Business Manager as Reflected in the Composite Responses of the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . . . . . . . . 129 31. Rank Order Comparison of Major Areas of Managerial Competence for Agri-Business Managers as Reflected in the Time Allo- cation, Cruciality and Role Expectation Ratings by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . 131 ix ‘SCI. r. U; aA -i at. | I I I vs 1.. ,,. r.\ r. . . .. -. u. r. o. I. 3. be it 9.. .1. u.“ n. #1. .u. .‘l «D .2 ~. ‘1 .1 ”J n; .. .. C.. . . . ‘1 ‘.b I‘.J «414 .waJ QIJ “(3" *4... Table Page 32. Distribution of Composite Time Allocation Percentages and Rankings of the Major Categories of Managerial Competence According to Type of Firm . . . . . . 134 33. Distribution of Composite Mean Cruciality Ratings and Rankings of the Major Cate- gories of Managerial Competence According to Type of Firm . . . . . . . . . 136 34. Distribution of Composite Mean Role Expec- tation Ratings and Rankings of the Major Categories of Managerial Competence According to Type of Firm . . . . . . 138 35. Summary of the Composite Rank Order of Compe- tency Categories, and the Component Activities Rated as Being Most Important in Each, of Agri-Business Managers . . . 14S 11”. .1 I I I,I I I I I I IrI q. I- v v 5.. - f o .J ... (C t... .- .. . . .. \ t l . A . . . Nit N“ "I T. m. w; wt . . r.— .7; .l .l .l l l p. m . m. l n1 mu. T T a: W“ O 0 I O O 0 0 MM. 1 .2 3 4 S In; 7 .. . T. Figure 1. LIST OF FIGURES Percentage of Total Time Allocated to Major Areas of Managerial Competence by Agri-Business Managers as Perceived by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . Time Allocation of Selected Operations and Coordination Activities of Agri-Business Managers as Ranked by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates. . . . . . . . . . Time Allocation of Selected Merchandising Activities of Agri-Business Managers as Ranked by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . Time Allocation of Selected Finance and Control Activities of Agri-Business Managers as Ranked by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates. . . . . . . . . . Time Allocation of Selected Personnel Supervision and Evaluation Activities of Agri-Business Managers as Ranked by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates. . . . . . . . Time Allocation of Selected Planning and Research Activities of Agri-Business Managers as Ranked by the Managers Them- selves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates. . . . . . . . . . Time Allocation of Selected Purchasing and Inventory Maintenance Activities of Agri-Business Managers as Ranked by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . . . . xi Page 60 62 65 68 71 73 76 H “ Cr t. I a. a... CL 5.. a . .r. u .d C C, u.“ m. CL C 3. V S C. r. Ft ‘3 c. C. —. T ”a U U .1 .1 r r r n. n. at. C C e v. 3 . o o . c we. DU Q4 7.. l. 2 u‘. l ‘l l I... Cu; 14. 15 Figure Page 16. Cruciality of Selected Personnel Super- vision and Evaluation Activities of Agri-Business Managers as Rated by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . . . . . . 99 17. Cruciality of Selected Public Relations and Community Affairs Activities of Agri- Business Managers as Rated by the Mana- gers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . . . . . . 101 18. Cruciality of Selected Merchandising Activi— ties of Agri-Business Managers as Rated by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . 104 19. Role Expectation Rating of Major Areas of Managerial Competence as Perceived by the Focal Managers, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . . . . . . . . 108 20. Expected Role Behavior of Agri-Business Managers Relative to Operations and Coordination Activities as Rated by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates. . . . . . . 111 21. Expected Role Behavior of Agri-Business Managers Relative to Personal Demands and Improvement Activities as Rated by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . -. . . . . . . 114 22. Expected Role Behavior of Agri-Business Managers Relative to Finance and Control Activities as Rated by the Managers Them— selves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . . . . . . . . 116 23. Expected Role Behavior of Agri-Business Managers Relative to Planning and Research Activities as Rated by the Mana- gers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . . . . . . 118 xiii 5‘. r ~,. 'H St. 'r. .-. s4. . ,_ V "v -.-n _ ~v, "cu\_ a I ‘Iv‘ ‘-’s k a ‘ -\ fit I Figure Page 24. Expected Role Behavior of Agri-Business Managers Relative to Personnel Super- vision and Evaluation Activities as Rated by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . 121 25. Expected Role Behavior of Agri-Business Managers Relative to Purchasing and Inventory Maintenance Activities as Rated by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . . . 123 26. Expected Role Behavior of Agri-Business Managers Relative to Merchandising Activities as Rated by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates. . . . . . . . . . 125 27. Expected Role Behavior of Agri-Business Managers Relative to Public Relations and Community Affairs Activities as Rated by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates . 128 28. A Comparison of the Cruciality Ratings of Responsibilities Actually Performed and Significance of Ratings of Elements of Expected Role Behavior of Agri-Business Managers as Judged by the Managers Themselves, Their Superiors and Their Subordinates. . . . . . . . . . 133 xiv p. .. a. C. re .4. i; W... (C 13 S 3 E ... C. :14.“ 7c .3 as p.. 1.. r... a ‘. r“ rd. an .a L; C. .2 re. re a. .3 a .l. r. ~. .1 2a 53 ~a .. a» ... 2. .2. .y. ..I -\~ 11 swish“ . Rte. S 'm “was. —t.5A CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Background The emergence of management as a distinct and essential institution has been a pivotal point in social history. Rarely, if ever, has a new basic institution emerged so fast, been proven indis- pensable so quickly, and encountered so little opposition. However, despite its crucial impor— tance, its high visibility and its Spectacular acceptance, management is still the least known and the least understood of all business concepts. In modern industrial society a highly refined division of labor has resulted in increased role2 specialization within complex organizations. Roles are created, developed and nurtured in order to fulfill the goals of the organization. Therefore, the organization holds a vital concern for the behaviors which are essential to satisfactory role performance. 1Peter F. Drucker, The Practice of Management (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1964). 2A role consists of a set of expected behaviors for a member of a social group. 3Daniel Katz and Robert L. Kahn, The Social Esychology of Organizations (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1966). ., .,.,. ,- ._ 4 - en. .‘..1 ~‘_ 0 l y:-;..r‘ .. "i ”4‘ Lha.unv-~ . . .. - .u' ’ ano' and .. n, -- - .' r-va 4, ‘h‘htaat- “b. .. “fu. v- . s-t "~>-..\_ . 'u- 1:. a ““"“S irI' ‘ v 4 The good manager is a dynamic, life—giving element in any business. Without managerial leadership the "resources of production" are likely to remain resources only and never become anything more. In a competitive situation, the quality and performance of its managers determine the success of an enterprise; in fact they determine its survival.l Management, its competence, its integrity and its importance may be decisive to the United States and to the free world in the exciting decades ahead. It behooves those in control of business and industry to take serious note of the projected situ— ation in regard to management manpower. Keith Davis2 and Grant Venn3 agree, after analysis of the manpower needs for the 1970's, that the nation's management shortage may be more serious than the engineering and scientific shortage. The need for management cannot actually be calculated on a simple supply-and—demand basis because management creates change and change creates the need for management. Therefore, the rate lDrucker, op. cit., p. 6. 2Keith Davis, "Management Brain-Power Needs for the 1970's," Journal of the Academy of Management (August, 1960T) 125. 3Grant Venn, Man, Education and Work: Post figcondary Vocational and Technical Education (Washington: American Council on Education, 1964), pp. 135—136. I .0. IL; 0 n a .. . s ..f; w~ L.. § ‘4; 1‘ 1 t a. .. ... I r“ . . t... .... 1.. . a” 2. .3 .3 . . ..-. re a. 9. o! I V v . . | .5 2. .3 u. u .3 s. .. a. a” ..-. 2. .. t C til I ..a .C .2 a. Cu .. b. w“ a. .. ... ....3 ta r“ .n .h an .. I ... 2.. a. .2 C .C . . . . L. L. .(n . . r. a . ‘L . . t; ...: . c. .3 .3 a . .. r . s . I: a: .1 nn. 2» H .. u .. ... .o a w . .c .3 ~ . .L. ._. an 2‘ .v.. L. a .. . . .- .. .... a . r is _ . . A u a Vs s . ~ . t of innovation and the managerial function are inter— dependent.l Since the end of World War II, in the world of business enterprise, rapid advances in technology, business practice and consumer discrimination have accentuated the need for employee training at all levels. The greatest need within this broad area or work, according to qualified students of business activity, is for training and retraining middle or operational managers.2 The increasing rate of obso- lescence in managerial ranks also highlights the fact that the executive job is changing more and more rapidly; bringing about an unprecedented situation-— the obsolete manager. The Problem Until recently it was widely believed that manage- ment develOpment was an essentially automatic process lMax Ways, "Tomorrow's Management,’ June l, 1966, p. 85. Fortune, 2See discussions by: Douglas McGregor, The Human Side of Enterprise (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1965Y: Walter Guzzardi, Jr., The Young Executives (New York: The American Library, Inc., 1964); Robert J. House, Management Development: Design, Evaluation and implementation—TAnn Arbor, Michigan: The University of Michigan Press, 1967). 3Auren Uris, Mastery of Management (Homewood, Illinois: Dow Jones-Irwin, 1968), p. 13. I I I. ll ‘ ¢ V. 0. u . r . . . 't I s . L a. 3 n. .L r. t a. i a. a .3 .. C. c. n: ...n . x w: :. ~ r a r _ r. —.. .5 ~._ ru. um L.c at RC N“ ”J a: An E p c .3 I _: I .d t a... S C .l w; .4 a C r Qa Tu F. I E E S I C. 7. ~ . e n» y. .C . t C .6 .0 l .d O 1 . r. ‘ . L. L. a. .... a. a ‘J. ..-. C u r. it .3 n. L~ J. n. r. 3. a. A“ Cw ht w a n. +.~ v; .1 hi. Pu L. ... .. . . S. r? 2.. ta. C. Pu .. a a . v1 ... l a v . L. .= _. Hi ... v . ...... t. .1‘ L. _‘ . >5 ‘3 i . «y .. .u .. .. r. ... .. 2. pg 1 . 2‘ 6L 6. v... .uu .: ra Lu pJ .u .. n. “A r.. .. .. .. I. .u - .. :— ..« .. x. 15.. st \fnh. which required little attention. It was felt that the normal operation of a business organization would permit the cream to rise to the tOp, where it would be quite visible, could easily be skimmed off as needed, and would serve its proper function thereafter. Today, however, most firms have discarded this belief in favor of more or less formal training programs which attempt to prepare and re-prepare appropriate personnel for management responsibilities. The educational process of preparing individuals for the many facets of life implies realistic cognizance of the specific requirements placed on the human animal. James Conant suggests that "the world of work, in all its varied forms, and preparation for that world of work at all levels is an essential part of life for every individual."1 Total education must, of course, be concerned with the total life of the individual in the real world. A major component of that real world is the world of work. A primary problem for those who would provide specific training for management personnel is the determination of the content for a suitable curriculum. The focus must necessarily be on the individual and what he must learn if he is to succeed as a manager. Relevant lJames Conant, "Vocational Education and the National Need," (Address delivered to the American Vocational Association, Chicago, December, 1959). .4 ' ~ . .....n-...4 ._ , . ..... .. ,- w . . ....-.- . 4.. . ".r~ -. ‘c.-o ‘_ A > ‘41.- “V1 “"0 », , .. v‘.~4‘ IL. I- a..'__ . "! 54“"n ......b - . " ... . v.- ... ...fi I“: . (L ( *-- "Ir. - r? I “\ I . ‘ \ l N ‘ “lit-lie ”1Q \ learning objectives must be defined in terms of recog- nized management performance requirements. One of the recognized models for deriving learning objectives is that espoused by Mager.l Although not pri- marily concerned with OCCUpational training, he argues that objectives must be stated in terms that describe expected demonstrable behavior on satisfactory achievement. However, before training objectives for a given job can be appropriately stated, certain specific input data are needed: (a) knowing what tasks the job consists of, (b) linowing what one needs to do to perform the various tasks satisfactorily, (c) knowing how frequently each task is Exerformed, and (d) knowing how crucial each task is to snaccess. It would seem then that the initial step in Cheveloping learning objectives and planning a suitable cuirriculum in any given area of training would be that of snecuring those specific input data relevant to the situ— ation. The central purpose of this study was to identify, Classify and analyze the more or less common activities, c=Oimpetencies and characteristics of selected personnel ir1 middle management positions associated with agri- b1lsiness organizations. It was assumed that through 1Robert F. Mager, Preparing Instructional Sggjectives (Palo Alto, California: Fearon Publishers, l962) . pp. 13-44. r. .i .... . . ~a. r” .J .3 r” V; .; T .3 .5 ... ., .H .. ... vo- --- ,. .4...- 7'": III 4 I . . w 6 .. p. . I v. . ... S a. w. E n. . S .... t S I C C l . . 4 ...U 3: ”I. .l fi|¢ e t by .rw. Lg Q» hut Na SQ .. .. a. v. S E e O 3,. _.. .... Ln ...4 r C. F” ... 3 S 2.. T. T. .C L... 3!. .... m . C. e ...: O 9.. I». ... n: .: r. .u y» ...: t L). Wu 2. u. .C L“ r“ .... no ... ..vv we. «C Q» s. {a A: .. . L. n. . a «z. .2 .2 ..N a C ... Q. n . s . A» . . .3 . :v .. ra Ln Au » .. I a . V -II .11 w u 5 . a » ... ... l . L. ..h w u .3 .3 i . A ~ d p 4 2h p . ... ... A rs . nu. Ii . a ,. L. ..m 1 b\ L ~ the manager's own perceptions, plus those of his superior and a randomly selected subordinate, it would be possible to identify those activities, competencies and charac— teristics for each of the selected managers. Further- more, it was assumed that from the rankings of time allocated to identified activities, cruciality ratings of identified activities and indications of the expected activities of each focal manager it would be possible to assess the relative importance of management functions which are particularly relevant to these selected agri- business managers. Several basic questions proved to be of primary concern in the analysis of agri—business positions and personnel. A major interest was lodged in the question 'what does the agri-business middle manager do'? To know that an individual occupies a management position is to know very little about his work. The Specific parameters of that position need to be determined if the management function is to be clearly understood and effective training provided for it. The most appropriate procedure for answering the above question appeared to rest in the determination of: (l) the proportion of his daily time allocated to certain routine activities and (2) the perception of the impor— tance or cruciality of said activities. Realizing the distinct possibility of differences between how managers perform in the real sense and what ... a. V. l: .5 n“ 7%. Lu r ,p. y. p. .u. ... p. w. o. .a n... ‘c F. VIAE| ( pNJ their performance might be in an ideal situation, it was deemed necessary to add a third dimension to the analysis; what should the manager do or what was his expected be— havioral performance? Other basic questions considered were: 1. Do the focal managers share common charac- teristics, activities and competencies? 2. Is there agreement as to cruciality of activi- ties and role expectations as perceived and rated by the managers themselves, their superiors and their subordinates? 3. Is there intrapositional and interpositional agreement upon time allocation of activities, cruciality of activities and role expectation? 4. What are the differences between the ratings of importance of selected components of actual role behavior and those of expected role behavior? 5. What is the correlation between type of firm, and manager's job tenure, age and level of education and actual role behavior? Expected role behavior? 6. Can the results of the time ranking of activi- ties, the cruciality ratings and the eXpres— sions of role expectations be correlated to the point that the functions of agri-business management personnel are clearly visible? “A uztlkn‘ I) w . A . . «v r” $. .. a. . ¢ .. _. \g . . . .,\ . . BL r. .: .. .3 S . . r: E l w. r J .3 ... A: 5. .... L. .... r. .. .. .. r. m: ._ a. ... l S C S ‘ nu .. r. ”x” —._ Ly 1 § . . I “A. ‘ . III” 1N u a.» «D fin.- m\~ 7.4 .. .¢ a: .; vi .3 Z. ”I ... s. .3 e . . 2. a. . . ... .3 ‘. L. ‘ . a» I a .7. r. .a .. ... ~. A. re. ... uL r. ... .n . 4 a. «a 4‘ L. ..a L. r... v; mu 2.. 4‘ A: ...: ... L. .H .. r. L. .7 C. ,4 ~.. 2. my. 7.. ..a t. ... 4 . .. _ 2‘ .. . .3 .v 2. ... \m a v Au - :v An intensive study of this type, it was assumed, should provide an empirical foundation on which to base decisions relative to initiating and/or revising train- ing curricula for persons who hold or aspire to hold middle management positions in agri—business firms. Definition of Terms Most of the terms and concepts used in this study are familiar and are used in the conventional manner; a few are employed with particular meanings, or with special significance. To aid in communication, a list of definitions is included here. Agri-business.--Non—farm business firms which supply or service agricultural producers or process agricultural products. Middle manager.--A person in charge of a depart- ment, division or Operation of the firm. He customarily Operates at a level below the top range of administration and has supervisory authority over a group of employees. Focal manager.--A person who occupies an agri— business middle management position central to this study. Superior.--The man in the organizational hierarchy to whom the focal manager reports. Subordinates.--Workers of various types who are under the direct supervision of the focal manager. .12.-... A... 1.x.“ .... - : a-GDV‘V .:‘— lili'-.~‘ “.... a. «-...Ya \n-I _. v. 'vlv‘ ‘ -'A”V“. '.v‘~'. i I . I V“ a l- ‘s- . -,. . n‘ 3“;mu..l I\- ‘~.‘-V\-‘. “. Q ,1» A “is: AF-t . y.‘_~ ‘ . v . . “2.5--“ ~. -v‘ ‘Jal C. TF‘. ‘ ~--t._ - ~“ _ I» ”;2v\ "9 ...‘Pb‘v V; F"V ‘4.“ Activity.--A specific operation or task which contributes to the overall performance of a position. Crucial activity.-—An activity which is critical or decisive in fulfilling a specific position. Time allocation of activities.--The relative amount of time spent, during an average week, on each of several activities in relation to others in the group. Role set.--Relevant role definers. Those close enough to the subject, both in proximity and function, to effectively observe behavior. Role expectation.--The expected behavioral attri— butes and performance of an individual in a given location and situation. Interpositional consensus.--The degree to which members of a role set agree. Intrapositional consensus.--Relative agreement among the focal managers themselves. Overview A frame of reference for the entire study is developed in Chapter I. A description of the background for the study is presented along with a general state- ment of the research problem. The major objective of this research is indicated and important terms are defined. 10 The theoretical basis and conceptual framework for the study are presented in Chapter II. The discussion proceeds from a base of theory in four areas: role theory in relation to management; role as a basis for training; the Operations or middle manager; and training for agriculturally related occupations. The study design and procedures are described in Chapter III. Information is presented relative to subjects studied, instrument construction and adminis- tration, data collection and analysis procedures. Chapter IV contains a presentation of the findings and an analysis of the data. The orientation is from the general to the specific. A summary of the study, an overview of significant findings, the conclusions and implications are presented in Chapter V. I A II I I I r\ V «... .4 l ..u.. o T. (c [y E .C C r ~. g. s we. .3 t 74 L; um um .l x u a. 2.. S 3 C u... a r». h... 0 LL 1 ... a. w. ..l c. .1 Lu 4 . .l {I e C. .t . . r T. r” t C t .... 5.“ t. .3 A. S ... w. “u Q» -.. t we a. .n a i . .3 2.. 2. 1a.. {I . . Cu 5 v. .. pm :. ... v. v4. >~ .... r.. C. «3 '7 st. . . \l. L~ #1» 2. uu. 5 . L. O a: CHAPTER II THEORETICAL BASIS AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE STUDY Introduction As indicated by Drucker,l little is yet known about the broad and complex science of business management. At present there is very little research available concerning middle management positions and there is a paucity of information relating to "mid—management" curricula. Even less is known about the management function in agri- business operations and its requirements for personnel training. Many people assume that management is management and that its principles and the application of those principles are fairly constant regardless of setting. This intensive and clinical look at the people, the positions and the functions which make up this sector of the management spectrum have provided a test of that assumption. lDrucker, op. cit. ll u C wr. Bl. F. 5 . .u. a . 2.. V. w“ v”. 11 «4 ..4 E .a .n . . .. f 3. E 3 .. E E L. 1 ... l3 .3 n. 2. V... 3. .. Au .5 .. n... V. ... . . ‘u 2‘ .au 2.» ..WA 3“ u» ..u If.“ G» 2. .n C .3 Z. .. .u .1 ad I 7. ... v. .3 3. w. L. R? ... 3.. ... rm 2‘ o» n c a. .. u.” .. .p~ »~ 2. «,3 ..., a? .3 a» n». I 1 12 As a framework for the study, certain limited areas of research were reviewed as they appeared to be directly or indirectly pertinent to the topic at hand. Role Theory in Relation to Management From the strictly psychological vieWpOints of Maslowl and Herzberg2 to the sociological and environ- mental concepts Of Kahn3 and Merten4 there ranges a broad gamut of theories which attempt to explain human behavior. Between the two extremes, social psychology appears to provide a conceptual framework for investi- gating the factors which influence the agri-business manager and their affects on his performance. That portion of social psychology known as role theory Offers an unique way of looking at these relationships; and it can be Operationalized to actual situations.5 lAbraham Maslow, Motivation and Personality (New York: Harper Brothers, 1954). 2Frederick Herzberg, Work and the Nature of Man (Cleveland: World Publishing Company, 1966), pp. 71-91. 3Katz, and Kahn, The Social Psychology of Organ— izations, Op. cit. 4Robert K. Merton, Social Theory and Social Structure (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1957). 5See Bruce J. Biddle, The Present Status of Role Theory (Columbia, Missouri: University of Missouri Press, 1961), p. 2. 3“ flu..- ~~-‘rv--\ .- r- ‘- ..~...-u~_.a ~ "wn‘ P»... I‘: -v. 5:: I " ‘I'fi: UL ._ . ~QCH 13 It is commonly assumed that a manager's job is defined by a position description which states his responsibilities and authority, and a title which locates his position in the organizational hierarchy. Such a definition is a gross oversimplication of reality. Many influences define and limit acceptable behavior. Items such as company policies and control procedures are necessary considerations. Of equal importance are the expectations of others (superiors, subordinates, peers, customers, etc.) about how the responsibilities of the position should be fulfilled.1 Another most relevant factor affecting management behavior is that of organizational change. The goals, needs, policies and structure of the firm are not static, but rather occur in what Katz and Kahn2 have called a dynamic equilibrium. Similarly, and out of necessity, the individual incumbent does not exist in a static condition. He is constantly adjusting to that changing environment. Gross, Mason and McEachern,3 after reviewing much literature concerned with role, determined that most lSee Douglas McGregor, The Professional Manager (New York: McGraw—Hill Book Co., 1967), p. 46. 2Katz, and Kahn, The Social Psychology of Organ— izations, Op. cit., p. 156. 3Neal Gross, Ward 8. Mason and Alexander W. McEachern, Explorations in Role Analysis (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1965), pp. 63-65. \l' -Fnr --\-A.-.A ”~fiY'“ ""“s .4 a s - ‘ . “A 1.- t , (N L 1 ~.. .«F‘ (In H’ 9‘! r—q 14 authors' definitions contain three basic ideas: that individuals (a) in social locations (b) behave (c) with reference to expectations. Role, according to Biddle,l is a set Of cognitions maintained for a person . . . by himself or others. An individual's own expectations for his performance and attributes plus the expectations of relevant others regarding his activities and competencies define his role in a given social system. In an organization roles are created in order to fulfill goals established by that particular group. Roles thus conceived represent organizational needs. Therefore, the organization, which is largely composed of relevant others, holds a vital concern for the behaviors which are considered essential to the successful role performance of each individual.2 If role, then, is a set of expectations about the performance and attributes of an individual in a given location and situation, a key factor in analysis would be the identification of the definers of the role, i.e., those who have pertinent relevant expectations. Some social researchers have encountered diffi— culty because they did not adequately and appropriately 1Biddle, op. cit., pp. 63—65. 2According to Robert L. Kahn et al., Organizational Stress (New York: John Wiley & Sons, I964), pp. 13—14. ‘0- . a . ,_ .u-.-~- - --.-o .. _. Z .. ... f. .. i Z .l T .2 S T. 7.. c. . ... v. A. .. x no .3 w L .J r. ..C {4 Q. 1 L 8 tie ». n. r. 3. w. .. .a r“ .3 .L ..Pu to ~ I a C n . I a .... 3 3. C. E .l ..u .C I .1 a ... r. a. ... .1 e mu. r C. .L n. v. . . L. n. L. n. a: A. ..1. . . Ad nv. .1. «G. .3 . ... . . 5 . .3 .. ... ..O I. an A.» re C. nu u. ..u f. r. .9. p. a” A“ 4 . . . r. a: rt C. r; C. Q. .lluw ML 15 identify the group of role definers (the role set). The parameters of the population included as role definers have Often been tOO indefinite for empirical usefulness. Furthermore, the degree of influence of each of the relevant role definers may have been incorrectly identi— fied. Including the expectations of all possible members of a role set may give as distorted a picture as not having included certain relevant members.1 It has been assumed here that, by virtue of the hierarchical position of the agri-business manager, immediate superiors and subordinates would be the most logical and relevant members of the role set. The rationale for this assumption rests in two areas. First, any formal rewards or sanctions imposed on an individual's role behavior are most likely to come, at least indirectly, from his superior. In addition, this superior usually represents the organization and its expectations of role fulfillment. Secondly, since the agri-business manager is evaluated, at least in part, on the performance of his subordinates, he will need to be cognizant of their expectations relative to his own performance. It is assumed that other role definers, such as customers and boards of directors, are rarely involved enough in the every day work situation to impose governing expectations. lGross, Mason and McEachern, Op. cit., p. 5. 