ABSTRACT EXECUTIVE EDUCATION, GROWTH AND MOBILITY: AN ANALYSIS OF A UNIVERSITY PROGRAM FOR A FOOD INDUSTRY CAREER ORIENTED GROUP by Lawrence Silverman Subsequent to World War II many industrial organiza- tions have engaged in a conscious effort to improve the quality of their management resources. These companies recognized that since products, policies, equipment and processes could all be imitated or duplicated by competitors, in the long run, the one real competitive advantage they could possess was a resourceful, imaginative management team. To aid in the development of managerial manpower, industry called upon the university community to establish executive development programs. At present some fifty uni- versities offer management development programs for men in the middle and upper ranks of business. These programs vary greatly in length, scope and objectives and are generally established to meet the needs of a specific group of individuals. In 1950 the food industry, anticipating the need for better educated manpower, instituted the Programs in Food Marketing Management at Michigan State University. Three Programs were instituted: Undergraduate, Graduate and 2 Lawrence Silverman Special. The latter is a nine month program which is offered to experienced employees of the industry who possess a high school education. Between 1950 and 1960, 403 men completed the requirements of their specific program. The purpose of this study is to evaluate what effect attendance in these programs has had upon the growth and mobility patterns of these men. The guiding hypothesis of this study is that the attendance in these programs by these participants has had a positive effect upon their upward mobility within the food industry. Additional hypotheses were established to test the relationship between the inde- pendent and dependent variables. A control group of non- program participants was selected for general comparison with the three student groups and specific comparison with the special student. Questionnaires were mailed to all students who had com- pleted their program's requirements by June 1960, and the non-student group. The response rates were: Graduate students 45%, Special students 61%, Undergraduates 15% and non-students 28%. The responses were analyzed by two methods: by the present position of the respondents and by the student, non- student categories. The independent variable of this study 3 Lawrence Silverman is the present position of the respondents. All of the positions were categorized into three groups: High, Middle, and Low. This distribution was accomplished by analyzing the job descriptions as stated by the respondents. In establishing whether or not there is any significant dif- ference in the responses, the chi-square test is utilized. Appropriate tables and summary analysis of the data and the implications of the data are also presented. On the basis of the research the following general con- clusions can be drawn: (1) Attendance in these executive development programs appears to influence the occupational mobility of the individual; (2) Promotion prior to and fol- lowing attendance are important indicators of the individual's potential mobility; (3) Poor utilization of the returning student or poor selection policies of the spon- soring company are prime causes for movement to another company: (4) Regardless of present position the majority of students believe they have benefited greatly from their attendance in these programs; (5) Students and non-students alike believe that higher formal education is needed for food industry management personnel; (6) The respondents whose present position places them in a high occupational level are characterized by a higher occupational origin of 4 Lawrence Silverman their father and wife's father. In addition they portray a greater tendency toward social mobility by virtue of their marrying a woman whose father is of a higher occupational level than is their own father. In summary, it can be said that executive development as embodied in the Programs in Mass Marketing Management has a positive influence upon the growth and occupational mobility of the participants. Copyright by LAWRENCE S I LVERMAN 196b, EXECUTIVE EDUCATION, GROWTH AND MOBILITY: AN ANALYSIS OF A UNIVERSITY PROGRAM FOR A FOOD INDUSTRY CAREER ORIENTED GROUP BY Lawrence Silverman A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Department of Marketing and Transportation Administration 1963 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS It is not possible to name all of the people who directly and indirectly aided in the development of this research work. However, the author wishes to single out the following individuals and organizations as having made sig- nificant contributions toward the completion of this study: Dr. Edward M. Barnet, Director of the Programs in Mass Marketing Management, under whose inspiring guidance this research work was completed. Dr. Barnet's influence upon the author's development goes far beyond this single work. Dr. Paul Smith and Dr. David G. Moore, members of the thesis committee, whose constructive suggestions were invalu- able to the development of the research work. Dr. Thomas A. Staudt, Head, Department of Marketing and Transportation, who served as chairman of the author's course work committee, for his continuous encouragement. Progressive Grocer, Robert Mueller — editor, the National Association of Food Chains and the Programs in Mass Marketing Management, whose financial support enabled ii the author to undertake and complete this study. The individuals of the cooperating supermarket chains, without whose cooperation the study could not have been completed. iii Dedicated to My Wife, Eleanor L. Silverman, for her continuous encouragement, understanding and sacrifice "Human History becomes more and more a race between Education and Catastrophe." Herbert George Wells iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii LIST OF APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi Chapter I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Foundations of Executive Deve10pment . . . 2 Future Managerial Development Needs . . . . 5 Executive Development--An Historical Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Evaluation and Potential . . . . . . . . . 14 Retailing's Needs for Education: Real or Imagined . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Executive Development and the Food Industry 21 The Scope of the Problem . . . . . . . . . 22 Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 General Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Limitations of the Study . . . . . . . . . 28 Some Possible Contributions of the Study . 29 II. EXECUTIVE DEVELOPMENT FOR THE FOOD INDUSTRY: THE PROGRAM AND ITS PEOPLE . . . . . . . . 31 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Development of the Programs in Food Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Description of the Programs . . . . . . . . 35 Financial Support of the Programs . . . . . 40 Other Food Industry Oriented Programs . . . 42 Education and Occupational Mobility . . . . 44 Research on Education and Mobility . . . . 45 TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued Chapter III. RESEARCH DESIGN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Study Design--Nature of the Sample . . . . Program Participants . . . . . . . . . . Number of Respondents--Students . . . . . Control Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Method of Selection--Control Group . . . Criteria for Selection--Control Group . . Data Collection Technique . . . . . . . . . Non-Respondents . . . . . . . . . . . . . Student Questionnaire--Content Analysis . Control Group Questionnaire--Content Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Questionnaire Analysis-~Conclusion . . . Methods of Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . The Chi-Square Test . . . . . . . . . . . . IV. PRESENTATION OF THE FINDINGS . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Career Patterns and Related Findings . . . Industry Experience and Present Position Impact of Education upon Mobility . . . . Analysis of Income Distribution . . . . . Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Impact of Program--Student Opinions . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reasons for Attending Program . . . . . . Benefits and Drawbacks of Program Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . Views on Company Selection Procedures . . Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mobility and Opportunity--Views and Opinions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Utilization of Training . . . . . . . . . Views on Store Manager Position . . . . . Importance of Higher Education for Food Industry Management . . . . . . . . . . Food Industry as a Career Opportunity . . Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Family Orientation . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Occupational Orientation . . . . . . . . vi Page 51 51 51 51 53 54 54 56 59 60 62 71 75 75 76 79 79 81 81 86 90 92 93 93 94 96 101 102 103 103 103 105 108 110 110 111 111 111 TABLE OF CONTENTS - Continued Chapter Education of Respondent's Parents . . Place of Birth of Parents Respondent's Age and Family Conclusion V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Introduction Evaluation of Hypotheses Specific Findings of the Study Formation Education and Practical Experience . Family Orientation Impact of Program--Student Opinions . Mobility and Opportunity Implications and Conclusions Implications for Executive Development Conclusions Suggested Areas for Further Research . APPENDICES BIBLIOGRAPHY vii Page 115 116 117 117 119 119 119 123 123 125 126 127 129 131 133 134 136 188 Table 10. 11. 12. 13. LIST OF TABLES Breakdown of Students and Control Groups into Occupational Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . Years of Food Industry Experience Prior to Entry into Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . Length of Time in Position Held Prior to Program Attendance . . . . . . . . . . . . . Position Held Immediately After Program in Relation to Position Held Prior to Attendance Number of Employers Since Graduation from Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Relationship between Year of Program Completion and Present Position . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of Years of Education Related to Present Position . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Comparison between Special and Non-Student (Control) Groups by Present Position . . . . Relationship of Three Student Groups to Present Position . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Distribution of Present Income by Present Position . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Present Income as Related to Student and Control Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Major Reasons for Attending Program . . . . . . Major Benefits Received from Program Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii Page 80 81 82 84 85 86 87 88 89 9O 91 95 97 LIST OF TABLES - continued Table Page 14. Immediate Supervisor's Opinion on Program's value 0 I O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O O O 100 15. Opportunity for Utilization of Training in Present Position . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 16. Views on Present Position as Step Towards Higher Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 17. Store Manager--Career or First Step Toward Higher Position . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 18. Importance of Higher Education for Food Industry Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 19. Relationship of Respondent's Occupational Level to Occupation of Father . . . . . . . . 112 20. Relationship of Respondent's Occupational Level to Occupation of Wife's Father . . . . 113 21. Comparison of Occupational Levels of Father and Wife's Father . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 22. Mother's Education Related to Occupational Level of Respondent . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 23. Father's Education Related to Occupational Level of Respondent . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 24. Number Who View Attendance in Program as Hindrance to Advancement . . . . . . . . . . 182 25. Procedures Used to Select Men for Attendance in Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183 26. Procedures Students Would Use in Selecting Program Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . 184 27. Major Reasons for Entering Program . . . . . . 185 28. Importance of Education for Food Industry Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186 ix LIST OF TABLES - continued Table Page 29. Major Benefits Received from Program Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix Page I. Description of Programs in Mass Marketing Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 II. Letters of Transmittal and Questionnaires . . 151 III. Categorization of Positions into Occupational Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . 178 IV. Chi-Square Computation . . . . . . . . . . . 179 V. Additional Empirical Data . . . . . . . . . . 181 xi CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The primary focus of this dissertation is the analysis of a group of food industry personnel who attended the Programs in Mass Marketing Management1 at Michigan State University between 1950 and 1960, with the ultimate goal being the determination of whether or not these executive development programs2 have had any measurable effect upon their career patterns. 1From 1950 to 1958 these programs were known as the Curriculum in Food Distribution. In 1959 this was changed to Programs in Food Distribution and in 1960 the present name was selected. 2A variety of descriptive phrases and terms are used to describe the process of the firm's attempts at securing the quantity and/or quality of executives it deems necessary for its continued existence and growth. The terms executive development, executive training, management development, management training and other similar phrases have been used interchangeably. Although such terms as supervisory train— ing and supervisory development have been used to signify the development of employees at levels lower than that of executives, for our purposes they shall be included in the general area of executive development. Because of the scope of this dissertation, all of the above terms shall be used in the restrictive sense of applying to university-program development rather than in the broader context of in-company and outside developmental programs, unless the distinction is made explicit. In order that the empirical research may be viewed in its proper setting, the greater part of this and the follow- ing chapter will be devoted primarily to the subject of university executive development in both its broadest context and its specific relation to the food industry and, second- arily, to the topic of education and its effect upon occupa- tional mobility. To further set the stage for the study, a detailed review of the programs with which the research is concerned will be offered. Even though the "how, what and why" of executive development are inextricably intertwined, it appears that for the sake of simplicity and understanding the "why" should be explored first in order that the historical growth of this development may be better understood. Foundations Q§_Executive Development The concept that organizations should work deliberately toward the development of their human resources has grown out of the bigness and complexity of modern enterprise, the challenge of international competition, the casualties of twentieth century warfare, the ecological shifts within our population and the growing awareness of the need for a more sophisticated management team to compete effectively in this . - n-v- an," u‘dv‘ ,-,. u. \. 0' o v.1 .vn V- dynamic and increasingly complex environment.3 To avoid the potential threats of complacency and the static atmosphere which might easily develop out of the promotion-from-within system, which is the major source of management recruitment, it became increasingly apparent that there existed a need for a method to widen the management horizons of supervisors in preparation for their movement up the executive ladder. Moreover, with the ever broadening base of public ownership of corporations and the increasing distance between the "new" owners and their management representatives, the subject of the responsibilities of management became one of wider public concern. What was becoming more apparent was that not only was it management's job to plan ahead for the physical growth of the firm but it was their duty to also plan so that the future stewardship of the business was assured. Because corporations have a life far longer than the men who serve them and that life is guaranteed only if a new crop of efficient managers is constantly sown, it would appear that of all the responsibilities that management owes to the stockholders of the business, probably first comes 3Frank X. Steggart, "An Analysis of Some Personal and Executive Characteristics of Participants in a University Program of Executive Development for Federal Personnel" (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago, 1961) , p. 2. that one of developing executive replacements. That this responsibility is in fact management's primary one becomes more apparent when we view the contempo- rary industrial scene. In striving for a continuing profit- able existence and growth, firms of all sizes and in all industries are engaged in the strategy of diversification. Because of this phenomenon, which has been attributed to the "cost-profit squeeze," any one firm is potentially vulner- able to the actions of any other firm regardless of the latter firm's present industry affiliation; though such competition may not be apparent, or possible, in the "economist's" short-run period. Products, policies, equip- ment and processes can all be imitated or duplicated. Consequently, in the long run the one real competitive advantage one company can hold over another is the posses- sion of a resourceful, imaginative management team.5 Only through the development of this "resource" can our economy continue its growth and maintain its vitality. Perhaps the most cogent statement on this subject is the following one John R. Suman, Vice-President and Director of Standard Oil of New Jersey, "Growing a Good Executive Crop," A speech given at Standard Oil of New Jersey. (No date) 5AMA Conference Reporter, Quotes from a speech made by Ernest H. Reed at the American Management Association Mid— Winter Personnel Conference, February 15-17, 1956. by Peter Drucker, When economists talk of "capital” they rarely include "knowledge." Yet this is the only real capital today. The development of educated people is the most impor— tant capital formation, their number, quality and utilization the most meaningful index of the wealth producing capacity of a country. ' In this statement we find that the "number” as well as "the quality and utilization" of educated people is important. Let us digress from the main thread of our discussion for a moment to examine the subject of the quantity of managerial talent which is presently available and that which is poten- tially forthcoming. Future Managerial Development Needs When we examine carefully the numbers of people who will be available for management positions in the decade to come, we find that we will be faced with a serious shortage. The reason for this shortage is the nation's low birth rate during the depression. Whereas between 1960 and 1970 the postwar boom in births will have resulted in a 46% increase in workers under twenty-five years of age, we can expect no more than a 6% increase in the total work force between the * Peter Drucker, "The Educational Revolution," Education, Economy and Society, A_Reader ig_the Sociology g§_Education, 6d. A. H. Halsey, Jean Fland and C. Arnold Anderson, (Free Press of Glencoe, Inc., 1961), p. 19. ages of thirty and sixty-four. And, more importantly, we can expect a decrease of 2.6% among those between the ages of thirty and forty—four. Yet the latter group is already providing over 11% of the top management family and a signi- ficantly higher percentage of the middle management group.7 In analyzing what the needs of our more complex society will be in the 1970's, Davis takes a slightly different approach.8 By the use of the best possible estimates of the future needs of business and the availability of manpower to fill these needs, he arrives at a total managerial develop- ment need of over eight million persons by 1975, and this. does not . . . in any way count the necessary re-training and developmental training of existing managers during the 9 , . next 15 years.” If we triple the 1957—58 rate of graduation of schools of business and engineering schools, which was 57,000 and 35,000 respectively for 1957—58, we arrive at a 7See: Robert F. Moore, "The Executive Matchmakers," Business HOrizons, IV, No. 3 (Fall, 1961), pp. 29-36, and "Trends in Executives Ages-—Ten Year Comparison," Booz, Allen and Hamilton, Management Research Department, p. 7 (no date). 8Keith Davis, "Management Brain—Power Needs for the 1970's," Journal 9f.the Academy gf_Manaqement, III, No. 2 (August, 1960). PP. 125-127. 9Ibid. .l ’1 'Y pa total of only slightly more than four million potential graduates for the entire fifteen year period from 1958 to l975--one half of the projected need. And many of these graduates do not become managers! Needless to say, the close cooperation of the business and university communities will be absolutely necessary if this problem is to be solved. Having briefly discussed the "number" problem, we can once again pick up the main thread of our subject of "why university executive development?" There are, of course, many other reasons which may be offered. Some managements, although anticipating little, if any, return from their participation and support, continue to send their men because of the prestige value which is frequently attached to such action. In its inimitable style Timg_refers to this factor as "a long-delayed reaction to the idea that the average businessman is just an uncultured 10 b°°b-" In addition there is little questioning of the fact that regardless of the initial reasons for their parti- cipation some companies received favorable feedback informa- tion from the first men they sent, which attested to the value which these men felt was received from their 10"Schools for Executives: How Helpful is Industry's New Fad?" Time, January 6, 1958. attendance, thereby encouraging further support. Having briefly examined some of the main forces which have given rise to the growth of university executive development programs, we can now turn our attention to the "movement" itself so that we may familiarize ourselves with how the programs developed and what forms they have taken during their evolutionary process. Executive Development-~Ag_Historical Overview11 Although executive development by schools of higher learning has been primarily a post-World War Two occurrence, it does have its roots in two programs which were started prior to this time. The oldest continuing university program designed for men actually occupying management posi- tions was begun in 1931 at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.12 Not until 1943 did Harvard and Stanford Universities at the request of the United States Office of Education offer a course known as the War Production 11The author is indebted to Frank X. Steggart for references to a portion of the historical material found in this section. 12Kenneth Andrews, "University Programs for Practicing Executives," A_Study Q§_University-Colleqe Programs in_ Business Administration, by Frank C. Pierson and others (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc.), pp. 577-608. Retraining Course which was to facilitate the transfer to war production of men displaced from their normal occupations. Although this program was terminated in June 1945, Harvard, in response to requests from industry, reinstituted a thirteenaweek program, without government support and with substantial changes in objectives and course content. With an ever-increasing number of firms beginning to look to the universities for assistance in the development of super- visors, the University of Chicago (1945), Pittsburgh (1949), Pennsylvania (1950), Indiana (1951), Northwestern (1951) and many others instituted offerings during the succeeding years. Although there is no complete accord on the exact number of colleges and universities offering education for executives, the range appears to be between thirty-five and fifty. Bunker, in his 1958 study, reports on finding l3Ibid. 4For a comprehensive review of company developmental programs, at universities and within the organization, see: Kenneth R. Andrews, ”Is Management Training Effective?: I. Evaluation by Managers and Instructors," Harvard Business Review, XXXV (January-February, 1957), pp. 85-94, and "Is Management Training Effective?: II. Measurement, Objectives and Policy," Harvard Business Review, XXXV (March-April, 1957), pp. 63-72. Also, Ward Stewart, Executive Development Programs ig_Colleqiate Schools g§_ Business (Washington: Office of Education, 1959) and Andrews, "University Programs for Practicing Executives." 