16 Such expectations as they do impose are likely to be reflected through superiors or subordinates of the focal manager. The focal individual, the manager, is, of course, an integral member of his own role set and hence his own perceptions of role and role fulfillment are most relevant. Although many forces bring pressures to bear upon the manager's perception of his role, his per- formance is greatly influenced by his assessment of his own capabilities. This, in turn, affects the ways in which he relates to others.1 With a role set of the focal manager, his superior and a representative subordinate, what can be expected in the way of role definition consensus or conflict? A number Of studies at various managerial levels have con— sistently revealed marked discrepancies between the superior's views of the role Of his subordinates and subordinates' perceptions of these expectations. Operational management personnel frequently find that they cannot fulfill the role that they perceive as being thrust upon them by day to day exigencies of organizational life and at the same time act consistently with the requirements of the imposed—from-above job lMcGregor, The Professional Manager, op. cit., p. 53. 2Kahn et al., op. cit., pp. 13—14. r"’. ....-v ~" ...- nl‘r‘ . ..- F‘. a-vv§ .- ---a .-.-V‘J . . III C. .2 r. 7.. .., .... ... .. C v. .a n1 3. .2 .... E S ... I uh. .. e. r“ .... m. VI. 7.. v. PU ..‘u u. so so .. I .. .3 CC C. C L. ... .1 ... ... ... ... 3. C. ... l r. ..-. ... .. :4 .... .C a an v. u“ .3 v. ... ... in ... :u L. .1 ..u .1 LT. r. C . Zn 2. he .. d .. s. .. u. .3 .. .. Nu u. .. nu. - ,,.r l7 description.1 The various role pressures of others often make a mockery of the neat, logical, formal statements of what they should be doing. Gross, Mason and MeEachern2 conclude that the extent to which there is consensus on role definition will likely be an important factor affecting the functioning of specific social systems. Role as a Basis for Training A system for classifying the demands and charac— teristics of management jobs, and the extent to which managerial positions vary in their possession of these characteristics, is necessary to an understanding of the varied and complex functions of managers.3 Such under— standing is prerequisite to any effort to properly devise training and education programs. There have been four major approaches to the problem of analysis. The classical approach attempts to define management and possibly describe some of the tasks that managers are supposed to perform. This approach has led to a consensus of conclusions to the effect that managers planned, organized, motivated and controlled, none of lChris Argyris, Intergrating the Individual and the Organization (New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1964), p. 49. 2Gross, Mason and McEachern, op. cit., p. 5. 3Rosemary Stewart, "The Use of Diaries to Study Manager's Jobs," The Journal of Management Studies (May, 1965). C. ... C .. .4. .. .x .v. .... v. .. t ...; t . I . _ . I .3 c r” H. r: . e. rs ... .c 3... ‘ . L“ «C ~. .... FL :a C» .. ..A .3 .. C i .. .. r t .... .s C .. ,2 L. r” ‘1 T. .t .... .3 .l "u .L. .. L. C 4 +. mu 0 S O ».. .H .C 7. .. r. s. a. ~. I v. .... 3 it a. Ru 2 .. C . 3 Z. S .: C .: .u .... T. .3 ... . x .3 . . S u ~. .3 . c. 1: .. :. .... L. A: 53 a v at a: AU V.“ v. .... .H . .2 2. .u .t ... ... cc ,.. .. ... V. Tu Hi .. .A 2. . . l. . . .. :u .a. .‘ .r~ ... \r. .. ..P. a: If [all I‘m» in. A: 18 which was much help in deciding how managers should be trained.1 The second approach employs job descriptions which outline the responsibilities of all supervisory and managerial positions in the organization. A severe limitation of this approach is the fact that such descriptions usually indicate what is supposed to happen or what some people think happens. In reality, these may be a far cry from actual activities. An attempt to overcome this limitation by devising a job description based on, and in terms of, work flow was undertaken by Chapple and Sayles.2 They appear to have been only partially successful. The third method of looking at managers' jobs asks the question, 'how can they be compared and evaluated'? A system, which sought to assess all aspects of a posi— tion under the general headings of application of knowledge, judgment, creative thought and management of men, was deveIOped by Doulton and Hay.3 Their purpose was to create a system for devising relative salary grades for widely differing managerial positions in the lSee Rosemary Stewart, The Reality of Management (London: Heinemann & Company, 1963). 2Elliot D. Chapple and Leonard Sayles, The Measure of Management: Designing Organizations of Human Effectiveness (New York: MacMillan, 1961), p. 18. 3Joan Doulton and David Hay, Managerial and Pro- fessional Staff Grading (London: AlTen & Unwin, Ltd., 1962T. 1 It. ’s .. . . .2 .. . ¢ ... «D an y” E E . a r a r c T. P... t a . . l... S 5 .r. 1.. F. n .2 ..4 ~ . . t at . . s- . a. S S .. 9. :u a: .v ~u. wq. ... 8 .¢ Q» 2‘ 8 AD : .. ... ;. ... a” .3 2. ... .. ... , C F. Tale Um. .. .. .2 _. .. 3. : __ C um Mt. 1.“. we” .P.» J L v... .r.” ..;H _—_. . N hf. k,“ . .. _._.. .. __ 2. t. C . .2 Q. :L r. n A“ 19 British Broadcasting Corporation. This method offers little assistance in the identification of training needs. "In what activities do managers spend their time?" is the primary question asked under the fourth method of management job analysis. This was essentially the question asked in this study. Answers to the ques- tion must be based on objective data and hence there was need to collect and classify information about specific management behavior. Gleasonl indicates that identification of the activities and competencies of a management function pre- sents a picture of all areas of performance required to fulfill that function. Carmichael2 concluded that there are sets of identifiable activities essential to the success of retail middle managers in different types of firms and by position functions. Another study found general agreement among the role set as to certain specific activities on which field sales managers spent some of their time. However, it was 1William E. Gleason, "Functions of Industry Approach to Curriculum for Vocational Education" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1967). 2John H. Carmichael, "An Analysis of Activities of Middle Management Personnel in the Retail Trade Industry with Implications for Curriculum Deve10pment" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1968). «b ..-. ~ 7‘ ‘ a u- —.--v L. 5 rhym- r- .. ~‘ i A _d~_-u-...¢ ~ "Vv‘hv‘"-w ~ ... ' 'Hv-woo~_ ' . ‘?“n‘- . ' - ~-a\.-~45- _ ’ ‘ ‘ LCM: (‘3 9! \-:: i.‘ J.- ‘U‘x ~ \3 (C, "C“: Qt. i 20 discovered that the responsibility and overall authority of this person was far from clear in the minds of his subordinates.l This study by Evans, and the previously mentioned study by Carmichael,2 both used a measure of cruciality to determine the activities deemed to be of most consequence to a given manager's position. Indi- cators of the importance of an activity were (1) the amount of time allocated to each, and (2) the perceptions of the role set as to which activities were most crucial to success of the position. These indicators have been employed as a basis for the study of agri-business manager in this project. In a similar vein, Stewart3 used a diary analysis of the time devoted to certain basic managerial functions and activities, while Hemphill4 determined the relative importance of a large group of management activities by means of respondent rankings on a comprehensive question— naire. In both instances, it was felt that this type of 1Rodney E. Evans, "An Emperical Analysis of the Functions and Role of Field Sales Managers" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1968). 2Carmichael, op. cit. 3Stewart, "The Use of Diaries to Study Manager's 4John K. Hemphill, Dimensions of Executive Posi- tions (Columbus, Ohio: Bureau of Business Research, Ohio State University, 1960). u u ~‘¢~ r. 1‘ '0‘ “"--v.. v-A v . . A ..H— .1; A v ‘ v r .. . . . . . .II e . . .. u. u-.. C ... F. . ... L t E . .. r n. . ,. .... I r .. .. E . . S A V “(a L .. e L. a 3. E u c. S S r. v . .l a L D. . . .3 S . ... E Pu L C e . r. . u . .. r. 3. v. e C. S .1 Ru 3. .3 L. .. . ... a. . . Wu . . .5” .3. . . Z 5.. .U .(u .r~ I . . .. t. : . .1. 2‘4 ‘ s a: hi. {i .3 s s 3H 21 data established a rather clear picture of the behavior of selected managers and their positions. The Operations or Middle Manager Most management texts make only slight mention of persons functioning in middle or operational management positions. This is probably due to the fact that many authors, for the most part professors and theoreticians, believe that the basic skills of management are similar for all types of organizations and at all levels of management. While this may be true in the very broad sense, it is not compatible with the contemporary demands for precise job description to provide guidance for train- ing. McFarland,l in his basic management text, lists six divisions of the management group: the chief executive, the senior executives, department or division heads, superintendents, general foremen, and first-line super- visors. Each of these is a distinct part of the organ— izational hierarchy, that framework of activity groupings and authority relationships within which people work together. Although the extent of decentralization of functions and personnel varies with the size of the company, the lDalton E. McFarland, Management: Principles and Practices (2nd ed.; New York: The MacMillan Company, 1964), p. 239. I I In. I u. - .I.¢ , .. A . r. 1 t .. a ,.. ... C. C t bu . .L 1 C C r. .. ... .... ... D. S l . ... .3 5.. r“ . . r. \.. .5 Pu. . C. .C ..b. L... l I a v . .l . Wu prl. ”we . u ”a n. a» S v. z» .‘¢ . L. .0 s .wu w“ .... «\~ .3.» Wr- r. r. L. v. r.. A. L. i... .‘ .... .. :m ..u .u .. ..A . .. r .-. E .‘ I‘. r ..., , :.A‘.-I§.¢.. 22 various structural levels are provided in order to more effectively accomplish the objectives of the firm.1 In order for an individual to understand where he fits into an organization and how he should operate within it, he needs to be totally aware of the structure and how it may influence his relationships and regulate his behavior. In a survey of management development within 121 industrial firms, NeWport2 concluded that: Middle management is that segment of an organization which includes personnel at levels of authority found between, but including neither, the vice presidential level and the first level of super— vision (most frequently referred to as the foreman level) . . . middle managers are accustomed to per- forming within the confines of a technically oriented functional area. McLarney3 indicates that the middle management group, which actually may include more than one hierarchical level, is concerned with the internal running of the busi— ness, whereas tOp management is primarily occupied with overall company policies and the handling of the firm's external activities. Following several years of consultation, practice and instruction, seven broad behavior-task guides for the 1Drucker, op. cit., pp. 193-225. ZMarvin Gene NeWport, "Middle Management Development in Industrial Organizations" (unpublished Ph.D. disser- tation, University of Illinois, 1963). 3William J. McLarney, Management Training: Cases and Principles (Homewood, Illinois: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1961), p. 99. 23 middle management level were develOped by Pfiffner and Sherwood.l They suggest that persons operating at this level maintain closer contact with day-to—day results; participate in operational decisions; evaluate personnel from a standpoint of immediate usefulness rather than future potential; are concerned with production results rather than program results; make specific plans for achieving goals established by the upper echelon; and implement policy decisions within the limitations set by higher level members of the hierarchy. Although the above-mentioned investigators have presented rather basic information relative to the identi- fication and classification of the middle management position, McGregor2 insists that there are additional factors which must be considered. He argues that the dimensions of such positions can be precisely defined only for a particular incumbent, in a particular set of circum- stances, at a given point in time. Variables which affect the "shape" of the position include (a) the way in which relevant others perceive and perform their own jobs, (b) the individual's qualifications and competencies, (c) the individual's perception of his managerial role, and the (d) constantly changing external situation. 1John M. Pfiffner and Frank P. Sherwood, Adminis- trative Organization (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1960), pp. 148—149. 2McGregor, The Human Side of Enterprise, op. cit., p. 80. -5 V‘ ~ H— 00-.- rv- unfioovw‘- ny ‘~\- ‘ »H . . .... w“ ... .... ... . . . . . . . ... S ... . .C E S l .... S .5. . .. T. v. .. .. ... en .1. ..u .... .r.. m. ‘. l h... «3 hi .Q “ . E t . c .... . e .2 .3 .L 3 e r. n. 3. n . a. w... c. .1. . C . .2 C. no . . l 2.. “in ....u ... ~ . ... . . 5... .p.. ..fl 1. v. .6... L. .3 r. ...u .. r. .13 ..4 TV. «5 as Y. A,» .. ... v. .. .~ n«. p. v. s. it .3 .-4 .. ... .p y p u .e . :4 .3 ... all ... . L. say ukx al v ‘11.. 11 .l'.‘ ..I 24 Training for Agriculturally Related Occupations Many studies have been directed toward identifying curriculum content for educational programs designed to train workers for agriculturally related industries. A great number of these have focused on identification of competencies of an agricultural nature. They have attempted to identify those areas covered in traditional educational proqrams for farm occupations which appear to be apprOpriate to non—farm occupations. In 1959, Kennedy1 documented what many others had been suspecting, namely, that agricultural competencies traditionally provided for farm workers would not suffice for non-farm agriculture related occupations. He found a high degree of dissimilarity between the kinds of abilities needed by farm workers and those needed in agri-business situations. Therefore, it no longer seems logical to approach the development of training programs from this vieWpoint exclusively. Thompson2 indicates, however, that about equal emphasis should be placed on agriculture and business lHenry Kennedy, "A Classification of Relationships Between Farming and Certain Other Agricultural Occu- pations with Implications for Guidance and Counseling Curriculum Development" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1959). 2John Thompson, Report of the Forty—Second Annual Conference on AgriculturaIEducation, Central Region, Chicago, 1963 (Washington: U. 8. Office of Education). ‘ 7““ ‘d--vu- - o. b * -~ I - v Va J . . . a» TV. _ ,_ .4‘ .. ”A u. v. r. w. E ... E 3 3. .3 a ,_ .l a .fiu x“ rm 6. s v r“ L. ... .o . .s L. a y ~ v ... .vfl “»I[ ll? 1 l. w xi; ‘5. education for students being trained for certain off-farm agricultural endeavors. Others have suggested the need for training programs that cut across traditional fields of instruction because wide areas of competencies are needed by workers in off-farm occupations.l The concept of an "educational mix,’ to be used in preparing workers for certain non—farm agricultural endeavors was devised by Taylor2 in work at the National Center for Vocational and Technical Education. Edu- cational mix, in this instance, refers to combinations of agricultural, business and industrial competencies, with emphasis on the latter two. Although the bulk of research related to agri- business work has been pointed toward other than manage- ment personnel, there are a few recent reports which refer to management activities and competencies. The team of Hamilton and Bundy,3 in reporting on competencies neces— sary for success in the retail feed business area, indicate that there were sixteen competencies relevant to dealing lRaymond Clark, Vocational Competencies Needed by Workers on Non-Farm Agricultural Occupations (East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, 1961). (Mimeo— graphed.) 2Robert Taylor, "Off Farm Programs: A Search for a Solid Base," American Vocational Journal (February, 1966), 34-37. 3William Hamilton and Clarence Bundy, "Agricultural Competencies in Retail Feed Businesses," The Agricultural Education Magazine, January, 1965. sd P». a. u. L. 4. . g y u- « . b ‘§C-F~ -‘vl» LAW ‘ 51‘; I19. ? «.3 A~_ 26 with certain phases of business and dealership manage- ment. Gleason,l with the help of a jury of experts, identified seventy-six activities related to the manage- ment function and its prOper fulfillment. His analysis revealed a total of thirty-five competencies necessary to perform the activities of the management function in the area of farm machinery sales. These were viewed as items which occupational training should cover. While not specifically concerned with agri-business management, there are many reports which suggest that the success of any type of working organization, especially the business firm, is almost entirely dependent upon its ability to nurture, train and develop managerial talent. In nearly all cases this process was directed toward specific types of management situations and functions.2 Techniques Used in Other Management Studies There are many research methods which have been used to determine the occupational training demands of various jobs or positions. Most of these have been examined 1Gleason, op. cit. 2See discussions by: S. C. Hungeryager and J. L. Heckman, Human Relations in Management (Chicago: South— western PubiiShing Co., 1967); E. H. Schein, "Management Development as Process of Influence," Management Review, May, 1961; Charles R. DeCarlo and Ormsbee W. Robinson, Education in Business and Industry (New York: The Center for Applied Research in Education, 1966). ‘.~" 4 r" v.../~V“u.‘- .nr .“ ‘ flaw!- ‘ '.v_....- u a i ' "‘1‘ a .. n a by n u v (U 3 AH“ r 2 n v. a l . 2a . in . v .Q . J31 1| .‘l‘..." .- 27 thoroughly prior to selecting the procedure to be used in this investigation. Among those methods used to analyze the activities of personnel in management positions are: (a) work sampling, (b) the shadow technique, (c) critical incident analysis, (d) card sort, (e) case history study, (f) Q—sort, (g) personal interview, (h) questionnaire and (i) a combination of personal interview and questionnaire. Each of these will be described briefly. Johnsonl used work sampling, a technique consisting of a random sampling of observations, to classify and analyze management activities of a limited number of food production managers performing at the middle manage- ment level. This technique was judged to be apprOpriate for determining objectives for a suitable training curriculum. Routson,2 when analyzing the performance of personnel in department stores, used the shadow technique, a method similar to work sampling. The subjects were observed for several days during a seven-week period. The obser— vations provided data which appeared to be useful in 1Virginia K. Johnson, "Responsibilities of Food Production Managers Performing at the Middle Management Level" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin, 1960). 2Jack C. Routson, "An Observational Analysis of Functional Performance of Retail Sales Personnel" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois, 1964). tire ,‘v .‘J .0 9.4- d O 'ng- . «a, V‘s.‘ fiyy -~“ ‘n‘ ..--“ .. --'k v-Vfi". M. \MH .1 TH .. C\ .l rpk .NH Q.» ~5- N\~ C e E c t.s .... h. I E .1 6.1 . fix 5.. K? H“ .C 28 devising training programs. In a similar vein, Stewartl used a diary method to determine how managers spent their time. The twenty-five variables used were derived from the diary entries. None of these methods would seem to provide information relative to expected role behavior, an important aspect of this project. Flanagan,2 the developer and primary advocate of the use of critical incidents as indicators of job require- ments or training needs, has conducted many analyses with this technique. The approach consists of a set of pro- cedures for collecting information by direct observation of focal individuals. Subsequently, it analyzes effective and ineffective behaviors related to the actual job per- formance. The result is a formulation of the critical requirements of a position. Although this procedure was developed primarily for applications related to armed services personnel, adaptations have been made by many . . . . . . 3 investigators Since its inception. lRosemary Stewart, Managers and Their Jobs (London: MacMillan Co., 1967). 2John C. Flanagan, "The Critical Incident Technique," Psychological Bulletin (July, 1954). 3For instance see: Jack W. Fleming, "The Critical Incident Technique as an Aid to Inservice Training," American Journal of Mental Deficiency (May, 1962); Fred J. Peabody, WAn Analysis of Critical Incidents for Recently Employed Michigan COOperative Extension Agents with Implications for Training" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1968). v -0 «cc-v- Ch)“. 0 . or? .‘ub I. ... e i S 7 an a ... h. ... l. 1 i c i . i a C a. C. 3 I F. .l D. e S .l r“ . . a. A; r.“ I S C C .C T .F. w... +.; .p i. P C. t .... C. a. + . 5 Q t e P... 3 P“ r. it Q .r.. S r C t a» a. O 5. .3 2. v. ,. . .i a. at. C Cl uu .C .. .5 my my. Y. :L 9. a" E. L; a C .l .1. w 29 In determining the vocational competencies needed for employment in the agri-chemical industry in Michigan, Christensen and Clark1 use a personal interview-card sort technique. The interviewee was told by the interviewer to place cards, colored according to job function and competencies, into compartments of a box which was partitioned according to scale value. The means of the ratings were used in determining subsequent instructional programs. Wald,2 investigating the characteristics of execu- tives and trends in these characteristics, used the case history method to study a limited number of management personnel. Definitive use of this procedure to determine the dimensions of the management function was also accomplished by McLarney.3 A profile of characteristics of the business executive is extracted from this form of intensive interviewing and testing and is useful in identifying the needs of future business leaders. The method is quite adaptable to the study of top management personnel because the administrative skills required at 1Maynard Christensen and Raymond M. Clark, Vocational Competencies Needed for Employment in the AgriCultural-Chemical Industry in Michigan TEast Lansing: Michigan State University, 1967). 2Robert M. Wald, "Who Will Be the Managers?" The Iron Age, October 5, 1967. 3McLarney, Op. Cit. I I .4 .. . . . .. . .3 ... . _ _ _ 3. .... v. _ .. .i .. _ . .L .l .C .3 A-.. .Hu .- . C a FV .5 .2 1... A.» .1 P0 C r I H. .1 ... I ... .... S r. .1 ,1 C .3 . . .3 .... 3 A: ax. .... L. M. . . a. .... a c “a .. .3 S ... r: a» :. ... C .H _ . r 3 C .3 .3 a. C r ... .u r. i P. ..i ... ... ... ... r.. .2 .2 .r. s. ,3 . . ... n. ... a» .1 .Q m. r ..N 30 this level are quite similar for a wide range of enter- prises. However, persons in management at lower levels and in quite disparate circumstances, although needing basic administrative skills, are assumed to also need Specialized knowledge for their particular area of endeavor. A modified Q-sort technique was used by Schill and Arnoldl in developing curriculum content to prepare stu- dents for employment in six technical occupations. A group of cards was designed to represent the content of various courses taken in preparation for various positions. Each respondent sorted the cards into three groups—-those closely related to job performance, those somewhat related, and those unrelated. A core curriculum was developed after analysis of all responses and groupings. Glickman, Hahn, Fleishman and Baxter2 used the personal interview to study the factors affecting advance— ment to top management positions in business organizations. The primary subjects of the study were persons who had recently advanced to their positions. Specific questions were raised as to just how, in their own views, they had 1William J. Schill and Joseph P. Arnold, Curriculum Content for Six Technologies (Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois, 19657} 2Alfred s. Glickman, Clifford P. Hahn, Edwin A. Fleishman and Brent Baxter, T0pranagement Development and Succession (New York: MacMillan Co., 19697. S l 2. C. ... C. ...u .2 ..u 31 reached these positions. The interviewers put constant emphasis on what the interviewees considered to DU important in their experience, judgments and decisions. Ertell also used the personal interview to secure the major portion of his data in identifying major tasks performed by retailing personnel. Time and financial limitations prevented the use of the interview for this project. It would appear that the most widely used method of investigating business management functions and activi- ties is that of the specifically structured questionnaire. Mahoney, Jerdee and Carroll2 are one group of many who have used such an instrument for measuring management performance in a variety of firms. Their questionnaire consisted of a brief check-list of duties and responsi- bilities which could be administered by mail. Hemphill3 and the Educational Testing Service, in a study of the dimensions of executive positions, also used a Specific questionnaire to analyze the work of ninety-three executives in five firms. Likewise, the American 1Kenneth A. Ertel, "Identification of Major Tasks Performed by Merchandising Employees in Three Establish- ments" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Washington State University, 1967). 2Thomas A. Mahoney, Thomas Jerdee and Stephan Carroll, The Development of Managerial Performance——A Research Approach (Cincinnati: Southwestern Publishing Co., 1963). 3Hemphill, op. cit. M... ...—....- ...u V‘O'.“. \ ....J--L.A- :... r, . - V—\ D a ecu...“ . .- ..... ... 1" ...; u-‘~~-.‘ O V . - ~wp~ - . ‘ [A —¢¢--- .4 v H .. "h;v1.. . ..._‘_ v.‘ ‘ ‘ I. «7-. n ..L‘v:.-u. 4 Va -_’ ,. . . n’v-A' ‘g- .. ~.i._--- L :J A.- . .._‘~ . fia.‘ .- ‘Fr .h“.l‘ ‘ .. . . .. ... .:‘ .5 ~ ., ‘AV‘ . 32 Institute of Management1 uses a series of especially designed questionnaires to facilitate the gathering and classifying of information Upon which their management audits are based. A survey by Brandon2 made use of the personal interview-survey questionnaire combination in several Michigan communities to provide occupational data for educational planning at the post-secondary level. Bomelli3 also used this method to secure data in regard to actual management performance in corporate organ- izations. After serious consideration of the alternatives relative to research methods or techniques it was decided that a specifically structured and administered question— naire would be the most logical for data procurement for this study. Summarization l. The success of any business organization may well depend on its ability to nurture, train and develop managerial talent. 1American Institute of Management, Management Audit Questionnaires (New York: American Institute of Manage— ment, 1961i} 2George Brandon, Twin Cities Technicians (East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University Press, 1958). 3Edwin C. Bomelli, "The Audit of Management Per— formance" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1963). (‘J L73 33 Training can be a valuable asset to managerial deveIOpment provided relevant and realistic curricula can be devised. In order to appropriately train persons for occupations it is necessary to be solidly aware of the requirements placed on individuals in given positions. Management functions are so varied and complex that the answer to 'what does a manager do' is not easy to come by. However, the identification of the activities and competencies which are deemed essential to success in a management position has been helpful in answering the question. There are sets of identifiable activities con- sidered to be essential to satisfactory manage— ment performance. Very little is known relative to the agri— business manager; his function and his role. Non—farm agricultural occupations require competencies over and above those developed in the traditional agricultural training programs. The middle manager position may occupy more than one structural level in the organizational hierarchy. In any case, it is primarily con— cerned with the internal operations of the business and with day-to-day results. .1 in, KL... 10. ll. 12. 13. 14. 15. 34 The dimensions of a middle management position should be defined in relation to the particular incumbent, the set of circumstances, and the given point in time. Role theory, which suggests that individuals in social situations behave with reference to expectations, offers a unique method for looking at the factors which influence managerial per- formance. Many influences define, shape and limit acceptable role behavior. The organization holds a vital concern for the behaviors which are considered essential to successful role performance. Identification of a relevant set of role definers is necessary in studying role behavior. Consensus among the role set, relative to role definition, is not usually expected. The amount of time allocated to each activity plus the perceptions as to cruciality of each have been used as satisfactory indicators of the importance of management functions. Addi- tionally, pertinent information has been secured in the form of perceptions as to eXpected or ideal role behavior. 16. 35 There are several reputable methods which have been used to secure pertinent data relative to management functions and on which certain curriculum decisions could be based. Assumptions Relative to the Study The following assumptions were established for the purpose of this study: 1. That knowledge of activities and competencies required of agri-business managers provides an appropriate basis for deriving instructional objectives for training programs for such managers. That the continuing education segment of the educational process would be the logical purveyor of training programs for agri-business managers. Role theory, would appear to offer a satis— factory route for investigating the relationships of men in management positions. In agri—business firms the organizational boundary for middle management is above the supervisory level at the lower end and immedi— ately below the executive level at the upper end of the management spectrum. There are certain similar activities performed by a wide range of middle management personnel in agri—business settings. 10. ll. 36 That daily activities can be grouped into areas or categories which relate to fields of mana- gerial competence. That a cruciality rating of activities, a time ranking of activities and an expression of role expectations are sound and acceptable indicators of activities and characteristics involved in the management function. The focal manager, his superior and a randomly selected subordinate were considered to be the most logical and relevant members of the role set. The broad similarity of the management functions in agri-business operations and industrial organizations allows the use of research instru- ments of similar nature. That a valid and reliable measure of the nature of the agri—business management function can be secured by analysis of the activities, compe— tencies and characteristics of incumbent managers. The most appropriate research technique for this study appeared to be that of a specifically structured questionnaire Limitations of the Study The study has been subject to the limitations of mail questionnaire surveys, especially those ~<-'. w 37 involving accuracy of responses and semantic difficulties. The representativeness of the focal manager respondents, of any more general population of managers, cannot be effectively proved or disproved. Confidence in the findings may be limited in certain instances due to the relatively small number of subjects involved. Results will be based on job behaviors as they currently exist and expectations as currently viewed. Changes over time might materially affect data and conclusions. There are many factors and pressures which have an affect on management role behavior. Due to the nature of the inquiry, certain items are not specifically considered. These would include: (a) the constantly changing external situation, (b) the way in which relevant others perform their own jobs, (c) the vagaries of organizational structure and life, (d) the manager's sense of commitment, (e) the extent and relationship of authority and responsi— bility invested in each individual, (f) the skills and competencies of peers, and (g) the personal interests of the manager. 38 Certain competencies such as communications, leadership ability, decision—making and others have been touched upon only indirectly in this study. Individuals were selected for sample inclusion from among those currently occupying management positions. No distinction was made on the basis of selection criteria such as potential managerial talent, which may have influenced their appointment to their positions. Little distinction is made between position description and man description in studying the management function. In certain instances this may be a limiting factor. - .0» ... o. .... V. ... ”v. Q» rm ....u ..v. . . f. .... a C. . c I 11 E t 0. r. 44 v. ~“ «3 .. 2“. G. . 1;. Ge 8 r. b 3. .n .u .. . .1 ... .1 a... L .. re h. 2.. v. ...,u .14 .2 .3 .7. : . ... i. an 2.. . . a: h» g .1 he .pc CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Introduction The methods employed to determine the tasks of the agri-business manager and the nature of his position, and to identify the indicated training needs are described in this chapter. Four major sections are develOped. The first provides information relative to the subjects or sample population. The second section describes the instruments employed. The next is concerned with question— naire administration and data collection and finally, data analysis is discussed and research questions presented. The Subjects Agri-business is one of the major economic assets of the state of Michigan. Not only are the business firms so engaged Operating in a wide range of non-farm agri— cultural endeavors but they are also widely scattered geographically Speaking. The companies used in this study are based at Lansing, Flint and Saginaw, are Michigan owned and operated and each does a yearly volume of business in excess of 12 million dollars. 39 uof‘ Q. - ----‘b‘- .. .. v. « . .. E .... .. C ... i ... .. R T .. .. I ... ... .. C t a. .. .... C C I C. a.» .. r ._ .. ... ... : ... 3 n. ... E r. and 3 .l . and a. I .. .: ... .3 2.. ... .3 ... #. ~C .y. w. e .. . ...... '1 3.. an 3 v. .. .... .2 ..n .... r. .... r. S 2 w. r. a. o. n. 14 . .n .. r. .. .H .2 .3 .. ... L ...). ... .V. .. .i .. f. Pr. . .. . . ... ... a: . . r . . . r C. . . .1 .3 4. ..h ... . .. .. .LI.. Mb .xc. .1 40 Because the agri-business middle manager is in a structural position in a business organization hierarchy, his position was examined from a variety of viewpoints. In effect, it was necessary to assume that deSpite structural similarities, certain company, function and product differences in both role behavior and role expectations might be present. It was further assumed that the larger the proportion of similarities in role behavior identified the more generalizations could be made about the position itself; and the larger the pro- portion of differences, the fewer the generalizations that could be made. In line with the assumed differences mentioned above, it was evident that an intensive investigation of a single company or type of firm would probably not pro— duce the necessary results. At the least, generalization would have been tenuous. Four groups of agri—business firms were, therefore, selected as representative1 of the industry. The four general functional areas in which they Operate are (a) processing and manufacturing, (b) single company branch retail supply outlets, (c) marketing and service, and (d) local multiservice Operations with parent firm management. 1Upon the advice of: The Michigan State Chamber of Commerce, The Michigan Agricultural Conference, The COOperative Extension Service, Michigan State University. ‘ Y‘“—" --..«C Fv~ s..-,‘. v‘ V \ 41 As indicated previously, the role set defined for this investigation contained (a) the focal manager, (b) the superior to whom this manager reports, and (c) a randomly selected subordinate. Assistance in sampling was provided by participating company officials. Since extensive discussions regarding the entire project had been held with these officials and since they had assisted in designing the study, it was assumed that they were sufficiently familiar with the situation at hand and with their own work forces to take the lead in the selection of a thirty—person sample from a management population of over sixty individuals. As each focal manager was designated, his superior was automatically indicated. The criteria for selection were: that the focal manager be serving in a middle or Operational management position, that he had been so engaged for at least six months, and that he have direct involvement with a superior plus serving as a supervisor of other employees. The subordinate, in each case, was randomly picked from within the group of employees (an average of seven) routinely supervised by each designated manager. Each subordinate was, of course, geographically located the same as his focal manager. Although no effort was made, in selecting the focal managers, to secure a specified geographical distribution, the respondents reported from nearly every area of the JJIIIIL IL . .... .H I .1 E. a. a. nu any n: ..u .,. . n“ .2 ..g C. v. .niu .3 Pu l tL . I I u .C _. . a- ... . 6. v. ... .1 1. t ., .l .. r. V . f. . ~ . e A? Q» n u . Q. .. \ pi v .3 .3 r“ L. y . L; ...). H.. B» .gL Li. .3 A: c . A“ u” . r“ L. r. .3 in ... r. a: C» C. .u.. “a .1 ... L. .. . s . . . n .. . 0'. ~12. .2... s . ru uu A.» gnu ~.., t» 6.. hfiu "C. .d. v... Q» 42 lower peninsula of Michigan (from Allegan to Benton Harbor, Traverse City to Monroe, Holland to Lapeer and areas between). Table 1 provides a composite picture of the respondent focal managers according to the type of firm in which they function. Twenty-eight agri-business middle managers functioning in four general types of firms, from all areas of lower Michigan comprised the study sample. These men had been in their present positions for an average of over five years, were in their late thirties and all but one had graduated from high school. Fifty per cent of the focal managers reported some form of special training beyond their formalized schooling. Instrumentation In line with the objectives of determining the nature of the agri-business manager's position, defining the normative aSpects of his activity and securing an indi- cation of role expectations, two questionnaires were developed as Parts A and B of the Agri—Business Manage- ment Survey. The 188 statements or activities used on the two were selected from available literature1 such as 1According to: Hemphill, op. cit.; American Insti— tute of Management, op. cit., Evans, op. cit., Glickman, Hahn, Fleishman and Baxter, op. cit.; Gleason, Op. cit.; Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, Employee Relations Research in the Standard Oil CompanyINew Jersey) and Affiliates YNew York: Employee Relations Department, Standard Oil Company of New Jersey); Stewart, 43 wom A.NH m.k H.m m.km mm mummmcmz Hmoom Ham wom o.NH m.m m.m m.km m mofl>ummfluasz wow m.mH m.o N.v 0.0m m mofl>nmm mam mcfiumxumz wmo m.NH m.o H.o o.mm m saaasm Hflmumm aocmum wmm m.NH m.m k.m 0.04 o mcflusuomMscmz cam @chmmooum mummy mummy mummy mcflcflmue GoduMOSUm mocmflummxm muscme mom 2 wmxe Euflm Haaommm . mummy . mmmum>4 boo m0mum>¢ .mummmcme pampcommmu mo mHflmoum mOHumHumuomHm:OIl.H mamas .a. .1 r.. r. 44 reports of management research, management audit vehicles; of major firms and certain doctoral dissertations. Subsequently, the statements were supplemented and adapted to agri-business middle management situ— ations on the basis of examinations of job descriptions from participating firms and considerable personal experience in the agri-business management field. In addition, consultations with executives of the partici- pating firms and with research consultants from Michigan State University aided in structuring the research instru- ments in such a way as to get the desired data. Part A of the Agri-business Management Survey (see Appendix A) had a two—fold purpose. First, it provided a means of obtaining data on the current behavior of the focal manager, his present tasks and their relative importance. Secondly, it provided a vehicle for indi- cating the perceived cruciality to success on the job of each of the various tasks performed. Since a measure of relative importance of normal activities was desired, the respondents were asked to rank the items using time spent on each during an average work week as the ranking criterion. Managers and Their Jobs, op. Sit.; John K. Trocke, Manag— ing for Profit (East Lansing, Michigan: Cooperative ExtensiOn Service, Michigan State University, 1968); Carmichael, op. cit. 45 In addition, heeding Parten'sl warning about the ability of an individual to accurately rank a large group of items, the activities were sub-divided into eight general categories. To avoid any bias or unintended influence upon the responses, the categories were not given titles on the questionnaire. They were, however, on the advice of previously mentioned consultants, grouped for analysis purposes into the areas of: (l) personnel supervision and evaluation, (2) Operations and coordi— nation, (3) planning and research, (4) merchandising, (5) finance and control, (6) public relations and com- munity affairs, (7) purchasing and inventory maintenance, and (8) personal demands and improvement. It should be noted that this ranking procedure was ordinal; the interval between ranks could not be deter- mined. It should also be noted that the ranking was within categories. The importance of the results could be assessed only on the basis of the relationship of one activity to another within each of the eight sections. Therefore it became desirable to determine the amount of time spent on each of the groups as a whole. To this end, each respondent was asked to estimate the time spent on each of the activity groups by the focal manager. Furthermore, an analysis of lMildred Parten, Surveys, Polls and Samples (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1950). .y r. ... .C a v. .. y. .l. .C r\ 41. I. ( .a . . 2. 2. .. T. a: nu . . by. a. mg n . Q» r . 2. C . .. a n- a . .3 ... ... . « C. r.. 2,. F4 ... ... Ll. Luv .. . o a v . p a n a ..J 2‘ r e. .n u w .. .n‘ ”H e e a» b; . n\~ (H ~\|A 46 the groups provided indications as to the competencies important to the particular position. Instrument A also secured data relative to the crucialness to success of each activity listed. A l to 5 rating scale provided an opportunity for the respondents to indicate judgement as to the cruciality of each item. This further indication of the importance of an activity seemed to be a considerable refinement over the time allocation alone. Again, both individual activities and groups of activities were used for com- parison purposes. Part B of the Agri—business Management Survey was designed to define the role of the agri—business middle manager. A sufficient number of items were included to allow an assessment of the various respondents' per- ceptions of the organizational position and function of the focal manager. Respondents were asked to approach each of the listed activities as if it would be possible to completely determine what the role and role behavior should be. They were asked two questions: (1) whether they believed a middle manager in this type of setting should or should not engage in a particular activity, and (2) the strength of that belief. Particular pains were taken to make sure that the items in this part (Part B) were congruent with the items in Part A so that comparisons could be made. In effect, then, a comparison of role expectations and role behavior 47 was made possible. As in Part A, the activities were categorized, but not identified, in eight groups. This too, allowed for comparisons of actual and expected competencies. Both Part A and Part B of the questionnaire were adapted and presented to each member of each role set. Each respondent focused only on the activities of the focal manager. The questionnaires were identical for managers, supervisors and subordinates with the exception that the instructions were adapted to the particular respondent. A third instrument, Agri-Business Management Survey (Part C), was prepared for and sent only to the focal manager. Its purpose was to secure pertinent information as to personal demographic data plus a brief picture of the background, attitudes and general characteristics of the individual--a profile of the man himself. Questionnaire Administration and Data Collection The cooperating agri-business firms had, approxi- mately one month prior to mailing the questionnaires, alerted their personnel to the effect that a management study was being developed and was soon to be undertaken. After selected company representatives had assisted in validating the instruments and procedures, further word was sent out through company channels indicating 48 the type of study to be performed and the fact that certain personnel might be receiving requests to participate. The questionnaires were coded according to each hierarchical position. However, all respondents were assured of the confidence of their answers and no signatures were solicited. The only other difference among the forms were in the use of pronouns and in the instructions provided for each part since the objective was to concentrate on the focal manager. A package including the questionnaire, a set of instructions, a letter from the investigator (see Appendix A), a cover letter from the participating firm's head— quarters and a stamped and addressed return envelope was sent to each previously selected respondent. This amounted to a total of thirty—one role sets of three members each. An urgent request was made that the questionnaires be returned within two weeks. The response from the focal managers and the superiors was substantial and on time. Ninety per cent (twenty- eight) of the former and 93 per cent (twenty-nine) of the latter complied as requested. Initial returns from the subordinate group amounted to only 28 per cent (nine). Subsequent encouragement by the participating firms brought in a final return of 81 per cent (twenty—five) which re— sulted in twenty—five complete role sets. LII ( 3 (”f y 49 Data Analysis Since consensus on role definition between the manager and other managers and between each manager and other members of his role set is an important factor in the functioning of the business as a social system and since it will also tend to prOvide an accurate picture of the various role expectations, two aspects of consensus have been considered; intrapositional and interpositional.l Intrapositional consensus indicates the relative agreement among the focal managers themselves on their commitments and the extent of those commitments to parti— cular activities. Interpositional consensus is, on the other hand, a reflection of the degree to which members of a role set agree on a particular activity or group of activities. The responses to the management survey questionnaire were coded and the raw data transferred by the researcher to a Computer Laboratory Fortran Coding Form. Data cards were subsequently keypunched accordingly. Consultants in the Applications Programming Section of the Computer Laboratory designed an appropriate program for statistical treatment of the data. Tabulations and appropriate statistical calculations were performed by the Control Data 3600 computer of the 1This distinction is used extensively by Gross, Mason and McEachern, op. cit. (I'f“. .....wu-a. A f‘ '2') \‘ Haul u 4 V ‘ (I) m L‘ '1" r "ru- ~oLu' ‘i'Pr.f\ fl - u 'r- .-j ..J {a 4,. t.:5 50 Computer Institute for Social Science Research at Michi— gan State University. Computer print-outs provided analysis of the responses in time allocation and cruciality rating of each activity and a breakdown of responses by type of firm, competency groupings, role performance and role expectations for each of the three member role sets. The Questions In attempting to accomplish the stated objective, to identify and classify the more-or-less common activi— ties, competencies and characteristics Of personnel in agri-business middle management positions, a series of pertinent questions were considered: 1. What are the characteristics of the selected focal managers? Re: age, education, job tenure, experience and special training. Previous investigators have concluded that a valid and systematic method for examining Specific management positions is to first determine what activities are undertaken in the fulfillment of the job requirements. To get a more accurate account of these activities, the views of the incumbent, his superior and a subordinate were deemed appropriate. Hence, the following question: 2. What does the agri—business middle manager do? (Activities) . .A an. oH‘ .. rc. ..- ..- 51 a. As identified by himself? b. As identified by his superior? c. As identified by a subordinate? Obviously, a simple listing of activities, with no further qualifying factors, provides no indication of the relevance or importance of each such activity either in relation to other activities or to the position it— self. It was assumed that, external pressures of various types might result in certain activities of managers being more time consuming than consequential. The next two questions, therefore, appeared to be quite pertinent. 3. What proportion of the manager's time is allocated to each activity? To each competency group? a. As perceived by himself? b. As perceived by his superior? c. As perceived by a subordinate? 4. How crucial to his success as a manager is each activity? Each Group? a. As rated by himself? b. As rated by his superior? c. As rated by a subordinate? Seldom does a manager Operate under what might be considered ideal conditions. Most managers, however, as well as their superiors and subordinates have more-or— less definite expectations as to what the manager should ‘ r! P1"! U. dv.‘ ...,A y a .:~V \v F'Ilvv 5'”th . ... V .4- ~. . ‘ Gl- “‘vi ., ’VF.“ v-v. . A”"u a. . ”e e k, r—n 52 be doing or would be doing in their present position, were there no interference factors. These expected behavioral performances are solicited in the question: 5. What should the agri—business manager do? (Role expectations) a. As rated b. As rated c. As rated Since a training for each agri-business by himself? by his superior? by a subordinate? curriculum individually designed manager according to a specific situation would be neither feasible nor practical, the degree of commonality of characteristics and performance among the focal incumbents was considered vital. An interest in determining the similarity or dissimilarity of the managers studied led to the following questions: 6. Do the managers studied share common charac- teristics? 7. Do they share common activities? a. As indicated by the focal manager? b. As indicated by the superior? c. As indicated by a subordinate? 8. Do they share common competencies? (According to groupings) a. As ranked by the focal manager? b. As ranked by a superior? c. As ranked by a subordinate? 53 9. Do they share common perceptions as to cruciality of activities? a. As rated by the focal manager? b. As rated by the superior? c. As rated by a subordinate? 10. Do they share common role expectations? a. As rated by the focal manager? b. As rated by the superior? c. As rated by a subordinate? 11. What are the differences between the perception of importance of actual role activity and the perception of importance of expected role activity? It has been postulated that consensus on role definition between the incumbent manager and his role set is an important factor in the functioning of the system of which all are members. Likewise, lack of consensus would tend to generate role conflict and hence might limit effectiveness of performance. Essentially this means that if the focal manager experiences undue conflict in the fulfillment of his duties, some of his attention, energy and expertise may be diverted from the performance of his job to the mitigation of the conflict. The two aspects of consensus are considered in the following two questions. 12. Is there intrapositional agreement upon: 54 a. The time allocation of activities? Of competency categories? b. The cruciality ratings of activities? Of categories? c. The role expectation ratings of activities? Of categories? 13. What are the differences in the intrapositional ratings? 14. Is there interpositional agreement upon: a. The time allocation of activities? Of competency categories? b. The cruciality ratings of activities? Of categories? c. The role expectation ratings of activities? Of categories? 15. What are the differences in the interpositional ratings? Although it may be assumed that all agri-business middle managers have certain areas of responsibility which result in many quite similar activities, it must also be assumed that variations in type of firm and general function would have some bearing on the role and behavior of said managers. The following question inquires into these assumptions: 16. What is the relationship between the type of firm in which the focal manager operates and: 55 a. Time allocation of activities? b. Cruciality ratings of activities? c. Role expectations relative to activities? Finally, there are questions which tend to summarize the data and the intent of the study: 17. 18. 19. What would the profile of an ideal manager a. Related to individual activities? b. Related to competency groupings? Can the results of the time ranking of activities, the cruciality ratings and the expressions of role expectations be correlated to the point that the functions of agri-business management personnel, considered herein, are clearly visible? Is there sufficient correlation between the category groupings to indicate the competencies most appropriate to carrying out those functions and thus to establish the bases for development of training programs for agri-business middle managers? ..