10 forty-two universities which offer executive development programs.15 Stewart and Andrews conducted studies which evaluated thirty-seven and forty-two university management programs respectively,16 and Drucker speaks of ". . . some fifty universities--in addition to a dozen large companies and professional management associations . . ." which offer management programs to men in the middle and upper ranks of business.17 Even these figures do not begin to show clearly the extent to which the proliferation of such developmental programs has penetrated the business society. The Small BusineSs Administration, with the support of more than two hundred colleges and universities, has developed some six hundred courses which, between 1954 and 1960, were attended by over twenty thousand owners and managers of small business.18 That there is a wide difference in length, scope and objectives between the forty-two programs reported 15Paul F. Bunker, Characteristics 9§_Executive Develop- ment Programs, University of Arizona Bureau of Business and Public Research, Special Study No. 14 (Tucson: 1958), p. 1. 6Stewart, "Executive Development Programs . . .," and Kenneth R. Andrews, "Reaction to University Development Programs," Harvard Business Review, XXXIX (May-June, 1961), pp. 116—134. 7Drucker, 17. 18 . . . Wilford L. White, "Small Bu51ness Management Develop- ment," Adult Education, X (Winter, 1960), pp. 86-87. 11 on by Andrews and those of the Small Business Administration should be recognized by even the most casual observer. To more accurately categorize the numbers and kinds of "variations" in programs which have developed out of the earliest offerings, Andrews selected four criteria: (1) whether the program is full or part-time, (2) whether its subject matter is a broad approach to the administrative process and to I'general manage- ment" offered to executives from a cross section of industry or is specialized in one way or another, (3) whether the course is primarily comprised of business or liberal arts subject matter, and 19 (4) whether the course is relatively long or short. By applying these criteria six categories of programs can be established.20 Briefly they are as follows: (1) Forty—two residential broad-coverage programs in general management of business administration of two weeks or more in length. (2) Eight non-residential broad-coverage courses in business administration designed for practicing l9 . . . . Andrews, "UniverSity Programs for Pract1c1ng Executives." 0Because the author believes Andrews' analysis to be the most concise and inclusive available, this section is excerpted and condensed from his remarks ("University Programs for Practicing Executives”). Other less recent and less encompassing analyses to which the reader may wish to refer include: American Management Association, Guide t9_ Intensive Courses and Seminars for Executives (New York: 1958); Bunker, p. 1; Julius E. Eitington, l'Liberal Learning for Enlightened Leadership," Personnel Administration, XXI (July-August, 1958), pp. 8-19; S. G. Huneryager, "An Evalua- tion of University Executive Programs," Journal 9f_§h§_ American Society Q§_Training Directors, XIV (March, 1960), pp. 37-42; and Stewart, "Executive Development Programs . . (3) (4) (5) (6) 12 managers which are a year or longer in length. Most of these non-residential courses belong to the middle management group. A half-dozen short, non-residential, broad- coverage courses in business administration designed primarily for working managers ranging in length from ten to twenty-four weeks. A sub- category of this group though usually shorter than ten weeks in length, is the short course in administration supported by the Small Business Administration. This is typically an eight-week program, meeting once weekly for 2 1/2 hours to consider "planning, organizing, staffing, directing, controlling—~rather than day-to-day operations of a business." At least ten liberal arts courses have been devised for executives . . . with five of these being full—time residential courses for execu— tives of American Telephone and Telegraph company. Leadership in the liberal arts branch of executive training is firmly in the hands of the Bell System, which continues to experiment, currently at Northwestern in an eight-week com- bination of a liberal arts approach to materials relatively close to business. There are at least twenty-four special residential business courses, not broad-coverage but parti- cularized either in subject matter or occupation of the participants. Courses like the Graduate School of Sales Management and Marketing at Rutgers University (five weeks), the short course in operations research at Case Institute (two weeks), a management development program for independent telephone executives at the Univer- sity of Kansas (four weeks), and a two-week program for civilian employees of the Air Force Materiel Command at Western Reserve suggest the variety of residential programs which have arisen in the new c00peration between business and the business schools to fit special subject matter to special groups in response to specific needs. In addition to the foregoing categories, there is an uncountable and lusty miscellaneous group consisting of hundreds of institutes, seminars, workshops, conferences, and short courses which 13 would be impossible to deal in a short space. These range in magnitude of effort from the presentation of a single institute to the offer- ing of 130 different programs put on by Michigan State University through its Kellogg Center for Continuing Education. From this brief description of the growth of executive development it is clear that this approach to manpower development has been one of the major accelerating training trends of recent decades. But the very fact that it has grown with such speed has given rise to some serious questions concerning its value for the corporation. Some liken the rapid proliferation of programs to the opening of "Pandora's Box" with "Hope" for the future yet to come. Others, and they appear to be in the majority, view this phenomenon with a more optimistic approach. Bricker's answer to the pessimists is one with which virtually all might agree. He wrote as follows: In the United States we have a penchant for jumping on bandwagons. Many times, such sudden, widespread espousing of a particular cause does damage to a basically sound concept by turning it into a fad; and when the fad is over, the real progress of the movement is set further back than the point it would have reached if the fad had not developed. There is probably no doubt that execu- tive development has had an element of "fad" in it so far as some companies (and some universities) are concerned. But the basic movement seems to have emerged from any possible overlying cloud of fadism into a solid, worthwhile program for raising 14 the sights and stimulating the thinking and percep- tion of tomorrow's major executives. At the same time Bricker recognizes some of the major problems which cause disillusionment within some companies and, therefore, qualifies the above statement by stating that . . management should be alert to the need for properly matching their nominees to programs suited for each individual; and make sure that each nominee actually wants to attend the program, and is fully aware of what he is expected to get out of it.22 Evaluation And Potential Undoubtedly it is the last part of Bricker's statement regarding explicit expectations which brings to the fore one of the major topics of argument concerning executive development programs. The expectation on the part of management and the program participants of what is to be achieved through attendance in the selected program presumes a certain ability to measure or evaluate the contributions the program has made to the participants' over-all develop- ment. After attempting one of the earliest and most l . . . . George W. Bricker, Jr., "UniverSity Executive Development Programs,” Michigan Business Review, XII, No. 1 (January, 1960), pp. 6—12. 22Ibid. 15 inclusive studies on the subject of management training effectiveness, Andrews espoused the following belief: I will say, therefore, that the evaluation question is not yet our first concern. The training people who wish an answer to justify their budgets, ward off their critics, and elevate their function in stature and recognition, and the management people who seek an answer because they disapprove vaguely of what is going on, should negotiate their well- justified concerns with one another rather than seek nonexistent objective measures (italics mine) to fortify their judgment . . . We should begin with, stay with, and deal with the needs of an executive for formal educational experience a§_hg_himself sees those needs and as his predecessors in a training experience have come to see them . . . §9_prove the quantitative contribution 9£_forma1 education may remain impossible and finally b§_considered irrelevant (italics mine).23 ‘ That this statement should have been made when it was, in 1957, is understandable. The greatest growth in univer- sity development programs occurred between 1953 and 1955. To attempt to evaluate what is in essence a long-run invest- ment in such a short—run period would have been meaningless if not impossible. However, when we view the present-day situation we find that more than 1000 companies throughout the United States and Canada have placed their trust in the university to accomplish the task of providing middle and 23Andrews, "Is Management Training Effective?: II. Measurement . . .," p. 72. 16 top management with this unique type of growth experience. These companies, while spending more than two million dollars annually,25 have become more concerned with this problem of evaluation and continue to ask what benefits their executives get out of attending these programs. In attempting to raise the veil of uncertainty which surrounds the question of "value" of executive development, an exhaustive study was undertaken ". . . to make a large scale, comparative evaluation of the impact of major university executive education programs upon their partici- pants."26 Although the authors of the study speak of the need for more analysis, the findings are generally favorable. Rather than discuss these findings in detail at this time, it appears that such discussion would be best undertaken in Chapter V when the results of the present study will be set forth and compared with the above mentioned work. 24Reed M. Powell, The Role and Impact Q§_the Part-Time Universitqurogram in_Executive Education, Division of Research, Graduate School of Business, University of California (Los Angeles: 1962), p. 67. 5"Business Courses Get Refinements." New York Times, February 22, 1959, pt. 2, pp. 1. 9. 6Powell, p. 2. Powell's work is the final report of thiés portion of the study. An excellent condensed presenta- tjx>r1 of these findings can be found in: Kenneth R. Andrews, "Reéicmion to University Development Programs," Harvard .EEEJLgpess Review, XXXIX (May-June, 1961), pp. 116-134. 17 On the basis of the study referred to above there is left little room for doubt that university development programs have contributed greatly to the development of our most precious of all industrial resources—-management manpower. Continued growth and refinement of the programs as well as more careful selection of the participants seems to be assured. But what does not seem to be assured is that all segments of our business society will accept the poten- tial rewards of these programs with equal enthusiasm. Recognizing the fact that the Andrews and Powell study27 examines only those forty-two programs described as broad- coverage, thereby not including a multitude of other offerings, it is still significant to note that out of the 6,000 respondents to their questionnaire only 162, or 1.7%, were members of the wholesale and retail trade. It certainly appears that such a small number is entirely out of proportion to the total number of those who are engaged in this vital and large segment of our economy. Because of the orientation of this dissertation, it is necessary that we examine in general the nature of the retailing industry and more specifically the food retailing industry to determine why such an apparent lack of interest 27Ibid. 18 in university development programs exists. Retailing's Needs For Education: Real Q£_Imagined Regardless how we measure or evaluate the place of education in the retailing industry, the results are the same: Its standing is poor. Quite simply, the total amount of formal education conducted by retail establishments is quite small; and the quality of that which is offered is questionable when compared to the needs of the industry. The authors of a recently published study28 on the present status of education and research in the retailing industry have presented a series of findings which may be viewed as an indictment of the industry in its failure to adequately meet its responsibilities within both of the aforementioned areas. Recognizing that (1) retailing, although showing a definite trend toward larger establishments, is still dominated by the small store; (2) retailing is the biggest business in the country with over 1,700,000 firms employing nearly 8,000,000 paid workers; (3) ample and varied 8Harold F. Clark and Harold S. Sloan, Classrooms in the Stores (Sweet Springs, Mo.: Roxbury Press, Inc., 1962), 123 pp. 19 opportunities for retailing education are available through governmental organizations, trade organizations, colleges and universities as well as in—company training programs of the larger organizations, and that various studies have shown that there is a high correlation between training and increased productivity, the retailing industry has, because of its failure in the area of education and inadequate research, contributed to the low-productivity growth of our economy. With scant employee training, a nonexploratory type of research, and slow productivity growth, retailing has become a bottleneck in the American economy.29 Perhaps it is too much to expect that the extensive research and educational programs common in industry today should be found in the merchandising area. The size of even the largest retail organizations is con— siderably smaller that that of the larger industrial- ists. Furthermore, industry has had the advantage of generous government subsidies and munitions contracts. But size alone can hardly be said to be an inhibiting factor when sales run into the hundreds of millions and sometimes the billions of dollars. Nor can profit margins stand in the way, at least for the large concerns, for the average per cent return on capital invested for the ten largest retailers in 1960 was fractionally above that of a comparable number of the largest industrialists.3O But regardless of size it would appear that the lack of 29Ibid., p. 5. 30The Fortune Directory, August, 1960, pp. 2-3, 26, as quoted in Clark and Sloan, Ibid., p. 79. 20 an educational program is due to tradition and policy rather than size. To many merchants, even today, a classroom in the store is an anomaly. They have attained their posi- tions through utter dedication to the job, hard work, adroit ability to judge people, and skillful trading.31 Many of the men who guide the retailing industry today act as if one man can continue to successfully guide the operations of an enterprise, regardless of its size. They do not View education, other than the most pragmatic kind, as a necessity for the continued, profitable operation of their companies. Beyond the technical, day-to—day type of instruction such as orientation lectures for the beginner or the training of sales people found in those in-company programs that do exist, little of any substance is found. If highly specialized instruction is a rarity, subjects of a more general nature are almost non- existent among the educational programs of the retailers. . . . the present study found no program concerned with the broader aspects of retailing, such as productivity, technological advance, or the important social and economic forces that are so materially altering consumer attitudes today.32 In summary then we can say that (l) few retailing organizations, even of the largest size, engage in any 31Clark and Sloan, Ibid., p. 13. 321bid., p. 21. 21 educational activities, (2) what education is offered is almost entirely based on techniques not administrative skills, (3) the techniques which are taught tend to become outmoded quickly as a result of the rapidly changing con- cepts within the industry, (4) together with the lack of exploratory research, the lack of adequate education has contributed to the low-productivity growth of the industry, thereby causing retailing to become a "bottle-neck” in our economy's growth rate. Executive Development and the Food Industry As a major segment of the retailing industry, the food industry stands equally guilty under this indictment. Even though executives within the food industry have from time to time agreed on the need for developing strong executive talent for the future, little has been offered beyond verbal affirmations at various industry seminars, clinics, and conferences. Why has so little been done? One management consultant lists the following reasons. 1) It is looked upon as a future problem that can be delayed, not as an immediate operating problem. 2) No one else is doing much "so why should I?" 3) Executive development appears expensive and may be "too theoretical." 4) When and if needed, executives could be hired from the outside. 22 5) Personnel (development) programs may be upsetting to an organization. Each of these "defenses" has been examined to some degree in our earlier discussions and, we believe, success- fully repudiated as to their acceptability. Certainly, it is harder to plan for the future needs of a company than it is to plan tactical procedures for day-to-day operations. And the program may be upsetting, theoretical and expensive. Occasionally there may be ”outsiders” who could be found for critical positions. The fact remains, however, that there is an industry- wide shortage of high-potential, promotable food chain executives. And projecting into the future, this shortage will grow more serious with each coming year unless active steps are taken now.3 The Scope Qf_The Problem The supermarket industry has been faced with many problems as the result of revolutionary changes within its competitive sphere of operations. To prevent a further erosion in the gross margins and net profits per dollar of sales which the industry faced in the decade following 3Donald R. Booz, "Building Tomorrow's Executives: What: Will We Do With Joe?" Super Market Merchandising, XXVJCI, No. 7 (July, 1962), pp. 61-62ff. 34Ibid. 23 World War II, diversification into non—food merchandise lines developed as a potent strategy to bolster these ever dwindling profits. With this came an increase in the size of stores which in turn demanded greater amounts of capital investment. Increases in the size of the store and the concomitant development of increased size of the organiza- tion through mergers, acquisitions and aggressive building campaigns brought about a greater need for competent management personnel. At the same time non-food chains, discount stores, closed-door department stores and their numerous hybrids increased their competition with the ”traditional" retailers not only for customers but for marketing management talent as well. The rapid expansion of the existing retail organi- zations and the mushrooming of innovative forms of consumer goods outlets which had neither the tenure nor the smaller break-in locations with which to mature their own store managers and potential marketing management personnel gave added impetus to the management "raiding" tactics which has become an increasing practice throughout the industry.35 The supermarket industry is particularly vulnerable to 3 . . . . . 5"Ideas and Trends in Retail Distribution," Grey Matter, VII, No. 4 (New York: Grey Advertising, Inc., July, 1961), p. 1. 24 these problems for two principal reasons. Because the marketing techniques which are being employed by the inno- vators are, in a large part, founded on concepts developed by the supermarket operators, it is to the innovator's benefit that he attract men who possess not only technical skills but who have developed administrative skills neces— sary for effective management activity. Moreover, as pre- viously alluded to, it is doubtful if the in-company training programs of the supermarket industry, as they are now constructed, are of the type which further the develop— ment of executive talent. Most store management training, which is generally considered as a prerequisite for higher management personnel is based on instructions in techniques-- techniques which quickly become outmoded in today's rapidly changing retailing industry. Little attention is given to the development of administrative skills-—skills which necessarily are the core for effective store administration, both at present and in the future.36 The need for the development of individuals with administrative abilities has not gone entirely unnoticed within the food industry. In 1950, under the guidance of a College Task Force of the National Association of Food 36Ibid. 25 Chains and with the cooperation of the College of Business Administration of Michigan State University, the Programs in Food Distribution37 were established. These programs had as one of their basic goals the development of men with execu— tive potential whose abilities would increase marketing management effectiveness within the food industry. During the decade 1950-1960 over 400 students had successfully fulfilled the requirements of the programs, from which they either returned to or entered the food industry. The guiding hypothesis of this study is that the attendance in these programs by these participants has had a positive effect upon their upward mobility within the food industry. It is further postulated that there are certain variables which can be isolated and shown to have a high degree of correlation with the level of achievement attained by the program participants. The position presently held by these men is the dependent variable for this study. Problem Statement The objective of this study is to investigate empiri- cally the influence that participation in these executive 7 . . . A complete history and description of these programs can be found in Chapter II and Appendix I. 26 development programs has had upon the development and occupational mobility of those men who successfully com- pleted the requirements of the programs between 1950 and 1960. Answers are sought for the following questions: 1. What importance do the participants attach to their attendance in these programs as a major factor in their occupational mobility and growth? 2. What factors can be shown to be correlated with the actual achievement of these men? 3. Is there a significant difference in achievement between those who attended the programs and a selected group of food industry personnel who did not attend these programs? 4. What implications can be drawn from the study which can be of aid in the future development of executive talent for the food industry? The research is an attempt to develop guide lines for the future development of food industry personnel. On the basis of the results of this study, areas for further inquiry will be presented. General Hypotheses The major hypothesis of this study is that attendance 27 in these executive development programs has had a measurable and positive effect on job mobility as evidenced by present position and income. It is further hypothesized that: 1. There is a significant difference in achievement between participants due to the particular program attended. 2. There is a significant difference in achievement between those who participated in the programs and a selected group of industry representatives who did not attend these same programs. 3. Industry experience alone is not sufficient for success but must be combined with executive develop- ment to insure adequate preparation for the needs of the food industry. 