-~ --.i., -‘r . " a1 “...; . (A h...” t, ._‘ .... "\. . ‘-~n.. CHAPTER IV THE FINDINGS The major objective of this study was to identify and classify the more—or—less common activities, compe- tencies and characteristics of personnel in agri-business management positions. To clinically investigate the role behavior of the selected individuals it was determined that their activities should be examined from three differ— ent vieWpoints and against three different criteria of significance. Each member of the role set, composed of the focal manager, his superior and a subordinate, has indicated his views relative to the ranking of certain activities accord— ing to time allocation; the relative importance of those activities as suggested by a rating of cruciality; and indications of the expected activities under more ideal conditions, with respect to the work of twenty—eight men who occupied agri—business management positions in the summer of 1969. The primary findings of the study are presented in this chapter. The compilation and classification of the 56 data secured from the various three—member role sets is presented herein in an attempt to answer the questions posed in Chapter III. Time Allocation of Activities There is probably no more objective way of ascertain- ing what a manager does than by focusing on the expenditure of his time during a rOutine working day or period of time. The portion of the questionnaire devised for securing this data from the focal manager, his superior and a subordinate was divided into eight categories with provisions for time allocation rankings within each grouping. No overall ranking of individual activities was obtained. Comments herein will be concerned first with the eight categories of competency (Personnel Supervision and Evalu- ation, Operations and Coordination, Planning and Research, Merchandising, Finance and Control, Public Relations and Community Affairs, Purchasing and Inventory Maintenance and Personal Demands and Improvement) and the relative importance of these categories as judged by the amount of time perceived as being devoted to each. Subsequently, comparisons of amounts of time allocated to specified indi— vidual activities within each category will be discussed. It is of interest to note that, generally speaking, the perceptions of the focal manager and those of his superior, in regard to the allocation of time to his various 58 activities, are relatively congruent throughout this section. On the other hand, the subordinate's per- ception of time allocation is often somewhat at variance with the other two members of the role set. In certain instances this lack of consensus tended to have considerable effect on the composite ranking of the activities within the group. According to the time ranking of competence categories in Table 2 and illustrated in Figure 1, activities listed under the Operations and Coordination category along with those pertaining to merchandising are accorded the greatest percentage of total time by the focal managers. There tends to be a rather significant consensus as to which of the groups should be ranked in the upper and which should be in the lower portion of the list. The findings here seem to corroborate the previous findings of Carmichael,l Evans,2 and Bomelli3 who reported that merchandising or selling, finance and control and Operational duties were the most important general functions of operational managers in various industrial situations. Of the fourteen activities listed in the Operations and Coordination category, Table 3 and Figure 2, the items lCarmichael, op. cit. 2 . Evans, op. Cit. 3Bomelli, op. cit. 59 5.5 m.5 m.m v.m bcmEm>OHQEH paw mpcmEmQ HMCOmumm m.5 m.m v.5 0.5 mmede >DHCSEEOO paw wcoflumamm oflabsm H.HH ¢.HH m.m H.ma mocmcmucflmz xuoucm>cH pew mcflmmzonsm «.ma k.HH ©.NH m.ms zuammmmm ecu masccmHm m.ma 5.m «.ma m.HH coflumsam>m pcm conH>Hszm HmCCOmumm 5.vH w.ma o.ma m.mH Homecou paw mocmcflm 4.0a o.om m.sa m.es magmaecmnoumz m.ea m.va 0.0m m.ms codamcaeuooo mam macaamumeo cmmz cmmz cam: cmez mbflmomeou mumcflpuonzm uoflumasm .uoz Hwoom asouo >OcmummEoo xm pmuuommm m4 .mmumcflpsonsm semen paw mnoflummsm uflmnu .mm>HmmEm£u mummmcmE exp >2 pm>fleoumm mm muommcme mmecflmsnlflsmm we mocmquEoo HafismmmcmE mo mmmum HommE ou pmumooHHm mEHu Hmuou mo mmmucmoummll.m mqméfi 54., 60 20.01F (‘nnuxnsito- I-‘oca 1 Manager Superior 19.54% Subordinate 19.0.- 18.54? 18.0(r 17.s~r 17.04) 16.5-5 16.0.? 15.5.t 15.0.. 14.54L 14.04r 13.5(- I 13.0: 12.5«L 12.0 4P 11.5.? 11.04- 10.5 .. 10.0 4L «r 4 q» T- 4? 'IU-O adh- .ing and Resear ffairs and Improvement 4* Operations and Coordination Merchandising Finance and Control Personnel Supervision and Evaluation Purchasing and Inventory Maintenance Public Relations and Community Personal Demands Plan ‘ I. \ liqure l.--Percentage of total time allocated to mayor areas of managerial competence by agri—Lusiness managers as perceived by rhr managers themselves, their superiors and their subordinates. 61 H.m 0.0H 5.m m.m o.m 5.HH o.m m.HH mwfluflpfluom HO000EDCOQOO . co mCOuCOOOOOOL 00 000000000 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.00 000000000 00 0000 IuOOE mcfluOSOcoo OCO OCHOCOCMO m.m m.m o.m m.5 m.5 m.m m.v H.m mcofluommcmuu mo mOHHw OCO OOHOOOH mCHQOOS 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 000000 mOHOm MO\OCO cofluospoum mcflummz 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 000000 0000 sumo ou mflofl HOflUOQm mcflcmflmmd m.m v.m H.ma o.ma m.m 5.5 m.m H.m DCOEuummOO On» How mOHpfluofiuQ mcflcmflanmumm OCO mchHEuOuOO 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 00000000 0000000 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0000000000 000 00 00000>0000000 OCO Ousuosnum Ocu mcflnwaOCm 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 x003 00000 0000000 0000000000 m.m H.5 v.m m.5 H.m m.m 5.m m.5 mOOSOHQEO OCOEO mcofluOHOH mafix003 msoHCOEHOC mnemoHO>Oo 0.5 0.0 5.HH v.oH 5.m v.m 0.0 N.m mOOOC HOCOmOOm 00 COHuoOOoum so muospoum OCHUCOHOO H.m 5.0 o.ma o.mH m.e m.v m.m v.0 muHOOOO x003 m.uCOEuHOQOO One mCHNHCOmuO 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 00000 00 30am 0:» mcflm0>umm5m OCO mCHccmam 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 000000000 0 00000 .Q.m COOS .Q.m COOS .Q.m COOS .Q.m COOS >00>000¢ OuflmomEOO OuOCHOuOQdm uoflummsm .Hmz HOoom .000OCHOCOQDO 000:0 OCO muoflnmmsm Cflmcu .mO>HOmEOL0 muOOOCOE esp he OOxCOu mO muOmOCOE mmOcflmsn IHCOO mo mOHDH>HuoO COHDOCHOCOOO OCO mCoHuOuOQo Omuomamm mo cofluOooHHO OEHBII.m mqmme €52 Manage: Superior Subordinate Composite " "‘ - Focal o——-0 o—a 1‘°51I 14.0«0 13.5uh 13.04- 12.5%? 12.01b 11.5‘F 11,0-5 10.5-4- 10.0‘P 9.5-0— 9.01b 3.50L 8.0-lb 7.5«- 7.0«-- 6.54~ 6.0uk 4.5-» 4.0-“— 3.5-1»- .00— 3 2.54- 2.0+ mcoauuMmcmuu mo mmflflm new mnuoomu 000000; mOuosq 00000 uo.u00 coduuawouo @000002 mHaOOo CO) 00 mnoh m cam ( O vcflcofimmd 0 ”One n 0006000000 00. 000 meau uuuoaum mcwnmdauOumO O00 ocflcHEumuoO vcauooxm odnoouh acme mo mmOc COO 0050 luumnom 000 |m>0000000 Ionuum Ono OCHNSHOC¢ muox mound Ocaun00 0000000600 momonuEO mCOEO mcoaumaou mcflxuo3 050000500; ocCQoHO>OO mpmmc accommwm 00 0000030000 00 muuopouo mcfiocmamm muuouuo x003 m.0c080000 two 000 meaNHCOmuo mpooo mo 30Hm 0:0 madma> nuomsm 000 00000000 Ococamamu O mcamu Figure 2.--Time allocation of selected operations and coordination activities of agri-business managers as ranked by the managers themselves, their subordinates. and their super iors V 3' 63 which require the most relative time have to do with organizing the department's work efforts around the flow of goods. In such instances the telephone is apparently an important managerial tool as attested by its ranking as the foremost time consumer of this particular group. The lowest ranking activity in the group, concerned with the reporting to company headquarters, may or may not indicate a considerable degree of autonomy in operations on the part of the focal managers. Mention should be made of the discrepancy between the responses of the subordinates and the other role set members. As an example, both the focal managers and the supervisors reported "Organizing the department's work efforts" as being the most time consuming activity, while the subordinates placed this item near the bottom of the ranking. Apparently this is an activity which is often not visible to the subordinate, therefore his perception as to time consumption. Table 4 and Figure 3 show the relative importance, time-wise, of the focal manager's Merchandising activities. This group is one of the two most important in terms of time commitment, taking an average of over 16 per cent of the manager's time (Table 2). As might be expected, cus- tomer contact is shown as the major concern. Special pro- motional events and the establishment of sales policies also rank high on the merchandising time requirement list. 64 memmflU MOM mmflpcmno numE mcflnwdmum pcm mcfluomamm mumpuo umEOumso mcfluflpwmxm uflpmuo umEOumso mcflxomnu mucflmaoeoo quOumso @cflaocmm mmaspmnom Ucm mEmnmoum @cflmfiuum>pm mcflccmHm mmocmonHm u0\pcm m0H5pmH mHmEOumso mcfl>oumm< cofluoeoum pcm mcflmfiuum>©m mo mmm0m>fluomwmm mcflumsam>m muoflummsm ou monomou meMm mcfiuuflebsm mosqfl00omu mcflmflpcmzouofi Hmuou mcflm>am0¢ muospoum no mmflpcmcoume 00H0flum mmHMm Hmflommm cfl @cflumflmmd mmuspmooum pcm mmfloflaom mmamm mcflcmflanmumm mu0m>m Hmcofluofioum HMflommm ocemcmuum pcm mcflccmam mumcoumso ou mcflxamu no mcflummuw .Q.m Emmi .Q.m com: .Q.m cmmz .Q.m cmmz muflmomEoo muwcflouonsm nofluomsm .umz Hmoom sun>wnoa .mmumcflpu0h5m Hflmsu pcm muoflummsm uflogu .mm>amm6m0u mummmcmfi 00p %3 pmxcmu mm mummmcme mmmcflmsnlflumm mo mmflufl>fluom mcflmflpcm0oum8 pmuomamm Mo coflpmooHHm mEHBII.v mqmde 65 Composite ---- Focal Manager C—oSuperior L HSubordinate T b l 1 A l l L l L l l L l l J I f l I F I r 1 V j " f r ' ' l 0 0‘ O" U‘ Q) :2 O Ln 5: L. C C m m At: u (H o I . +4 0 C) +4 I' -4 Q) U: L4 L: t; r}; m x L. n H '1: m U m E -.¢ Q) '12 0 L4 i r-d L4 0 U) M (I H ’1‘ Q) A O u [-L E :1 gm '6 I‘d L: U m «1 r0 .. 'u U 4) 1»: L4 0 0 m I u u. L: m ,2: u 0‘ a M L‘ s m (I 0.) u U :1 H' (n '13 "J 01'!) C a) U 0 t In '1: (D O 'J : 1' u: U L. « L4 34 I: H L» C {I H H L: U) u c ;. r4 0 'r‘, , 1 :1 L) r". U L. O '1) rd (6 Q) ..4 03 m tn 0,) u m (1) UN: 01'!) u 1: m m U m t) w x: n'. E a 1: 0 Own E U m-{o Hutu; Lin 0 n-M!u m .a x h‘)‘ C" O U‘ 0 H m m u L: r) 11'!) fl -.4 M .. {j . -') u‘ '1) U‘ i: m c t l 1;. (z u g; Q) (U A Q) :J .4 p4 ow; r. (: r',‘ u u) (l u I... () ..c «n {I g. f t '; .c x: u .o m --4 m A f), (1 HI -H ”j, u m 11 N to d U a’ . nj 0 L: 1’ ' R1 -4 "1 ) A m A u I In H H- c U T) (I m 0 .Q U Q U) 4 A $4 Lari I: a i. M :1 U. 0 L414 (1 L.‘ ‘M ,2 4 :34 r): r, F. U L: ,4 "J H U H) U u. 0401: E. O Q .a m 54 'J i) t: C- 'u (I U 'I) it: u) 1) .. ”J M nu» U H O U) U a «5 L4 I) 1.;- 1). :1. fl: tn ") Q.“ m «1.0.. :2 t. m "u 1).") - I to 1. L4 0 '4 1‘. O m )4 m (J L; L4 1 ’1) (U '3 «u :3 , t1) (2 D. 'J r4 r‘ 14 U M f) .(I H ‘A‘ h '1! rn H (3 a. H L La: (1.0. n'? m o. 0 .r: E u m 'u m ..1 t2 «1 .v; 5. N1 L. ;..m " U r) U .4 (I u, (1.11 Figure 3.-—Tim‘ \llHCdtlfln n1 srllvttd mwrchnndlslnq avt1w|iiwu u! «arm-Luanw nmn.'xgors as ranked 1"; Nu; rumaans flit-warlvcfi. ”It” fi‘W‘T’WV" 4"" H"‘” """‘"""'""' 66 This is one instance in which there is consensus among the role set members relative to high and low priority activities. Apparently the majority of the focal managers leave many of the routine tasks such as checking customer credit and expediting orders to their employees and devote more of their time to managerial-type activities. According to most management experts, this is the way it should be.1 "Handling responsibilities which cannot be delegated" received one of the numerically lowest composite mean time allocation scores given to any activity. This would indi- cate its high priority in the management scheme of the agri- business firms surveyed. Table 5 and Figure 4 indicate its importance by placing it at the top of the Finance and Control category. These results indicate that not only was this activity an important time factor in this particular category, but that there was a high degree of respondent agreement as to its relative importance. Likewise, there appears to be a feeling that there are certain time con- suming duties which must be handled by the manager himself. The variance of responses accorded similar activities in different categories is most interesting. In the Mer- chandising grouping, sales and pricing policies were con- sidered to be quite important. However, within the Finance lSee McGregor, op. cit.; Stewart, op. cit.; Argyris, op. cit. 67 m.m o.HH m.H o.mH o.m w.oa H.m n.0H >.m w.oH m.m o.oa m.m h.oa m.m m.oa mmfloflaom 00m mcflmume mcfloflum mcflnmflanmumm Houucoo Haouwmm Homoum How mcflmcmuud pcmEuummmp mLu mo mmocmcflw ms» 00 xomzo omoHo m msflmmmx mucwEmumum mmoH pcm uflmoum mcflmwamcd mmflcoE xcmaEOU mcflapcmm mumoo mcflumnmmo ocm mmusmflm mmamm ocflwwamcm mmcflzome woflmwo umcuo ocm muoumasoamo buHB mcflxuoz museums 60m mumuuma mcflumuofla mmocmcflm HmucmEunmmmp m0fl©nmmmu mHOequsm guHB mcfluwmz moflaom 0H mcoHuMHum> HOm muoflnmmsm Eouw oocmummao mcflusomm mummpsn mcflummmuw mmfloflaom pflpmuo umEoumso mafinmflanmumm momwc mocmHSmcfl mcflapcmz paw m0H0HEumumo pmummmamp on uoccmo 00H03 mmfluflaflnflmcommmu msflaocmm .Q.m cmmE .D.m cmmz .Q.m Emmi .Q.m cmmz muHmOQEOU mumcfipuonsm Hoflummsm .umz Hmoom >ua>fluoa .mmumcflpuonsm Hflmnu paw muofiummsm Hflmnp .mm>ammEo0u mummmsme may ma Umxcmu mm muwmmcmE mmmcflmsbnflumm mo mmHuH>Huom Houucoo pcm mocmcflw pmuomaom Mo coflumooHHm mEHBII.m mqmde A. 65:30... 68 Composite Focal Manager ¢~—-————o Superior O-—————{JSubordinato 13.0—— 12.54% 12.000 11.5~r 11.04» F g o 1 10.04% 9.54» 9.0T» 3.54L 8.04P 7.S~r ---- +— mmaofiuom pcm mcamuma mcfloflua ocwcmaabmumm Heuucoo Haouhmm nomoua u0w mcfioceuud ucwfiuumamp on» No mmococau ecu co xomco omoHo m mcaamox mucmaoucum mmoH 000 uauoum wcau>dmcd mmacoe >00QE00 mcwavcmm mumoo mcwuu luomo can m¢h50au modem vcdnmamsd mocwzooa moauuo nonuo can mucuua nsoano :uwa ocaxuoz muuooou p00 muwuuoa mcwumuoso mwocmcfiu Hmucoauumm twp maupunamu who Iaummom Law: madummz wondoo 0a mcoauofiuo> new mquumasm Eouu mucoumwao wcausuwm mummcsn mcflumamum mwflUAHOQ uapwuo umfioumsu mcwnmwanounm momma mucousocw mcwaccun cce mcwCHEuouwo ooumwoaoc on uoc ucuo noes: nowuwaan newcomnou undated: Figure 4.--Time allocation of selected finance and control activities of agri- business managers as ranked by the managers themselves, their superiors and their subordinates. 69 and Control category the establishment of pricing margins and policies was given the lowest possible ranking. Although some authoritiesl suggest that business management is first of all "people management," Personnel Supervision and Evaluation was ranked in the middle of the category groupings (Table 2, Figure 3) by the agri-business respondents. Within the grouping in Table 6 and Figure 5, however, the three most important time-ranked activities were directly concerned with personnel supervision. In addition, each member of the role set placed these items at the top of the list; the only time that such complete agreement occurred. Nearly unanimous agreement was also evident in placing the employee personal problems advise- ment item at the bottom of the category listing. The composite mean rankings of the activities in the Planning and Research category suggest a tendency on the part of the focal managers to systematically plan ahead according to consumer demand and to keep abreast of the times. In the light of this tendency, it is difficult to understand the apparent limited amount of time devoted to new and pending legislation. Table 7 and Figure 6 provide the specific information in this respect. The low time allocation ranking of the training of potential managers is quite typical of most management situations and thinking. 1According to Drucker, op. cit.; House, op. cit.; Uris, op. cit. 7O m.m H.0H a.m N.HH a.m 0.00 ~.m a.oa mamanoua . HMCOmHmQ co mmmonQEm mcflmfl>©d ~.m m.m v.m m.m m.H m.HH H.m o.m A.oum .m0oaumom> .mocmusmcflv mEmum Iona uflmmcmn mm>onEm ocfiapcmm o.oa a.m m.ma m.mH m.m m.a m.m m.oa mmmsoHQEm smanoua mcaaecmm m.m m.m N.m n.m H.m v.0a n.m v.m mcofluflpcoo mcflxHOB ccm mummmm .nuammn coonmEm How mcflpfl>onm a.m m.m a.a m.a a.m a.m s.~ o.oa mmocm>mflum mascaasm o0H>H0mmm m.a H.a H.a m.oa m.a m.m m.a m.m mmmsoHasm ucmmnm sch an mcaaaflm m.m H.a H.m o.m m.m m.m m.m m.m mmmsoaasm manuan pcm mucmoflammm now mcflzmfl>umu0H 5.5 m.m H.ma H.m a.m m.m a.m m.m mmssaooosa pcm mmfloflaom wcmmeoo mcHCHmmem H.m m.m m.m m.m n.m m.m o.m v.m mcoflumsuflm ammoHQEm mcflpumm Ion mHOAummsw zuflz mcflumoH0:EEOU m.m m.a o.a a.m a.m m.m m.m s.s mmmsoHQEm 3mg acaaamss m.m m.m m.a m.o m.m m.m a.m m.m mamuos 0: mcflmomx 60m mmmwoamEm mcflum>fluoz m.m m.a s.m N.m s.~ m.m a.m a.a mmumaaouonsm no coama>umasm humane s.m m.m H.m a.o ~.N a.m N.H o.~ muoruo on xuoz acacmammm ccm mmflufluoflua non mcflnmflanmumm m.a N.m N.m m.m H.m m.m H.a H.m mmumcacuonsm s0 meow xuoz mcfiumoam>m pcm mcwxomco .D.m cmmz .Q.m cmmz .Q.m cmwz .Q.m cmmz sua>au60 muflmomEOU mumcflcuonsm Hoeummsm .umz Hmoom pcm mHOAHmQDm peony mmflufl>fluom coflumsam>m pcm coflmfl>ummsm Hmccomuom cmuomamm mo coflumooHHm mEflB||.m .mmumcflpmonsm yawn» .mm>ammEm0u mummmcme wnu an pmxcmu mm mummmcmE mmmcflmznlflumm mo mqm<9 71 14.0 4* Composite - - ~ - Focal Manager O—————o Superior 13.5 ‘P D-—O Subordinate 13.0 ‘t 12.5 J0 12.0 «L 11.5 ‘f 11.0 %- lO.5 4* L 1 0 e 0 l 9.5 4r 9.0 «» 8.5 «- F d S e 6 5.0 fir 4.5 ‘b \ 4.04% 3.5«» \ .0w 3 .541- 2 04- 2. mEmanoua accomuwa co mmm>oHnEo acamfi>pd A.Uum .mcoau loom> .wucousmcaw mEmuDOum unwocon wm>oHQEw mcfiflpcmz mom>oaaew Emanoua mafiacco: mcouuflpcoo mcflxuoz U00 xuouam .0uac00 wo>o~a use new mcwou>oum moocm>wauv woonQEw mca>~0mom moo>o~aao ucomnm 000 ca accuses mwoonmEo mcauar 600 muchaaame nofl m0a3mw>uwu0H mmuscmo Iona use moaUAHom >00dEOU mcwcflmHaxm m0oaumsuam ow>oHan ocacummmu muoauwasm nuaB mcaumoecsfiEoo mow>oHQEw 300 m0H0aoue mamuoe do Ocflamwx p00 www>oHQEw mcfluc>fluoz woumcapuonsm uo 00Mmfi>qu5m uomuwo muonuo Ou xuo3 mcacoammu 000 mmauaquum non acazmaanaumw nonmagnuonsm an econ x003 meaum 13Hm>m 00m mcfixuwcu Figure S.--Time allocation of selected personnel supervision and evaluation thvir activities of agri-business managers as ranked by the managers themselves, superiors and their subordinates. Lil-a 72 m.m m.aa N.m m.m v.m o.m m.m m.m 0.0 m.m v.0 m.m o.m m.n o.m 5.0 n.m v.0 m.v 9.0 v.m m.m m.m q.m v.m v.m h.m m.m m.m h.HH v.m 5.0H m.m m.m N.v H.m o.m w.m m.v m.m m.m 0.0 h.m m.h H.v 0.0 m.m v.0 m.m N.m m.m m.m m.m 5.0 m.m a.m n.m N.HH m.m w.oa m.m v.m m.m m.oa m.m o.m v.m N.OH H.m m.h h.m o.h 0.0 0.5 m.m 5.0 v.m m.v m.m N.m m.m H.v o.m w.m w.m m.m v.0 m.h o.m m.m m.v m.m m.v 0.5 m.m m.m H.m m.m m.m m.m 0.0 o.m m.m m.v >.m N.v m.m m.> m.m m.m 00000H 10000H 0000000 000 300 mcflwpsum 00000005 00500m H0flu00000 00H0H0ue 000HH no 00000000 .0000fl 300 How @0H00000m mwcflummE 00H000H0 000 woflaom >00QEOU @0HU00000 000%0HQE0 m0 00OH0 1000050 000 0H0000000 000000H0>m muofluwmsm >0 0300 000000 000HQ 00H30HH00 00H0H>H000 muopflpmmeoo mcwzmfl>0m 0000>0 000 000000 mususm 00000000000 x003 m0 0000 00 000E000000 000 00% 000000000 000000H0000m 00000800m0H 00x008 m0flmpsum 000 @0HOH0uno 0000000000 000 0000000 00 000000 000000000 000 @0H00800u00 0000000w000 0>OHQEH 00 00000 How 000x000 000600 00800000 mcflwpsum 000 @000H800000 000>0HQE0 mo 00Huflafl0H0000000 000 00H00500p00 .Q.m 0002 .O.m 0002 .D.m 0002 .0.0 000: muflmomeou 0000H©nonsm 00000000 .002 H0000 mufl>fiuo0 .000000000000 Hflmnu 000 muoflnwasm Hflmcu .00>H00§000 00000000 000 >0 000000 00 00000008 0000H000 10000 m0 00H0H>Huo0 00000000 000 @00000H0 00000H00 m0 00Hu000HH0 0Eflell.n mqm00000 >c0aeoo 000000000 000000080 00 00000000030 000 000000000 00000300>m 000000050 >0 0300 00000: 00000 000300000 00000>0000 00000000800 000300>0m 0000>0 000 000000 000050 00000000000 x003 00 0000 00 0008 1000000 000 000 0000 100000 000000000000 000008 100000 00x008 000 1%0300 000 000000000 0008 1000000 000 0000000 00 000000 0000300 100 000 00000800000 00008000000 0>00080 00 00000 000 000x000 000800 00800000 000>0300 000 00000800000 000>00080 00 00000000000000 100 000 00000800000 .--Timc allocation of selected planning and rusearch activi11ug u! aqrx- Figure 6 business managers as ranked by the managers themselves, thulr subordinates. thr1r rlf's' q1uder1rjrfi 74 Contrary to the apparent tendency to delegate cer- tain routine tasks to subordinates in the previously con— sidered categories, the focal manager seems to Spend a great deal of time in non-management—type activities within the Purchasing and Inventory grouping (Table 8, Figure 7). It must be assumed that he actually Spends time "Adding new supplies or merchandise to inventory records" and "Ordering special merchandise for customers" rather than supervising subordinates in these functions. Except for "Checking the condition of equipment, buildings and property,‘ the last ranked activity, there is exhibited a considerable amount of non-consensus among the role set members in this category. In fact there appears to be no pattern of agreement in their perceptions. The time priority within the Public Relations and Community Affairs grouping, Table 9, Figure 8, appears to rest strongly in the area of improvement of the company image. It should also be noted that management efforts in this area are of a more subtle nature rather than the direct community involvement associated with company repre- sentation in local projects or pressures applied to employees to participate in community activities in the name of the firm. All respondents, regardless of position, agreed that Personnel Demands and Improvement Activities of the focal managers were allotted the least amount of time of any of m.m o.oa m.m H.0H m.m m.m m.v H.0H muummoud mam mmcfloaflzn .ucme Imflswm mo cofluflpcoo mnu mcflxomnu m.v m.n m.m m.m mucmfimflcm pom mumpuo ocflEoocH mcflpnmmmu mumHHQQSm mcfluomucou m.m m.m m.q m.m mucmsuumamo porno nuHE mnmcuo mcflumcflpuoou N.m m.n m.m 0.5 mmfluflfiflomW mam macflefiflsn .ucme Imflswm wo muflmmmu MOM mchcmuum m.m w.» m.m o.m mumfla »n0ucm>cfl mcflmmflnw> pom mcflxomcu N.v H.m m.m o.o cmEmmHmm on mcflcmumflq H.m m.m m.m o.w mumpuo mmmsonsm pom mmoflo>cfl mcflxomno m.m m.m >.m H.m mmflammsm pom mmflpcmcoume mo ommuoum ummoum mnu mow mcflmcmuum m.m o.n m.v w.m po>flmomu mmflocwcopofi now mxowso wcflcwflm u0\pcm mo umfimomu WCH>MHuumU m.m m.w o.m o.m mumuumsmpmwc Lufiz mmoflum no mwfluoucm>cfl .mumpuo @cHEuflmcou H.v n.n m.m m.n mmeoumso MOM mmflpcwgonmE Hmflommm mcflumpuo H.v m.m v.m v.m pmumpuowu pom monopuo on on mEmuH mchHEumqu n.m m.o m.w m.m monoomu >uoucm>cfl ou mmflpcmnonme no mmflaamsm Boa mcflppm m.q m.m n.m w.e mummgm moaud pom mmsmonumo mumflHQQSm mcflxpsum .D.m cam? .Q.m com? .Q.m Com? .m.m cmmfi sufl>fluom muflmomeow mumcHUMOQsm uoHummsm .uo? Hmoom mam muofluomsm aflogu mmeHr/Huom QUCGCQMCHCE .moumchHOQsm Hflwzu .mm>ammemcu mnemmcme opp >2 poxcmu mm mummmcme mmmcflmsbnflnmm we >ancm>cH mam mcflmmgonSQ Umuomamm mo coflumooHHm oeflenn.m mqmuoucu>ca onwawwuw> can mcfixumnu % -——+ -~——~+——-——--+ ——+ cwEmmHmm Ou mcficmuqu mumpuo mmuzousm can mmoao>Cw unaxowno mwnaamsm pan mmapcmcouwe 1% uo wwmuOum quOum wzu u0w ocflocmuu< pw>amowu L- mmnpcmnuume now mxoocu mchmHm u0\pcm uo umfiwowu mcfixwfiuumo mumuumggpmmc cua3 it meowum uo meHOuco>cH .mumpuo ocHEufiwcou mumEOumno 41 u0u mmflpcmcoqu deflomam ocflumpuo pmumpuomu 1T van pwuwpuo on 0» meuw mcflcfifiumumo acuooou >u0ucm> use 0» unaccunouoa no mwaammsn 3o: ucfipvt maven» wowua pan mmamoamumo muwfiammsm mcw>p2um 13.0”- 12.5"- 12.0mQ m.m m.m H.m h.oH o.m n.m w.m v.m mmHuH>Huom mofl>nmm wuflcsEEoo cfl mcflummflofluumm m.m a.m N.¢ m.h m.m N.OH m.m H.HH saunas saunas IEoo on 0p mowonmEm mcflmmusoocm v.m m.m n.m m.m n.m e.m m.m m.m UHHQDQ noEDmcoo on» LpHB mcoflumHmn mcfl>oumEH mo mponumE mcflcHEumumo 0.0 N.m o.m m.» a.m a.m q.m H.HH mumpumsawmmn ou mucoEEoo nmEoumso ocfluuHEmcmHB m.m o.n n.v 0.0H v.m m.v m.va m.n mcoflummflcmmno manmuflumco on mcoflusnflnucoo hammEoo mafiufluonusd s.m a.o e.m s.e H.v o.» v.m n.w mcoflumHmu unease new mcoflumoHCSEEoo Hmcumucfl mcfl>oumEH m.m m.o a.m q.m o.e v.0 q.m H.a coflcnao Deanna LuHB Luzon mmoHo CH mcflmmmm n.m v.m v.m m.m m.m m.m m.m m.m mumEoumso %QQMLCD ou mcflcmumflq m.~ m.m o.~ v.v o.m m.m m.m m.m mmcflsmspma unansa pm mcnxmmam n.m v.m v.m m.m m.m m.m m.m m.w mumpflmuso gufla mmofl>umm n0\pcm muUSpoum acmmEoo usonm mcflxame w.m v.v v.a m.v m.m m.v m.m H.v momEH homogoo on» so mcflxomco .Q.m Cmmz .D.m cmmz .Q.m mez .Q.m cam: sun>nuoa muflmOQEou mumCHpHOQSm uoflnmmsm .umz Hmoom . cam muoflnmmsm nHmLu mmflufl>fluom mnHMmmm xpflCSEEoo paw mcoflumHmn QHHQDQ pouooamm we :ofiumooHHm mEHBII.m .mmumcflpuonsm nflmnp .mm>HmmEm£u mummmcme opp >9 pmxcmu mm mummmcmg mmmcflmsnlfluom wo mqmdfi 78 13.0 t n. o M t O l thr.n .1. 04.. id 1...! ."O we» Curs.§ .44. ._ q . a. «I! V y . . .AMV .19. _ a U I I I // fl// I I .... / I I \ / / «I ' I / \\ I I / ,. o - - - x o. ‘Uv-.t ’ I C /l..: I - til. / \\ I, M\\ .q . \ «/ 1p. 0 D. Q . F F [f L. i > 1 by L — — 41 d fl 4 fl 1.1! _‘ 4 4 4 4| 4 «1 q 5 o 5 o S o 5 o 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 o 5 0 5 2 2 l 1 o o 9 9 8 8 7 7 6 6 S S 4 4 3 1 1 1 1 1 l muownoum i; HmooH :w >cmusoo ecu mcfiucmmmuawm we muwuuoamu Canon noxpcm nonmam3mc coda madame: musuosuum nozom a muficsfifioo ecu nu“: muouucoo ochon>mo mmflufl>fluos L. mow>uom >uacaaloo cfi mcwuumwowuuom pauses L1 xuwcaafloo on O» mmwonaEv mcwususoocm Udansa uofisucou ecu cud: ; mCOwUnku mcw>0unew no avenues usacwfluwuvo mumuusav node: 0» mucoESOO uwfioumau ucfiuuflEmCMuB mcofiuMN Iacmmno manmufiusnu tr 0» macausbfluucoo >cmmeoo meanfiuocu=< mcofiumeu Unansa pcm mcoHuooHcsano Hmcuwucfi mcfl>ouQEH L coHcho oflaasm cufiB cusou mmoHo Ca veammwx 1e muQEOumso >aaon ac: on mcficmumaq mmcfiumcumm oaansa um ocflxmmam mumoam suso cue: mmofl>uwm u0\pcw muunpoum >cmm I800 unonm mewxame 1 mmew xcca ano ecu co mconwcv Figure 8.--Time allocation of selected public relations and community affairs activities of agri-business managers as ranked by the managers themselves, their superiors and their subordinates. 79 the categories (see Table 2, p. 59). There would appear to be a bit of incongruity in the ranking of "Planning my own activities" as number one and at the same time placing "Evaluating my own effectiveness as a manager" in position number twelve in Table 10 and Figure 9. Consensus among the role set members was again quite evident in the agreement that special work for or with a superior had a low time priority for the focal manager. While a ranking of the agri-business manager's activi- ties according to the amount of time devoted to each may well determine what he does on the job, it does not neces- sarily provide an indication of the relative importance of each activity nor of its crucialness to the individual's success in his position. Therefore, an Opportunity to place an additional judgment of importance on each item and group was provided for each respondent. Cruciality Ratings of Activities As was the case in the time allocation section, the portion of the questionnaire devised for securing cruciality data from each member of the role set was divided into eight categories with provisions for rating the same activities within each grouping. No general pattern emerged in this section relative to the congruence of the interpositional responses exhibited in Table 11 and Figure 10. There was, however, a noticeable m.s m.mH H.q m.oa m.v m.qH a.m a.HH newsmasm sE Eouw mocwpmflmmm HMCOmHmQ mcfluumo m.a m.oa N.~ m.oa s.m v.a m.o m.HH scmaeoo was now so muoflnomsm now meow Hoflommm mcfloo m.m m.oa m.m m.m m.m >.oa H.m m.aa ummmcme m mm mmocm>fluomwwm G30 >8 mcflumsam>m m.m H.0H a.m m.m ~.m m.oa v.m o.HH mmmcwman monuwo so ago: um mcnxuoz m.v m.m m.m ~.o a.m V.NH H.v m.oa momsoaoam mo mugnmno IEoo paw mcoflumommsm on moacoumfiq o.m ¢.n o.v ~.s H.m m.» a.m m.~ manunm>o mcnxuoz n.v m.n m.v m.m m.v m.m m.e H.o NSamson was ecm coHunmoo we» cum; sou mpspfluum m>Hpflmom m mcHQon>wo H.q m.o m.v m.m m.m n.o m.m m.v mmocmummcoo paw mmcfluwme mpmug meapcmuué o.s h.o a.s o.m H.m N.o N.m s.m momsoHaEm ocmumumec: cam can: wumoHCSEEoo weapon on 30: mcflcummq o.v v.m m.q m.n m.m m.m w.m m.m mmocmnmmcoo pcm mmcfluomE maficwmnu HmEHOM mcflpcmuua m.m m.m m.~ o.o m.m m.m s.v 0.5 scmEunmamo >5 Mo masses on» m>onmEH on 30: mcflcflfiumumo n.m m.o n.v H.m m.m v.m n.m m.m uocmmEop ppm opsufluum .mmme m0 muflbmc assemumm Hmpoa mcfluflbflcxm o.m 0.0 v.m O.” m.m m.q m.m v.0 meanpmoflanso momnu manommm a.m m.m m.m a.s H.m m.m v.m m.v monsn>nuom ago he mcnccmaa .Q.m com: .Q.m com: .Q.m com: .Q.m cmmz >un>fluoa muflmomsoo mquaUHOQsm uoflumasm .umz Hmoom pcm muoflnmmsm uflmgu . WQMMCHCHODSm HHGSH .mm>HmmeLu mummmcmE may >3 pmxcmu mm mummmcme mmmcflmsntflumm mo moflufl>fluoo ucmEm>onmEH pew mpcmEmp HMCOmHmQ pmuomawm mo cofluoooaam mEHBII.oa mamme 81 '4! MT . l. t: _ I4 ,_ _ _ t m . -.. t . C I t tn .1. 01 I 1d . 1!! J. ..mwo m a mu...» . CPSS _ . a _ . .4 . .m ; 1. 1r tr 4T ’ iv. iir b hi « . . km W. a t i. «w w \+‘ + a m + .# ml” +. |+ r» + + .w v 1+ l 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 O 5 0 5 O 5 O 5 0 I I O 0 e e e e e e e e o o o e o e e e a e e o e .‘ 3 3 2 2 1 1 0 O 9 9 8 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 A. 4 3 3 2 2 ... 1 1. 1 1 1 1 l 1 uofluemam ma Beau euceumemee aecOeuea mcwuueu aceaeou on» ecu no anewuedse uOu anon demoed» ocfloo uemecafi e as aeeco>uuoeuuo are ml ucwuesae>m meecwesn eowuuo so use: us ocaxuoz nee>o~nlo uo eucaead I600 use ecoHumem nose 0» acaceumdq e§«uue>o mcwxuos xcemaoo ecu use sewudmom on» phase» epsuauue e>wufim0d e meadoHe>eo meuseueucoo use mocduees eceuu unacceuuc meeaoHQEe ocean names: can sue: eueowcsEEou ueuuen ca 30: veacueeq meoceuewcoo can mocaueee ocflcemuu HQEuOu unacceuu< usefiuuwmep >5 mo eaeuoe ecu e>oudEw on so: meanwEueueo uoceefiep use ecoufiuue .mmeuc mo evanez HQCOmuem Huvoa ocflBExu ecoMueUHHndd even» mauveem newuw>wu0e :30 >5 mewcceam Figure 9.--Time allocation of selected personal demands and improvement activities of agri-business managers as ranked by the managers themselves, their superiors and their subordinates. 82 Ho.m me.m em.~ mm.~ madmaecmgonmz oo.m mv.m an.m Nw.m . muemmwd >uHCSEEoo cam mcoflumaem ofiansm mm.m om.m om.m om.m coflumsam>m pew coflmfl>uemsm HeCCOmnem wm.m mv.m mm.m vv.m eoceceucflmz huouce>cH Use mcflmmcousm me.m mm.m mv.m hm.m uceEe>oumEH one mpcoEeo HMCOmuem mv.m H~.N om.m Nv.m Houucou one eocmcflm av.m He.m on.m mm.~ ceaumcaonooo one weenumnmoo oe.~ mo.m Ho.m om.~ sonmmmmm was mcaccmam awe: use: one: use: euflmomEOU eumcflpnonsm uofluemsm .umz Hmoom moonw xoceuemeou >m peuuomem m4 .meumcflCHOQSm geese cam muoflnemsm uflecb .me>HemEecu mummmcofi ecu >b pe>fleouem mm mnemmcme mmecflmobuflumm MOM eoceueano Hmflnemecme mo mmenm uoflmE mo weapon hpfiameosnvln.aa mamme N e 0 o -..+.__. N e m U‘ 83 ./ - - - - Focal Manager Composite 4“-..-—-bSuperior C}. - __.-.... J Planning and Operations and Coordination Purchasing and Inventory Research Finance and Control Improvement Personal Demands and Maintenance Personnel 1r Supervision and Evaluation Public Relations and Community Affairs a; 4»— Merchandising USubordinate Figure 10.--Cruciality rating of major areas of managerial competence for agri-business managers as perceived by the managers themselves, their superiors and their subordinates. 84 tendency on the part of the subordinate respondents to rate all activities at a lower level while the superiors tended to rate all of them at a relatively higher level. Although the focal managers did not view Planning and Research as the most crucial category of activities, the composite ratings of the entire role set placed this activity at the top of the list. The next most important categories were those of Operations and Coordination and Finance and Control. These were also high ranking group- ings in the time allocation section. Contrary to certain other research findings1 and to the time allocation rankings, Merchandising was rated at the bottom of the category groupings and therefore was considered to be the least crucial to success on the job. Table 12 and Figure ll display the relative ratings of the Planning and Research activities of the agri—business managers studied. It should be noted that the three tOp items, "Looking for ideas to improve performance," "Deter- mining the responsibilities of employees," and "Determining and studying consumer demand" were not only given an identi— cal composite rating but were the identical top items in the time allocation ranking of this group of activities (Table 7, p. 72). Likewise, the three items given the lowest cruciality rating were at the bottom of the time allocation ranking. L 1As reported by Drucker Op. cit.; Carmichael, op. cit. 85 m.H v.m o.H m.m m.H m.m m.o e.m cofluea Imnmea manpcem pee Bea mau>psum 0.0 0.m m.0 e.m n.n m.m 0.0 0.0 mennn>nnom mnounneosoo mcnzen>em H.H m.m m.o m.m o.a m.m v.H m.m mecna no muosponm .mEeuu Ben n0w mauconmem 0.n 5.m 5.0 5.m n.n m.m m.n e.m muce>e pce eccenu ensuSM mcflumeoenom 0.H e.m 0.0 o.m 0.n m.m m.0 m.m mocnuees ocnccmnd pee mouaom wcemEOU ocupceuum m.n e.m 5.0 0.m m.n m.m m.n m.m mnOnneosm he c30p pepcmc mceam mcHBOHHom m.o e.m v.0 o.m m.o o.m o.H H.m mnemecmE ensu5m Hefluceuom maucflmnh H.H m.m m.o m.u m.a q.m o.H e.m cenumEn0mcu uexneE mcflxpsum can ocflcueuco 0.n m.m 5.0 m.n 0.0 m.m 0.n e.m mmm>0no5m no mgOnnmmm Imam one mammomonm mcuuesae>m 0.0 n.m 0.n m.m 0.n n.m m.0 0.n humannmomo men mumnmoo on pepeec weenDOmen ecu mchHEneueo 0.n 0.N v.0 5.n 0.n 0.n m.n m.m xnos no mmnm no nameunmamo ecu nOM mpnecceum mcflcmwaceumm m.o m.H m.o >.H m.o m.H >.o m.m pceaep nessmcoo mcflmpsum one mchHEneueo 0.0 a.n m.0 e.n m.0 a.n 0.n q.m mmm>0nosm no mewuflaflcflmcommen ecu ochflEneueo n.a m.n m.n 0.H 0.n 5.n m.n m.n eocmEnOMned e>onmEH ou mmepw now mcnxooq .Q.m Cmez .Q.m Gee: .Q.m ceez .Q.m new: sun>nno< euflmomEou euecflpnocsm neunemsm .nmz Heoom .meuecflpnocsm nfiecu pce mnoflneQSm nflecu .me>aemEecu eneqeceE ecu >3 Ueumn mm mnemmcmE mmeCHmscuflnme mo meHuH>Huoe ceneemen one maecceam peuoeaem mo xueaefiosnvll.ma mqmee 86 r C q I u n in I 01.. a C 0 CF D___.___..QSubordinate o———————o Superior 4.0 «l- w J 3.5 3.0 1.5 AF in 4 «F 1.0 scuueamumea maupcea use 30c onu>psuw neuuu>uuos mnouuuemeoo mau30n>em necua no suustnd .nEeuu 30: new usucousem euce>e one eccenu enouou ocuueeoenom nmsuueefi unacceam can xbuaoa >csaeoo maucceuu< mucunemse xc 3300 cepcec ocean mausoauom mnemscsa ensusu Hmuuceuom asuCMMnB scuumenOucA uexnca ocuaooum one maucueuco mee>oHaEe no nc0uueeoo=m Use muemOQOnQ mauuesas>m ucesunsdev ecu eueneao cu ceoeec meonsOmen ecu onucweneueo xno3 uo eens no uceEunsdep ecu nOu noncommum onuceuacsumm pceEeo neEdncoo usuxpsum one oeuCufineueo meehonEe mo eeuununc Iwmcoamen ecu OcMCuEneueo eucsEnOWnem e>ondEu ou meepu new ocuxooq Figure ll.--Cruciality of selected planning and research activities of agri— business managers as rated by the managers themselves, their superiors and their subordinates. 37 "Organizing the department's work efforts" not only appeared at the top of the Operations and Coordination activities cruciality list but it was given one of the highest cruciality ratings of any single activity per- formed by managers. Further study of Table 13 and Figure 12 bring to light the fact that certain activities which were indicated as being quite time consuming in Table 8 (p. 75) are not considered to be as crucial to success on the job as might have been assumed. As an example, "Using a telephone" was shown to have the greatest amount of time allocated to it, but in the cruciality ratings this item was far down the list. In a similar manner, "Completing routine paper work" was ranked sixth in time allocation but was perceived to be the least crucial of all the activities in this group and ranked fourteenth. The focal managers and the superiors were almost identical in their ratings of the activities in the Finance and Control category, Table 14 and Figure 13. With the exception of the last three items, the subordinates tended to not agree with the other two role set members in regards to ratings of specific activities. Another example of activity time allocation not necessarily being equal to cruciality of that activity is demonstrated in a compari— son of the ranking of "Establishing pricing margins and policies" and "Analyzing profit and loss statements" at the top of the cruciality ranking here but at the bottom of the time allocation group on Table 5 (p. 67). 88 anB nemem ecuuson mouueHQEou eamoem sueuneo ou ecoh Heuoemm mancmnmmm meuuu>uuem HeuceEunemep co mneunesopeec ou mcuunomem meeonmEe mo mmcH IueeE mcHuUSGCOO pce mcumcennm mcoHuommcenu mo meuuu can monooen mcheex oeuuoocm eacsone ecocmeaeu e ocumb uceEunemep ecu mo mmece>uuoeuue one ensuosnum ecu mauuwaecd mmuosv meaem n0\pce c0uu03ponm maaueez mpeec HMCOmeem ou COuuUSpOnm no muosponm mcuocmHem uceEuneer ecu new meuuunoHnm mcucmuaceume one mCHcHEneueQ mpoom mo 30am ecu mcumu>nemsm one mauccmam meemoHQEe ocean mCOuueHen mauanB mDOHCOEnmc maumoHe>eo unemme xnoz m.uceEunmmep ecu maunucemno .Q.m Gee: .Q.m cmez .Q.m new: .Q.m ceez euHmOQEOU euecupnocsm nounemsm .nmz Heoom nun>nuo< o mwflmfiHHUHOQSm nuecu one mnoflnemsm nuecu .me>aeeEecu mnemeceE ecu >9 peuen me mnemmceE mmecumsc lunme mo meuuu>uuoe coHuechnooo one mGOHuenemo peuoeaem uo wuuaeuosnoll.ma mqmae Composite - - - - Focal Manager d—D Superior D—D Subordinate 89 4.0 -L 3.5 -r . xnos nemsm . i. enuusou ocuuenmuou .r eumoem cueuneu Ou econ Houeeme mausmumum neuuu>uuun .Heuceaunsneo so eneuumsv lune: Ou Dcwunomem L mee>0~nle uo mosqueel rucuuoaucou one mauocsnut 1 unawuoemcenu no meauu ifi mam monouen vcnmeex 1. ocuuoocm eHndOnB i. ecocmeaeu e acumu ucefluuemec ecu LT mo nmece>wu0euue one ensuosnun ecu mcunhumum neuoso neaem no la \vce nouueoponm mcwueez mpee: i. Hesomeem ou newuesponm no muosponm unacceaem uceflunemeo ecu iv new meuuwnOMHQ usucmwu iceume one acucelheueo mooom no )oHu ecu wocumw>uemsm Use newscsum l mee>onfle i. occfle accuueueu gauche) mucusOShec ocuaoHeseo uncuwe xnoa m.uses luneaeo ecu ususmceuno 11 di- 200 ‘0' 1.5 «L 1.0 b 4 0 s 3 2.5 Figure 12.--Cruciality of selected Operations and coordination activities of aqri-businass managers as rated by the managers themselves, their superiors and their subordinates. 9O m.o >.m n.o m.m m.o H.v m.o m.m menucoee eofluuo necuo oce mnoueasoHeo cuwz oeuxnoz 0.n 0.0 m.0 0.m 0.0 0.m 0.0 0.0 munoomn 00m mnmuumn manumuono m.n ~.m N.n m.m n.n 0.0 m.n m.m 5onnoo an mconumnnm> new mnoHnemsm Eonu eoceneeao meansoem v.H o.m m.o m.H o.H o.v m.o o.m moeec eoce InsmCH mauaocec oce maucHEneueo n.n 0.N 0.0 n.m 0.n m.m m.n e.m menace namesoo mannecmm m.H m.m m.o >.H m.H m.m m.o o.m Honucoo Haon>em nemonm n0u maumcenn< o.H 5.m o.a m.m H.H m.m m.o n.m meoceCum HeuceEunemeo ocuonemen encuneoom cuHB mauueez m.o m.m m.o o.m m.o m.m 0.0 o.m mueoosc mcuneoenm 0.n 0.m 5.0 0.n 0.0 m.~ m.n 0.~ emummmnme on uoaceo coucB meuuuaucumcommen mcflaocem 0.0 0.n 0.0 0.n n.n n.m m.0 0.n unmannmame men no mmocmcnn ecu co xoeco emoao e oeumeex 0.0 m.n m.0 m.n 0.0 n.m m.0 e.n menonnoo uuoeno neEoumso ocucmuaceumm 0.n m.n 0.0 5.n n.n 0.m 0.0 m.n mumoo manumnmoo oce mensmum meHem mcwnmaecm e.o 5.H m.o H.m m.o m.a v.0 o.a muceE neueum mmoa oce uuuonm mounxaecc 0.0 0.n 0.0 5.n 0.n m.n n.n e.n menonnoo one maumneE mGHOHnQ mcucmuaceumm .Q.m Geez .Q.m Gee: .Q.m new: .Q.m Gee: nun>nuoe euumomaoo euecuonocom nOHnemcm .nmz Heoom .meuecuonocsm nuecu one enounemsm nuecu .me>aemEecu mnemecee ecu ac oeuen we mnemeceE mmeCumsQIHnme mo meuun>euoe Honucoo oce eocecuu oeuoeaem mo wueaefloanIl.va mqmUuuom nu unanue Inne> nOu enouneosm EOnu eoneneeuo onunsoem ”if. i. moeen eonensmnu menu Ionec one onunuEneueo it meunoE xnemfioo onuuonez i. Honunoo auonxem neQOnQ nOw annonenn< meonennu iv ueuneEuneQeo onuoneoen mnouneazm cue: onuuee: 1r muemosc oneneaend oeuemeueo ec uonneo conc3 meuu luaucumnommen annuone: _ 1.. “ ~ uneEuneQeo i. ecu mo meonenne ecu no M xoeco emoHo e mnudeex _ menonaoo unoeno neEOumao onucmnuceumm lw mumoo onuuenemo one mensouu meuem onunxuend . . 1. muceEeueum mmou , one uuuonm onu~>uen< / .//dfi m . . a. menOnHOQ one mnnmneE onuonna onucmuuceumm L. + « n a u 0 S 0 5 0 5 0 O . . O . . O 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 their superiors and their Figure 13.--Cruciality of selected finance and control activities of agri- business managers as rated by the managers themselves, subordinates. 92 As has often been postulated, effective communication is perceived to be very crucial to successful job perfor- mance on the part of agri-business managers. Table 15 and Figure 14 show this to be true by locating "Learning how to better communicate with and understand employees" at the top of the Personal Demands and Improvement group. There appeared to be a relatively high degree of inter- positional consensus concerning the cruciality of activi- ties in this category. "Checking invoices and purchase orders," "Checking the condition of equipment, buildings and property," and "Determining items to be ordered and reordered" all received identical ratings in Table 16 and Figure 15, Purchasing and Inventory, and therefore must be considered equally crucial in the minds of the respondents. It would appear that the results here are not entirely compatible with those mentioned earlier in regard to the tendency of the managers to assign certain routine duties to subordinates and to reserve management-type duties for themselves. It would seem that the first and third items mentioned above could be considered as routine activities which any re- Sponsible person might usually handle. However, the focal managers apparently believe that these are functions which they must perform and which are quite crucial to the job. Comparison of this group of activities, as rated for cruciality, with the same group as ranked according to 93 H a o.m H.H m.m H.H m.m H.H m.m mmenumnc eouuuo no eEoc ue mnuxnoz m.n 0.0 m.n 0.m m.0 m.m m.n v.0 ennunm>o mcnxnoz n.n e.m n.n m.m 0.n e.m m.n m.m ncmnsou ecu nOn no enounennm now econ Heavenm onuoo 0.~ N.m 0.m 0.N nOHnmnsm se Eonu eoneumwmme Henomnen onuuueo m.o n.m m.o m.m m.o ~.m m.o m.m meoneneunoo one mmnHueeE eoenu mnwoneuun o.H m.m o.H m.m m.o n.m H.H e.m meonenemnoo one monuueeE mnunuenu HeEnOu onuoneuun o.H w.m o.H e.m m.o m.m m.H o.m noneeEeo one eonuuuue .mmeno mo muwcec HenOmnen HeoOE mnuuucncxm H.n v.m m.n m.~ 0.0 e.m m.n m.m chnueouncsn eeenu ocueeem o.m m.H m.N H.m wefiufl>uuoe n30 >5 mnunneam 0.0 0.~ 5.0 0.n 0.n n.m 0.n n.m nemeces e we mmene>uuoewue n30 >5 onuuenae>m 0.0 0.n 5.0 e.n 0.0 m.m 0.0 n.m mmmnOHQEm no mncnmnnsoo one mnowumemmnm ou mnuneumflq 0.0 0.n 0.0 5.n 0.n 0.m 5.0 0.n unmannmnme as no mnenos ecu e>onnEH ou 30c mnunHEneueo 0.0 5.n m.0 5.n 5.0 m.n 0.n 0.n namesoo man one cenunmon men one: Iou eonuuuue e>uuumom e onunoHe>eo m.o o.a o.o m.H m.o n.a o.u e.a meeonmEe oneumneonn one cuu3 eueounnEEoo neuuec ou 30c mnunneeq .o.m neez .o.m neez .o.m neez .o.m nee: nun>nuoe euumomeou euenuonocnm noHnennm .nmz Heoom .meuenuonocnm nuecu one mnoHnenne nflecu .me>HemEecu mnemeneE ecu mc oeuen me mnemenee weenumnc nunme mo meuun>uuoe uneEe>onnEu one moneEeo HenOmnen oeuoeaee mo muuaewonnoll.ma manna 94 Focal manager ¢——-—o Superior Composite o——————438ubordinate 4.0 ‘t 3.5 k 8 0 e 3 2.5 «P seesussc sedans no sac us 9.3308 ssuuusso unease: aneoloe ecu use so encuueQSs ecu econ neueems unwon sequence ml luau eons uueuees Ascosuen uswuueo seensueucoo one sunwueel eoenu undoneuun eeeceneucoe one sunuueel one nensnu nuance mangoes»: noneeleo one eosuuuue .ueeuo mo euucec Hence unos noses ocnunAnsxu aconnuonnnas eosuu unuosen neuuu>uuoe can a! unannsam neoenel e as seene>uueeuue can an unuuesus>m neea0amae mo nunuendaoe one encuueemmss ou onwneueuq unefiunemeo a! mo euenol ecu 090nm lie ou soc onucwlneueo accused ecu one cauu tuned ecu onesou eosuuuue e>uuueom s ocuaoae>eo neeaoamle oneueneons one cud: eueeunsflloo neuuec ou soc ununneea Figure 14.--Cruciality of selected personal demands and improvement activities of agri-business managers as rated by the managers themselves, their superiors and their subordinates. 95 mumEoumso pow mmflocmnoumE Hmwommm mcflumouo mummnm moaum ocm mmdmonumo mumflaaasm mcflwosum mumuumsvommc :uH3 mmoflum Mo mmflMOpcm>cw .mumouo mcflEuHmcou muamEuummmo umguo Luflz mumouo mcflumcflouoou :mEmmHmm o» mcflcmumflq mucmEmflcm ocm mumono mcflEoocfl mcflonmmmu mumflammsm mcfluomucou mouoomu >u0ucm>ca ou wmflocmnonme no mmflamasm 3mm mcfloo¢ ow>flmowu mmflocmnoume new mxomno mcflcmflm u0\ocm mo pmflmomu mcflmwfluumu mumHH >u0ucm>Cfl mcflwwflum> ocm mcflxomzu mmflammsm ocm mmflocwnogme mo mmmuoum ummoug may new mcflmcmuu< mmflpflaflomm cam mmcflwaesn .ucma Imflsww mo muflmmwu now ocflmcmuuo omumouomu ocm omumouo on on mEmuH mcflcHEumumo huummoum ocm mmcfloaflsn eucmE Imflsvm m0 cofiufiocoo map mcflxomnu mumouo mmmgousm ocm mmoflo>afl mcfixomsu .D.m cows .D.m C602 .D.m com: .Q.m cmmz mufimomEoo mumcflouogsm Hoflummsm .umz Hmoom mufl>fluom Hflmgu Ucm muOHHwQSm Hflmgu .mmumcflouonsm .mm>ammEmL# mummmcmE wLu >9 owumu mm mummmcme mmmcflmsnlflumm mo mmHuH>Huom wocmcmucflma >nouzm>cfl ocm mafimmzousm omuomamm mo wuHHMHUSHUII.wH mqmde 96 Composite — - -‘- Focal Manager Q—O Superior 4.0-!!- 3.5" 3.0-4b— b d 5 s 2 1.5—0— 1.04» mueEou nmao no“ mmaocmnu IuoE Heaoomm @cfiumouo uoocm ovaun one monooaeumu mumAHQQSm ocfimosum mumuumswoew: cua3 movaum uo mmAHOuco>cd .muoouo mcfifiufimcou mucus qummwo umcuo Lua3 muwouo mcfluecMouoou cmEmeem ou anacoumflq mucoeaflcm oco mumouo ocHEOUCa moaoumumu mquHmaam moauocucou monoumu xuOu Icm>Cfi ou omflocmnoume no mmflamasm 3mc @cHood oo>fioomu mmaocmnouoe uOu mxoono mcficoam u0\ocm wo umfimomu moa>wauumu mumfla auOuco>Ca vcflmwfiuw> ocm mcfixomcu mwaaamsw one omflococo mums mo mocMOum uoaoum ecu ecu mcflmcmuu< mmaufiaauou ocm anew noafidn .ucwfiaasvm mo muaeamu u0u ocHocmuud omuwouo non one owumouo on Cu mEmufi mcflcHEuouoo >uumaoum ocm mood toaasn .ucweawsum mo cofiuaocoo ecu meaxoocu mumouo onerousa one mooao>cfl ocflxoonu Figure lS.--Crucia1ity of selected purchasing and inventory maintenance activities their superiors and their of aqri-business managers as rated by the managers themselves, subordinates. .L‘nh... ~— 97 time allocation (Table 8, p. 75) indicates that many of the time consuming activities are not considered crucial activities by the respondents, i.e., "Checking the condi- tion of equipment, buildings and property" was ranked at the top of the cruciality list but at the bottom of the time allocation list. Table 17 and Figure 16 show the relative importance of the various Personnel Supervision and Evaluation activi- ties as rated by role set members. Although both the focal managers and the superiors perceived "Checking and evalu- ating work done by subordinates" as the most crucial to the job, the subordinates placed this activity far down the list. On the other hand, the subordinates felt that "Re- solving employee grievances" should be the most crucial of this category, while the focal manager and superiors ranked it quite low. There was complete agreement relative to placing "Filling in for absent employees" and "Advising employees on personal problems" at the bottom of the cruciality ratings for this category. Although the Public Relations and Community Affairs group of activities was considered to be one of the least crucial by the respondents, the individual activity "Im- proving internal communications and public relations" was given the highest rating of all 112 items by each of the role set groups. Table 18 and Figure 17 also show that "Keeping in close touch with public opinion" to also be Fifi.“ 98 r:-1;1::aaqnww; “.0 n.m m.o a.m 5.0 m.m 0.0 o.a mamnnoun denomumm no mem>onEe mnHmH>o4 H.H o.m m.o m.m o.H o.v a.o m.m mmmsoHnsm ucmmnm see an mannnam N.H m.m m.o m.m o.H m.m m.H o.m mnofluenuflm eeonmEe mnfiouemou , muofluwmsm nuflz mnflueoHnSEEou H.H m.m H.H m.m H.H o.m o.a m.m mounomooum one meflowaom xnemeoo mnflnfleamxm m.a m.m m.o m.a o.H m.m H.H m.m mmone>eflum eeonQEe mnH>H0mem v.a m.m H.H o.m m.H m.m o.H m.m A.oue .mnoflueoe> .eoneusmnHV mEenm Iona pfimenmn meonmEm mnHHonem m.a o.m a.o N.m N.H m.m m.H m.m mmmsoHnsm smanoun meaneamm N.a m.m 5.0 n.a m.H m.m m.o m.m mnOfluHonoo mnflxnoz one wuemem .nuaeen emwoamEm now mnflow>oum o.H ~.m m.o m.m 5.0 m.m H.H o.~ mmmsoHQEm manna: one muneoflamme non mnflBmH>neunH m.o m.m m.o o.m 0.0 m.H H.H m.m meuenfiouonsm mo nonH>uean uoeuflo o.n H.m o.H o.m o.H m.m a.o a.a mmmsoHQEm 3m: mcacnmue o.H m.n m.o e.m 0.0 m.H o.H a.H mmuecaeuonsm an enoo xuoz mnfluesHe>e one mnflxoeno m.o m.a 5.0 m.H m.o m.a m.o o.m muenuo 0» xuoz mnenmamme ecm monuauoHHn ooh mannmaanmumm 5.0 m.a 5.0 o.m m.o m.H n.o o.m mnmuos no onwmmex one meeonmEe mnflue>fluoz .Q.m Semi .Q.m new: .O.m new: .D.m cemz mua>fluon euHmOQEOU euenflouoosm Hoeuemsm .Hmz Heoom .mepenflononsm Hflmnu one mHoHHoQSm Hflmnp .me>aemEeLu muemeneE mop >3 ooueu me muemenee mmenflmsnnflume mo mmflufl>fluoe noflueSHe>o one noflmfl>ueQ3m HennOmueQ oeuoeaom mo xuflaeflonuoll.na mumme 99 Composite - - - — Focal Manager ¢———e Superior a——————438ubordinate I 5‘» .ii‘. if mEeHnoum aenOmnem no mee>oHaEe onflme>o< it meeonQEe.unemne sou as meanest f mnoeuesuem eeonmEe onfiouemeu nuodueasm nu“: onuueownsfieou rmeuserONQ one weaveaoa >neQEoo onwnfleaaxm ll meune>eaum ee>oHQEe mnw>HOmem A.oue .mn0«ue0e> .eone lusmnwv mEeuooun yew Ienen eeonmEe onwaone: I r mee>onEe Eeanoud endaone: mnofiueonoo mnwxuoz 1 one >ueuem .nuaeen ee>oaQEe new gnwow>0um meeonQEe weaken one muneu league now onMBea>ueunH ' r meuenflouonsm uo nona>uern uueuwn I meeonaEe Ben onwnweua MOUQC nT Ifiouonsm xn enoo xuoz onwuesae>e one onwxoenu 1 muenuo ou xuoz one unmemme one meeuquOAun non madameanmumm r eaeuoE as onfimeex one mee>oHQEe onwue>wuox 4.0dh F a 5 I 3 3.04» — d S s 2 2.0-4- 1.5qp 1.04} Figure 16.--Cruciality of selected personnel supervision and evaluation activities of agri-business managers as rated by the managers themselves, their superiors and their subordinates. 100 5.0 m.m m.o m.m 5.0 n.m m.o m.m mumuuoemu Oueeu u0\one Hememmzen cufl3 mnuueez H.H m.m m.o H.m 5.0 H.q N.H H.m mucuumwucmmuo munmuuumno on mnofluscuuunoo aneane mnuwuuocuse m.o ~.m a.o o.m n.o H.m o.H e.m emecue xuucSEEOU ec ou meeonQEe mnflmeunoonm o.a H.m a.o m.m m.o m.m N.H m.m mumuumseemmn ou muneEEoo ueEoumso onuuqumneHB o.a o.m a.o H.m H.H H.m o.H a.m mmcuumnumm ouunsn um amusemem m.o m.m m.o o.m m.o m.m o.a m.m meuufi>uuoe eou> Iuem wuunsEEoo nH mnfluemuouuuem o.H m.m o.a m.m a.o m.m H.u a.m musuusuum umzon xuucsasoo ecu cuHB muoeunoo mnHmoHe>eo o.H e.m m.o o.m H.H n.m m.o m.m muomfloun HeooH nu >nemEoo ecu mnflunemeumem H.H N.N o.u H.N m.o o.m m.o m.u mumeumuzo sues mmou>uem u0\ece muonooum mnemEoo unoce mnflxaee o.H H.m 0.0 a.H H.H m.m a.o H.m woman NEmerson mnu :0 ocuxomno a.o o.m 5.0 m.H m.o a.u n.u m.m nuance ueEnmnoo ecu cues mnOHueHen mnH>OHQEH mo moocueE manHEueueo m.o m.H m.o H.H 5.0 ¢.m H.H H.m mueEoumso >Qmecns ou oneneumfiq a.o m.a e.o m.a o.u a.a m.o H.N acucuno euacsm cuuz cosou emoao nu mnHQeem m.o m.a 0.0 m.H o.H o.H m.o o.a mnoHueHeu euacnm one mnoflueofln38600 Henueunu mnH>OHQEH .D.m ceez .Q.m Gee: .Q.m Gee: .Q.m Coez xuu>uuo< euumomeoo euenflouocsm uofluemsm .umz Heoom .meuenflouocSm uflecu one muoHHeQSm uflecu .me>HemEecu muemeneE ecu xc oeueu me muemeneE mmenflmsclflnme mo meuuu>fluoe muflemme wuflnsEfioo one mnoHueHeu eflacsm oeuoefiem mo xuflaeflosuoll.ma mqm<5 101 ‘I eueuuomeu Ouoeu u0\one somemesen cu“! unuussl I l. encuueuunemuo once .e quuece ou unauuscuuunoo \ unenloo unueuuocund . osonul . u o + huunnlloe sc ou eeeaOAGIs unuueueoonu I . A eusuussv Ioeec ou eunelloo ueIouese mnuuualsneuh I 09 -+—-_~4~ eunuuecuem unease an onus-one eswuu>quee o . tr ecu>uee auqnnl \ neon nu onuueauo«uuem \ a . ensuesuue heron r I . e . l- nudes-loo ecu cud: I I I eueeunoe unaaode>en .o . .I I I I I. L. euoenoum deuce nu Anna - . /////, // nice ecu onuuneeeunen . lbIIVAV // L unsoueuso cud} e s a meow>uee u0\ons euosooum unenlOu unoce mnwxaea 1 euelu unenloo on» no unuxoocu nuance nelnenoo ecu cues r encuuedsu onu>ouolu no neon».- sauce-house r eullousse mamecns ou ununeueun . consume nuance a: cooOu eeOne nu on“ agony-Hen unease I; one enoaueeanslloe Henueunu mnwboumlu riln-ztlltft=a-é-It, 1- ‘.Oee mo mmene>fluoewme onuuenae>m v.u ~.m o.H m.m o.H m.m m.a m.m mmoamzouum uo\ece mnunueu mueEoumno onu>oummn o.a H.m m.o m.~ m.o m.m m.a o.m mucm>m auscuuosonn Heuoemm mnflmneuue one mnfinneam n.a o.m H.u m.~ m.o q.m m.n o.m mmnem Hmuomnm cu accumumme H.H m.m o.a n.m m.o m.m m.H n.~ meanoecom one mEenmoum mnumfluue>oe mnunneam H.H m.~ 5.0 v.m o.n N.m ~.H m.m mucunmnsm ou muuomeu meaem onuuuuecnm m.n he.m m.n e.m m.n m.m H.H o.m muoseonn no mmuecmnonms mauounm o.n m.~ 5.0 s.~ o.n m.H H.H m.m mumsoumso on mauxnmu no mauummuo N.H N.N o.a m.m m.H v.~ o.H m.H mueouo ueEOumno onuuuoemxm m.o H.m m.o o.m m.o o.m o.H m.~ uuoeuo uefioumno mnuxoeco H.n H.N 5.0 m.n H.H m.m H.H a.~ mucumHneoo nmsoumso meaneamm a.o H.m 5.0 m.n H.H m.~ a.o H.~ mmswucnomu mnflmuonecouefi Heuou mnuuwaenn n.o .m.a n.o o.n “.0 e.u m.o m.n mensemoone one meuouaom meHem mnflcmuaceumm .O.m nee: .Q.m nee: .o.m nee: .Q.m neez muu>uuo< euumomfiou euenflouocnm uofluemnm .umz Heoom .meuenflouocnm nflecu one muoflnemnm uuecu .me>aemEecu muemeneE ecu ac oeueu me muemeneE mmenflmncluume mo meuuu>fluoe mnflmflonecouee oeuoeaem mo muflaeflonuvll.ma mqmne Focal Manager o—-—-—-—-o Superior Composite D——-——-—-G Subordinate 104 +— 3.5 3.0 >eameuo new eeaonecouel onuueaeua one mnuuueaem nOuuoaoua one onunuuue>oe we meene>uuoeuue onuuence>m .4. i- meonezoaae u0\one enunueu mueEOumno mnu>ouea< eune>e 1y HenoHuosouQ Heuoeae unuuneuue one ununnean neaem Heaven» nu unuueuenn meanoecum one maeuDOua onumuune>oe unannean muuoaeu meaee onwuuuscsm l . . -r mucuuemne cu ” _ c l euosoOum no . emuonecouee mnuUuun mueEOunso Ou onuxHeu no mnwueeuo eueouo ueEOumao onuuuoenxm .. uuoeuu A ueEoumno onuxoeco 1. munueameoo ueEOumno onuaonem mesguncoeu unuewoneco Ines Heuou onwu>aenn 1r meunoeuoum one eeuOAHoa meaem mnucnumceunm 4» t L Figure 18.--Cruciality of selected merchandising activities of agri-business managers as rated by the managers themselves, their superiors and their subordinates. 105 TABLE 20.