4. Views on the need for education to be successful within the food industry will vary directly with the amount of education possessed and degree of success of the respondent. 5. Certain factors of family background can be shown to be highly correlated with achievement. The dependent variable for this study is the present position of the members of the groups studied. All other variables are considered to be independent. The research is 28 designed to either verify or disprove the hypotheses on the basis of the relationships between the independent variables and the dependent variable. The methodology used to carry out the study is presented in detail in Chapter III, Research Design. Limitations Qf_The Study The limitations of the study are as follows: 1. Existence of unmeasured social and psychological variables makes it necessary to examine the vari- ables from the standpoint of degree of correlation rather than one of cause and effect relationship. The ex post facto nature of the replies makes it probable that the passage of time has influenced the recall of the respondents. The results of the study cannot be viewed as repre- sentative of the entire industry since those studied represent only a minute portion of those employed in the industry. However, insights into the problem of executive development for the food industry can be drawn from the results of this study. 29 Some Possible Contributions Q:_The Stuqu The deprecatory views on executive development which are held by the majority of those in the food industry exist because of a lack of understanding of the potential advan— tages of such activities as well as the lack of any prima facie evidence which might establish the value of that executive development which has been engaged in in the past. It is the aim of this study to show the effect that executive development has had on the participants of the Programs in Mass Marketing Management. By doing this it is expected that the members of the food industry will be better able to judge the value of engaging in executive development activities. To this end it is expected that both the qualitative and quantitative findings will offer significant insights into the benefits which have been derived from these programs by the participants, and, furthermore, will aid in the development of a better under- standing of those factors which appear to be highly corre- lated with success. From a broader perspective it is expected that this Study will make a positive contribution to the general body of lcnowledge of executive development. Those few studies whllih have been done in the area of measurement of executive 30 development effectiveness have been concerned with the development of personnel who have already achieved executive status. This study, however, is directed toward an analysis of an executive development program which has as its focus the development of individuals who, at the time of their attendance in this program, find themselves only at the threshold of the "executive suite." Ultimately, then, it is expected that we shall be able to say with some degree of certainty whether or not these unique programs in executive development have made signifi— cant contributions toward the development of food industry executives, and, furthermore, what factors appear to be correlated with the success of these participants. CHAPTER II EXECUTIVE DEVELOPMENT FOR THE FOOD INDUSTRY: THE PROGRAM AND ITS PEOPLE Introduction This chapter seeks to delimit the general executive development context of the initial chapter by describing the particular program in which the food industry personnel involved in this study have participated. We shall, first, examine the historical development of the program. Secondly, we shall review the program's structure and content. And, finally, within the framework of education and its effect upon occupational mobility, one of the major reasons for participating in this type of program will be discussed. Development 9f_the Programs in_ Food Distribution Within each industry there can be found certain individuals who, in retrospect, must be considered as visionaries. These men are set apart from their contempo- raries because of their ability to both identify and fulfill certain needs of their industry long before others are aware that they exist. Three leaders within the supermarket 31 32 industry belong in this category: A. D. Davis, Winn-Dixie Stores, Incorporated, Frank J. Lunding, Jewel Tea Company, Incorporated and Lansing P. Shield, the Grand Union Company. These men saw that the increasing complexity of the super- market industry demanded a new type of administrator. This "new man" would have to possess more than the intuitiveness which was characteristic of the "fly-by-the-seat-of-the- pants" type of individual which had dominated the industry during its pre-WOrld War II days. He would have to be armed with more than intuitiveness and shrewdness to be able to cope with the multitude of problems with which they believed the industry would be faced. To this end in 1949 they pro- posed to the National Association of Food Chains that a college training program for food industry personnel be established. To investigate the feasibility of such a program a College Training Task Committee was established by the .National Association of Food Chains, under the guidance of its president, John A. Logan. The members of this committee were Lloyd W. Mosley, The Grand Union Company, Chairman, Charzles L. Arnold, The Kroger Company, and J. C. Fairchild, COIOQlial Stores Incorporated. The initial objectives of 3UCh as program, which were established by the committee and 33 ratified by the N.A.F.C. board of directors, were: 1. Raising the standard and enhancing the standing of chain food distribution with employees and the public; 2. Attracting and developing men with executive potential; 3. Providing facilities and opportunities for broader training of present and future employees; and 4. Increasing the effectiveness of management, thus lowering the cost of food distribution and raising the standard of living. The criteria which were established as guides for the selection of a school to meet these needs were: 1. Geographic location from the point of view of centrality. 2. Standing or reputation of the institution. 3. Availability and adaptability of related courses. 4. Physical facilities available including housing for married students. 5. Tuition and other costs. 6. Restrictions or limitations on admission of out-of-state students. 7. Attitude toward Special students (non—college graduates). 8. Attitude toward company sponsored scholarships. After evaluating 27 universities the committee selected Michigan State University as the "pilot" school. Through the efforts of Mr. Logan, the N.A.F.C. committee, John A. ILannah, President of the University and Dr. Kenneth Wilson, 8 . . National Association of Food Chains, Background Information: Curriculum in Food Distribution (Washington, D. (2., December, 1959), p. l. Ibid. 34 the head of the Business Administration Department and the first "Director of the Curriculum in Food Distribution," three separate programs were instituted. The Graduate program was started in 1950 with thirteen Master of Arts degree candidates being enrolled, and in 1951-52 the Special and Undergraduate Programs were opened for enrollment. In 1953 Dr. Edward A. Brand became Director of the Programs and in 1959 Dr. Edward M. Barnet, formerly Director of the Executive Development Programs at Northwestern University was appointed Program Director. Dr. Barnet reaffirmed the original management development objectives by stating that, ". . . this educational program at Michigan State University is dedicated to: lst, providing a business educational program suited to the dynamic and fast-changing needs of the food industry; 2nd, providing types of programs fitted to different age levels: graduate, undergraduate, special; 3rd, meeting the demand for new types of managers with administrative skills and know—how required in the growing complexity of intensified com- petition; 4th, capitalizing on the quality of men identified by their employers as most likely to have greater potential for responsibilities beyond their present positions by investing them with greater knowledge.40 4 . . . . . 0Edward M. Barnet, Michigan State UniverSity's Execu- tives Development Programs ig_Mass Marketing Management, College of Business, Michigan State University, 1962-63, p. :3 35 The title of the programs was changed first to "Programs in Food Distribution Administration," then to "Programs in Food Marketing Management” and then to its present title, "Executive Development Programs in Mass Marketing Management." These changes were not due to a desire to engage in a game of semantics, but resulted from the need to reflect the broadening scope of the Programs. Food Merchants are no longer food merchants only. They have become a part of the great general mer- chandising community, concentrating on mass marketing management of the flow of consumer goods from the mass producers. Today, production and distribution are united on a continuous belt dilivering a high standard of living to the public. . . 42 Description 9£_the Programs The Special Program was a unique undertaking. It was recognized by all of the men who aided in the establishment of the curricula that there were a number of experienced employees, particularly at the store management level, who exhibited executive potential but lacked the broad back- ground and administrative techniques which they would need 'to move into positions of greater authority and responsi- lelity. Although most of these men were high school ‘ 41Ibid. 2 . . For a complete description of the Programs, see Appendix I . 36 graduates, very few of them had had an opportunity to increase their formal education. In order that this untapped resource could be developed, a nineemonth, inten— sive program of study was instituted. A broad variety of subjects was offered and each man was given the opportunity to develop a program which would fit his specific needs. The following excerpt from a statement made in 1953 by the National Association of Food Chains is an indication of the types of courses the Special student could include in his curriculum: Specialized training in food merchandising, food stOre operation, and food chain administration is offered in the curriculum. Michigan State college is ideally suited to fulfill the needs of courses dealing with produce, meats, poultry and dairy products. Specific attention is also given to each of the major areas in business administration, such as: accounting, marketing, finance, management and economics. Courses are included in public speaking, business writing and business law. Subjects dealing with personnel and human relations in industry are a part of the students' training.43 Upon completion of the nine-month program, a Special Program (kartificate is awarded. In some instances Special students ‘have remained at Michigan State to complete the requirements for' a Bachelor's Degree. The same opportunity as that which was afforded the 3 . . . Jean Osgood, News Release, National Assoc1ation of EPOCi Chains, washington, D. C., May 22, 1953- 37 Special student was offered to the employee who possessed a bachelor's degree but wished to continue his formal educa- tion to receive a Master's degree. (Originally a Master of Arts Degree was awarded, but in 1959 a Master of Business Administration Degree was offered in keeping with the policy changes of the College of Business and Public Service.) The graduate student is required to meet all of the normal requirements of the Master's program of the College of Business. In addition, those courses which are directly related to Mass Marketing are required as is a formal paper. This program is more rigorous and intensive than the Special program, but the requirements can be fulfilled within one calendar year. Both the Special and Graduate Programs have as their primary goal the continued development and training of men who have exhibited executive potential to their employers. In this respect these programs are unique among executive development programs. Whereas most participants in execu- tive development programs, such as those which were referred to in Chapter I, are already in executive positions at the tZime of their attendance in the program, the Graduate and Special students almost always come from lower or middle I"C'il'iagement positions. Also, these men attend the Programs 38 not for a few weeks as do participants in most other execu- tive development programs, but for the better part of a year. Furthermore, although the men are from a single industry, the subject matter which they are exposed to is not special- ized but is broad in nature. Therefore, these executive development programs do not fit neatly into any one of Andrews' six categories of programs44 which were described in Chapter I. These Programs in Mass Marketing Management can be described in Andrews' terms as being residential broad-coverage programs which are "particularized" in the occupation and interest of the participants but not in subject matter, with both liberal arts and business courses being included in the programs. The Undergraduate Program is the third program which is offered. In keeping with the original objectives of those who founded the programs, the undergraduate program has as its purpose the attracting and training of future employees of the food industry. However, the Undergraduate Program cannot be considered an executive development program. It is ". . . in effect, a major in mass (formerly only "food") HEarketing management following completion of the freshman 44Andrews, "University Programs for Practicing EKG cut ives . " 39 and sophomore years in the basic requirements (liberal arts) of the University College indicated for all undergraduates.”45 Although some of the students in this program have had industry experience on a part time basis or through associa— tion with their family's organization, many have had no direct relationship with the food industry. With little or no food industry involvement or allegiance, it is to be expected that many of these students would eventually select other industries for employment rather than the food industry. Even though it is anticipated that this will affect the degree to which this group will be represented in the findings of our study, we believe that it is important that the responses of the undergraduates be included so that we can compare and contrast the career patterns of all three student groups. Each of the three programs has been constructed to meet the needs of a specific group of men. Not only are the men introduced to the most advanced concepts in mass marketing rmanagement and general business administration, but they are alsc>given the opportunity to broaden themselves by enroll— iJKJ in liberal arts courses such as Psychology, Sociology, Phillosophy, and History. Although courses in Agriculture, 5 . Barnet, Executive Development Programs . . 40 i.e., poultry, dairy products, meat cutting, etc., were once required subjects for study, in recent years these courses have been offered on an elective basis. This change reflects the belief that the student should emphasize those subjects in which he cannot get on-the-job training. The student's education is not limited to his daily classroom activities. Each year since the beginning of the Programs food industry executives have journeyed to the campus to speak to the participants. The speeches and the resulting reparteé between the speakers and the students offer them an opportunity to evaluate the state of the art within the industry in light of their own experiences and in relation to the conceptual foundations which have been offered in the classroom. In addition, the students are given the opportunity to visit many of the leading food manufacturers and distributors, during which time they have an opportunity to observe and evaluate the methods and techniques used by the particular company. Through these "extra-curricular" activities the individual is better able t1) critically evaluate alternative methods of operation and corporate philosophies and actions. Mncial Support gf the Programs At the time of the inception of the program the 41 membership of the National Association of Food Chains under- wrote the inaugural fund. They donated $17,500 per year for the first five years and $12,000 per year for the next five years. The money was awarded to men who had competed for scholarships through application to the N.A.F.C. In 1954 a number of manufacturers began to offer $1,000 scholarships and in 1957, when the N.A.F.C. ceased providing direct financial support, the scholarships were increased to $1,500, with $500 going to the support of library funds, travel, research and administrative activities of the programs, and $1,000 being used by the student for tuition and other expenses. In 1960, a new approach to financing both participants and the program was approved by the many industry groups interested in the advancement of these programs. Each company sending its own men agreed to make a voluntary contribution of $500 for each man sent. This has been publicized both by the National Associa- tion of Food Chains and the Grocery Manufacturers of America to their respective members. Men sent by their own employers are said to be bearers of Company Fellowships. This, however, does not meet the need for scholar- ships of many men who are not financed by employers and creates a serious challenge to those who wish to recruit men not already claimed by employers as their own. To meet this problem, the new National Business Advisory Committee for these programs . . . has announced its intention of raising several $2,000 scholarships, $1,500 for the student and $500 for the programs. The plans for organizing a method of raising such funds are being formulated. It is not 42 possible to state when or how many of such scholar- ships will be made available. In almost all cases the sponsored student continues to receive all or a part of his salary while he is enrolled in the Program. Other Food Industry Oriented Programs After eight years of operation this "pilot” undertaking was considered a success by many in the food industry and expansion of the Programs to other schools was undertaken. In 1958 Cornell University and in 1959 University of Southern California instituted similar programs. Unfortunately, total enrollment in the three schools has not fulfilled the expectations of the supporters of the Programs; an indication of the lack of understanding by many in the industry of the potential benefits which would accrue to both the participants and their companies. Other schools such as Western Michigan University, University of Delaware and most recently St. Joseph's College, Philadelphia, Penna., have instituted programs for the development of food industry personnel. However, these PrOgrams are not of the same type nor have they the same Objectives as those previously mentioned. The Western \ 46Ibid. 43 Michigan offering is designed as a c00perative education— work program. It is two years in duration and ". . . is offered only to interested young clerks now working in the nation's super markets."47 The St. Joseph's enterprise ". . . will offer a four year liberal arts curriculum com- plemented by a specialized food marketing major."48 In neither case is executive development the primary objective of the schools. At the present time the Programs in Mass Marketing Management offer the food industry an opportunity to give their employees and prospective employees the broad, high- level educational experience which is believed by many to be necessary for executive manpower development. In Chapter I it was suggested how the organization might benefit from its support of university executive development programs. But the question of why the participants themselves might want to enroll in these programs has not been examined. The final section of this chapter is devoted to this question. 7"Specialized College Training to Shape Future Food Industry Leaders," Progressive Grocer, XLI, No. 4 (April, 1962). PP. 92—96, 101. 481bid. 44 Education and Occupational Mobility To attend the Programs in Mass Marketing the prospec- tive student must absent himself from his job for a period of nine months to a year. He must uproot his family, move his possessions, move his children from one school to another and in some cases accept a lower salary for this period of time. In most cases he faces the formidable task of reorienting himself to the classroom environment. In the case of the Special student, who is, on the average, 28 years old, it has been ten years since he was required to meet academic standards. Yet with all of these pressures more and more men continue to express a desire to attend these Programs. It is believed that the major reason for this desire is to increase their chances for occupational mobility. Recognizing the increasing complexity of the food industry, these men have chosen to make an investment in the form of more formal education, with the eventual return on this investment being higher occupational status. Certainly this route to higher status is not unique to this group of men. The education-mobility issue is an old one in social research and has received considerable atten— tion in the literature. It has been said that education is thee principle avenue for upward mobility in most 45 . . . . 49 . . industrialized nations. Two other writers have said that education ". . . is one of the most important factors in determining the occupation and income levels to which a . ..50 person can aspire. Another author has stated that leading researchers agree that education is the one most significant variable determining the ultimate placement of . . . . . 51 indiViduals in the soc1al order. Thus there appears to be general agreement that education is an important factor in social and occupational mobility. Although many studies could be reported to substantiate these general statements, only a few shall be indicated. Research QEDEducation and Mobility One type of study has been to record the educational levels of people in different types of occupations. One such a study shows that whereas 70 percent of professionals and 26 percent of managers and officials have one year or 9 . . . Seymour M. Lipset and Reinhard Bendix, Occupational Mobility in_Industrial Society (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1959), p. 9. 50 . . . Paul C. Glick and Herman P. Miller, "Educational Level and Potential Income," American Sociological Review, XXI, p. 307. lRichard Centers, ”Education and Occupational Molaility," American Sociological Review, XIV (February, 1949), pp. 143-144. 46 more of college, only 5 percent of farmers are equally well 52 . . . . educated. This type of study gives a static picture of existing education levels in different jobs, but does not show the opportunities for mobility between jobs.. One way to show this mobility is to relate level of income to level of occupational status. One study reports that there is "high correlation between educational level . . . . "53 achieved and income, rent paid and occupational status. . . 54 . . . Glick and Miller, in correlating average income for men between 45 and 54 years old and years of education show a direct relationship exists. In this study each successive addition to years of education brought an increase in average income. Graduation from college showed the greatest increase-—an average of $2,434 per year. It is not our intention to report on all studies such as those we have listed. However, a search of the litera- ture does reveal a high degree of unanimity among scholars 2 . . . . 5 Seymour M. Lipset and Reinhard Bendix, Soc1al Mobility in_Industrial Society (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1959), p. 92. 53 . . C. F. Schmidt, E. H. McCannell and Maurice D. Vanarsdal, "The Ecology of the American City: Further Comparison and Validation of Generalizations," American _50ciological Review, XXIII, p. 392. 54 Glick and Miller, p. 308. 47 that education offers the individual increased opportunity for occupational mobility and career development. However, it cannot be stated that education is the sole determining factor in the individual's career development. Donald Super and Associates have begun a ten year study of the factors that influence careers and suggest the following tentative listings: . . 55 POSSible determinants of career patterns I. INDIVIDUAL CHARACTERISTICS AND EXPERIENCES A. Psychological Characteristics 1. Intelligence 2. Special aptitudes 3. Interests 4. Personality a. Attitudes (e.g., toward work, toward authority) b. Values (e.g., work values) c. Specific traits (introversion—extroversion, etc.) d. Needs (e.g., achievement needs, nurturance needs) 5. Temperament 6. Self—concept 7. Drive (level of aspiration) 55Donald E. Super and Associates, Vocational Develop- ment, a_Framework for Research, Career Pattern Study, Monograph 1 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1957), P. 131, as quoted in Thomas R. O'Donovan, "Contrasting Orientations and Career Patterns of Executives and Lower Managers"(unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of (Personnel and Production Administration, Michigan State University, 1961), pp. 16-17. 48 Physical Characteristics 1. Height 2. Weight 3. Body structure 4. Physical strength 5. General health 6. Constitution 7. Endocrine balance 8. Adequacy of physiological functioning 9. Special physical assets 10. Special physical handicaps Experiences 1. Amount and quality of education 2. Amount and quality of specialized training 3. Special skills 4. Prior work history 5. Hobbies 6. Organizational membership 7. Social and recreational activities 8. Amount and quality of interpersonal relation- ships established (e.g., acceptance of others, acceptance by others) 9. Identification with role models 10. Rejection of role models 11. Concept of others II. INDIVIDUAL'S PERSONAL SITUATION Parental Family Background A. \lO‘U'IDpUJNl-J Socioeconomic status of parents Family financial situation Father's job (Possible) mother's job Occupational mobility in family background Reputation of family in community Placement in family (only child, oldest, youngest, etc.) Number of siblings Parental aspirations Cultural stimulation Interpersonal relationships in family Family Situation Married, single, separated, or divorced Number of dependents Health, age, and sex of dependents Aspirations of spouse Interpersonal relationships in family 49 C. General Situation 1. Current socioeconomic status 2. Current financial situation 3. Current job 4. Personal reputation 5. Geographic location a. Region b. Urban-rural 6. Military service obligation 7. Citizenship 8. Race 9. Religion 10. Competition encountered (in school, job, etc.) 11. Attitudes of significant others a. Toward the individual himself b. Toward work III. INDIVIDUAL'S ENVIRONMENT 1. Economic conditions in: country; area; community Occupational structure of the area and community Occupational trends of the area and community . Community attitudes about occupations . Peace or war . Technological developments . Characteristics of the era IV. NONPREDICTABLE FACTORS 1. Accident to self or to important others 2. Illness of self or important others 3. Death of important others 4. Unanticipated opportunities 5. Unanticipated liabilities (e.g., property loss through theft, fire, storm) N \lO‘U’lbw Even though all of the above factors contribute to an individual's career pattern, it is education which stands out as the most important single determinant. It is our Purpose to evaluate the occupational mobility of those men ‘Mho have attended the Programs in Mass Marketing Management. Z\lthough we shall evaluate other factors which Super has 50 listed, we shall be primarily concerned with the evaluation of the effect this university executive development program has had upon the career pattern of the participants. In the following chapter we shall set forth a detailed description of the research design used for this study. Chapters IV and V will present the findings of the study, and the summary and conclusions. CHAPTER III RESEARCH DESIGN Introduction The purpose of this chapter is to set forth the methodology which was employed in the gathering of the data used in this study so that the research findings found in Chapter IV can be either confirmed or invalidated. The research design is divided into three sections. The first section describes the nature of the sample groups used in the study. In this section we shall show who the subjects are, how many there are, and how they were selected. The second section discusses the data collection technique used and the questions which were asked of those studied. The third section discusses the methods employed in the analysis of the data. Included in this section are descriptions of the statistical procedures used to analyze the data. Study Design——Nature Q§_The Sample Program Participants From the time of the inception of the Programs in Food 51 52 Marketing in 1951 until June, 1960, 112 men entered the Master of Arts or Master of Business Administration program, 154 students attended the special program, and 137 under- graduates completed the requirements for their Bachelor of Arts degree in Business Administration with a Food Marketing major. Because of the relatively small number of men who have attended these programs, it was decided that rather than selecting a random sample for study it would be best to contact all members of the universe with which we were concerned. The major problem which was encountered at this point was locating the men. However, by contacting their last known employers and by using the last known addresses only six special students, fourteen graduate students, and twenty- one undergraduates could not be located. In addition, four special students, three graduate students, and thirteen undergraduates were not sent questionnaires56 because, at the time of the study they were either still in school working toward higher degrees or were known to have gone directly into the Armed Forces after leaving Michigan State University. Therefore, the universe under study was defined ‘ 56 . . . . The structure of the questionnaire Will be discussed if! the next section. 53 as all students who had graduated from the Programs in Food Distribution between June, 1951, and June, 1960, excluding those who had gone directly into military service from the programs and were still in the Armed Forces at the time of the study, and those who had remained in school to work toward a higher degree. Number g§_Respondents--Students Of the 150 special students who were sent question— naires 67, or 44.7 per cent, replied. In the graduate student category 65, or 60.6 per cent, of the 109 who were mailed questionnaires responded. And of the 137 under- graduate students who were defined as part of the universe 21, or 15.3 per cent, replied. As was stated in Chapter II, the low response rate of the undergraduate students was predictable. Low motivation and lack of experience with the food industry are believed to be contributing factors to the low response rate of this group. Even though the undergraduate program cannot be con- sidered as an executive development program, the responses of the undergraduates will offer us an opportunity to evaluate the differences between those who have had an opportunity to combine education with experience and those WTlo have a college education but have not had the time to 54 get a significant number of years of industry experience. Control Group It is our objective to ascertain whether or not attend- ance in these programs is a significant factor which has aided in the occupational mobility of the participants. An intercomparison between the three student categories, therefore, is not sufficient. Although such a comparison would offer an opportunity to examine differences resulting from years and type of education beyond the high school level, it would not enable us to draw any significant con— clusions regarding differences in success between those who had attended the programs and those who had not. In order that such a comparison might be made, a control group was selected. Method pf_Selection--Control Group Because of the higher formal education of the graduate and undergraduate students, the author decided to use the Special student category as the one to which the control group would be compared. The reader will recall from Chapter II that almost all of the special students are high School graduates with little or no college experience. They 63130 had a great deal of work experience in the industry, 55 with eighty per cent having been employed for five years or more in the food industry prior to their enrollment in the Special program. It was felt that by comparing the control group's responses primarily with those of the special students and only secondarily with the responses of the other two student groups, a more significant test of the hypotheses would be possible than if such a comparison were not made. An evaluation of the records of :he Programs in Mass Marketing Management revealed that four companies57 had sponsored almost 60 per cent of the special students. Of this total number one company sponsored 40 per cent, the second 30 per cent, the third 16 per cent, and the fourth accounted for 14 per cent. It was decided that the names of 250 men would be selected from the files of these four companies in the same proportion as the number of men they had sponsored. To eliminate the possibility of a biased selection by the companies, the author received permission to personally search the files of three of the four 57 . . These companies have asked to remain unnamed. However, it can be stated that they are all supermarket organizations with combined sales, in 1961, of over 4.2 billion dollars. They have been firm believers in executive development and were kind enough to open their files to the author. The control group could not have been selected without their cooperation. 56 companies. Because its personnel records were kept at each division's headquarters rather than at the corporate head- quarters, the fourth company agreed to make the selection according to the criteria which had been established. Criteria for Selection-—Control Group Careful study of the special students' responses showed that there were certain basic characteristics which these men possessed. They were, on the average, 27 years of age when they entered the program; they had all completed high school with only a few having as much as one year of college education; they were employed in the positions of store manager, assistant store manager, or department manager immediately prior to their enrollment into the program. And approximately 80 per cent were married. Our objective then was to use these characteristics as criteria for the selec- tion of a matching sample of men who had not attended the Programs. The following is an example of the type of specifica- tion sheet which was sent to the companies prior to the actual selection. 57 . . 58 Selection of a Selective Sample of the XYZ Stores Personnel I. Criteria: All of those selected must fall within the following categories: 1. Must be between the ages of 28 and 37. 2. Must be a high school graduate but shall not have more than one year of college. These men shall not have attended any programs in food distribution such as those offered by Michigan State Univer- sity, Cornell University, and other schools. 3. Must have been in a managerial position between the particular points in time listed below. (Managerial position is herein defined as a position no lower than a department manager within a store nor higher than a store manager.) 4. Of the total number selected, eighty per cent should be married and twenty per cent single. II. Breakdown of required sample according to desired characteristics. Numbers given are minimum requirements. 1. Present Age and Past Managerial Position a. Five men between the ages of 35 and 37 who were in a managerial position, as defined above, between the years 1951- 1953 inclusive. b. Twelve men between the ages of 32 and 58 . . . . . This particular speCification sheet was sent to the company which had sponsored sixteen per cent of the total of the four companies previously mentioned. 58 34 who were in a managerial position between the years 1954—1956 inclusive. c. Twenty-three men between the ages of 28 and 31 who were in a managerial position between the years 1957-1960 inclusive. 2. Marital Status a. Of the total minimum number of forty men that are selected, thirty-two should be married and eight should be single. Upon receiving permission to select the names from the companies' files, the author proceeded to select the names of all of those men who met the established criteria. By using a table of random numbers the actual number required was selected from the original listing. This procedure was followed for each of the four companies. Of the 250 ques- tionnaires which were mailed to this group, eighty-one were returned. Ten of the eighty-one were thrown out as not usable; therefore, seventy-one or 28.4% of the control group responded satisfactorily. Although this rate of response is not as high as that of the special or graduate students, it must be remembered that the control group could not be expected to have the same degree of personal involvement in the study as those who had attended the programs. That this disinterested group of men responded as well as they did, 59 however, indicates a high degree of interest in the study. The total of all usable responses, then, is 224 with 67 being those of the special students, 65 of the graduates, 21 of the undergraduate group, and 71 coming from the control group. Data Collection Technique Because of the wide dispersion of the students and control group throughout the United States and because of the limitations of time and financial resources, the mail questionnaire method was used. The questionnaires59 were sent to each member of the defined universe with a cover letter and stamped return envelope. Three mailings were used for the student groups. The first follow-up, which was sent sixty days after the questionnaire was mailed, was a reminder letter. The second follow-up letter included another copy of the questionnaire and a cover letter urging the individual to respond. The responses to each mailing were analyzed separately, and no significant differences were found to exist. This lack of significant difference 59The author is indebted to Professor William Henry of the University of Chicago for his assistance in the develop- ment of the questionnaire. 60 between the responses to the three mailings permitted us to combine them into one group for our final analyses. Copies of the questionnaires and cover letters can be found in Appendix II. The members of the control group were also contacted by mail. The questionnaire was accompanied by a cover letter which was countersigned by the Personnel Directors of the respective companies. This was done so that the recipients of the questionnaire would be aware that permission had been granted, by the companies, for them to participate in the study. Wherever possible the questions asked of this group were the same as those asked of the student group. Only one mailing was used for the control group as the response to the first mailing was considered to be satisfactory for our purposes. Non-Respondents Although a number of studies have demonstrated that there are important differences between respondents and non- respondents to mailed questionnaires, similar differences are also indicated between early and late or "easier-to- reach" and "harder-to-reach" respondents. In the absence of census data or some other criterion for comparing respondents with non- respondents, "a comparison of early and late returns 61 should reveal differences in the same direction as would a comparison of returns and non-returns." While this procedure may not be sufficiently sensi— tive to measure the magnitude of the mail-back bias, it may provide a simple and valuable technique for determining the probable direction of bias.60 Since the evaluation of our three mailings shows virtually no significant difference between them in the type of responses which were elicited, it was not deemed impera- tive that the non-respondents be studied. Therefore, we believe that we can generalize our findings to include all of the members of the student groups. It is believed that a major reason for the non— responses was the length of the questionnaire. Twelve blank questionnaires were returned by graduate and special students. (This is slightly under five per cent of the number of questionnaires mailed to these two groups.) The reason they gave for not filling in the questionnaire was its length. Although this possibility had been established in a limited pre-test, we preferred to take this risk rather than have a large response to a shorter and less complete questionnaire. So that the reader may have a better under- standing of this last point, we shall now evaluate the 0Richard F. Larson and William R. Catton, Jr., "Can the Mail-Back Bias Contribute to a Study's Validity?" American Sociological Review, XXIV, No. 2 (April, 1959), pp. 243-245. 62 questionnaire on an item by item basis. Student Questionnaire-~Content Analysis The Questionnaire was divided into four sections. The first group of questions were designed so that a complete job history of the respondent could be developed. Item one asks for a complete occupation history since the student's graduation from the program. A job description for each position title listed was requested because of the lack of uniformity within the industry of work assignments as related to the title of the position. For example, in one supermarket company the position Field Sales Manager might entail the same general work assignments as that of a Zone Manager in another company or a Division Manager in a third company. To determine the degree of stability and loyalty, particularly among the students who had been sponsored, the names of the respondent's employers were requested. This information was compared with the answer to question 2, part b, which asked the name of the company they worked for before entering the program, to determine whether or not the sponsored men remained with the same company after graduation. The remainder of items two and three complete the job history data. By analyzing the responses to the 63 first three items, we were able to determine: 1. occupational mobility, both before and after program attendance. 2. length of time, (a) in each position, (b) with each company, (c) within the industry, (d) as a part—time or full-time employee. 3. whether or not the respondent was employed by a member of his family. Number three above is of importance because of the pos— sibility that employment with a family organization might increase the speed of a respondent's occupational mobility. To reduce the chance of a biased answer to the question of occupational mobility all questionnaires which had a "yes" answer to item 3-c were analyzed separately. However, family affiliation appears not to have had a significant influence upon the results of the study. Section II is comprised, almost entirely, of open-end questions. Item four asks for the respondent's reasons for enrolling in the programs. To determine whether or not these desires had been fulfilled the responses to items five, six, and seven were compared to the answers to question four. Both items five and seven ask for the benefits which the students had received as a result of program participation. 64 The benefits listed in item seven, which were developed from the pre-test, were used as a check against the responses in item five. Although some similarity was noted between the answers to the two questions, there were a significant number of additional benefits listed by the respondents which justified the inclusion of both questions. Item six was included to determine whether or not attendance in the programs was considered as a hindrance rather than a benefit to the student's occupational mobility. Here we are attempting to avoid the bias which might exist if the respondent were asked to list only the benefits he received without giving due regard to any potential disadvantages that might be associated with attendance in the program. Items eight, nine, and ten are concerned with the process by which those men who were sponsored were selected to attend the programs. Item eight asks the individual to describe the method by which he was selected to attend the program. By interviewing students who were in the programs at the time of the study, it was discovered that many of them did not know what method their companies used in selecting them for attendance in the programs. These men believed that if the companies would publicize the selection procedure which they used, more qualified personnel would 65 avail themselves of the opportunity to enroll in the program. In attempting to establish some norms for a selection procedure, item nine asked the respondents to set down the method they would use in selecting men to attend the Food Distribution Program if this responsibility were theirs. Item ten continues on the same subject by asking the respondent to list those characteristics he would look for in the men he would select to attend the program. By com— bining the answers to these three questions we hope to be able to establish some criteria for a selection procedure which can be used by the sponsoring companies. Questions eleven and twelve were analyzed together. Item eleven asks, "What bearing do you think your immediate supervisor feels your participation in the program has on your advancement potential in the company?" Item twelve asked whether or not these same feelings were held by top management. Although it generally could be assumed that top management believed in the value of the program, there was some question as to whether or not middle management held to the same belief. The men who graduate from the Programs in Mass Marketing Management generally enter positions at the lower level of middle management. It is the responsibility of their immediate supervisors to see that they are treated 66 in an unbiased fashion. Assuming that a company has used an excellent selection procedure in identifying those men they wish to sponsor and assuming further that top management is fully behind the program, if any return is to accrue to the organization from their investment into these human resources, their middle management must not hold any resent- ment toward those who have attended the program. Tangential to this problem is that of adequate utiliza— tion by the company of the returning student. Item thirteen asks, "Do you believe that you are being utilized in a posi- tion which permits you to use the training you have received in the Food Distribution Program?" A contributing factor to operating ineffectiveness is poor utilization of the student. Too frequently we hear of an individual who is placed in a position lower than the one he held prior to his attendance in the program, with the eventual effect being disillusion— ment and lowered efficiency. It is the purpose of this question to determine how frequently this has occurred. Items fourteen and fifteen are directly related to the subject of occupational mobility. The first of these two questions asks the respondent if he views his present posi- tion as a step towards a higher management position. Although it was anticipated that the majority would answer 67 in the affirmative, it is our purpose to relate the answer to this question with the answer to question fifteen. This question asks the student to state his opinion and what he believes his organization's philosophy to be on the subject of whether the position of store manager is a career posi- tion or a first step towards higher managerial positions. At present there is a significant difference of opinion on this subject within the supermarket industry. Some companies believe that the position of store manager should be considered as terminal in nature. These companies generally believe that the store manager should not be given a great deal of autonomy but rather should be under the continuous supervision of headquarter's personnel. Other companies, however, view the position of store manager not only as a potential step towards higher management levels but also as an executive position where the greatest possi- ble amount of autonomy should be allowed. It is our hypoth- esis that the graduates of the programs concur with the latter View and where they are employed by an organization which holds to the former belief dysfunctioning on the part of the student will result. Item sixteen was thrown out. The purpose of this question was to determine if there were any significant 68 differences in the degree of insight the student might have into the nature of the Food Industry as a result of which program he attended. However, since almost all of the answers were the same, possibly as a result of their famili- arity with trade journals and other similar publications, no direct analysis was possible. The purpose of question seventeen was to determine the degree of importance which the respondents felt top manage- ment should place upon a college education for food industry management personnel. Question eighteen asks if the respondent would recommend the food industry as a career for young men. As stated in Chapter I, the food industry faces an increasing shortage of potential management personnel. It is through the recommendations of those presently in the industry that many young men will be influenced to investi- gate the food industry as a career possibility. Section III of the questionnaire asks for income data. Items 18a and 18b ask for the gross income which was earned immediately prior to attendance in the program, the amount earned, by two-year intervals, after leaving the program, and the respondent's present income. Items 18c and 18d request information on the kinds of bonuses which are received and the source of any other family income. The 69 last part of this section, item l8e, asks how the respond- ent's income was derived while he was a student in the program. The purpose of this last question was to establish if there was any difference in success between those who had been primarily supported by their sponsoring company and those who had to rely on other sources for their income. The last section of this questionnaire is concerned with personal background information. Section (a), items one through four, asks for the respondent's age, marital status, family size, and years of education at the time of his entry into the program. Items five and six asked for the program in which the respondent had participated and the year in which he graduated. This was asked as a check against our records. Section (b) requested the present age, marital status and family size of the respondent. The last five items were concerned with the background of the respondent's family. Items one and two ask for the respondent's father's occupation and the occupation of the father of the respondent's wife. The purpose of these two questions was to establish the socio-economic background of the respondent and his social-class mobility. The socio— economic background is indicated by the occupation of the respondent's father. Although many factors should be 70 considered before placing an individual at a particular socio—economic level, perhaps the best single factor which can be used is occupation. The categories which we shall use for this study are a modification of those presented by Alba M. Edwards.61 Dr. Edwards has arranged the labor force into six categories: (1) professional persons, (2) proprietors, managers, and officials, (3) clerks and kindred workers, (4) skilled workers and foremen, (5) semiskilled workers, and (6) unskilled workers. For our purposes it was deemed best to combine categories three and four into one group and categories five and six into another division. The reason for limiting the classes to four is due to the relatively small size of our responses. Since 224 useful question— naires were received, it would be statistically unwise to increase the number of categories. To establish the degree of social mobility a comparison will be made between the responses to items one and two in this last section. Item three, which asked for the father's yearly income, was thrown out because the majority Of those responding were unable to supply the information. Item four 61 . . . Alba M. Edwards, Population: Comparative Occupation Statistics for the United States: 1870-1940 (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1943). 