--The most cruc1al individual actiVities of agri-business managers as reflected in the composite responses of the managers themselves, their superiors and their subordinates (mean rating of 2.0 or higher). I. II. IV. VI. Mean Rating: 1.5 ——Organizing the department's work effort --1mproving internal communications and public relations -—Establishing sales poliCies and procedures Mean Rating: 1.6 --Establishing pricing margins and policies —-Learning how to better communicate with and understand employees Mean Rating: 1.7 --Developing harmonious working relations among employees --Analyzing profit and loss statements --Developing a positive attitude toward the position and the company Mean Rating: 1.8 --Analyzing sales figures and operating costs --Establishing customer credit policies --Determining how to improve the morale of the department Mean Rating: 1.9 --Looking for ideas to improve performance --Determining the responsibilities of employees --Determining and studying consumer demand --Planning and supervising the flow of goods --Keeping a close check on the finances of the department --Listening to suggestions and complaints of employees --Motivating employees and keeping up morale --Establishing job priorities and assigning work to others --Checking and evaluating work done by subordinates —-Listening to unhappy customers Mean Rating: 2.0 --Establishing standards for the department or area of work --Determining and establishing priorities for the department o-Balancing products or production to seasonal needs --Hand1ing responsibilities which cannot be delegated --Eva1uating my own effectiveness as a manager --Planning my own activities --Checking invoices and purchase orders --Checking the condition of equipment, buildings and property 100 a true perspective of the agri-busincss manager and his position is to be secured, then this third criterion of significance, ideal behavior, must be taken into account. It must be considered along with time allocation rankings and cruciality ratings of the focal manager's real be- havior or activities. Part B of the Agri-Business Management Survey (see Appendix A) was constructed so that the respondents rated the specified activities from one to five according to their judgment as to whether the focal manager should or should not perform in a certain manner. A rating of one indicated a strong positive reaction and a rating of five a strong negative reaction. This represented an effort to elicit from the members of the role set their perceptions as to the "ideal manager" and his position. According to the composite mean rating of all re- spondents, Table 21 and Figure 19, Operations and Coordi- nation proved to be the most important category of role expectation activities. However, three categories were very close in mean scores. Likewise, the fourth, fifth and sixth categories were very close with only .06 points separating the scores. A rather surprising response placed the Merchandising category near the bottom of the list. Such a rating did, however, correspond to the low ranking of this group of activities in the cruciality section (Table 10, p. 80). 107 m oo.m m o.m m h.m m m.m muHmMmm muflcsafioo cam mcoflumamu owansm a am.~ a m.m a m.m a m.m madmancmnoumz m mH.m o m.m o m.m v o.m mocmcmuchE wuoucm>cfl paw mcflmwnousm m na.m m H.N m m.m m H.m coaumsam>m cam coflmfi>nmmsm HmCCOmHmm a MH.N a H.N v m.m m H.m noummmmu mam mcflccmam m no.m m H.m m m.m m m.H Houucoo can mocmcflm m oo.m a m.a m H.m m o.m ucmEm>oudEH paw mesmEmU Hmc0mumm H mm.H m o.m H m.H H m.H coflumcflouooo cam macaumummo l [it 'I} r. ’1‘ "b FkL} P‘I” r} y} ? it ’ L b? I y I?” ’[IF’I F Ibr.’ Ir'Ll xcmm com: xcmm cmmz xcmm com: xcmm cam: l -L r! mmsouo wocmpdeOU muflmomEou muwcflouonsm Hoflummsm .Hmz Hmoom .mmumcflouonsm uflmnu cam mHoHMmQSm uwmgu .mummmcma HMUOM map >3 Um>flmonmm mm mocmummEoo Hmflummmcmfi mo mmmum uohmE mo mcflumu coflumuommxm maomll.am mam¢9 108 Composite - - - -Focal Manager 0—9 Superior O--—O Subordinate 4.0 1— —-1r- 3.5 ‘1 I . 1“]! u! IA! 3.0 II 1111:: 11‘ M4 b A 5 2. 0 o 2 muamwwm huwcsaaoo can mcoauoamu nudged mcwmflncsnoumz mocmcmqumE wuoucm>cw can mcwmmnousm dewucoam>o can sawwfl>ummsm chc0mumm noummmwu can mewccmam Houucou one mocmcflm ucmfim>0umew paw mocmewo HocOmumm nodustouooo can mcoHumquO Figure 19.--Role expectation rating of major areas of l competence as perceived by the focal managers, their superiors and their subordinates. manageria 109 In fact, generally speaking, the rank order of role ex- pectation and that of cruciality were very similar. Equally surprising was the interpositional con- sensus exhibited by the role set members which resulted in very similar rankings of the eight categories. In addition, and unlike the cruciality ratings, the levels of the mean ratings were almost identical for the focal managers, the superiors and the subordinates. Attention should also be called to the striking agreement among the role definers in the following eight tables (Tables 22 through 30). In nearly every instance, they all ranked the same items in the top three places in each category and similarly agreed as to which activities belonged at the bottom of each. Table 22 and Figure 20, which are concerned with the Operations and Coordination functions of the focal managers, indicate that full jurisdiction over subordinates, an open line of communications with the firm's human hierarchy, and familiarity with company policies and regulations are considered by the respondents to be important items of role behavior for managers. These same respondents felt that being able to make special commitments for the home office was a relatively unimportant function and therefore placed this item at the bottom of the category ranking. Note should be made of the rating given the top item "Have full jurisdiction over the number and work of llO 5.0 H.N 0.0 o.m m.o m.H 5.0 m.H 5.0 m.H h.o m.H 0.0 m.H m.o m.H m.o m.N v.0 v.m 0.0 H.N m.a H.N 5.0 m.H v.0 v.H n.o m.H 5.0 m.H m.o H.H eaem wo mEueu HmEuoc Gene Henuo ou evawmo eEon uHEEoo ou.eanm em oeBOHHow ewe mensoeooum one mcoHumH5meu .meHSH Ham eusm exez meflufl>fluom was mo cemflmumme meuecHUHOQSm one muoflueQSm deem Eeep uceEemmcmE m.Euflw ecu mo puma Hemmeucfl am we ceouemeu em eueuemo museEuuemec Hecuo CH muemmceE 30: o» coHuceuue emoHe wed mee>onEe Eoum one EHHM ecu Eouw coflumuemooo Use >uam>0a uoemxm mucfiom3ea> cue mcoflueasmeu .mefloflaom mceQEoo Ham nuflz HMHHHEMM em meuecflUHOQSm one muoHHeQSm on mcoflueoHCDEEoo mo ecfla memo cm deem meuecflouonom mo xuo3 Use uenEdc ecu ue>o coflueflomflusn Hasw e>em .Q.m Cmez enamomaou .D.m Gee: .D.m Gee: euecflouonsm uofluedsm .D.m Cmez .Hmz Hmoom sufl>fluo< .meumcflouonzm Hflecu cam muofluemsm uflegu .me>HemEe£u muemmcma esp >n beams me meflufl>fluom coflumcflcuooo one mcoflpmnemo on e>HumHeu muemecme mmecflmsnlflumm wo Hofl>esen eaou ceuoemeI|.mm mqmds ‘9' 1141 ger O--438ubordinato Composite - - - - Focal Mana ¢——o Superior J... Kaly eaeu we naueu aeauoc can» segue 0» eoaeuo eaoc ufiesoo ou eace em pesoHHOH eue meusp leooua a anewusaooeu .meaau Has ease ecu: newufl>wu0e mac 1 no vemweudmu neuecapuo scam one uuofiuemom aeex Bee» uceaeuecea e.Euwu ecu uo uuem deuce» tea as me pepummeu em eumuemo mucefieuemeo r uecuo :w muemecee 30c ou sawuceuue emoHu wen mee>o~mae scum 1 one Shaw ecu Eouu acaue luemooo a menaon ueemxm mucwom3ea> can unawuoa lameu .mewowaom hceQEoo Has cue: unwaflseu em “ aeuecwouocon a encased I van 0» aco«uuowcsaeoo «o ecHH :emo as meex neuesflouocom no xuo3 one season ecu ue>o noduowpmwuon gnaw e>om 4.0" 3.5«r r q 5 o 2 2.0 1v- Figure 20.--Expected role behavior of agri—business managers relative to operations and coordination activities as rated by the managers themselves, their superiors and their subordinates. 112 subordinates" by the focal managers. This rating of 1.1 suggests that this is considered the most important of all of the sixty-eight items in this section by the managers themselves. Again there was complete interpositional agreement as to which items should be ranked first and second in the Personal Demands and Improvement category; Table 23 and Figure 21. In fact the top ranked item, "Keep an open mind——prevent emotions from influencing decisions" was given one of the highest ratings by the subordinates. There appeared to be a strong negative feeling on the part of all respondents regarding the value of managers spending a great deal of time with routine office work. This was exhibited in Table 24 and Figure 22, which had to do with Finance and Control functions, wherein this item was ranked at the bottom of the list. Not only was the composite mean rating the lowest of all sixty-eight items, but both superiors and subordinates were in agree- ment with the managers in their ratings of this particular function. No one would argue with the belief that the agri- business manager should "Continually search for new and better methods of Operation,' as expressed in the positive ratings given this item by the reSpondents in Table 25 and Figure 23. Likewise, the development of long range goals would generally be considered as a desirable attribute for 113 mo. A As m.o «N.N 0.0 m.N m.o m.N 5.0 O.N 0.0 m.H m.o m.H 0.0 *m.H m.o h.H m.o ¥V.H m.o n.m m.o m.H 5.0 h.H m.o o.m m.o m.H m.o m.H m.o o.m m.o m.H m.o n.a uceEuummeo ecu CH eeonmEe >ue>e mo con ecu ow ou eace em mcoflumoflacod epmuu ceeu cam mmcHueeE eceuu oceuud coHumHmHmeH eumum cam HeooH mo ummeucm deem eoceuuemxe uceEemmceE m50u>eum cmc e>em coHuHmom mucu ocuESmme ou HOuud measumuu useEemmcmE e>ueoem uoceeEeo one wmeup .mcHEooum ou mm uceEuummec ecu qu eHmmee cm uem muosooum one mmecumsc ecu mo emoe IHBOQx HecOmued eumcmo ou e>uuum ueceumHH boom m em mcoflmfloep masocesHmcH Eoum mCOquEe uce>eHQ|I©cHE memo cm deem .D.m ceez .Q.m Gee: .Q.m Gee: .Q.m See: euumomEOU eue2u©uocsm Hofluemsm .umz Heoom >uu>uuo< .meumcuouocom Huecu one mHOHuerm Huecu .me>HemEecu muemmcee ecu >c oeueu we meaufl>fluoe uceEe>oumEH one moceEep fiecomued ou e>HueHeu muemmcee mmecflmscluume wo u0a>ecec eaou ceuoemxmls.mm mammB Composite - - ' Focal Manager o——-o Superior D——O Subordinate 114 3.0‘r r ‘3‘.|1 [.411 1r uceEuuemeo.ecu ‘hu r. aw eeonmEe aue>e mo //// now on» on ou «and mm Iii lir/ #gw/ \. mucuueo g. s ,l nuacsa enouu ween one / mmcflueee epeuu pceuu< AW . n.// .¢ co«us~nuuea eueua one \UYAMN// / HmooH uo umeeuce meex ////H/D / x I eocefiuemxe uceEemean A$//// ./ H .. m50u>eum vac e>em / /. r.///. / coHuumom aucu mew /mr .Mg insomme ou sauna measusuu I m uceEeweceE e>ueoem \ uoceeEep was mmeuo .msw . . . r. IEoouo ou no uceeuuemep JVW/ _ ecu u0m eameexe so uem V .u ”n0 -e muosoOHQ was mmecwmsc /. mu ecu wo empea3ocx Hence 1 _ teem eumoms ou e>uuum . ,r av iv ueceumua 0005 e em / /, \; mucumuoeo meanneSHmcu . . .,: scum encuuoee uce>eua Inpcfle cemo as meex 2.5 t 2.0 .5 1.0 t Figure 21.--Expected role behavior of agri-business managers relative to personal demands and improvement activities as rated by the managers themselves, their superiors and their subordinates. _§_. ....- 115 xuoz eoummo enuuoou cuuz eEuu mo Heeo ueeum e onemm mnflmuonecoueE one mnumuuue>oe mo mHeuneEeonSM ecu oneumueono muneEeueum Heuonenuw euxaene one euedeum moucue mmenflmnc mo memecm HHe oneumueonD mumoo mnuueuemo u0\one nofluooooum mo Houunoo eESmmc uneEuuemeo ecu wo eoneEMOmuem ecu uOm eacumnOQmeu aaeuuune em uuoeuo one Heuumeo wo em: uoeuuoo ecu oneumueonb eueo mmenumnc ueudueunu one enwaene ou eHce em meeonmEe muu one Euum ecu nee3uec xnua mex ecu me oe3eu> em .O.m nee: .D.m nee: .Q.m nee: euumOQEoo euenuouocsm HOauemsm o.H m.m o.H m.H v.0 m.H n.o o.m m.o m.a o.H m.H 5.0 v.a v.0 m.a o.o v.H .Q.m neez .umz Heoom >uu>uuom .meuenuouocnm Huecu one muoHueQSm uflecu .me>HemEecu mnemeneE ecu mc oeueu me meuuu>fluoe Houunoo one eonenflm ou e>flueaeu muemeneE mmenumncluume mo uoH>ecec eHou oeuve®xmul.vm mumme JJlG Composite - - - -Focal Manager d——-° Superior D—O Subordinate 4.5l 3.04b ij enuunou cud: eluu no Heeo ueeuu s oneam unueuonecouml one 17 unueuuue>oe no naeunea neonnu ecu oneueueono 4T auneseueue Heuenenuu eaaaene one euemeum LT acucue aaenuanc mo neoecn Hue oneueueonn euaou it mnuueuemo u0\one nauuoso noun uo nonunoo efinaae uneauuemeo ecu I: no eonesHOMuem ecu new eflcuunomeeu haeuuune em u._"oe.ue 1T one Heuumeo no em: ueeuuoo ecu oneueueonn . M L. eueo auenuunn ueumueunu 1 one enaaene ou once ea c _ neeuoHale auu one u. Esau ecu neesuec xnua W uex ecu ae oeseu> em x3: 833 Figure 22.--Expected role behavior of agri-business managers relative to finance and control activities as rated by the managers themselves, their superiors and their subordinates. 117 m.o e.m m.o m.m 0.0 m.m 0.0 H.m mouueo ecu nH eEuu ecu mo umOE onedm m.o m.m m.o e.m e.o e.~ o.n m.~ unmanon>me one mcuaamna Amvuosooum Ben nu euemHOAuuem m.o m.m o.n e.m m.o n.m o.n m.m mmmsoHQEm no mefluwaucflmnommeu Hae enHEueueo m.o ~.~ m.o m.m v.0 H.~ m.n H.m mucuumasm no Hm>onnoe ecu now mneam mnwueuemo euemeum n.o m.H m.o e.n 0.0 H.m m.o m.n muoseonn m>uuupmmeoo cuu3 ueHHHEem one mo eue3e em >.o n.a 5.0 o.m e.o q.H m.o n.u anew ecu now mnonmsomuo mnflnneam uneEemeneE nu oeosHonH em 0.0 e.n 0.0 m.n m.o m.n 5.0 e.n unmannmnme may see mnmom one mneam emneu mnoa moae>eo a.o m.n m.o a.n 5.0 e.n 0.0 m.n acuumnmno no meonume nmuumn one 3en new coueem mfiaennuunou .o.m new: .o.m new: .o.m new: .o.m new: >uu>uuo< euumomEoo euenuouocnm HOuuemnm .umz Heoom .meuenuouocnm Hflecu one muouuemsm uflecu .me>HemEecu muemeneE ecu xc oeueu we meuuu>uuoe coueemeu one mnfinneam ou e>uueHeH muemeneE mmenflmsclflume mo uoH>ecec eaou oeuoemeII.mN mqmda Focal Manager 4-——-O Superior Canpos its O-———-a Subordinate JJLB ecummo ecu nu eEuu ecu mo umoe onenm unefimoHe>eo one unannean Aevuocooum 3en nu eueQuOHuuem -7 meeonnEe mo meuuuauc numnoaneu Hue enusueueo mucuuemnm . mo He>oumne ecu yaw mneam onuueuemo euemeum I euooooua e>uuuueneoo cuu3 neuauseu one no eueze em Scum ecu 4 now encummnemwo onunneam uneEemeneE nu oeonaonu em uneEuueaeo a. ecu qu maeom one mneam eoneu mnoH mode>eo nodueuemd mo !. moocueE ueuuec one 3en now coueee waaennuunou Figure 23.--Expected role behavior of agri-business managers relative to planning and research activities as rated by the managers themselves, their superiors and their subordinates. 119 any manager. The latter was ranked second among the Planning and Research functions listed in this category. The respondents also seem to prefer an active, involved manager because they relegated the "Spend most of the time in the office" to the lowest ranking with a quite negative rating. The expected role behavior of the focal managers relative to Personnel Supervision and Evaluation is shown in Table 26 and Figure 24. The rankings indicate that the motivation and training of employees should be of primary importance, but that the holding of regular employee meet- ings is probably not a requirement. The very negative rating given to the last item also suggests that being a pal to subordinates is not the way to motivate for effective performance. There appeared to be little difference between the tOp five items in Table 27 and Figure 25 as indicated by the relatively close composite ratings. In this category of Purchasing and Inventory Maintenance the respondents did feel that the utilization of buildings and space was the most important function of the ideal manager and that the taking of inventory personally was the least important of the items listed. Table 28 and Figure 26 display the relative impor- tance accorded the listed Merchandising activities or functions by the various members of the role set. 120 ll m.o n.m m.o m.m ~.H m.m o.H m.m meemonEe ou Hem e em m.o o.m m.o m.m m.o o.m m.o o.m mmnuueeE eemonEe neanmeu oHom o.H H.m 5.0 H.m ~.H N.m m.o m.n moceEHOenme eeondEe uOm moueoneum cmuaceumm o.H o.m m.o H.H H.H o.m m.o m.H mueEoumco one meemonEe mo nOuuoeuouQ ecu MOM Eeumoum >uemem e QoHe>eo n.o m.H n.o m.H 0.0 o.m h.o m.a mnOHueueu . uneEemeneEnnoceH oumec oneumueonD 5.0 m.n 5.0 a.n v.0 a.n 5.0 m.n memes Human mmcmm on scene ec one eadoem now deem e e>em 5.0 m.n v.0 a.n m.o m.n a.o m.n mmmsonsm 3m: MOM Eeumonm mnunueuu e eou>oum o.o m.a o.o o.m v.0 N.H v.0 o.a eoneEHOMHeQ e>uuoemme ou meuenuouoccm eue>uuoE ou eHce em .o.m neez .o.m nee: .Q.m neez .o.m -neez >uu>uuo< euumomeou euenuonocnm uoHuemcm .umz Heoom .meuenuouocSm Huecu one muoHuemnm nuecu .me>HemEecu muemeneE ecu wc oeueu me mewufl>fluoe noHuesHe>e one nonfi>uemnm HennOmuem ou e>uueaeu muemenee mmenflmnclflume mo uOH>ecec eaou oeueemxmnn.mm mqmae 12‘1 4.0 Composite - - - - Focal Manager ¢—--O Superior D-—--O Subordinate fr —1|— 3.5 1.! eeemOamEe ou Hem e em nmnwueee eemoHQEe Heasmeu oaom eoneEuOMHem eehonEe ecu moueoneue cmuaceumm euenoumcu one meehonEe mo nOuuoeuoum ecu ecu Beau Iona hueuem e moHe>eo encuueaeu uneseuenea Inocea Queen oneueueona moeen awecu emnem Ou counv en one edmoem u0w deem e e>e= meeonmEe 3en uou seem noun onunueuu e eou>oum eonefiuouuem e>uu noeuue ou neuenuouocdm eue>uuon cu eace em Figure 24.--Expected role behavior of agri-business managers relative to personnel supervision and evaluation activities as rated by the managers themselves, their superiors and their subordinates. 122 m.o m.m m.o m.m m.o m.m o.H m.m mcnecOmnem sconce>ou exee m.o e.m n.o m.m o.H m.m v.0 m.m neEmeHem m.uoone> cuuz eEuu onedm no. e.m e.o e.m o.n e.m mo. H.m eenoeeooeee one eneueeees sneeze uecu ensue ecu cuuz neuHuEee mm 5.0 a.n e.o m.n 5.0 o.m e.o e.n eneuneeee mouneoeo see; ocegeo one wammnm mo m3eH ecu em: eo. e.n mo. e.n mo. e.n 5.0 e.n speemoua one eeno ICMSUHGE CO OUGmHDmCfl QHMHCflMZ n.o e.n e.o m.n 5.0 o.m e.o e.n eeuummse onuneouo nu onec eeuw e e>ec m.o m.H m.o e.u o.H m.~ e.o m.u mueuneues one eeuoneoonee wo >uoune>nu uedoua e nueunuez 5.0 e.n e.o o.m e.o e.n 5.0 m.n sue>uooeeee eoeme one emeuonnsn menace: 0» edge em .o.m ceez .o.m new: .o.m nee: .o.m sees muu>uuo< euumomfioo euenflouocsm HOuuemnm .umz Heoom .eeuenuouocnm uuecu one muofluednm uuecu .me>HemEecu muemeneE ecu >c oeueu me meflufl>uuoe eoneneunHeE wuoune>nu one mnumecoucm ou e>uueaeu muemeneE mmenumccluume Mo uoH>ecec eaou oeuoemxmll.nm mqmde 1123 Composite - - - - Focal Manager ¢——O Superior o———O Subordinate 4.0 up 3.5 4— 2.5 4- -4}— 1.0 A: .~.' _. iii”... a —v— addenOmuem >uoune>nw exea neEmeHee e.uoone> nun: «sue ocoam enuonecouea one naeuueuea wammse uecu mfiuuu ecu cuu3 neuaueem em maeuueuefi onuueouo nec3 oneEeo one acumen no eSeH ecu em: huuemoum one eeuoneceuea no eoneusmnu nueunwez neuammnn unuueouo nu onec eeum e e>em naeuueuee one emuonecouefi mo quune> Inu ueaoum e nueunuez h~e>wu aoeuwe eoeme one menu toauzc enuauus ou eHce em Figure 25.-~Expected role behavior of agri-business managers relative to purchasing and inventory maintenance activities as rated by the managers themselves, their superiors and their subordinates. 124 m.o m.m e.o o.m e.o H.m o.n e.m eeuonenonen mnuomuso mo meacoecom >ue>uaeo eemue>o m.o o.m m.o m.m w.o o.m n.o o.m mance mmenumnc oueoneum eemue>o one eueuuunu on spunune en» e>em e.o m.m m.o ~.m 5.0 e.~ s.o e.m maenmonn onneuu Iue>oe emu>uemnm one moae>eo m.o e.~ m.o N.~ e.o m.~ e.o e.m oeueesoen nee; neEoumno xne ou eaceuue>e em 5.0 e.~ e.o m.~ e.o e.m e.o m.~ neneenee ooom e em o.H m.m 5.0 N.m m.o m.~ N.H m.m uneE Ie>oudEH cuHB umumme one menown Icoeu meaem mee>onEe enwaend m.o o.m m.o o.m 5.0 H.m v.0 m.H mnoHuHonoo uecueE mo uneooum e em m.o o.m e.o o.m e.o N.N H.H m.H Honenoo sunneno no euenuneonoo .Q.m neez .O.m nee: .Q.m neez .Q.m nee: >uu>uuoe euHmomEou euenuonoccm nouuemsm .umz Heoom .meuenflonoccm Huecu one muoHHemsm uflecu .me>aemEecu muemeneE ecu wc oeueu we meHuH>Huoe onumuonecouefi ou e>flueaen muemeneE mmenflmcclflume mo HOH>ecec eaou oeuoemxmll.mm mqmne 125 Composite - - - - Focal Manager Q—————9 Superior O—O Subordinate +--»+— 3.0-+ 2es "P" 2.0 '1— 1.5 1L- 1.0-t eeuoneconee oncomuco wo neaco uecon >ue>uaeo eemue>o eeuou mmenumcc eemue>o one eueuuunu ou wuuauce ecu e>en mfieumoua mnueuuue>oe emu>uemne one aoHe>eo oeumenoeu nec3 ueEoueco mne ou euceaue>e em neEmeHem ooom e em uneEe>oumEu cuu3 umunme one menouncoeu meHem meeonmEe euuaenn encuuuonoo uecnefi mo uneonum e em Houunoo muuaenw no eueuuneonou Figure 26.--Expected role behavior of agri-business managers relative to merchandising activities as rated by the managers them- selves, their superiors and their subordinates. 126 Apparently, in this case, there is a belief that the manager should concentrate more on management—type activi- ties and less on routine functions which can often be handled by other employees. The general trend of the ratings and rankings in Table 29 and Figure 27 appears to be very similar to the same category in the cruciality section (Table 17, p. 98). Company goodwill, public Opinion and public relations policies are judged to be of greatest importance while socializing with superiors and/or subordinates after hours has been ranked as least important. Table 30 presents a profile of the expected perfor- mance of the "ideal" manager using the composite mean responses of the role set members to the items on the role expectation questionnaire. The higher the mean response, the more intense are these respondents' expectations that a manager should perform in the manner indicated. Only those functions which rated a positive 2.0 or higher are included. Over half of the 68 items were rated at this level. As might be expected, the top ranked categories contributed a higher proportion of the items to the "ideal" manager's profile than did the lower ranking categories. 127 e.o s.m 5.0 m.m m.o o.e e.o e.m eeeenuononne one enounenne cuuB cuoz neume enuaeuoom m.o o.m o.H o.m m.o m.m m.o o.m memneo HeooH ou monnw aneeEoo uHEEoo ou eHce em e.o m.m e.o e.m 5.0 e.m e.o s.~ enneeee snnnnneoo nu euenuonnnen ou meuenflouocnm emeusoonm 5.0 e.~ 5.0 e.m e.o m.~ 5.0 e.~ anuzooom snennoo muononn 0» meuuu>wuoe wuunnEEoo nu ememnm 5.0 o.m v.0 m.m m.o o.m 5.0 >.m mnOuuonnw muunnEEoo nu ueoeea e em e.o N.m n.o m.n m.o e.~ 5.0 H.~ eeuonnon encunenen ounnnn Henueuxe one Henneunu cmuaceumm v.0 o.m o.H m.a m.o o.m n.o o.m moeen one monenu .nOAnflmo ouucnm no erHOMnu deem e.o m.n e.o o.m e.o m.n e.o e.n Hauzooom sneenoo enononn 0» Heuunemme meoHuoeum ecu oneumueono .Q.m neez .Q.m nee: .Q.m nee: .Q.m nee: suu>uuon euHmOQEOO euenuouocnm uofluemnm .umz Heoom .meuenuouocnm unecu one muoHueQSm uuecu .me>HemEecu muemeneE ecu wc oeueu me mefluu>fluoe mnuemme muunnEEoo one mnoHueHeu beacon ou e>uueueu muemeneE mmenflmncluuoe mo uoH>ecec eHou oeuoemxmnl.mm mqmne Focal Manager Superior D——--O Subordinate Composite 0—0 128 '0 «>- L c ‘h- 4.0 4+ 3.5 3.0 «P 2.5 2.0 1% 1.5 ‘- 1.0 I aeuenuouocne one encuuenne cuus cues usuue ssuaeueom aeaneo aeooH ou aonnu anon lace ualloo cu eace en euueuue huwnallgu nu euemueuuuem ou meuenuouocne eoeueoenm Hausoooo anemloo eucaoum ou aeuuu>uuoe muunaisco nu eoemnm encuuencu auunnflsoo nu ueoeeu e on neueuaom uncuuea nee nuance Henueuue one Henueunu cauAceuem eoeen one eoneuu .nOAnuno nuance no oeIHOunu neon Hausooou hnemloe eu0floun ou neuuneaae meeuuoeum ecu oneueueonb Figure 27.--Expected role behavior of agri-business managers relative to public relations and commity affairs activities as rated by the managers themselves, their superiors and their subordinates. 129 TABLE 30.--The expected performance of the "ideal“ agri-business manager as reflected in the composite responses of the managers themselves, their superiors and their subordinates (mean rating of 2.0 or less). I. II. IV. VI. Mean Expectation: 1.4 --Keep an Open mind-~prevent emotions from influencing decisions --Be viewed as the key link between the firm and its employees Mean Expectation: 1.5 --Have full jurisdiction over the number and work of subordinates --Keep an open line of communication to superiors and subordinates --Be familiar with all company policies, regulations and viewpoints --Continually search for new and better methods of operation Mean Expectation: 1.6 --Develop long range plans and goals for the department --Be able to motivate subordinates to effective performance Mean Expectation: 1.7 --Be a good listner --Be included in management planning discussions for the firm --Be able to utilize buildings and space effectively Mean Expectation: 1.8 --Strive to update personal knowledge of the business and products --Be able to analyze and interpret business data —-Understand the correct use of capital and credit --Be entirely responsible for the performance of the department -—Assume control of production and/or operating costs --Be aware of and familiar with competitive products —-Provide a training program for new employees --Have a feel for people and be quick to sense their needs --Maintain a prOper inventory of merchandise and materials --Have a free hand in ordering supplies --Maintain insurance on merchandise and property Mean Expectation: 1.9 --Expect loyalty and cooperation from the firm and from employees --Pay close attention to how managers in other departments operate --Be regarded as an integral part of the firm's management team --Set an example for the department as to grooming, dress and demeanor --Receive management training prior to assuming this position --Understand basic labor—management relations --Use the laws of supply and demand when ordering materials --Understand the practices essential to promote company goodwill Mean Expectation: 2.0 --Keep superiors and subordinates appraised of activities --Have had previous management experience --Understand all phases of business ethics --Prepare and analyze financial statements --Develop a safety program for the protection of employees and customers --Concentrate on quality control --Be a student of market conditions --Keep informed on public opinion, trends and needs -..; 130 The Composite Picture of the Three Criteria of Significance To arrive at specific conclusions relative to the activities and functions of agri-business managers, all pertinent data must be considered. Not only must each specified area of interest be examined in itself, but the relationship between areas and the resulting whole are also of considerable consequence. A comparison of the major categories of competence as reflected in the time allocation, cruciality and role expectation ratings of all role set respondents is shown in Table 31. The ranking of the categories are listed for each criteria segment according to the type of respondent. A mean ranking is also provided in each case, which indi- cates the relative overall perceived importance of each category of activities. The composite ranking places Operations and Coordi— nation at the top of the list by a fairly substantial margin. The second and third items, Finance and Control and Planning and Research are closely grouped; as are items 4, 5, 6 and 7. Public Relations and Community Affairs was clearly allocated to the bottom of the field. Although not identical in their rankings of compe- tency categories, the various segments of the role set do present a reasonably high degree of interpositional con- sensus as to which items should be in the upper and which should be in the lower half of the list. .xnem nee: n m: “noHueuoemxm eaom u m1 uxuflaeuonuu n O «eEHH n B« m m n m m o m m m m n m m n n mnuewwn wuuncEEoo one mnoHueHem ouucnn o o m n o m o n o m m o o m o eoneneunuez xnoune>nH one enumecouna a a H m s a m e s e H m s e N munseHonenonez m o o o m m m m o n m n m o o noHuenHe>m one nOHmu>uednm HennOmnem H m e e N H m m m m e e m e e unene>onneH one moneEeo HenOmuem u e H e m m m m m e e e m m H m noneeeen one mnnnneHn l o m N H o m e o m m m m o m m Houunoo one eonenum m m m m H m H H H H m H H m H naneenuonooo one enoHueneeo [ii " 1|}, 1r" [ 1 hr mm U B m2 mm U B m: mm U ,H. m2 mm U Bk mnucnem mnucnem mnuxnem mnuxnem anouw woneuemEou meuenuouocnm muoHuednm .umz Heoom euHmOQEou .meuenuouocnm uuecu one muoHuednm uflecu .menaemaecu muemeneE ecu xc wmnflueu nOuueuoedxe econ one muuaeuonno snOHueooHHe eEuu ecu nu oeuoeameu me muemeneE mmenumnc Iflume u0m eoneuemEoo HefluemeneE wo meeue uoheE mo nomauemEoo ueouo xnemll.am mcmne 132 Figure 28 graphically portrays the relationship between actual and ideal role behavior for the focal managers as revealed by the mean ratings of each compe- tency category. In almost all instances, the role expectation ratings were higher than the cruciality ratings for the same items. In other words, the re- spondents expected a higher or more professional level of behavior on the part of the focal managers than that which was actually exhibited by the managers studied. Note should also be made of the tendency for the subordinates, in both instances, to place a higher mean rating on nearly every item than did the focal managers. Likewise, the superiors tended to react in an opposite fashion by placing lower ratings on each item. Variations in Activities of Focal Managers According to Firm To determine the impact, if any, of the type of firm on the behavior of focal managers, the reSponses of all role set members were grouped according to the type of firm in which they were employed and then examined in the light of each criteria segment. The composite results according to competency groupings are displayed in Tables 32, 33, and 34. The distribution of time allocation percentages shown in Table 32 indicate total intrapositional consensus <:oncerning the relative amount of time spent on Purchasing Mean Ratings 133 Cruciality Role Expectation Ratings Ratings Compos its W Compos its - r - Focal Manager * *"Focal Manager e———e Superior MSuperior G——a Subordinate MSubordinate 3eo ‘1!