71 is concerned with the level of education attained by the respondent's parents. The purpose of this question is to establish the degree of correlation between the education of the parents and the occupational mobility of the respondent. It is anticipated that where the level of parental education is high, we will find the respondent prone to be more mobile both socially and occupationally. The final question on this questionnaire pertains to the birthplace of the parents. Our purpose here is to see whether or not those respondents who are first-generation Americans possess the same degree of mobility as those whose parents were born in the United States. The method which was used to analyze the responses to the thirty-eight questions which were asked of the student group will be presented after we examine the questionnaire which was sent to those men who did not attend the Programs in Mass Marketing Management. Control Group Qpestionnaire-- Content Analysis The questionnaire which was sent to those who had not attended the programs was constructed so that the responses could be compared to the special students'. Therefore, wherever feasible, the same questions were asked of both 72 groups. The questionnaire was divided into four sections. Section I had as its purpose the development of an occupa- tional profile of the individual. Question one asked the respondent to list the description of and length of time spent in each position during the preceding ten years. However, not all of the positions listed were necessarily used in our comparative analysis. The selection of those positions which were to be used for the analysis was not an arbitrary one, but was determined by the category62 to which the respondent belonged. To illustrate, assume that a particular member of the control group held a managerial position between 1954 and 1956 and was 33 years old. This would put him into the second of our three groups. Since we will be comparing him with the special student who entered the program during these same years, we would select only those positions which he had held for the preceding five years for inclusion in our analysis. The answers to questions two and three contain the remainder of the infor- mation necessary to complete the occupational profile. The questions in this section are the same as those which were asked of the student group, therefore permitting us to make 2 6 See pages 57 and 58, Chapter III, for the method by which the control group categories were established. 73 a direct comparison between the responses of the two groups. Item three asks the respondent if he is in a position which permits him to use the training he has received during his food industry experience. Our purpose here is to deter— mine whether there is any difference in the level of frus— tration between the non-students and the students as a result of the difference between the position they are presently in and the one in which they believe they should be employed. Question four asks, "Do you view your present position as a step towards a higher management position?" Question five asks for the respondent's views on whether the position of store manager should be considered to be "terminal" or as a first step towards a higher position. Questions four and five, therefore, are the same as questions fourteen and fifteen on the student group ques- tionnaire. Our purpose is to determine whether education has any effect on the way in which the respondents view the subjects of potential occupational mobility and store manager position. Item six was thrown out since, like the answers to question sixteen on the student questionnaire, there was virtually no difference in the responses. Item seven is of particular interest since it asks for the non-student to 74 express his opinion concerning the importance of higher education for food industry management personnel. Because the members of the control group have virtually no higher education, we anticipate that there will be a significant difference between their responses and those of the student group. Question eight asks, as did number eighteen on the student questionnaire, if the respondent would recommend the food industry as a career for others. If there is a signif— icant difference between the two groups in occupational mobility, we would anticipate that the group with the lower mobility would be less inclined to recommend the industry as a career opportunity for others. Items 9a, b, c, and d, which comprise Section III, are concerned with income data. Parts a and b ask for a ten- year income history by two-year intervals and the respond- ent's present income. As in the case of the listings of the positions of the non-student group, only the income for a designated number of years, depending upon the category in which they are located, will be used for comparison with the income history of the student group. Items c and d ask for the type of bonus received, if any, and other sources of family income. The final section of the questionnaire pertains to the 75 personal data of the respondent. Item 10a asks for the man's age, marital status, family size, and highest level of education attained. Question 10b asks for the occupational background of the respondent's father and his wife's father. The occupational categories which were previously described will also be used for this group so that the profiles of the socio-economic origin and social mobility through marriage of the students and non-students can be compared. The answers to the final questions of respondent's parents' education and place of birth will also be compared to those of the student group and will be correlated with the respondent's occupational mobility. Questionnaire Analysis--Conclusion Wherever possible the two questionnaires are identical. Only those questions which are directly related to opinions concerning the Programs in Mass Marketing were omitted from the non-student questionnaire. In almost all other cases the questions are identical. Where the questions are not identical, they have been so worded that comparisons between the responses can be made. Methods p§_Analysis In analyzing the data which will be presented in 76 Chapter IV, two methods will be used. The responses will be grouped according to our original breakdown of student and non-student categories. The data will be presented so that comparisons can be made between the responses of the three student groups and, where applicable, between the student and non-student groups. In the majority of cases, however, the responses will be evaluated according to the present position of the respondent. All of the positions which were listed by the respondents were divided into three categories, which we shall term High, Middle, and Low. The groupings can be found in Appendix II. Using these positions as the independent variable we shall correlate all other responses (which we have defined as the dependent variables) within these three categories. Therefore, we shall not only evaluate the responses by the student-nonstudent breakdown, but we shall also attempt to isolate those variables which are correlated with the level of position which the respond- ents have attained. The Chi-Square Test It is our objective to determine whether or not there are any significant differences in response between the graduate, special, undergraduate, and non—students. At the 77 same time we wish to know if there is a significant differ- ence in responses which can be related to the position categories, either high, middle or low, into which all of the respondents have been divided. In determining if the distributions we are considering are different or are caused by chance, we have utilized the chi-square statistic. The chi-square test compares the actual value in a cell with the expected value. The expected value is computed on the basis of proportions. To interpret a given chi-square value, only a few facts need to be known. The higher the value, the greater is the difference between the actual observation and what would be expected if no other factors were influencing the distribution. If the observed and expected values were the same, the chi-square value would be 0. The low probability of such an occurrence gives rise to the need of confidence limits. The confidence limit desig- nates the probability that the conclusion is correct. To determine if the distribution is significantly dif- ferent the 95% confidence level will be used for this study. This means that the particular distribution would occur by chance only 5 times in 100. To determine the extent to which the distribution is different the 90%, 99% and 99.9% levels will also be used. 78 These state that for the 90% limit there are 10 chances in 100 that the distribution would occur by chance, for the 99% limit 1 in 100, and for 99.9%, 1 in 1,000. The tables show the chi-square value and the signifi- cance levels. To establish significance computed values are compared with the values which are attached to each confi— dence limit. The chi-square tables and values can be found in any standard statistics book. In comparing the computed value with the table value a significant difference is indicated when the computed value is greater than the book value. The method used to compute chi-square values is found in Appendix IV. CHAPTER IV PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS Introduction In this chapter we shall present the empirical findings of the study. To maintain continuity of thought the data are presented in four sections. Section one is concerned with the topics of industry experience, education, income and related findings. Section two contains the responses of the student groups to the questions which are related to their views of the Programs in Mass Marketing Management and the influence they believe their attendance in these Programs had upon their career patterns. The third section relates the findings to those questions which were asked of both the student and non- student groups, i.e., views on their career potential, importance of store manager, needs of industry for educated personnel and recommendation of industry as career for younger people. The last section presents the significant findings on the individual's socio—economic background. In some cases empirical data which are not directly analyzed within the body of the text can be found in Appendix V. 79 80 All of the data are presented in either of two ways: by the occupational level categories which were established in Chapter III or by the student-control group breakdown. Table 1 indicates how the student and non-student groups are distributed between the three occupation categories. TABLE 1 BREAKDOWN OF STUDENT AND CONTROL GROUPS INTO OCCUPATIONAL LEVELS (numbers) J -’ Student and Control Groups Present . . Total POSition Graduate Under- Special Control graduate High 29 7 19 1‘ 3 58 Middle 26 10 33 37 106 Low 10 4 15 31 60 Total 65 21 67 71 To make the tables which follow more meaningful the data is presented in percentages. The interested reader may refer to Table 1 for conversion to absolute numbers. 81 Career Patterns And Related Findings Industry Experience and Present Position Frequently we are told that it is necessary that a man acquire a significant number of years of experience if he is to have an opportunity to advance into higher managerial levels. Table 2 presents the student group by occupation level and the number of years worked within the industry prior to entry into the program. TABLE 2 YEARS OF FOOD INDUSTRY EXPERIENCE PRIOR TO ENTRY INTO PROGRAMS (as a percentage of occupational level) Years of Experience Occupational Level Less than 5 5—10 Over 10 High 40.0 34.0 26.0 Middle 40.3 35.8 23.9 Low 29.6 44.4 25.9 X2 = 1.128 - not significant at all levels There is no significant difference between the three occupa- tional groupings in relation to this factor. That is, the 82 men who are in the highest position category do not possess a significantly greater or lesser amount of industry experi- ence than those in the two lower groupings. However, if we analyze the length of time that the student had spent in the last position he held prior to his attendance in the Program, we find that a relationship does exist which is significant at the 90% level; that is, there are but 10 chances out of 100 that this distribution could have occurred by chance alone. TABLE 3 LENGTH OF TIME IN POSITION HELD PRIOR TO PROGRAM ATTENDANCE (as a percentage of occupational level) Years in Position Held Prior to Program Occupational Level Less than 2 to 5 Over 2 years years 5 years High 57.4 21.3 21.3 Middle 47.6 39.7 12.7 Low 29.2 45.8 25.0 X2 = 8.359 - significant at 90% level The data in Table 3 indicates that the longer a man had been employed in this "last" position the less were his chances 83 to improve himself after he had completed his program and returned to his job. It would appear that if a man had not been promoted shortly before his entrance into the program, his potential occupational mobility was measurably reduced. Of even greater significance is the relationship between the position held before attendance in the Program and the job which the man was assigned to after he returned to his company. Table 4 indicates that there is a signifi- cant degree of dependence between the position which is presently held and the difference between the positions which were held immediately prior to and immediately after the student's attendance in the program. Regardless of whether the man was promoted from a Low Position to a Middle position, from Middle to High, or Low to High, the important factor was that he was promoted. As shown in Table 4 only 9% of those who are presently in a High position were given a lower position after they returned to their company, while over 34% of this group were given a higher position. Frequently, selection for attendance in these executive development programs indicates to the individual that he is being considered for promotion and that his company is willing to invest money into preparing him for greater responsibilities. Where such promotion does not occur 84 within a reasonable length of time, the individual may elect to seek employment elsewhere. That such action is taken is signified by the data in Table 5. TABLE 4 POSITION HELD IMMEDIATELY AFTER PROGRAM IN RELATION TO POSITION HELD PRIOR TO ATTENDANCE (as a percentage of occupational level) Difference in Levels of Positions Held Prior to and After Program Attendance Occupational Level Did Not Higher Same Lower Work Before Program High 34.5 47.3 9.1 9.1 Middle 13.0 71.0 11.7 4.3 Low 0 79.3 13.8 6.9 X2 = 19.709 - significant at all levels It is interesting to note that it is the High and Low categories which exhibit such tendencies. In the case of those in the high positions it appears that although they did possess the abilities necessary for a higher position, they were not utilized by their company upon their return from the Program. Therefore, they left for employment with another company. 85 TABLE 5 NUMBER OF EMPLOYERS SINCE GRADUATION FROM PROGRAM (as a percentage of occupational level) I L Number of Employers Occupational Level l 2 or more High 67.3 32.7 Middle 94.2 5.8 Low 65.5 34.5 X2 = 17.393 — significant at all levels A different reason seems to exist for the movement of those in the Low group. In most cases it appears that poor selection procedures were used by the sponsoring company. As a result many of these men were not of the calibre to be promoted and, being frustrated, they decided to leave. It should be noted that most of the men in these two categories, High and Low, were sponsored by three companies. This indicates that although they support the programs, these companies lack adequate utilization and/or selection policies. 86 Impact Qf_Education upon Mobility Although we have shown in Table 2 that experience alone is not a significant determining factor of a man's career pattern, we are able to show that when education is combined with experience occupational mobility is greatly enhanced. The data found in Tables 6, 7, and 8 permit us to make this _statement. Table 6 indicates that the student's present position is dependent upon the amount of time which has elapsed since his graduation. TABLE 6 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN YEAR OF PROGRAM COMPLETION AND PRESENT POSITION (as a percentage of occupational level) Year of Graduation Occupational Level 1951-1954 1955-1957 1958-1960 High 32.7 38.2 29.1 Middle 8.7 46.4 44.9 Low 0 31.0 69.0 X2 = 25.0997 - significant at all levels This is certainly understandable, for it takes time for the benefits which a person has received from this type of 87 executive development program to have their impact. The man's experience subsequent to his attendance in the Programs is fertilized by his increased knowledge and, after an incubation period, the length of which is usually depend- ent upon the individual, his growth may be measured. But the increase in experience is not the only deter- mining factor in the individual's mobility pattern. When we test the relationship between the level of education and the present position of both the student and non-student groups, we find that a high degree of dependency does exist between the two variables. TABLE 7 NUMBER OF YEARS OF EDUCATION RELATED TO PRESENT POSITION (as a percentage of occupational level) Years of Education Occupational Level 12 uige:ol6 16 Over 16 High 3.4 34.5 12.1 50.0 Middle 33.0 33.0 9.4 24.5 Low 51.7 25.0 6.7 16.7 X = 37.72 — significant at all levels 88 TABLE 8 COMPARISON BETWEEN SPECIAL AND NON—STUDENT (CONTROL) GROUPS BY PRESENT POSITION (as a percentage of occupational level) Occupational Special Control Level Students Group High 86.4 13.6 Middle 51.6 48.4 Low 28.8 71.2 X2 = 20.9032 - significant at all levels In fact, when this same analysis is made using the Special and Control groups pply, this same dependency is exhibited. This latter point is extremely significant in that the experience which the control group possesses is comparable to that of the Special student group. Therefore, we can definitely conclude that the position of the individual is highly dependent upon whether or not the individual con— tinued his formal education beyond high school. To substan- tiate this finding we can analyze the three student groups to see whether there is a significant difference between them in the positions they now hold. This data is presented in Table 9. We see that the chi square test of independency is validated; that is, the 89 position held is not significantly dependent upon the par- ticular program from which the student graduated. Therefore, we can say that it is the attendance in the Programs in Mass Marketing Management which is the most significant determi- nant of the individual's career pattern rather than attend- ance in one particular proqram or another. TABLE 9 RELATIONSHIP OF THREE STUDENT GROUPS TO PRESENT POSITION (as a percentage of occupational level) Student Categories Occupational Level Graduate Special Undergraduate High 52.8 34.5 12.7 Middle 37.1 47.2 15.7 Low 34.5 51.7 13.8 X2 = 4.1936 - not significant at all levels There is no doubt that industry experience, as a foundation for the potential executive, is necessary. However, it is when this foundation is strengthened and broadened by participation in these Programs that the indi- vidual becomes able to accept a job which demands greater 9O responsibility and authority. Analysis p§_Income Distribution Recognition of an individual's increasing importance to his company is most usually shown by increases in monetary compensation. Our analysis shows that there is a direct relationship between position and income. TABLE 10 DISTRIBUTION OF PRESENT INCOME BY PRESENT POSITION (as a percentage of occupational level) Income Occupational Level $5,000- $7,500- $10,000- Over 7,499 9,999 15,000 $15,000 High 5.2 17.2 51.7 25.9 Middle 20.8 50.0 29.2 0 Low 68.3 31.7 0 0 X2 = 135.892 - significant at all levels This high correlation is to be expected if we assume employers to be rational men. This particular analysis does permit us to test the reliability of the responses. It does not appear that the respondents overstated their present 91 income. This also gives us an indication that our original categorization of jobs into our three levels of positions does appear to be in agreement with the food industry's ranking of positions by salary scale. Another way of evaluating the present income of the respondents is by the student, non—student distribution. The influence of education is implicit in this analysis. TABLE 11 PRESENT INCOME AS RELATED TO STUDENT AND CONTROL GROUPS (percentage by student-control categories) Income Levels Student and Cczntr°i $5,000- $7,500- $10,000- Over a eg°rles 7,499 9,999 15,000 $15,000 Graduate 21.5 26.2 41.5 10.8 Undergraduate 33.3 47.6 14.3 4.8 Special 31.3 35.8 25.4 7.5 Control 33.8 43.7 19.7 2.8 X2 = 14.67 — not significant at all levels We see that there is a significant difference if we include the non-student control group. It is also interesting to note that if we eliminate the control group from this 92 analysis, we find that, although the graduate student appears to be earning a higher income, given the acceptable confidence limits which have been established for this study, the difference in income is not dependent upon the program in which the student was enrolled. Here, too, it is partic- ipation in the Programs which is the significant determinant rather than enrollment in any pp§_of the three programs-- Special, Graduate or Undergraduate. Conclusions The data in this section indicates a significant rela- tionship between attendance in these executive development programs and occupational mobility. Experience is important only when it is combined with increased formal education. Comparison between the position held immediately before and immediately after attendance gives an indication of poten- tial mobility. Poor utilization of the returning student and inaccurate selection procedures by sponsoring companies can give rise to the individual's leaving the company. Income is directly related to the position and both are dependent upon attendance in the Programs, and not to one specific program as opposed to another. 93 Impact 9; Program--Student Opinions Introduction We have shown that by attending any one of the three Programs in Mass Marketing Management a man greatly increases his chances for upward occupational mobility. Now we shall see what importance the student places upon his participation in the Programs. Unlike the responses of the previous section which were objective in nature, the data in this section are subjective responses. In almost all cases the student was able to give more than one answer to each question. Because of this possibility we shall present the data in two ways. In the body of the text the replies will be reported as a percentage of the number of students who responded with a particular answer. The chi-square distri- butions, which are computed on the base of the total number of replies by each occupational category, will be placed in Appendix V. Our purpose in presenting the data in this fashion is to indicate to the reader the number of students within each occupational level who replied with a given answer. The levels of significance will be reported in both tables. 94 Reasons for Attending Program Regardless of the students' present occupational level their reasons for entering these executive development programs are basically the same. As would be expected, many anticipated that their chances for promotion would be enhanced. Not only were they seeking increased knowledge of the Food industry itself, but many specifically mentioned a desire to "broaden" themselves by increasing their formal education. The following excerpts from the responses of two students are indicative of the feelings which were expressed by most of the respondents: To further my education--to enable me to better cope with the complexities of society and the business world . . . to acquire more knowledge in the field of food distribution--that would be an asset in attain- ing higher positions in a company when the opportunity would present itself. Preparation for higher management positions . . . believed that the program would provide me with know- ledge and insight that cannot be obtained from "on- the-job training" - i.e., association with members of other companies. The reasons stated are certainly of great interest, but frequently omissions can be equally revealing. Very few of the students were seeking specific "technical" knowledge of the type which they could acquire on-the-job. Rather than looking for specific "how-to-do" knowledge they were more concerned with acquiring a broad foundation of ideas and 95 .mHmBmsm mamfluaoe mo uaomwu m mm Rooa cmnu duos 0» ppm was msomm mHm>mH Ham um ucmuaueamem so: u mse.s u x N e.m m.mo m.em m.sm 30a e.os m.se H.mm m.ee messes 4.6H m.em o.me o.me seem coaumospm mnumspsH boom Hmho me cod Hmo no as H s a m .u. m a .m mo mmpmasosx HmEHom ommmm U H mo nodummmmsm How wummmum swoonnu masonmxomm . pmmmmuosH am>mq mo msacmpmoum . Hmsoflummsooo msfibsmuué how mcommmm Aaw>ma Hmsofiummoooo 30mm swnufi3 musmpoum mo HwQEos so woman RV m2¢m00mm OZHMHBZM mom mZOmme Ham um unmoumacmem u oemm.mm u x m o.mm o.mm n.0m m.ma o 30A H.NH H.mH H.Hv H.5N m.® mamas: m.ms m.oe o.sm m.om H.~H swam Umaaflxm cam Hmmmsmz paw mucommwm oz pmaaaxmsb Hmoaumao Houmfiumonm Hmsoflmmmmoum . Hm>mq Hmsoflummoooo soflummoooo m.Hm£umm flam>ma amaofiummsuoo mo mmmucmoumm m mmv mmmeflm m0 ZOHBflmDUUO OB Qm>mq Qmn Hoseaummoooo soflummsooo m.Hm£umm m.mma3 Aam>ma Hmcoflummsooo mo wmmuswoumo m mmv mmmfiflm m.mmH3 m0 ZOHEmq AfiZOHEdeUUO m.BZWQZOmmmm ho mHmmZOHefiqmm ON mqmflfi 114 occupational orientation of the respondent's father and wife's father to be significantly related to the occupa- tional level of the respondent. Tables 19 and 20 indicate that the higher the occupational level of the respondent, the higher the occupational origin of his father or his wife's father. It is also significant to note that those who exhibit social mobility through marriage also exhibit their mobility by their high occupational level. This latter point is illustrated by the data in Table 21. TABLE 21 COMPARISON OF OCCUPATIONAL LEVELS OF FATHER AND WIFE'S FATHER (as a percentage of occupational level) Wife's Father's Occupation Occupational Level Higher Same Lower than as than Father's Father's Father's High 51.8 28.6 19.6 Middle 29.5 39.8 30.7 Low 22.2 55.6 22.2 X = 13.8624 - significant at all levels 115 Whereas over 50% of those who are presently married and are in the High occupational level married women whose father's occupation was higher than their own father's, only 22% of the respondents in the Low occupational level exhibit the same mobility through marriage. Education pf_Respondent's Parents An evaluation of the educational level of the respondent's parents indicates that there is a significant relationship between the respondent's occupational level and the amount of education his mother has acquired. The same relationship does not hold, however, when we evaluate the education of the respondent's father. TABLE 22 MOTHER'S EDUCATION (as a percentage of occupational level) Education Level Occupational Level No Some Graduated Beyond High School High School High School High School High 21.0 22.8 36.8 19.3 Middle 27.9 29.8 33.7 8.7 Low 46.7 23.3 23.3 6.7 2 X = 58.6594 - significant at all levels 116 TABLE 23 FATHER'S EDUCATION (as a percentage of occupational level) Education Level Occupational Level No Some Graduated Beyond High School High School High School High School High 31.0 24.1 25.9 19.0 Middle 36.5 26.0 19.2 18.3 Low 46.7 28.3 13.3 11.7 X2 = 5.8352 — not significant at all levels The data in Tables 22 and 23 appear to indicate that it is the mother that has the greater influence upon the individual. If the mother has a higher education, she recognizes its importance and encourages her son to acquire a higher level of formal education. It may be that the mother is more "mobility-conscious" than the father and, recognizing that education is a route to social and occupa- tional mobility, influences her son accordingly. Place of Birth of Parents There is no relationship between the birth-place of the parents and the son's achievement. In the preliminary 117 stages of this study the author believed that there would be a tendency for the first generation, United States born, student to exhibit a greater degree of mobility than those whose parents were born in this country. However, the data indicates that this is not the case. Respondent's Age and Family Formation An analysis of the data concerning age, marital status and number of children indicates that there is no relation- ship between these factors and the achievement of the individual. Although the Special student and non-student are generally older than the graduate and undergraduate, age itself is not an aid or detriment to the individual. Unlike some industries where youth is a deterrent to rapid mobility, the Food Industry does not put a premium upon the older and more mature man. With the rapid changes which are taking place within the industry, it seems that the younger, more flexible individual is being sought to fill more responsible positions. Conclusions The occupational achievement of the father and wife's father are highly correlated with the individual's occupa- tional level. The higher the occupational origin of the 118 respondent's father, the higher is his own position. Of those who responded, their achievement is directly corre- lated with the educational level of the mother, an indica- tion of maternal influence upon the individual's mobility aspiration and achievement. First generation born respond- ents are no more or less mobile than those whose parents were native born. Age and marital status of the respondent are not related to his success. CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Introduction The purpose of this chapter is to present the summary and conclusions of the research study. The chapter is divided into four sections. Section one presents an evalua- tion of the hypotheses which were presented in Chapter I. The second section summarizes the findings of the data which is presented in Chapter IV. Section three presents the con- clusions and implications for executive development within the food industry. The final section suggests other areas for research. Evaluation Qf_Hypotheses 1. There i§_§_significant difference in_achieve- ment between participants due pp_ph§_ particular program attended. On the basis of the data presented in Table 9 the hypothesis must be rejected and, therefore, judged invalid. Although the Graduate student accounted for over 50% of the 119 120 students in the high occupational level, on the basis of the chi-square test for independence this could have been caused by chance. Furthermore, the data from Table 11 indicates that income is not dependent upon the particular program attended. Here, too, we find that more Graduate students are earning between $10,000 and $15,000 than are Special or Undergraduate, but the chi-square test is not significant at the accepted confidence limit. 2. There i§_§_significant difference ip_achieve- ment between those who participated ip_§h§_ programs and §_se1ected group pf_industry representatives who did not attend these same programs. In selecting the control or non—student group criteria were established so as to make these men comparable to the Special student in age, industry experience and education. The control group, however, had not attended any executive development programs such as the Programs in Mass Marketing Management. On the basis of the findings of the data as presented in Tables 7 and 8 the hypothesis is judged to be valid. 3. Industry experience alone i§_not sufficient 121 for success but must b§_combined with executive development §g_insure adequate preparation for the needs g: the food industry. Indications from the data in Tables 2, 6 and 7 permit the validation of the hypothesis. When the years of industry experience which the former students had prior to their attendance in the Programs is related to their present occupational level, no significant relationship emerges. But, as shown in Table 6, after attendance in the Programs a significant relationship does exist. The combination of experience and higher formal education does have a positive effect upon the individual's career mobility. A comparison of the Special and Non-Student groups, who are comparable in the amount of industry experience they possess, gives even greater support to the acceptance of the hypothesis. 4. Views gg_the need for education tg_p§_successful within the Food Industry will vary directly with the amount 9f_education possessed and degree 9: success 9§_the respondent. A critical evaluation of the data in Tables 18 and 28 permits acceptance of the hypothesis as being valid. However, the responses are not as divergent as one might believe. Of the 224 respondents only 8 felt that education 122 was relatively unimportant. Table 18, which indicates the responses by occupational level, shows that those in the Middle and Low levels are more prone to indicate that both higher education and experience are needed for the individ- ual in a management position. The data in Table 28 evaluates these responses by the student, non—student categories. From this analysis it can be seen that it is the non—student who emphasizes the need for experience. Yet the Special student who has had compa- rable experience indicates that education is extremely important. 5. Certain factors gf_family background can be_ shown tg_b§_highly correlated with achievement. Tables 19 and 20 indicate that those in the High cate- gory are more often characterized by a higher occupational origin of their father and wife's father than are those who are in the Middle and Low occupational levels. In addition, as indicated in Table 21, there is a greater tendency for those in the High occupational level to marry a woman whose father is in a higher occupation than is the respondent's father. Achievement of the individual is also significantly related to the education of his mother. The higher the 123 occupational level of the respondent, the greater is the amount of schooling possessed by the mother. Maternal influence upon social and occupational mobility is indicated by the data in Table 22. The above factors indicate that respondents in the High occupations are more apt to possess backgrounds of social and occupational mobility than those in the lower categories. They continue their mobility pattern by increasing their formal education. From these factors the hypothesis is validated. Specific Findings Q§_The Study Throughout this study the present Occupational Level of the respondents has been identified as the independent variable. In this section we shall present a summary of the dependent objective variables which are significantly related to the independent variable. In the following section a summary of the subjective findings will be presented. Education and Practical Experience In evaluating the relationship between the years of experience of the students prior to their attendance in 124 these executive development programs and their present posi- tion no significant relationship was established. When the variable of education is injected into the analysis, a sig- nificant relationship does emerge. A comparison between the student and non-student groups indicates that the increase in formal education beyond the level of high school has a significant impact upon the individual's career pattern. A comparison of the three student groups, i.e., Graduate, Special and Undergraduate, indicates no significant differ- ence in advancement potential. It is the combination of practical experience and higher formal education which has the greatest impact upon career mobility. Three significant factors emerge from an analysis of the students' job history. First, those that had been pro- moted within the two year period prior to their attendance in the Programs were more likely to experience continued advancement than those who had not received a promotion within the same time period. Second, those who received a promotion immediately following graduation were identified as "promotables" and had the greatest chance to eventually attain a high position. Finally, although the majority of students remained with their sponsoring company a number sought employment with other companies. Indications are 125 that either the returning student was not adequately uti- lized by his company or the company did not use an adequate selection procedure, thereby sending a man to the Program who was not of managerial calibre. In either case frustra- tion seems to be the major reason for leaving the sponsoring company. Present income is significantly related to the Occupa— tional Level of the respondent. An analysis of income by the student, non-student categories indicates no significant relationship between the variables. Although the Graduate student appears to be receiving a higher income, it is not significant at the 95% level. Family,Orientation The respondents whose present position places them in the High Occupational Level are characterized by a higher occupational origin of their father and wife's father than are those in the lower occupational levels. In addition, those in the High Occupational Level show a greater tendency toward social mobility by virtue of their marrying a woman whose father is of a higher occupational level than is their own father. An evaluation of the relationship between the respondent's educational orientation and his present 126 position indicates a significant relationship between the mother's education and the present position of the individual. This latter point would seem to indicate the potential maternal influence upon the individual's mobility aspirations and achievement. Impact 9f_Program--Student Opinions The measurement of the objective factors which are related to the occupational level of the students indicates that participation in these executive development programs has had a significant impact upon the career mobility of the participants. The students' opinions support this finding. The major reasons given for attending the Programs were a desire for a broader background, an increased knowledge of the food industry and an opportunity to increase advancement potential. Regardless of their present position, the major- ity of students agreed that they had benefited greatly from their attendance. The benefit most frequently listed was the opportunity to learn how various companies solved similar problems. In addition, most felt that their increased knowledge and broader backgrounds gave them greater confidence in accepting new assignments. Indica- tions from the responses are that the students were well satisfied with their experience and would recommend that 127 others enter the Programs. Although the majority of students felt that their attendance in the Programs had been an aid in their advance- ment, approximately 20% believed that it had been a hindrance. The deprecatory views of their immediate super- visors concerning a "college-man" was the major reason given for their feelings of being "hindered" in their advancement. This View was expressed by students within each occupational level, not just by those in the lower categories. Although most of the students indicated that their executive develop- ment experience was a distinct advantage, they also recog- nized that their job performance was most crucial in deter- mining their continued advancement. On the subject of company selection procedures for attendance in the Programs, the students suggested that personality tests and competitive examinations be used in addition to supervisory recommendations and personal inter— viewing or "screening" procedures which are now used. A number of students believed that if selection procedures were made more widely known to employees, many more well qualified men would apply for attendance in the Programs. Mobility and Opportunity Although the majority of both the students and 128 non-students believe they are in a position which permits them to use their previous training, those in the lower positions exhibit less satisfaction than those in the High and Middle Occupational levels. Over 90% of the respondents believe that their present job will lead to a higher position, even though many of these men have not exhibited any significant degree of career mobility in the past. Because so many of the respondents are or have been store managers, they were asked if they viewed this position as a career job or as a step toward higher management. Those who are presently store managers do not view their position as a career job unless more prestige and greater responsibility and authority are given to them. The respondents who are above the store manager position recog- nize the need for more career store managers due to the increasing importance of this position. Those in the Low Occupational Level also view the position of store manager as one which would be a good career if more prestige and responsibility were given to the store manager. Only 4% of the respondents attach relatively little importance to higher formal education for food industry management personnel. Although the non—students stress the 129 importance of practical experience, the Special student who has had comparable experience places greater emphasis upon the need for higher education. A third of the respondents express the belief that the food industry will have to place more importance upon a higher education for management personnel and that experienced, well qualified employees should be given an opportunity to increase their formal education. Almost 95% of the respondents recommended the food industry as one which held excellent opportunities for the young man. As a prerequisite to success the majority sug- gested that some store-operation experience be had by all individuals. Implications And Conclusions Because of the limitations of this study, as identified in Chapter I, it is not possible to state that participation in these executive development programs was a primary cause . . 63 . of career mobility. As Andrews pOints out: Neither companies nor schools, when both choose promotable men to be the participants, can use 63Andrews, "Reaction to University Development Programs," p. 130. 130 subsequent promotion as validation. We should nonetheless remember that the contribution of education to performance, competence, and promo- tion may be very great, however indirect. Yet the students themselves have placed great value upon their increased education as a prime determinant of their subsequent mobility. This reaction is in keeping with Andrews' findings which indicate that, . . it is interesting to note that the longer the program, the more likely men are to attribute direct connection between attendance and subsequent progress. The benefits they report are similar to those reported by Andrews: "Broadening," greater analytical ability and increased confidence. Although the findings of this study closely parallel those of the Andrews report, the participants in these exec- utive development programs are significantly different than those reported on by Andrews. Over half of those Andrews studied were between 41 and 50 years old, had 11 to 25 years of service with their present company and were in executive positions. The participants in the Programs in Mass Market- ing Management are almost all under 32 years of age, with less than ten years' experience and were not in executive positions when they attended the Programs. 64Ibid. 131 It would seem that it is possible to give younger men who are not executives the same opportunity to increase their formal education with equally favorable results. Furthermore, findings of this study indicate that it is pos- sible to identify those who possess mobility potential by evaluating their occupational and educational orientation. Implications For Executive Development As the trend toward decentralization continues, it becomes necessary for companies to develop men to take on broader managerial responsibilities. The increase in com- petition for managerial talent places continuous pressure upon management to seek out and identify the potential executive at the earliest possible moment. The findings of this study indicate that such identification can be made when the potential executive is in his twenties. By iden- tifying the individual at this early age and exposing him to a continuous and well—planned executive development program, the company can avoid executive bankruptcy. Perhaps the major implications of this study apply to the retailing industry in general and food retailing in particular. Most retailers rely on in-company development programs which concentrate on the teaching of techniques. 132 But this type of training cannot give the individual those benefits which are considered so important by participants of university executive development programs. The question of who should be given the opportunity to increase his formal education is best answered by reference to one of the major findings of this study: the Graduate, Undergraduate and Special students appear to have benefited equally by their attendance. The important factor is that the corporate objectives of executive development should be well defined and programs constructed to meet the needs of the specific type of person or persons being sent. As retailers increase in size there is a tendency toward decentralization. With this decentralization more responSibility and authority is frequently passed on to lower management. If top management expects top-level per- formance from lower management, they must equip them with the knowledge necessary for the job. If, on the other hand, management centralizes control of operations at the head- quarters level, then, as the findings of this study indicate, broad, executive development opportunities should be offered only to those in higher administrative levels. 