- 2.5a" 2 .01. l.S-~ 1. 0 di- 1 J l J 1 1 L I T 1 V I I T m I e eau u n o n e o o 5 22% cm c~ n -H:~ n o n n e +au O 'o n e man u o. 0 r4 ::u e o .4::o -a n=~5 as Can tnc ncu clean -o wcu mqn 0'4 nc: «so. a u .5 at): a -Uv4 ()0 -H$4 :3E ::e eeae I) H eo nu ne OH on c cnu-«ou as eu S“ e WHH o Denna e as .58 n: :2 :13" ~ g2“ gs: o u an o a. n a. e a. > g :8 H £ fin Competency Categories Figure 28.--A comparison of the cruciality ratings of responsibilities actually performed and significance ratings of elements of expected role behavior of agri-business managers as judged by the managers themselves, their superiors and their subordinates. 134 . El [ ' s.e e e.s e m.e e m.e a onene>onnnn one moneEeo HenOmuem m.n e m.m n m.n m m.o m muuewmn >uunnEEou one mnOHueHem euacnm o.m o H.ma o o.mH m o.oa o eoneneunuez >uoune>nH one mnumecounm m.eH m s.aa m n.HH o m.HH m coneemem one onunneum H.0H m H.HH o m.oH m m.mu m noHuenHe>m one nOumu> unease HennOmuem o.ma o m.ma m m.mH e m.ma o conunou one eonenum m.eH H m.mH m H.aH H s.mH m mnneuonenonez em.mH m wm.ma a wm.oa m ww.ma a noHuenHouoou one mnoHueuedo neex xnem neez xnem neez cnem neez xnem eounnem mnuunuoemnnez Hueuem eou>uem one mnuuecuez one onummeoonm coneum luuanz .Enum mo emmu ou mnHouoooe eoneueQEoo Heuuemenefi mo meuuomeueo women ecu wo monuxnen one memeuneouem noHueooHHe eEuu euHmOQEoo mo nofluncunumuoll.mm mcmne z1n¢l lrnnvnlx)ryz M.1inlx;nau1c(> axul 1%:rsu3nzll In:nhu1ds; arul IIH- provement. There is, however, much less agreement as to the time spent on other managerial responsibilities. As might have been eXpected, the Multi-service and Processing and Manufacturing managers perceived the activi— ties included in the Operations and Coordination category to be the most time consuming. On the other hand, the Branch Retail and Marketing and Service managers ranked Merchandising as their most important general area of activity as denoted by time expended. The most noticeable difference in time allocation came in the Planning and Research area. While the Marketing and Service managers ranked this group of activities second in relative amount of time devoted to it, the other managers placed that category much lower. Table 33 provides a picture of the cruciality ratings as perceived by the managers, superiors and subordinates from the four types of firms. In this case the type of firm apparently has some bearing on the responses because there appears to be a considerable difference between the level of ratings for the Marketing and Service firms as compared to the Multi-service firms' represented. Every item except one is rated as being more crucial to the former than to the latter. In addition, there is a considerable lack of uni— formity in the ranked positions of the competency categories 136 FL 5 it! > ?} He.m e me.m s em.m m me.m a mnanonenoneg no.m o mo.m m Ho.m n mm.m o muHemum wannEEoo one mnoHueHem oHHcom nm.m o mo.m m mn.m w mo.m m noHuenHe>m one nonH> Iuemnm HennOmnen mm.m m mo.m o oo.m o mm.m o eoneneunHez >uoune>nH one mnHmecouna sm.m s oe.m m om.m H mm.m m onene>onnnH one moneEeo HenOmuem Hm.m m oo.m o om.m m mm.m m Houunoo one eonenHm Hm.m m ms.m m mm.m m mm.m m noHuenHouooo one mnoHueuedo oH.m H oo.m H mm.m o mm.m H coueemem one manneHm neez xnem nee? mnem neez xnem nee: xnem eoH>uem mnHunuoewnnez HHeuem e0H>uem one mnHuecuez one mnHmmeooum coneum IHanz .EuHm mo edwu ou mnHonoooe eoneuedEoo HeHuemeneE wo meHuomeueo nomeE ecu wo mmonneu one mmnHueu >uHHeHonuo neeE euHmomEoo mo noHuncHuumHQII.mm mqmne 137 between the various types of firms. At the same time, however, there is actually little real variation in the rating scores. For example, there is a spread of only .3 points between the top and bottom ranked items in the Processing and Manufacturing column; the Multi-service column shows even less differential between numbers one and eight. While Merchandising is ranked second by the branch retail representatives, it is ranked near the bottom by the other three groups. At the same time, the Marketing and Service managers ranked Personnel Demands and Improve— ment seventh in the list of eight, while the other groups placed it at or near the top. The mean role expectation ratings of the competency categories by representatives of the various firms is shown in Table 34. Here the Marketing and Service managers seem to be at odds with the remainder all the way down the line. There is an amazing consistency among the Multi— service, Branch Retail and Processing and Manufacturing representatives in regard to rank order of the categories. This consistency does not hold, however, relative to the actual rating scores. Summary The activities and functions of agri-business managers were examined, rated and ranked by categories and 138 om.m v mn.m m mm.m m wm.m m muHmMm %uHCSEEoU m cm mcoflumHmm oflan 9a mH.m m mm.m a mH.N s mm.m a mcflmflecmeuum: mm.m a am.m m oo.m m mc.m w mocmcmuch: >uoucm>cH pom mcflmmcousm mo.m H Hm.m m mm.a m oo.m m coflumnam>m ppm conH> lummsm Hmccomumm mv.m o om.m v mm.a v mm.a v coummmmm cam ocflccmam Nw.m m mm.m w om.H m mn.H m Houucou pcm mocmcflm mm.m m oa.H H no.a H mm.H H ucmam>ouaeH wcm mpcmEmo Hmcomumm ma.m m mm.m m mm.H m mm.H m coflumcflpuoom pcm mcoflumumdc I? r i 'I . com: xcmn cam: xcmm com: xcmm com? xcmm t1 QSOHO mocmummfiou mofl>umm mcHuSpomWscmz Hflmumm mofl>umm ppm mcflumxum: wcm mcflmmmooum cocmum IfluHSfi l .ll.‘n .Euflm mo mmwu on ocflmuooom mocmudeoo Hmflummmcmfi mo mmfluoomumo HommE ecu we mmcflxcmu pcm mwcflumn coflumuommxm maou some muHmOQEoo mo coHuSQfluumflott.wm mqmme 139 individually within these according to significance in the performance of more-or-less routine duties. Signifi- cance was judged three ways; by the amount of time devoted to each activity, by the degree of cruciality to success accorded each activity and by a declaration of the ex— pected or ideal role activity.' The perceptions of fix significance as reported by the managers themselves, their a J superiors and their subordinates were recorded and con- 1 sidered in each instance. 1 A summarization of the results of the analysis can g; be seen in Tables 20, 30 and 31 on pages 109, 133 and 135, respectively. Generally speaking, the focal managers and their superiors usually responded in a similar manner, while the subordinates were often at variance with the other two. The composite ratings and resulting rankings of the compe- tency groups in regard to cruciality and role expectations were also usually quite similar. These two, however, did not always coincide with the time allocation rankings. In fact, many rather time consuming activities were rated quite low as far as cruciality to success on the job was concerned. CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The Problem {Wk This dissertation has been focused on the agri— business manager. The major objective of the study has been to identify and classify the more—or-less common g f activities, competencies and characteristics of a selected i5 group of such managers with a view toward the development of suitable training curricula. The perceptions of the focal managers relative to their activities and categories of activities on the job, plus the perceptions of their superiors and subordinates concerning those activities and categories of activities were considered to be logical indicators for making the desired determinations. The various perceptions were expressed in terms of three measures of importance: time allocation, cruciality to success and rating within a hypothetical ideal situation. The Respondents All respondents in this study were employed by three Michigan owned and operated agri-business firms as of July 15, 1969. A summary of findings and information relative to the respondents is given below: 140 L‘_ V . 141 Of the eighty-two respondents, twenty-eight were focal managers, twenty-nine were superiors of these or other middle managers, and twenty- five were subordinates of the focal managers. In twenty-three instances, the focal manager, his superior and the subordinate were directly related in their routine job performance in the organizational hierarchy. The firms employing the respondents represented four general functional areas of agri-business endeavor: Processing and manufacturing, Single company branch retail outlets, Marketing and service, and Local multi-service operations with parent firm management. The average age of the focal managers was 37.9 years (two-thirds of the group were 36 or older), and they had been in their present managerial position for an average of 5.1 years. The ranges here were 27 to 53 years of age and 6 months to 23 years of job tenure. All but one of the focal managers had graduated from high school. The average amount of formal schooling completed by the focal managers proved to be 12.7 years and 50 per cent of them reported some form of special out-of-school training in addition. 142 Procedures With information available in the literature, exami— nation of pertinent job descriptions and assistance from business and educational consultants, questionnaires were developed, checked and approved as being appropriate for the desired purpose. Three general criteria segments, embodied in the questionnaires, were used in order to secure the necessary picture of the agri-business manager and his position. Specifically, there were: (a) the relative allocation of time to certain activities by the focal manager, (b) a judgment of the importance of said activities by means of a cruciality rating, and (c) an indication as to which activities or functions should be performed by the manager under ideal conditions. The descriptive statistics employed to analyze the responses were percentage and frequency distributions, mean scores of importance, standard deviation of scores, signifi- cance of probability and derived rank order. The data were processed by the Computer Laboratory at Michigan State Uni— versity. The findings were presented in detail in Chapter IV. The balance of this chapter is devoted to a summary of the principal findings and to conclusions based upon those findings. Summary of Findings Agri—business middle managers perform a wide range of activities in fulfilling the requirements of their w r. f S ‘7'“ "“— 143 positions. Many are quite important while others are much less critical. Some very time consuming activities are merely time consuming because they are judged by respondents to be not really crucial to successful performance on the job. As an example, the managers spend, on the average, over 16 per cent of their time performing the merchandising activities specified in Chapter IV. However, this category of activities for managers was relegated to the lowest spot ‘ . ‘1: ‘1 "I .wg-i.‘ u Jinj F! on the cruciality priority list and received a quite nega— filaw-a tive rating relative to expected role behavior. frw’ f 'l The perceptions relative to role behavior of the focal managers were occasionally quite comparable to those of the superiors and subordinates. In more instances, how— ever, there appeared to be considerable divergence of opinion. These results tend to coincide with the findings of Kahnl referred to earlier. Generally speaking, the superiors were much more nearly in agreement with the focal managers than were the subordinates. The subordinates also tended to be more critical in their ratings of activities and competencies. There appeared, therefore, to be no definite overall interpositional consensus. Complete intrapositional consensus also seemed to be lacking. Inter-firm variations were quite apparent, especially in the cruciality and role expectations ratings. This also is consistent with earlier studies. lKahn et al., op. cit. 2Carmichael, op. cit. 144 A major difference exists between the perceptions of activity importance and priority reported by the Marketing and service managers as compared to the managers in other types of operation. Apparently the different orientation, concepts and objectives of this type of agri— business situation were responsible for much of the vari- ation rather than any special attributes of the managers themselves. The summary of competency category rankings in Table 35 reflects the composite perceptions of all respondents relative to competencies deemed necessary for successful performance as an agri-business manager. The sub-items or important activities are more specific job requirements perceived as most critical by the respondents. The Oper- ations and Coordination competency is regarded as the upper- most requirement, followed by Finance and Control and Planning and Research. No overall ranking of individual activities was secured. The most important activities in each category are, however, listed. The forty items identified in Table 35 provide a rather complete picture of the more necessary duties, responsibilities and functions of the selected managers. They should also serve as a guide for training curriculum development. All. W I‘ll-p.“ A 145 TABLE 35.--Summary of the composite rank order of competency categories, and the component activities rated as being most important in each, of agri—business managers. Competency Categories Important Activities OPERATIONS AND COORDINATION FINANCE AND CONTROL PLANNING AND RESEARCH PERSONAL DEMANDS AND IMPROVEMENT PERSONNEL SUPERVISION AND EVALUATION MERCHANDISING PURCHASING AND INVENTORY MAINTENANCE PUBLIC RELATIONS AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS --Organizing the department's work efforts --Developing harmonious working relations among employees --Keeping an open line of communication between hierarchical levels --Planning and supervising the flow of goods --Balancing products or production to certain needs --Bstablishing proper credit policies --Serving as a key link between the firm and its employees --Analyzing and interpreting financial data --Preparing satisfactory budgets --Establishing pricing policies --Establishing standards for the department or area of work --Searching for new and better methods of operation —-Determining the responsibilities of employees -—Developing long range plans and procedures for the department --Determining consumer demand --Striving to update personal knowledge of the firm and its products --Determining how to improve the morale of the department --Keeping an open mind--preventing emotions from influencing decisions --Planning own activities and procedures --Listening to employees and peers --Checking and evaluating work of subordinates --Training new employees --Motivating employees to effective performance --Establishing job priorities and assigning work accordingly --Direct supervision of subordinates --Establishing sales policies and procedures --Concentrating on quality control --Analyzing total merchandising techniques -—Being a student of market conditions --Handling customer complaints --Maintaining a proper inventory of merchandise and materials --Checking invoices and purchase orders --Arranging for repairs of equipment, buildings and facilities --Utilizing buildings and space effectively --Determining items to be ordered and reordered --Keeping in close touch with public opinion, trends and needs --Improving internal communications and public relations '--Checking on the company image --Following practices which promote company goodwill --Talking about company products and/or services to outsiders 146 Limitations Confidence in the findings may be limited in certain instances due to the relatively small number of subjects involved. The results of this study are subject to the limitations of cross-sectional research. Findings have been based on job behaviors as they currently exist and expectations as currently viewed. Changes over time might materially affect data and conclusions. There are many factors which influence manage- ment behavior. Due to the nature of the inquiry, certain items are not specifically included. Likewise, certain competencies have been touched upon only indirectly. The relatively low level of agreement among the role set members, in certain instances, may limit the extent to which these findings ought to be generalized. Summary of Conclusions There are common and identifiable activities which are agreed upon by high level managers, middle managers and rank and file employees as being critical to the success of agri—business managers in Michigan. These fall principally into the categories of: Operations and l47 Coordination, Merchandising, Finance and Control, Personnel Supervision and Evaluation, Planning and Research, Purchasing and Inventory Maintenance, Public Relations and Community Affairs, and Per— sonal Demands and Improvement. There are certain general competency areas which are elemental to effective and appropriate management behavior. These are: Operations and Coordination, Personal Demands and Improvement, Finance and Control, and Planning and Research. Managerial perceptions of job requirements differ somewhat according to the type of firm in which the men are employed. For example; the managers in multi—service and processing and manufacturing firms felt that merchandising was a relatively non-crucial function, but the branch retail firm managers believed that the merchandising function was highly crucial. Many activities judged to be important to the success of managers are not usually considered to be management-type activities but are of a nature that could be handled by other employees, e.g., checking invoices and purchase orders or greeting customers. To be successful, managers apparently need cer- tain technical as well as managerial skills. 148 These would include: speaking at public gather- ings, preparing budgets and interviewing job applicants. Agri—business managers seem to be current— operations oriented, giving little time to long range planning and development. They apparently concern themselves with the imple- mentation of policies handed down from a higher management level. Perceptions of the importance of managerial competencies appear to differ according to the type of respondent. Managers perceive the Per- sonal Demands and Improvement competency as being ranked sixth in importance, while the superiors place it second and the subordinates rank it fourth in importance. Similarly, Purchasing and Inventory Maintenance is ranked much higher by the focal managers than by the other role set members. Managers tend to differentiate between the amount of time allocated to a given activity and the importance or cruciality of that activity. Examples would include: "checking the condition of equipment, buildings and property" which was ranked at the top of the cruciality list but at the bottom of the time allocation listing. 10. ll. 12. 13. 14. 149 Perceptions as to the proportion of time allocated to activities and competency categories appear to vary according to the position of the respondent, e.g., the focal managers indicated that ll per cent of their time was spent on activities in the Personnel Supervision and Evaluation category ".3 while the superiors perceived an expenditure of over 15 per cent and the subordinates judged the amount to be only 9 per cent for this same group I. of activities. ‘15 77." in!“ ifl‘ .~ Lam—.._; ‘1 J. 2-...“ Perceptions as to the cruciality of activities vary more among types of firms than among role set members. Managers generally share common role expectations, especially as they pertain to major competency areas. A higher or more professional level of behavior is generally expected from managers than that which has been revealed by this study. Intrapositional agreement is more likely in the allocation of time to activities and competency areas than in perceptions of cruciality or role expectations. Interpositional agreement relative to time allocation of activities, cruciality of activities and expected role behavior is more probable 15. l6. I7. 150 between managers and their superiors than be- tween managers and their subordinates. Managers and their superiors tend to perceive the relative importance of competency areas in a similar fashion but subordinates appear to hold differing views, especially in regard to cruciality to success on the job. An ideal agri—business manager would be quite competent in areas of Operations, coordination, finance, control, planning and research. He would also be concerned with his personal re— lationships and with endeavors leading to self— improvement. The techniques used in this study plus the data compiled and the results obtained permitted a description of the job requirements of a pOpu— lation of agri—business middle managers; they identified a set of activities necessary to success on the job of men involved in management functions for agri-business firms; they permitted inferences of training needs for such managers; and they revealed differences in inferred job requirements and training needs by position or situation of the managers. P ‘13 .3531; 151 Conclusions Relative to the Training of Agri—Business Managers Rapid changes in the agri-business world, followed by changing demands on the management function, place emphasis on the need for occupational adaptability of per- sons involved in such situations. Sound and applicable training programs can and should lay a substantial found- ation for this adaptability. If sound programs of satisfactory management training for agri-business situations are to be developed, planners should consider: (1) their relatedness of the functional areas in which trainees will eventually perform, (2) the appropriate mix of general and specific curriculum areas required, (3) the career objectives of the trainee(s), and (4) the level of competence desired. Many rank and file activities were found to be im— portant to the success of the managers studied. In the light of this information it would appear logical to raise the question as to the form that training, for such func— tions, should take. Perhaps much could be accomplished in this area by means of a period of practical learning within an intern—type format. Similarly, such items as trouble shooting, determining responsibilities of employees and determining items to be reordered are quite difficult to teach in a formal setting. Because the activities and responsibilities of agri- business managers are continuously changing as newer and u s ”g: 3 ’4- 152 more refined concepts emerge, training instructors should work very closely with employers and experts in the field so that all involved will be kept abreast of any such changes and the resulting needs of all concerned. Implications for Curriculum Development The results of this study offer several practical implications to employers, managers, and especially to professional training personnel. Management training needs were identified as they occurred within the reality of the situation in which managers work. Hierarchies were speci- fied for certain competency categories and for activities within each. The competency categories and activities listings should provide an understanding of the items the focal managers, their superiors and subordinates consider critical for successful job performance. Before any extensive planning relative to curriculum is undertaken, it would appear axiomatic that a decision should be made as to the intent or objective of the pro- posed training. If the functions of the manager are to be upgraded and improved according to the indications of ideal behavior then the rankings shown in Tables 21 through 29 should be given major consideration. If, on the other hand, management training is to be given only to maintain the present level of competency exhibited by personnel within the firm, then the time allocation rankings (Tables thitu' n”. A “1"". a a L“. ...! 153 2 through 10) and cruciality ratings (Tables 11 through 19) become more important. Additional consideration must be given to the goals, objectives and general operations of the firm(s) employing the trainees. Since middle management, as considered in this study, is equated with operations management, it should be emphasized that a manager in a retailing situation has considerably different competency and activity priorities than one who is functioning in a manufacturing setting. In other words, the man must be trained to function within the scope and framework of the firm which will hopefully reap the results of any training program. It seems to be clear that training endeavors must include items which are generally agreed upon as being critical or important to those in agri-business situations. One of the major tasks of the trainer would be to provide worthwhile training experiences in Operations and Coordi- nation, Finance and Control, Planning and Research and Personal Improvement. Rather than attempting to cover only the specific items listed in these categories it would seem feasible to suggest that training should embody the major principles of these management areas. This is not to say that the remaining areas of Per— sonnel Supervision, Merchandising, Purchasing and Public Relations should be ignored. Obviously, many of the activities in these categories are also important 154 parts of management. Table 35 on page 145 should be helpful in this respect. Reference has been made to certain non-management- type activities which appear to be important in some in- stances. The fact that these may be considered important herein does not necessarily indicate the necessity of spending time on them in a training program. Again, the objectives of the training effort must be a factor. The format of the training program, depending on what is to be accomplished, may include a certain amount of on- the-job experience as well as formalized instruction. In either instance, major emphasis will need to be placed on certain items and minor emphasis on others. It would not appear propitious to generalize at this point. Recommendations for Further Research 1. Future research in this field, if it is to analyze the variables by management position, should involve greater numbers of managers. There is also a need for studies similar to this investigation in other lines or forms of agri—business enterprise. 2. Additional data in the areas of manager's attitudes, the abilities and performance of peers, and the impact of outside forces on the management function would add further dimensions to the agri-business management picture. ‘4 »rm’ . .