133 Conclusions Although this study gives every indication that the Programs in Mass Marketing Management have given the students greater chances for advancement by increasing their knowledge, ability and confidence, and even though many of the sponsoring companies indicate their support and approval of these educational endeavors, the author possesses ambi— valent feelings regarding the future. From 1950 to 1960 less than 500 men were enrolled in these programs. The three directors, Drs. Wilson, Brand and Barnet have repeatedly made pleas to the industry regarding their future needs of executive talent and the developing shortage of management manpower. It has been pointed out that the only unique asset these companies can possess is an imaginative, knowledgeable and flexible management team. Yet only token support has been given to these executive development programs. The value of executive development can no longer be questioned. The Programs in Mass Marketing Management have been developed to equip the individual with a broad perspec- tive which extends beyond the food industry into the total sphere of business and society. The time is rapidly approaching when the Food Industry 134 will have to decide whether or not it wishes to continue to develop individuals who will be able to accept business leadership responsibilities such as those men who have attended the Programs in Mass Marketing Management. Suggested Areas For Further Research This study has attempted to delineate the potential advantages of a university executive development program which is oriented toward the education of men who have not yet reached the executive plateau. Further research in two areas is indicated by the findings. In identifying the potential executive many psycholog- ical, social and economic factors must be evaluated. A study of higher management personnel within the Food Industry, which would be oriented toward isolating these variables of personality and background, would reduce the error in identifying and selecting potential executive talent. An ongoing study of this nature would enable man- agement to both reduce the cost of and increase the effec- tiveness of manpower development. Findings of this study also point toward a need for increasing the responsibilities of line-supervisors in the area of management development. Frequently, it is the 135 line-supervisor who has the first and only opportunity to seek out and identify the above average subordinate who possesses executive potential. If the supervisor could be made aware of this important phase of his job, more qual- ified men could be identified for executive development. How this should and could be done would be a rewarding endeavor. Neither top management nor the university is able to prepare a man for executive responsibilities until he has been identified by his superior. APPENDIX I DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAMS IN MASS MARKETING MANAGEMENT 137 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY'S EXECUTIVE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS IN MASS MARKETING MANAGEMENT* (formerly named FOOD MARKETING MANAGEMENT) A Curriculum in Business Administration for Volume Merchandisers of Consumer Goods in the Food and Other Industries Serving the Public Edward M. Barnet, Ph. D. Professor of Business Administration Director COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND PUBLIC SERVICE EPPLEY CENTER EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN *"Food merchants are no longer food merchants only. They have become a part of the great general merchandising community, concentrating on mass marketing management of the flow of consumer goods from the mass producers. To- day, production and distribution are united on a continuous belt delivering a high standard of living to the public." 1962-63 138 HISTORY AND PURPOSE Since 1950, at the instigation of leading executives in the food chain industry represented in the National Association of Food Chains, this educational program at Michigan State University is dedicated to: lst, providing a business educational program suited to the dynamic and fast-changing needs of the food industry; 2nd, providing types of programs fitted to different age levels: graduate, undergraduate and special; 3rd, meeting the demand for new types of managers with administrative skills and know-how required in the growing complexity of intensified competition; 4th, capitalizing on the quality of men identified by their employers as most likely to have greater potential for responsibilities beyond their present positions by investing them with greater knowledge. To state that the food industry--manufacturing, wholesaling, brokerage, cooperative, voluntary, or chain--constitutes the largest in the country is to understate its significance. With the rapid mutations of combined grocery and meats, to supermarkets, superettes, minimarts and now gigantic disa count stores offering, in addition to grocery-meats-produce, apparel, hardware, drugs, cameras, recordings and toys, the nature of management has shifted from administration of a Mama-Papa unit to the use of colossal distribution centers, massive transportation, electronic brains and highly equipped brain power. While profits per unit sold are figured in fractions of pennies, capital investment has soared into large fractions of millions of dollars per unit store. To survive, turnover and markup together must assure adequate return on invested capital. Management of an earlier day could survive on hunch and shrewdness. Today's management calls for men who can use all the tools of modern administration: accounting, 139 marketing research, site location analysis, warehouse admin- istration, financial management, skill in conference leader- ship, advertising, packaging, uses of floor space, parking space, traffic flow, and architecture. Competition by innovation particularly characterizes the food industry. But it is not alone. Constricting margins of profit compel the search for greater turnover. Volume is sought through new promotions, new items, new colors, new locations. Offsetting low markup items is the increase in non-foods, capturing loyalty through stamps, give-aways, circus atmosphere. Reaching for new segments of the market, night openings, Sunday openings, trading up, trading down, different retail- ers have tried different approaches, while manufacturers and wholesalers cooperate or even instigate still newer approaches. Frozen foods were an innovation. Quick-freeze- dry may displace them with a still greater service to the public. With the acute shortage of managerial talent facing the nation in the next ten years due to the lack of births in the 1930's, all industry will be competing for the available man—andawoman power. While the gross national product is expected to double in this upcoming decade and the popula- tion is fast approaching 215 millions, those in the manage- rial age groups, 25-45, number only 47-million each year for the next ten. Of these, only 23-million are males. The inevitable result must be--and already is--delayed retirement past 65 years of age, accelerated apprenticeships and the demand for more investment in knowledge to enhance the capacities of good men already identified as leaders. Since even today only 35% of high school graduates go to college, obviously some of the best minds in the country are in that 65% who do not. Even though only 13% of the popula- tion went to college at the time of World War I and almost triple that percentage attend now, the vast majority of our brightest citizens do not have a college education. Manage- ment must offset this by investing in management development. 140 KINDS OF PROGRAMS 1. II. Special Our Special Program is designed for those outstanding men and women who have only a high school education or at most only a few years of college beyond that. The mini- mum age for Special Students is 21 years. The average age is 28. Although many men with college degrees prefer the Special Program because of the less rigid curriculum and broader variety of subjects available in contrast to the Master's Degree Program, we recommend the latter pro- gram with the advanced degree for those whose undergradu- ate record and admissions test scores make them eligible for acceptance in it. The Special Program is tailored to fit the educational needs of each participant in it. In addition to account- ing, economics, marketing, personnel administration, advertising, and other business subjects, they may want and need public speaking, writing and reading courses to develop certain skills. While we have available courses in meats, dairy, poultry, horticulture, etc., we recom- mend that participants take mostly those subjects in which they cannot get on-the-job training in their own organizations. In the short nine months (3 terms) of the Special Program, there is not enough time even for all the business courses most participants come to want. Completion of the Special Program is marked by the award of a Special Program Certificate. Master's The program for the degree of Master of Business Adminis- tration is a one-year program, in contrast to the two- year minimum of most other highly accredited graduate schools of business. It is a most intense, highly accel- erated program. Most food marketing students have demon- strated the capacity to complete it in an eleven month (4 term) period. To qualify for the M.B.A. program, candidates should have had a 3.0 average (on a 4.0 point system) as undergradu- ates. Applicants whose undergraduate record is somewhat less than this may be considered for admission as "pro- visionally accepted" providing their test scores on both III. 141 the Miller Analogies and Graduate Admissions Tests plus their greater maturity indicate they show the potential capacity to maintain the required "B" average. The test scores will be required either prior to or at the time of entry into the Graduate Program. It is also recommended that candidates have had at least two years of job experience. Undergraduate The Undergraduate Program is a four-year curriculum. The Undergraduate Program is, in effect, a major in mass (formerly only "food") marketing management following completion of the freshman and sophomore years in the basic requirements (liberal arts) of the University College indicated for all undergraduates. There is a firm conviction that in a world characterized by sputniks, jet propelled planes, the rise of suburbia, the emergence of large disposable incomes with their implications for vast new opportunities and social change worldwide, a man cannot face the unpredictable without a broad foundation. This permits juniors and seniors to participate in courses accenting mass marketing management with particu- lar emphasis on the food industry, in addition to a diver- sified exposure to the complete spectrum of business administration issues: accounting, personnel administra- tion, public speaking, economics, business law, traffic and transportation, psychology, and, of course, intensive aspects of marketing-—to name a few. For those who want more knowledge of the specifics such as meats, poultry and produce, cooperation with the College of Agriculture makes them available as well, on an elective basis. Students with proper academic credentials obtained in other universities may apply for admission and transfer to this program for their junior and senior years. Seniors are eligible to participate in field trips with Special and Graduate students. 142 All undergraduates, as well as all other students in the several aspects of these programs are eligible for mem- bership in Pi Sigma Epsilon fraternity and all it holds for social and professional activities. .MORE DETAILED DESCRIPTIONS OF THE COURSE REQUIREMENTS ON EACH OF THE PROGRAMS (SPECIAL, GRADUATE OR UNDERGRADUATE) MAY BE OBTAINED SEPARATELY BY REQUEST FROM THE DIRECTOR OF THE PROGRAMS. .APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION .All students should send their applications for admission to the Office of Admissions and Scholarships, 258 Student Services Building, Michigan State University, East Lansing, .Michigan. Transcripts of all work taken previously——whether they be high school, college, night school, or correspondence courses--should be sent to the Office of Admissions and Scholarships in support of the application. These should be nailed directly by the institution originating the records to this university and must not pass through the hands of the applicant. Request should be made for information regarding the kinds of aptitude and other screening tests offered by this university to serve as a basis for properly advising students on the ‘kinds of courses they should take initially to prevent assignment to those in advance of their capacities or prior preparation. .Applications for Scholarships should be made through the Director of the Programs in Mass Marketing Management, Eppley Center, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. In all cases affecting applications for admission, the Office of Admissions and Scholarships will notify the student con- cerning the decision made on his application. HOUSING Student housing is of unparalleled excellence at Michigan State University. Married student housing is comparable to the modern motel and at reasonable rates. New dormitories for men are of the most modern architecture and permit real participation in informal "bull sessions" which are invaluable. 143 Housing costs for a single student, including board and room are $262 per term, or $786 per 3-quarter year, or $1,048 per 4-quarter year. Room rates alone (not including food) in the Graduate Residence Center are $168 per term for singles, $126 for double occupancy. For married students, who number almost one—third of the total student body of about 23,000 men and women, the monthly rates are $84.00 for l-bedroom and $90.00 for 2-bedroom apartments. WRITE TO DIRECTOR OF HOUSING, Michigan State University, for detailed information. For those seeking two- bedroom apartments, birth certificates of children must be presented at time of application; if additional births make a move desirable, present the new birth certificate at earliest possible date when seeking the larger apartment. Deposit at time of application for housing is $25.00. FEES Michigan Out-of-State 1. Course Fees* Residents Residents Per term $108.00 $ 290.00 Per annum for 3-term student $324.00 $ 870.00 Per annum for 4-term student $432.00 $1,160.00 2. Repeat Course Fees . . . . . $5.00 per course 3. Late Credentials . . . . $5.00; a fee of $5.00 is charged students who fail to file their credentials before 5:00 p.m. three weeks before the first day of registration. 4. Late Registration . . . . $15.00 to $25.00; students registering or paying fees after the regular registra- tion date are required to pay an additional fee: $15.00 for the first day and $5.00 more for each day thereafter up to the limit of $25.00. This fee will not be refunded. 5. Dropping of Courses . . . . If a student drops a course which changes his total credit load from full time to part time or from one part time group to another, a refund of half of the differences in fees between the *Notes from Michigan State University Catalog, 1962-63. For more details see Catalog. 144 two fee groups will be made, providing the drop is made before the middle of the term. If the drop is made after the middle of the term, no refund will be given. 6. Refund of Fees-4Withdrawal from the University . . . A student who officially withdraws from the University on a voluntary basis after registration but before the middle of the term may, upon presentation of the official with- drawal, student receipts, identification card and activ- ity book to the Registrar's Office, be authorized to receive one-half of fees paid for the term. If the with- drawal occurs after the middle of the term, no refund will be given. 7. State News . . . . . $3.00 per year ($1.00 per term) 8. Student Government Tax . . .$ .75 per year ($ .25 per term) 9. Estimated Cost of Books and Supplies - $185.00 per year 10. Fraternity (Pi Sigma Epsilon) . . . . $ 45.00 per year 11. A rough total estimate of minimum costs per student, not including clothing, medical, transportation, etc.: 3—Term Undergraduate 4-Term Master's or Degree Special Student Candidate In—State Out-of-State In-State Out—of-State Single $1,400 $1,875 $1,875 $2,675 Married 2,250 2,750 2,575 3,175 Married(l child) 2,550 3,050 2,975 3,475 Married(2 children) 2,750 3,250 3,175 3,675 FINANCIAL AIDS First, it should be noted that the difference between the costs of education per student sustained by the University and the amount paid by the student totals approximately $1,000 per capita per academic year; this subsidy is provided by the taxpayers of the State of Michigan. "In order to keep the door of opportunity open for superior students, Michigan State University has established an Office 145 of Scholarships, a Student Loan Office, and a Student Employ- ment Office. The purpose of these offices is to help highly- qualified young people realize their goal of a college educa- tion by assisting them through financial aids. Presently there are three major types of financial aids available: scholarships, loans, and part-time employment."* SCHOLARSHIPS AND COMPANY FELLOWSHIPS Historically, scholarships have been provided by chains, wholesalers and manufacturers for men who competed through applications to the National Association of Food Chains. These were $1,500 scholarships, bearing the name of the donor firm, of which $1,000 was applied by the student winner to his tuition and other expenses and $500 came to the support of the program, for library funds, travel, research and other admin- istrative activities of the programs themselves. In 1960, a new approach to financing both participants and the program was approved by the many industry groups interested in the advancement of these programs. Each company sending its own men agreed to make a voluntary contribution of $500 for each man sent. This has been publicized both by the National Association of Food Chains and the Grocery Manufacturers of America to their respective members. Men sent by their own employers are said to be bearers of Company Fellowships. This, however, does not meet the need for scholarships of many men who are not financed by employers and creates a serious challenge to those who wish to recruit men not already claimed by employers as their own. To meet this problem, the new National Business Advisory Com— mittee for these programs (see list of members in Appendix A) has announced its intention of raising several $2,000 scholar- ships, $l,500 for the student and $500 for the programs. The plans for organizing a method of raising such funds are being formulated. It is not possible to state when or how many of such scholarships will be made available. Application forms for such scholarships may be requested, however, and should be sent to the Director. They will be screened by a committee made up of faculty of the University's College of Business and Public Service, as well as by members of the National Business Advisory Committee. *Michigan State University CatalOg, 1962—63. 146 APPENDIX A Membership of The NATIONAL BUSINESS ADVISORY COMMITTEE for MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY'S EXECUTIVE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS IN MASS MARKETING MANAGEMENT Chairman: Robert S. Larkin Director of Chain Store Sale Philip Morris, Inc. New York City, N. Y. G. H. Achenbach, President, Piggly Wiggly Sims, Vidalia, Ga. William Applebaum, Visiting Consultant on Food Distribution, Harvard University, Boston, Mass. R. D. Arney, Vice President, George A. Hormel & Co., Austin, Minnesota Charles L. Arnold, Special Personnel Consultant, The Kroger Company, Cincinnati, Ohio W. Robert Boyd, Vice President, Fisher Foods, Inc., Cleveland, Ohio Paul Brown, Vice President, Scott Paper Company, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Frank J. Cogan, Editor, Food Business, New York City, N.Y. Lawrence Drake, Director, New Publication Development, Cahners Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, Mass. L. V. Eberhard, President, Eberhard Foods, Inc., Grand Rapids, Mich. E. Lee Feller, General Manager, Alliance Associates, Coldwater, Mich. W. C. Ferguson, Vice President, American Stores Company, Philadelphia, Pa. Ned Fleming, President, The Fleming Company, Inc., Topeka, Kansas Dan F. Gerber, President, Gerber Products Company, Fremont, Michigan B. D. Graham, Executive Vice President, H. J. Heinz Company, Pittsburgh, Pa. Don R. Grimes, President, Independent Grocers' Alliance, Chicago, Ill. Ray 0. Harb, Executive Vice President, Cooperative Food Distributors of America, Chicago, Ill. Thomas G. Harrison, Chairman, Super Valu Stores Inc., Minneapolis, Minn. 147 Clifford W. Isaacson, Vice President, Continental Baking Company, Rye, N. Y. Marie Kiefer, Executive Director, National Association of Retail Grocers, Chicago, Ill. LeRoy M. King, Consultant, New York City, N. Y. Arthur E. Larkin, Jr. Vice President, Maxwell House, Hoboken, N.J. Mard Leaver, President, Kellogg Sales Company, Battle Creek, Mich. Harley V. McNamara, Chairman of the Executive Board, National Tea Company, Chicago, Ill. Myer B. Marcus, Executive Vice President, Food Fair Stores, Inc., Philadelphia, Pa. Lloyd W. Moseley, Vice President, The Grand Union Company, East Paterson, N.J. Robert W. Mueller, Editor, Progressive Grocer, New York City Edward M. Muldoon, Vice President and General Manager, Grocery Products Division, Beatrice Foods Company, Detroit, Mich. Vernon C. Myers, Publisher, Look Magazine, New York City, N.Y. Calvin M. Newman, Vice President, Hinky Dinky Food Stores, Omaha, Nebraska William B. Nixon, President, Campbell Sales Company, Camden, N.J. William F. Pyle, Editor, Supermarket News, New York City, N.Y. George A. Ramlose, Consultant and President, George A. Ramlose Foundation, Boston, Mass. Watson Rogers, President, National Food Brokers Association, Washington, D.C. Harold O. Smith, Jr., Executive Vice President, National- American Wholesale Grocers' Association, Inc., New York City, N.Y. Weir C. Swanson, Personnel Manager, Jewel Tea Company, Melrose Park, Ill. Rudolph Treuenfels, Executive Vice President, National- American Wholesale Grocers' Association, Inc., New York City, N.Y. R. F. Underwood, Vice President and Director of Sales Develop- ment, Lever Brothers Company, New York City, N.Y. Edward H. Walthers, Executive Vice President, Ernest Paper Products, Inc., Los Angeles, Calif. Paul S. Willis, President, Grocery Manufacturers of America, Inc., New York City, N.Y. 148 APPENDIX B STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES NATIONAL BUSINESS ADVISORY COMMITTEE for MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY'S EXECUTIVE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS IN MASS MARKETING MANAGEMENT Our objectives in forming this important Committee are: 1. To obtain across-the-board representation of the entire industry (manufacturers, wholesalers, voluntaries, coop- eratives, chains, brokers, trade associations, publishers, research organizations): a. to b. to have direct access to the experience, wisdom and ideas of practitioners in the field; reach those whom we can best serve with a direct and clear knowledge of the middle management development programs in business administration that we provide; assure that our programs are alive and up to date in a period of explosive change and that we avoid the dangers of falling into an "ivory-tower" detachment. To advance the Programs in Mass Marketing Management in our College of Business at Michigan State University: a. in b. in c. in d. in e. in curriculum improvement and revision; library resources; scholarship resources, to provide financial aid to worthy students; research grants for doctoral study; expanding teaching staff by part-time assistant- ships to promising doctoral candidates. 149 APPENDIX C LIST OF COMPANIES FROM WHICH PARTICIPANTS HAVE COME MANUFACTURERS Campbell Soup Company, Camden, New Jersey Continental Baking Company, Rye, New York General Foods Corporation, White Plains, New York: Birds Eye Division Maxwell House Division H. J. Heinz Company, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania George A. Hormel & Company, Austin, Minnesota La Choy Products Company, Archbold, Ohio Lever Brothers Company, New York City, New York Libby, McNeill & Libby, Chicago, Illinois Nestle Company, Inc., White Plains, New York Scott Paper Company, Chester, Pennsylvania Tidy House Division of Pillsbury Mills, Inc., Shenandoah, Iowa CHAINS, COOPERATIVES AND VOLUNTARIES California Illinois Alexander's Markets Eagle-United, Inc. Market Basket, Inc. High Low Food, Inc. Safeway Stores, Inc. Hillman's Inc. Independent Grocers' Colorado Alliance Busley Supermarket Company Jewel Tea Company Johnston Super Markets District of Columbia National Tea Company Giant Food Shopping Center Tri-City Grocery Co. Florida Indiana Publix Super Markets Henry J. Eavey, Inc. Stevens Markets, Inc. Marsh Foodlines Winn—Dixie Stores, Inc. Iowa Georgia Benner Tea Company Colonia Stores, Inc. Piggly Wiggly Sims Stores Kansas Howard's Piggly Wiggly Maine Hannaford Bros. Co. Massachusetts First National Stores Star Market Company Stop & Shop, Inc. Michigan ACF-Wrigley Eberhard's Super Markets Food Fair Markets Harding's Friendly Mkts. Hasper's Sav-Mor Markets Mansour's Super Markets Oleson's Super Market Plumb's Super Markets Minnesota Red & White Red Owl Stores, Inc. Super Valu Stores, Inc. Mississippi Sunflower Stores Nebraska Hinky Dinky Stores New Jersey Grand Union Company Shop-Rite New York Central Markets Daitch—Shopwell Stores Hart's Food Stores, Inc. Ohio Century Food Markets Evans Grocery Company Fisher Foods, Inc. Kroger Company Pick—N-Pay Super Markets, More 150 Inc. Humpty Dumpty Super Markets Pennsylvania American Stores Company Carlisle Food Markets Food Fair Stores, Inc. Genetti's Sav-Way Mkts. South Carolina Community Cash Super Markets Tennessee Malone & Hyde Mulkey-Jackson Super Markets Texas H. E. Butt Grocery Co. Virginia Overton Markets Canada Steinberg's Ltd. Germany Ekloh's Puerto Rico Government of Puerto Rico APPENDIX II QUESTIONNAIRES AND COVER LETTERS 152 COVER LETTER Student Questionnaire lst Mailing MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY, East Lansing College of Business and Public Service Executive Development Programs in Food Marketing Management - 103 Business Administration June 8, 1961 Dear Alumnus: This year, more than any other in history, could be called, "The Year of the Food Industry Executive." Throughout food marketing, increasing attention is being given to the impor- tance of the need for capable individuals to assume positions of responsibility and authority at all levels of management. As an aid to the entire industry, we of the Executive Develop- ment Programs in Food Marketing Management have undertaken a study which is being sponsored by the National Association of Food Chains and Progressive Grocer. This study is concerned primarily with determining the place that higher education has in the development and advancement of executives in the Food Industry. The success of this study, which is expected to be utilized by your company as a future guide in their executive develop- ment programs, depends entirely upon you. It is of crucial importance to the industry that you participate in the study. By returning the enclosed questionnaire you will supply us with the information needed to compile reliable and statisti- cally accurate results. These findings will be presented to the Fall convention of the National Association of Food Chains and will be published in Progressive Grocer and other food industry trade journals as part of a nine—part, nation- wide study. You may have been requested, last year, to complete a 153 Alumnus -2- June 8, 1961 questionnaire similar to this one. However, the information requested at this time is part of a more extensive study and will enable us to compile more accurate data. The lack of adequate returns last time prevented our sending you a copy of the results because of their questionable validity. You may be certain that all information will be kept in the strictest of confidence and will be reported to the public only as components of representative groups. To aid you in returning this questionnaire we have enclosed a stamped envelope. Please remember, the success or failure of this study rests upon you as an individual. For that reason, we will be most appreciative of your participation. We are looking forward to hearing from you as soon as possible. Gratefully yours, Edward M. Barnet Director Executive Development Programs in Food Marketing Management Lawrence Silverman Project Director Enclosure 154 COVER LETTER Student Questionnaire 3rd Mailing MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY, East Lansing College of Business and Public Service Executive Development Programs in Food Marketing Management - 103 Business Administration August 4, 1961 Dear Mr. : Within the past two months you received a questionnaire which you were requested to fill out and return to me. This ques— tionnaire, as you know, is to be used as the basis of a study being conducted by the National Association of Food Chains and Progressive Grocer. Recently I have received personal letters from a number of graduates stating that their questionnaire had been mislaid and requesting another copy so that their replies could be used in the study. As a result of these requests it has occurred to me that this may also have been what has happened with your questionnaire. Therefore, I am enclosing a questionnaire with a return enve- lope in the hope that you will take this opportunity to have your opinions included in the final result of this study. As I have stated in my previous letter your response is of the utmost importance and is urgently needed. I am looking forward to receiving your reply. Gratefully, Lawrence Silverman LS:cs Project Director Enclosure 155 STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRE INTRODUCTION Please answer all questions to the best of your recollection. Remember, all information will be strictly confidential and in no way related to individual respondents. (Please use pen or typewriter.) Section I Starting with your present position and working backwards please list all positions you have held since graduating from the Food Distribution Program at Michigan State University. List each position on a separate line. (That is, if you were produce manager and then became a store manager, even in the same store, consider these as two separate positions.) For each position recorded, indicate the name of the company, a description of the duties performed and the length of time in that particular position. Title of Name of Job Length of Time Position Company Description in Position 156 2. What position did you hold immediately prior to your entry into the Food Distribution Program at Michigan State University? (If not employed, check here and skip to question #3) a. Position b. With what company? c. How long did you hold this position? d. Was this full time or part time? (Check one) Full time Part time 3. How many years, in total, had you worked in the Food Industry prior to your entry into the program? (If None, skip to question #4) a. years b. What type of jobs did you hold during these years? c. Was any part of this time spent in a store or organ- ization owned by any of your relatives? Yes No If you answered yes, how long did you work for them? years What positions did you hold? SECTION II The following question is primarily concerned with your personal feelings and opinions. 4. ANSWER IN AS MUCH DETAIL AS YOU FEEL IS NECESSARY What were your reasons for entering the program? 157 Some graduates of the Food Distribution Program have listed various benefits that they have received from attending the program. Some of these have been greater technical knowledge of store operation, greater ability to handle subordinates and superiors, greater advance— ment opportunities, and the ability to assume more responsibility. In as many ways as possible, please list and explain the benefits which you feel you received from the program in which you participated. 158 6. Are there any ways that you feel your attendance in the program has hindered or restricted your personal or corporate development and advancement? Yes No If you checked yes, would you please list and explain what these hindrances or restrictions have been. 7. Please check each benefit listed below which you feel you derived from the program. (Include any mentioned previously) Gave me an opportunity to make new personal friends. Greater confidence in accepting new assignments. Brought me to the attention of my supervisors. Gave me an opportunity to reevaluate my previous goals and objectives concerning my future life's work. Gave me greater insight into problems of handling subordinates and superiors. Aided in the development of my knowledge of mer- chandising techniques. Gave me an opportunity to see how different com- panies solve similar problems. Presented me with an opportunity for increasing my chance for advancement which I would not have had if I had not attended the program. Gave me an opportunity to make industry contacts and friends which would be of help in future business operations. 159 8. If company sponsored, how were you selected to attend the Programs? Please describe this method. 9. If, at some time in the future, it were your responsibil- ity to select men to attend the Food Distribution Program, what procedures would you use? 10. What characteristics would you look for in the men which you would select to attend the program? 160 11. In your opinion, what bearing do you think your immedi- ate supervisor feels your participation in the program has on your advancement potential in the company? 12. Do you believe these same feelings are held by top management? Yes No If no, how do you think they differ? 13. Do you believe that you are being utilized in a posi- tion which permits you to use the training you have received in the Food Distribution Program? Yes No If no, what types of jobs do you think you should be doing to make the best use of this training? 14. 15. 161 Do you view your present position as a step towards a higher management position? Yes No Please explain your answer. Some people in the Food Industry View the position of supermarket store manager as "terminal" in nature. (That is, the position of store manager should be con- sidered as a career position rather than as a first step towards higher managerial positions) ng_ g ygg feel about this statement? If you are presently employed by a retail organization, would you please state what you believe your company's attitude is regarding the above question. 162 16. What major changes do you foresee taking place in the food industry within the next decade? (Please list as many as you can think of.) 17. In view of the present position of the food industry and the changes which you stated in the above question, what stand do you believe top management should take regard- ing the importance of a college education for food industry management personnel? 18. Would you recommend any particular phase of the food industry as a career for young men? Yes No Please explain your answer and state what phase you are speaking about. mam¢UHAmm< BOZ Hm>o a ooo.omw mom.mauooo.maw mom.leoom.NHw mm¢.NHIOOO.OHw www.mloom.hw mm¢.hlooo.mw mmm.¢loom.mw 163 mm¢.mm “was: coHumHmEoo soflumamsoo soflamamsoo cofiumamsoo Emnmoum oucfl Emumoum Houmw Emumoum umumm Emumoum umumm Emumoum kumm muucw Cu mzoqu mummm ungfim mnmm> xflm mumm> Hsom mumm> 039 HOHHQ Hmw» A.CEDHOU “mm xomno mco m>mn pasozm sowv .sEsHoo 50mm CH wEoocfl mumaHQOHmmm m£u mswxumnu >9 Hm3mcm mmmmam A.Uu0 .munmfiumw>cw Bonn mausuwu .mmocmsoHHm.Mmmflme ..m.H .Qon momma uso> £ua3 sofiu Iomssoo CH pm>flmomu msousfl maso mpsaoch .30amn pmumfia mafia Ga musflom man mo nomm um meoosfl manmm> Amsofluuspmc wuommnv mmoum H50» mm3 umnz .mmH .mUQMQZOZM MDOW m0 Emmm WEB OB .o 0 ooo.omw 000.0alooo.mam mam.¢auoom.maw mo¢.~auooo.ogw mom.m noom.k w 000.0 Iooo.m w mmm.¢ loom.m w 00¢.mw Hw®CD 00¢ mummw 00¢ mummw 00¢ mumww 00¢ mummy 00¢ mh0mw 039 uses xflm unmflm awe mzoozH AGEDHOU Hum x0030 mco 0>0£ pasonm 000V .cEsHoo £000 CH mEoucfl wu0wumonmmm mzu 0cfixowzo >9 H03ms0 ommmam A.oum .musmsumm>sfl Eoum mansuwu .mmus030HH0 mosaoxm ..0.H .Qon Momma H500 £ua3 sofiuomssoo 0H ©0>flmomn msoosfi maso mosaoch .30H03 pwumfla wean Ga musflom 0:» m0 £000 D0 wEoocH >Hu00> Amcofiu0500© whommnv mmou0 usom 003 D053 .00 MGQMQZOZX MDOM ho Emmm $39 08 .¢B¢Q HZOUZH EBHB UZHQflmQ .mZOHBmMDO UZHZOQAOm HEB mm3m2¢ mmma Ham um unmoflmficmam no: . -oo.o u ax mm m.¢m «.ma «.ma «.ma m.om 300 ms H.0H m.oa ~.mH ¢.ma o.~m macuaz mm m.m o.ma «.ma m.om ¢.m¢ swam \lTu H No m mm am an sa n1. u D 19 n 31 w.e - a o I.I m P 1 s T. 1. PW on 1.9 so a T. IE SH au 18 X 23 m1. 81. us (a w .3. WM. .mu m... d M e o u u a .b I m s... .0 am A"... I a... 1. ca . Lew. s M c. v.4 u H0 0.00 o o T... 0 d3 T. 1.1 q .d P a s o I M m m A _ coauomHmm :0 00m: mcosums AH0>0H H0coflummsooo mo 00mucmonmm 0 00V mEmH 000 um unmoflmficmflm 00s . onom.a n as 0m 0.5m m.wa ~.nH m.nH 0.00 H.mo 300 Nva 0.0N h.HN m.om m.h~ m.0v m.~o 0HUUflE boa m.H~ o.o~ o.o~ ¢.m~ o.m¢ 0.m0 0000 ),L .a s 3 e D 1.8 .a a u.d N o a o A x o m a a A age 0 3 1 q 2 e m o 1 e o 1 m e s o 1. 0.0 a o 1.1. 1 s 0.1 o o n 1.8 D.m o n e 0 a u 1.2 u 1 1. 1 e a u lvd E 1. BI. 93 m1. UP (\a .L M t. 1.3 1.u e 1. t.I s 1. o o 1.1. a P u o u d a an 0% Sn mu 00 m A o s n 1. o -.+ 00>0A % m I. .m m 3 a 000000000000 8 S .d M C. M 1 e o o 1. S S 1.1.. q 3 3 s M o _ 1 0005000000 000000090 AH0>0H £000 £00003 00:00:00 mo 0000000000 0 00V 0mBZ¢mHUHBm¢m SdMUOMm UZHBUMQmm ZH mmD QHDOB mBZHQDBm WMMDQWOOMm 0N mnm¢8 TABLE 27 MAJOR REASONS FOR ENTERING PROGRAM (as a percentage of occupational levels) Reasons for Attending 185 (.1 eqmnn) sasuodsaa 1210; Jefiotdmg go uo1qs366ns UOTQTSOd Jeq61H 10; exedezd qusnpuI poog go abpetMoux peseaxouI uo1qeonp3 120103 paseezou: q6n01qq punoszoea go 6u1uep2013 Occupational Level 76 12.0 25,0 31.6 31.6 High 30.0 26.3 32.0 11.6 103 Middle 41 2.4 46.3 24.4 26.8 Low X2 = 7.4131 - not significant at all levels 186 000>00 000 00 00000000000 u 000m.00,u x N ~.m0 m.m0 m.o0 0.00 0.00 0000000 0.00 o.m~ 0 0.m0 m.mm 0000000 0 0.0m 0.0 0.0 0.00 0000000000000 m.m 0.0m o m.m m.m0 00000000 L s I "000 .d I 3 HWQm mom mw mxm x a 1 0.0 d m a 1.1 0.0 1 1.x.n 0 0:0 0 m e 010 0 1 1911 291. d3 91.1 a 1 0.4 s u a 0 1. 0 1.1 m 3 s 9 1.1.1 1 A a a e a P v u z e 1.9 s e u 1 n 1.1.3 a s N E T. s T.1 A sup! 3 UK 9 l 2 1.3.9 3 1 3 I 0000000000 1.1.9 3 m 0 P A x q m . 1.0 o o .0 .0 n .0 0000000 0 0 0 m 0 J a 3 0 .000 mm m u. 0.... e u e a 2 0000000 3 1. u u u 1. a o o 1 u s a e .b 0000000050 00 000000 00000000000 0000000I0000000 >0 000000000mv Bzmzm0¢z¢z NmBmDQZH Doom mom ZOHB¢UDQM mmmUHm m0 MUZ¢BMOmZH mN Mdmée TABLE 29 MAJOR BENEFITS RECEIVED FROM PROGRAM PARTICIPATION (as a percentage of occupational level) Program Benefits 187 (.quumN) sesuodseg 1230; Slos1AJedns Am ;0 u01queqqe sq: on em qunoxg su01qetez 01and 01 £31I1qe peseexouI saA1qoe§q0 pue $1905 Ieuosxed eqenIeAeeJ 03 Aq1unqzoddo quemaoueApe 10; Aq1unqzodd0 paseexouI senb1uqaen 6u1s1pueqoxam meu pauzeaq squemu61sse meu 5u1qdeooe u1 eouap1gu00 1032019 smetqoxd 1211m1s BAIOS se1uedm00 sno1xeA moq uxeeq Occupational Level 18.2 15.3 15.0 13.1 14.6 12.0 11.7 274 High 17.0 16.4 14.0 15.2 11.9 14.9 10.7 336 Middle 15.4 16.0 12.8 14.7 12.8 10.2 156 17.9 Low 3.4624 — not significant at all levels —. - 2 X BIBLIOGRAPHY Barnet, H. R. Man Management in_Chain Stores. New York: Harper & Bros., 1931. Bendix, Reinhard, and Lipset, Seymour M. (eds.). Class, Status and Power: A_Reader in Social Stratification. Glencoe, I11.: The Free Press, 1953. Bennett, Willard E. Manager Selection, Education and Training. New York: McGraw-Hill Co., Inc., 1959. Bower, Marvin (ed.). The Development 9§_Executive Leader- ship. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1951. Clark, Harold F., and Sloan, Harold S. Classrooms ig_the Stores. Sweet Springs, Mo.: Roxbury Press, Inc., 1962. Duncan, Otis D., Hatt, Paul K., and North, Cecil C. Occupations and Social Status. Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press, 1961. Foy, Fred C., et a1. Views 9Q_Business Education. A Symposium published for the American Association of Collegiate Schools of Business. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, School of Business Administration, 1960. Halsey, A. H., Floud, Jean, and Anderson, C. Arnold (eds.). Education, Economy and Society: A_Reader ig_§hg_ Sociology 9§_Education. Glencoe, 111.: The Free Press, 1961. Lipset, Seymour M., and Bendix, Reinhard. Occupational Mobility ig_Industrial Society. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1959. Lipset, Seymour M., and Bendix, Reinhard. Social Mobility ig_Industrial Society. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1959. 188 189 Mace, Myles L. The Growth and Development g£_Executives. Boston: Division of Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University, 1950. Parten, Mildred. Surveys, Polls and Samples: Practical Procedures. New York: Harper & Bros., 1950. Pierson, Frank C. and others. A_Study of.University—College Programs in_Business Administration. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1959. Powell, Reed M. The Role and Impact 9£_the Part-Time University Program ig_Executive Education. Los Angeles: Division of Research, Graduate School of Business, University of California, 1962. Rogoff, Natalie. Recent Trends ig_Occupationa1 Mobility. Glencoe, Ill.: The Free Press, 1954. Articles and Periodicals Andrews, Kenneth R. "Is Management Training Effective? I. Evaluation by Managers and Instructors," Harvard Business Review, XXXV, No. 1 (January-February, 1957), 85 -94 o Andrews, Kenneth R. "Is Management Training Effective? II. Measurement, Objectives, and Policy," Harvard Business Review, XXXV, No. 2 (March-April, 1957), 63—720 Andrews, Kenneth R. "Reaction to University Development Programs," Harvard Business Review, XXXIX, No. 3 (May- June, 1961), 116-134. Anshen, Melvin. "Better Use of Executive Development Programs," Harvard Business Review, XXXIII, No. 6 (November-December, 1955), 67—74. Anshen, Melvin. "Executive Development: In-Company vs. University Program," Harvard Business Review, XXXII, No. S (September-October, 1954), 83-91. 190 Bennett, Willard E. ”Master Plan for Management Development," Harvard Business Review, XXXIV, No. 3 (May-June, 1956), 71—84. Booz, Donald R. "Building Tomorrow's Executives: What Will We Do with Joe?" Super Market Merchandising, XXVII, No. 7 (July, 1962), 61, 62+. Bricker, George W., Jr. "University Executive Development Programs," Michigan Business Review, XII, No. 1 (January, 1960), 6-12. Centers, Richard. "Education and Occupational Mobility," American Sociological Review, XIV (February, 1949), 143-144. Chapman, John F. "Thinking Ahead: Trends in Management Development," Harvard Business Review, XXXII, No. 2 (March-April, 1954), 27+. Crockett, Harry J., Jr. "The Achievement Motive and Dif- ferential Occupational Mobility in the U.S.," American Sociological Review, XXVII, No. 2 (April, 1962), 191- 204. Curtis, Richard F. "Income and Occupational Mobility," American Sociological Review, XXV, No. 5 (October, 1960), 727-730. Davis, Keith. "Management Brain Power Needs for the 1970's," Journal g§_the Academy 9§_Management, III, No. 2 (August, 1960), 125—127. Eitington, Julius E. "Liberal Learning for Enlightened Leadership," Personnel Administration, XXI (July- August, 1958), 8-19. Freeman, William M. "Business Courses Get Refinement," New York Times, February 22, 1959, pt. 2, l and 9. Given, William B., Jr. "The Engineer Goes into Management," Harvard Business Review, XXXIII, No. 1 (January- February, 1955), 43-52. 191 Given, William B., Jr. "Reaching Out in Management," Harvard Business Review, XXX, No. 2 (March-April, 1952), 33-45. Glick, Paul C., and Miller, Herman P. "Educational Level and Potential Income," American Sociological Review, XXI, 307. Hodge, Robert W. "The Status Consistency of Occupational Groups," American Sociological Review, XXVII, No. 3 (June, 1962), 336-343. Huneryager, S. G. "An Evaluation of University Executive Programs," Journal 9§_the American Society 9§_Training Directors, XIV (March, 1960), 37-42. "Ideas and Trends in Retail Distribution," Grey Matter, VII (July, 1961), New York: Grey Advertising, Inc. Kaplan, Sidney J. "Up From the Ranks on a Fast Escalator," American Sociological Review, XXIV, No. 1 (February, 1959), 79—81. Katz, Robert L. "Human Relations Skills Can Be Sharpened," Harvard Business Review, XXXIV, No. 4 (July-August, Katz, Robert L. "Skills of an Effective Administrator," Harvard Business Review, XXXIII, No. 1 (January— February, 1955), 33—42. Kelley, Philip R. "Is Top-Level Management Sufficient for Its Job?" Dun Review and Modern Industry, LVII, No. 2258 (October, 1949), 14-15, 63-68. Kline, George E. "The Super Market Manager-—The Growing Power in Food Retailing," Progressive Grocer, XL, No. 10 (October, 1961), 38—41, 44-55. Knowles, A. S. "Influence of Industries on Local Academic Programs," Educational Record, LVII (July, 1961), 179-182. 192 Larson, Richard F., and Catton, William R., Jr. "Can the Mail Back Bias Contribute to a Study's Validity?" American Sociological Review, XXIV, No. 2 (April, 1959), 243-245. Lockley, Lawrence G. "Five Abilities Essential to Executive Capacity," Dun's Review and Modern Industry, LVII, No. 2256, 27-28, 47-50. "Marketing, 1960: The Critical Areas," Printers' Ink, CCLXX, No. 4 (January 22, 1960), 50-52. Maurer, Herrymon. "The Worst Shortage in Business," Fortune, LIII, No. 4 (April, 1956), l47-149+. McMurry, Robert N. "The Executive Neurosis," Harvard Business Review, XXX, No. 6 (November-December, 1952), 33-47. McMurry, Robert N. "Man-Hunt for Top Executives," Harvard Business Review, XXXII, No. 1 (January-February, 1954), 46-62. Moore, Robert F. "The Executive Matchmakers," Business Horizons, IV, No. 3 (Fall, 1961), 29-36. Mueller, Robert W. "The New Executive in Chain Store Operations," Progressive Grocer, XXXIX, No. 3, 48-58. Mulligan, Raymond A. "Socio-Economic Background and College Enrollment," American Sociological Review, XVI, No. 2 (April, 1951), 188-196. Powell, Florence. "Developing the Store Managers," Modern Retailer, March 2, 1962, 9. Powell, Florence. "Any Top Organization is the Long Shadow Cast by a Single Man," Modern Retailer, November 17, 1961, 18. Powell, Reed M. "Growth Plans for Executives," Business Horizons, LV, No. 2 (Summer, 1961), 41-49. Planty, E. G., and Efferson, C. A. "Developing Leadership for Tomorrow's Tasks," Dun's Review and Modern Industry, LX, No. 2285 (February, 1952). 193 Rosen, Jerry. "Chain Supermarket Manager: Front Line Executive," Chain Store Age, XXXVII, No. 4 (April 19, 1961). 83-90. Sampson, Robert C. "Train Executives While They Work," Harvard Business Review, XXXI, No. 6 (November- December, 1953), 42-54. Sewell, William H., Haller, Archie O., Straus, Murray A. "Social Status and Educational and Occupational Aspiration," American Sociological Review, XXII, No. 1 (February, 1957), 67-73. "Schools for Executives: How Helpful is Industry's New Fad?" Time, January 6, 1958. "Specialized College Training to Shape Future Food Industry Leaders," Progressive Grocer, XLI, No. 4 (April, 1962), 92-96, 101. "The Era of the Seasoned Hack," Modern Retailer, February 2, 1962, 5. "Training: How Much for Management?" Super Market Merchandising, XXVI, No. 2 (February, 1961). "We Need 2000 Managers," Modern Retailer, August 10, 1962. Westoff, Charles F., Bressler, Marvin, and Sagi, Philip C. "The Concept of Social Mobility: An Empirical Inquiry," American Sociological Review, XXV, No. 3 (June, 1960), 375-385. White, Wilford L. "Small Business Management Development," Adult Education, X (Winter, 1960), 86-87. "Zayre's Joel Jacobson Sketches Ideal Manager," Modern Retailer, April 20, 1962. Reports American Management Association. AMA Conference Reporter. Midwinter Personnel Conference, February 15-17, 1956. 194 American Management Association. Guide t9_Intensive Courses and Seminars for Executives. New York, 1958. Bunker, Paul F. Characteristics gf_Executive Development Prggrams. Special Study No. 14, Bureau of Business and Public Research, University of Arizona. Tucson, 1958. Booz, Allen and Hamilton, Management Research Department. Trends iQ_Executives' Ages: Ten Year Comparison. No date. Public Documents Edwards, Alba M. Population: Comparative Occupation Statistics for the U.S.: 1870-1940. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1943. Stewart, Ward. Executive Development Programs in_Collegiate Schools 9f_Business. Washington: Office of Education, 1959. U.S. Office of Education. Training for Students in_the Food Industry. Division of Vocational Education, Bulletin No. 290, January 23, 1961. Unpublished Material McKay, Quinn G. "The Impact of University Development Program on Participating Executives." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, 1960. O'Donovan, Thomas R. "Orientations and Career Patterns of Executives and Lower Managers." Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1961. Osgood, Jean. NeWs Release for the National Association of Food Chains. Washington, D.C., May 22, 1953. 195 Steggart, Frank X. "An Analysis of Some Personal and Executive Characteristics of Participants in a University Program of Executive Development." Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago, 1961. Suman, John R. "Growing a Good Executive Crop." Reprint of a speech, from Standard Oil Company of New Jersey. ‘0 \«n‘ Ir m... U... .2»... aka...» ”Mu Ram... 115.. We... - 1 Cr. W H M ldl F'V‘