--*“Mu__- . , ‘é' ‘1 . \ 155 The question of changes in the manager's per— ception of role requirements over a period of time seems valid for future research. Also, to what extent do managers differ in employment role per- ception at the point of entry into the position of manager? There is a need for a study of the job mobility patterns of management personnel in agri-business situations and the implications for training of such movement. The classification system employed in this study probably requires more refinement. Since it does seem to hold promise for analyzing manage— ment job performance, other researchers may choose to make adaptations to the system. This research made no attempt to assess the relative importance of the members of the role set as perceived by the focal manager in the delineation of his role. In fact the role set was constructed on an a priori basis. Research to indicate the important role definers would have significance. Research is needed to determine the extent and nature of training and experience appropriate to prospective instructors who would seek to train agri-business management personnel. [- 5'1- -.__.._x _. ‘— BIBLIOGRAPHY v _. BIBLIOGRAPHY American Institute of Management. Management Audit Questionnaires. New York: American Institute of Management, 1961. r "*- “..-. Argyris, C. Integrating the Individual and the Organi— zation. New York: John Wiley and'Sons, Inc., 1964. Biddle, Bruce J. The Present Status of Role Theory. Columbia, Missouri: University'offiMissouri Press, 1961. Bomelli, Edwin C. "The Audit of Management Performance." W Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State Uni- versity, 1963. Brandon, George L. Twin Cities Technicians. East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University Press, 1963. Carmichael, John H. "An Analysis of Activities of Middle Management Personnel in the Retail Trade Industry with Implications for Curriculum Development in Post-Secondary Institutions." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1968. Chapple, Elliot D. and Sayles, Leonard R. The Measure of Management: Designing Organizations of Human Effectiveness. New York: The MacMillan Co., 1961. Christensen, Maynard and Clark, Raymond M. Vocational Competencies Needed for Employment in the Agricultural— ChemiEaIWIndustry in Michigan. East Lansing, Michi- gan, 1967fw V Clark, Raymond M. "Vocational Competencies Needed by Workers in Non-Farm Agricultural Occupations." East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, 1964. (Mimeographed.) leg-‘3 157 Conant, James. "Vocational Education and the National Need." Address delivered to American Vocational Association, Chicago, December, 1959. Davis, Keith. "Management Brain-Power Needs for the 1970's." Journal of the Academy of Management, (August, 1960), 125. beCarlo, Charles R. and Robinson, Ormsbee W. Education in Business and Industry. New York: The Cento? for Applied ResearCh in Education, 1966. Doulton, Joan and Hay Staff Grading. , David. Managerial and Professional London: AIlen and Unwin, 1962. Drucker, Peter F. The Practice of Management. New York: Harper and Bros ., 1964. Ertel, Kenneth A. "Identification of Major Tasks Per- formed by Merchandising Employees in Three Establish- ments." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Washington State University, 1967. Evans, Rodney E. "An Emperical Analysis of the Functions and Role of Fie ld Sales Managers." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1968. Flanagan, John C. "The Critical Incident Technique." Psychological Bulletin, (July, 1954). Fleming, Jack W. "The Critical Incident Technique as an Aid to Inservice Training." American Journal of Mental Deficiency, (May, 1962). Gleason, William E. "Functions of Industry Approach to Curriculum for Vocational Education." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1967. Glickman, Alfred S.; Hahn, Clifford P.; Fleishman, Edwin A.; and Baxter, Brent. Top Management Development and Succession. New York? The MacMilIan Co., 1968. Gross, Neal; Mason, Ward 8.; and McEachern, Alexander W. Explorations in Role Analysis. New York: John Wiley 5 Sons, 1965.w Guzzardi, Walter, Jr. The Young Executives. New York: The American Library, 1964. Hamilton, William and Bundy, Clarence. "Agricultural Competencies in Retail Feed Businesses." The Agricultural Education Magazine, (January, 1965). -v~—.—..-v—v- WT: hum—l LI —g—-.—-—r‘—-‘ Q (as; 4 1w. - 158 Hemphill, John K. Dimensions of Executive Positions. Columbus, Ohio: Bureau of Business Research, Ohio State University, 1960. Herzberg, Frederick. Work and the Nature of Man. House, Cleveland: World Publishing Company, 1966. Robert J. Management Development: Design, Evaluation and'Implementation. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Press, 1967. Hungeryager, S. C. and Heckman, J. L. Human Relations in Management. Chicago: Southwestern—Puhiishing Company, 1967. Johnson, Virginia K. "ReSponsibilities of Food Pro— Kahn, Katz, duction Managers Performing at Middle Management Levels." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin, 1960. Robert L. et a1. Organizational Stress. New York: John Wiley & Sons, i964. Daniel and Kahn, Robert L. Social Theory and Social Structure. Glenco, Illinois: The Free Press, I966. Kennedy, Henry. "A Classification of Relationships Be— Mager, tween Farming and Certain Other Agricultural Occu- pations with Implications for Guidance and Counseling Curriculum DevelOpment." Unpublished Ph.D. disser- tation, Michigan State University, 1959. Robert F. Preparing Instructional Objectives. Palo Alto, Caiifornia: Fearon PubiiShers, 1962. Mahoney, Thomas A.; Jerdee, Thomas; and Carroll, Stephan J. The Development of Managerial Performance—-A Research Approach} Cincinnati: Southwestern Publishing Co., 1963. Maslow, Abraham. Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper Brothéis, 1954. McFarland, Dalton E. Management: Principles and Practices. 2nd ed. New York: The MacMiiIan Company, 19632 McGregor, Douglas. The Human Side of Enterprise. New York: McGraw—Hiii, 1960. McGregor, Douglas. The Professional Manager. New York: McGraw—Hill, 1967. McLarney, William J. Management Training: Cases and Principles. Homewood, Illinois: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1964. Merton, Robert K. Social Theory and Social Structure. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, i957. Newport, Marvin G. "Middle Management Development in Industrial Organizations." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois, 1963. Parten, Mildred. Surveys, Polls and Samples. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1950. Peabody, Fred J. "An Analysis of Critical Incidents for Recently Employed Michigan COOperative Extension Agents with Implications for Training." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1968. Pfiffner, John M. and Sherwood, Frank P. Administrative Organization. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hail, Inc., 1960. Routson, Jack C. "An Observational Analysis of Functional Performance of Retail Sales Personnel." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois, 1964. Schein, E. H. "Management Development as a Process of Influence." Management Review, (May, 1961). Schill, William J. and Arnold, Joseph P. Curriculum Cpntent for Six Technologies. Urbana, Illinois: University of'Iliinois,ii965. Standard Oil Company of New Jersey. Employee Relations Research in the Standard Oil Company (New Jeiseyi and"Affiliates. New York: Employee Relations Department, Standard Oil Company of New Jersey. Stewart, Rosemary. Managers and Their Jobs. London: The MacMillan Company,ii967. Stewart, Rosemary. The Reality of Management. London: Heinemann and Co., 1963. Stewart, Rosemary. "The Use of Diaries to Study Manager's Jobs." The Journal of Management Studies, (May, 1965). ' V —w— Taylor, Robert. "Off Farm Programs: A Search for a Solid Base." American Vocational Journal, (February, 1966}, 34-37. 5'“? Cl ‘fi fiT¢JMI——-—p__,_,- 160 Thompson, John. Report of the Forty-Second Annual Conference on Agricultural Education, Central Region, Chicago, 1963. Washington: D. 8. Office of Education, 1963. Trocke, John K. Managing for Profit. East Lansing, Michigan: COOperative Extension Service, Michigan State University, 1968. Uris, Auren. Mastery of Management. Homewood, Illinois: Dow Jones-Irwin,‘i9687. r__ Venn, Grant. Man, Education and Work: Post Secondary i Vocational and Technical Edfication. Washington: American CEBncil on Education, 1964. E Wald, Robert M. "Who Will Be the New Managers?" The Iron Age, October 5, 1967. * F: 1. Ways, Max. "Tomorrow's Management." Fortune, July 1, .9 1966, p. 85. APPENDIX r .2“- 161 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY SPECIAL STUDY AND SURVEY OF AGRI-BUSINESS MANAGEMENT Summer, 1969 This study is designed to identify the more-or-less common activities carried on by management personnel and to determine the relative importance of such activities. The entire project is designed and conducted by the Uni— versity. You are not asked to identify yourself in any .‘ way. The information obtained herein will be used only i J for this project and kept in strictest confidence. mi The survey consists of three parts, all attached. Part A is concerned with the way you spend your time in carrying out the duties of your present position. It also asks for an indication of the crucialness to success of your job of these various activities. Part B provides an opportunity for you to give your views regarding the "ideal" manager while part C is only for the purpose of securing some supplemental information about yourself. Please be completely frank and honest with yourself and your position as you complete these questionnaires. Brief descriptions of activities or duties which may or may not be a part of your present position will be listed. Please follow the instructions as you consider each item. Since firms vary in their structure and the terms they use for identifying the parts of the organization, we have arbitrarily used the term department to designate the area of company operations which is under your direct supervision. MSU FORM # I62 AGRI-BUSINESS MANAGEMENT SURVEY Part A Please rank, in the left hand column, the listed activities from 1 to 14 in terms of the amount of time you believe you spend during an average week on each in relation to the others in the group. (1 indicating the most time Spent and 14 the least time spent.) If you have nothing to do with certain items, rank them in order of importance at the end of the scale but insert an N along-side the number (such as 12N). At the end of each section, we ask that you indicate the percentage of your total time that you believe you spend on the activities in the group as a whole. The sum of your percentages for the eight headings should be 100 per cent. In the right hand column, rate each item from 1 to 5 accord- ing to your feeling as to how crucial it is to success in your position. 1 would indicate that the item is extremely crucial, 2 would suggest the item to be quite crucial, 3 equals moderately crucial, 4 indicates probably not crucial, and 5 equals not crucial at all. Group A A. Interviewing job applicants and hiring employees. B. Checking and evaluating work done by subordinates. C. Establishing job priorities and assign- ing work to others. D. Training new employees. E. Direct supervision of subordinates. F. Resolving employee grievances. G. Advising employees on personal problems. H. Communicating with superiors regarding employee situations. I. Providing for employee health, safety and working conditions. MSU FORM # 163 Part A J. Handling problem employees. K. Handling employee benefit programs (insurance, vacations, etc.) L. Motivating employees and keeping up morale. M. Filling in for absent employees. N. Explaining company policies and pro— cedures. After you have completed the item checks above, please indicate the percentage of your total time which you estimate you spend, during an average week, on the above activities as a group. % Group B Please check the items in this group in a fashion similar to Group A on the preceding page. Rank the listed activi- ties from 1 to 14 in the left hand column according to time spent in relation to the others. Fill in the estimated percentage of total time spent for the group at the bottom and rate the cruciality of each item from 1 to 5 in the right hand column. If not clear, refer to the instructions for Group A. A. Organizing the department's work efforts. B. Arranging and conducting meetings of employees. C. Analyzing the structure and effectiveness of the department. D. Determining and establishing priorities for the department. E. Keeping records and files of trans- actions. F. Reporting to headquarters on depart— mental activities. G. Developing harmonious working relations among employees. MSU FORM # 164 Part A H. Using a telephone. I. Balancing products or production to seasonal needs. J. Completing routine paper work. K. Trouble shooting. L. Meeting production and/or sales quotas. M. Planning and supervising the flow of goods. N. Assigning special jobs to certain people. Estimated percentage of total time spent, during an average week, on the above activities as a group. % Group C Please complete this page in a fashion similar to the preceding pages. Refer to Group A for complete in- structions for each group. A. Establishing standards for the department or area of work. B. Determining the responsibilities of employees. C. Attending company policy and planning meetings. D. Reviewing competitors activities. E. Following plans handed down by superiors. F. Determining the resources needed to operate the department. G. Looking for ideas to improve performance. H. Evaluating proposals and suggestions of employees. MSU FORM # 165 Part A I. Obtaining and studying market information. J. Searching for new items, products or lines. K. Forecasting future trends and events. L. Determining and studying consumer demand. M. Training potential future managers. N. Studying new and pending legislation. Estimated percentage of total time spent on this group of activities. % Group D Please complete this page in a fashion similar to the pre- ceding pages. Refer to Group A for complete instructions for each group. A. Greeting or talking to customers. B. Establishing sales policies and procedures. C. Planning advertising programs and schedules. D. Selecting and preparing merchandise for display. E. Pricing merchandise or products. F. Handling customer complaints. G. Planning and arranging special pro— motional events. H. EXpediting customer orders. I. Evaluating effectiveness of advertising and promotion. J. Approving customers returns and/or allowances. MSU FORM # 166 Part A Submitting sales reports to superiors. Analyzing total merchandising techniques. Assisting in Special sales. Checking customer credit. Estimated percentage of total time spent on this group of activities. % Group E Please complete this page in a fashion similar to the pre- ceding pages. Refer to Group A for complete instructions for each group. A. Dictating letters and reports. Preparing budgets. Analyzing sales figures and operating costs. Arranging for proper payroll control. Securing clearance from superiors for variations in policy. Establishing customer credit policies. Analyzing profit and loss statements. Meetings with superiors regarding departmental finances. Handling responsibilities which cannot be delegated. Establishing pricing margins and policies. Determining and handling insurance needs. Keeping a close check on the finances of the department. MSU FORM # N. 167 Part A Working with calculators and other office machines. Handling company monies. Estimated percentage of total time spent on this group of activities. % Group F A. Participating in community service B. activities. Transmitting customer comments to head- quarters. Keeping in close touch with public opinion. Developing contacts with the community power structure. Representing the company in local projects. Encouraging employees to be community minded. Meeting with newspaper and/or radio reporters. Speaking at public gatherings. Authorizing company contributions to charitable organizations. Checking on the company image in the community. Improving internal communications and public relations. Talking about company products and/or services with outsiders. MSU FORM # Estimated percentage of total of activities. % Group G 168 Part A Listening to unhappy customers. Determining methods of improving relations with the consumer public. time spent on this group Please complete this page in a fashion similar to the pre— ceding pages. for each group. L. Checking invoices and purchase orders. Ordering special merchandise for cus- tomers. Checking the condition of equipment, buildings and property. Listening to salesmen. Studying suppliers catalogues and price sheets. Checking and verifying inventory lists. Determining items to be ordered and reordered. Contacting suppliers regarding incoming orders and shipments. Adding new supplies or merchandise to inventory records. Coordinating orders with other depart- ments. Certifying receipt of and/or signing checks for merchandise received. Confirming orders, inventories or prices with headquarters. MSU FORM # Refer to Group A for complete instructions 169 Part A Arranging for repairs of equipment, buildings and facilities. Arranging for the proper storage of merchandise and supplies. Estimated percentage of total time spent on this group of activities. % Group H Please complete this page in a fashion similar to the pre- ceding pages. Refer to Group A for complete instructions for each group. A. Reading trade publications. Attending formal training meetings and conferences. Learning how to better communicate with and understand employees. Developing a positive attitude toward the position and the company. Determining how to improve the morale of my department. Attending trade meetings and conferences. Working overtime. Evaluating my own effectiveness as a manager. Listening to suggestions and complaints of employees. Exhibiting model personal habits of dress, attitude and demeanor. Working at home on office business. Doing special jobs for superiors or for the company. MSU FORM # l llll’lIVIi 170 Part A M. Planning my own activities. N. Getting personal assistance from my superior. Estimated percentage of total time spent on this group of activities. % Part B We would like you to approach each statement in this part as if there were no restrictions to setting up your posi- tion exactly as you would want it to be. In a sense, we want your ideas on the "ideal" manager; the ultimate ob- jective being to make the position as effective as possible for both the company and the man. Using the scale below, please circle the number which most nearly reflects your true feelings about each statement. The ideal manager in this position: Absolutely must Probably should May or may not Probably should not Absolutely must not mbWNH l. l 2 3 4 5 Have had previous management experience. 2. l 2 3 4 5 Be regarded as an integral part of the firm's management team. 3. 1 2 3 4 5 Have full jurisdiction over the number and work of subordinates. 4. 1 2 3 4 5 Understand basic labor-management relations. 5. l 2 3 4 5 Be included in management planning discussions for the firm. 6. 1 2 3 4 5 Engage in community activities to pro- mote company goodwill. MSU FORM # 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. MSU 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 l 2 l 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 FORM # 171 Participate in new product(s) planning and development. Establish standards for employee per- formance. Pay close attention to how managers in other departments Operate. Receive management training prior to assuming this position. Be viewed as the key link between the firm and its employees. Be a good salesman. Be able to analyze and interpret busi- ness data. Use the laws of supply and demand when ordering materials. Be a pal to employees. Understand the correct use of capital and credit. Have the ability to initiate and over- see use of standard business forms. Understand the fundamentals of adver- tising and merchandising. Spend most of the time in the Office. Be able to motivate subordinates to effective performance. Prepare and analyze financial statements. Be aware of and familiar with com- petitive products. Analyze employees sales techniques and assist with improvement. Be entirely reSponsible for the per— formance of the department. 172 25. l 2 3 4 5 Develop and supervise advertising programs. 26. 1 2 3 4 5 Keep superiors and subordinates appraised Of his activities. 27. 1 2 3 4 5 Understand the practices essential to good customer relations. 28. 1 2 3 4 5 Provide a training program for new employees. 29. 1 2 3 4 5 Be a student of market conditions. 30. l 2 3 4 5 Spend a great deal of time with routine office work. 31. 1 2 3 4 5 Socialize after work with SUperiors and subordinates. 32. l 2 3 4 5 Maintain a proper inventory of mer- chandise and materials. 33. 1 2 3 4 5 Be available to any customers when so requested. 34. l 2 3 4 5 Set an example for the department as to grooming, dress and demeanor. 35. l 2 3 4 5 Be able to commit the home office to other than normal sale terms. 36. l 2 3 4 5 Develop a safety program for the pro- tection of employees and customers. 37. l 2 3 4 5 Understand all phases of business ethics. 38. l 2 3 4 5 Concentrate on quality control. 39. 1 2 3 4 5 Determine all responsibilities of employees. 40. 1 2 3 4 5 Be a leader in community functions. 41. l 2 3 4 5 Strive to up-date personal knowledge of the business and products. 42. 1 2 3 4 5 Keep an Open line Of communications to superiors and subordinates. 43. l 2 3 4 5 Continually search for new and better methods of Operation. MSU FORM # 44. 1 2 45. 1 2 46. 1 2 47. 1 2 48. 1 2 49. 1 2 50. 1 2 51. 1 2 52. l 2 53. l 2 54. 1 2 55. l 2 56. 1 2 57. 1 2 58. 1 2 59. 1 2 60. l 2 61. l 2 MSU FORM # 173 Assume control of production and/or operating costs. Prepare Operating plans for the approval of superiors. Be able to commit company funds to local causes. Keep abreast of local and state legis— lation. Have a free hand in ordering supplies. Establish internal and external public relations policies. Oversee delivery schedules of outgoing merchandise. Be familiar with all company policies, regulations and viewpoints. Spend time with vendor's salesmen. Be able to do the job of every employee in the department. Encourage subordinates to participate in community affairs. Be a good listener. Develop long range plans and goals for the department. Have a feel for people and be quick to sense their needs. Expect loyalty and cooperation from the firm and from employees. Keep an open mind--prevent emotions from influencing decisions. Be able to utilize buildings and space effectively. Make sure all rules, regulations and procedures are followed. 174 62. l 2 3 4 5 Take inventory personally. 63. l 2 3 4 5 Hold regular employee meetings. 64. l 2 3 4 5 Attend trade meetings and read trade publications. 65. 1 2 3 4 5 Keep informed on public opinion, trends and needs. 66. l 2 3 4 5 Be responsible for all purchase orders (outgoing). 67. l 2 3 4 5 Be familiar with the firms that supply materials and merchandise. 68. l 2 3 4 5 Maintain insurance on merchandise and property. Part C Check only one item under each question unless instructed otherwise. 1. Your age: 2. When did you begin working in your present position? (Month and year) 3. What month and year did you first start to work for this firm? 4. How many years of similar management experience have you had with this or other firms? None 9-10 Under 1 11-12 1—2 13-14 3-4 15—16 5-6 17-18 7—8 19 or more 5. What was the highest grade level you completed in school? (Check the item which comes closest to your situation.) 8th grade 1 yr. reg. college 10th grade 2 yrs. college High School grad. Jr. College grad. 1 yr. short course Bachelor's degree Short course grad. MSU FORM # 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 175 In High School, what type of program did you take? Business or commercial (bookkeeping, typing, calculating, etc.) Distributive education (merchandising courses with supervised work) Agriculture College preparatory No special emphasis If you have had some post—high school training, what was its emphasis? Agr. short course No major Liberal arts Other (identify) Business Management TechnicaI’ How many general business—type courses have you had since high school? Management-type courses? (Identify) Can you identify any part of your education which has specifically helped you secure your present position? (Identify) Can you identify any part of your education which has been particularly helpful in performing your present duties? In the light of your present position and responsi- bilities, what type of further training would be most helpful to you? (Be specific) If you had the Opportunity, would you: (Check each item) Go back to college for years. Take a short course(s) from a post-secondary institution. Take a management course(s) under an adult education or extension program. Enroll in company—sponsored training programs. What was your father's occupation or major position held? Your wife's father's occupation or major position? How far (grade) did your wife go in school? Your father? Your mother? Your w1 e s father? Your wife's mother? MSU FORM # l6. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. Advanced much more rapidly than most. Advanced slightly faster than most. About the same as most. Somewhat slower than most. It was a struggle. Not in school during teens. As a youth, were you active in: K: es No 4-H Clubs Scouts Little League Church Activities Music Lessons Boys Camp During your last two years Of High School, about how many hours per week, both in and out of school, did you spend on extra-curricular activities? None ll-l4 1-3 15 or more , 4-7 Don't remember 8-10 How many really close friends (those in whom you would confide) did you have in school? None Many One or two Almost everyone in class Several Not sure What was your parent's attitude toward your school work? Continually pushed me Lukewarm Always encouraged me Couldn't care less Mildly interested Quite negative What was your parent's attitude toward your involvement in youth activities? Continually pushed me Lukewarm Always encouraged me Couldn't care less, Mildly interested Quite negative Very happy Unhappy because: Reasonably happy parents didn't get Nothing special along of friction with father of friction with mother MSU FORM # 23. 24. 25. 26. 177 From your past experience, which of these factors do you feel have been the most important for your success? (Check as many as apply) Ability to get along with co-workers Ability to get along with supervisors Ability to organize details of work Being at the right place at the right time Skills and experience Plain hard work Guts Something else F . Why did you leave your last full-time job? ‘] Dissatisfied with pay “ Dissatisfied with working conditions Little chance for advancement Had a chance for a better position Was promoted ‘ Never worked on another job Personal reasons other than job “w. 11'3"" Do you view your present position as a step toward a higher position? Yes NO Maybe Have no idea What is your ultimate goal in employment? MSU FORM # .Ill'llll'fii