.._. - L4; III I 'gllgy‘ < I A A ( AN EMPERECAL Aé‘éALYSiS OF AN NR FORCE ITEM MANAGER RULE AND {TS RELATIONSHEPS WiTH AUTOMATED PRGCESSES Hiesis fer the Degree of Ph. D¢ MiCHmAN STATE UNNERSETY PAUL ERNESY ERZEN 1969 «elm» LIB R A R Y Michigan Sta :6 ‘ University This is to certify that the thesis entitled AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF AN AIR WRCE ITEM MANAGER ROLE AND ITS RELATIONSHIPS WITH AUTOMATED PROCESSES presented hg Paul Ernest Erzen has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. degree in Business ”943%.; Ma/jor profe Date fliéy 0-169 ABSTRACT AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF AN AIR FORCE ITEM MANAGER ROLE AND ITS RELATIONSHIPS WITH AUTOMATED PROCESSES By Paul Ernest Erzen The Problem The Air Force Logistics Command has been a pioneer in promoting automation of management information systems and procedures for management and control of world-wide logis- tics support functions. Implementation of the automated pro- cesses has substantially changed the logistics manager's work environment over the past ten years with more and more indi- viduals becoming heavily dependent upon automated systems and the systems' outputs for performance of their position re- Sponsibilities. The research was limited to a descriptive study of the Economic Order Quantity (EOQ) Item Manager role and its rela- tionships with the automated data processing (ADP) systems Upon which it is dependent for information to perform various stock control functions. Some of the basic concepts from role analysis theory were used in examining the item man- ager's role behavior and attitudes relating to the ADP sys- tems' environment. The primary objectives of the study were: 1. To identify basic characteristics of the persons performing the functions of EOQ item management in an automated systems environment from biographical and job activity survey data. Paul E. Erzen 2. To analyze the EOQ item manager's role relation- ships with automated data processing systems and the systems' products. 3. To investigate the EOQ item manager's role behavior in terms of perceived career satisfaction, job sat- isfaction and anxieties related to role conflict or ambiguity situations. 4. To search for dysfunctional role behavior resulting from role conflicts and role ambiguity related to ADP Systems' factors within his work environment. Study Methodology A mail survey questionnaire was developed with role theory concepts providing the basic conceptual framework. The questionnaire was administered to about 50 per cent of the EOQ item managers at each of the five Air Materiel Areas within the Air Force Logistics Command. The survey provided data on EOQ item managers' evaluations of the necessity of specific ADP systems' products and also their perceptions of ADP systems' efficacy. Information was also generated on item manager career satisfaction, job satisfaction, and job related anxieties. To test the proposition that ADP systems can be a source of role conflict and ambiguity for some item managers, two sets of high and low groups were contrived by selecting the 20 per cent of the sample having the highest and lowest product necessity and system efficacy response scores. Paul E. Erzen These groups' responses to the job satisfaction and the job anxiety items were used to test hypothesis predictions. Analysis of the data relied primarily on descriptive statistics with limited application of a parametric test of the equality of the means. Findings and Implications 1. ADP systems' products having the highest degree of consensus on necessity were required for performance of primary operational tasks and decisions relating to stock control actions. The products with the lowest product necessity response scores usually provided item managers information for general man- agement type actions, and these response patterns reflected ”lack of agreement" on product necessity rather than a consensus that products were unneces- sary. ADP systems, when viewed as a total entity, are per- ceived by the majority of item managers as being highly effective. Primary sources of role conflict and ambiguity were related to the more general situational factors such as: (1) excessive work load, (2) too little author- ity for the responsibility, and (3) a lack of know~ ledge about promotion possibilities. Role overload ranked highest as a source of role conflict. Paul E. Erzen Examination of ADP systems as a Specific source of role conflict and ambiguity for the total item man- ager sample indicated general acceptance of the ADP systems' environment. The selected "low product necessity" and "low systems efficacy" groups reflected significantly more job dissatisfaction and ADP systems related role conflict and ambiguity than the selected "high product neces- sity" and "high systems efficacy” groups. AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF AN AIR FORCE ITEM MANAGER ROLE AND ITS RELATIONSHIPS WITH AUTOMATED PROCESSES By Paul Ernest Erzen A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Management 1969 §3ZJ(JN .‘ I,’ '2" L»! ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The successful completion of a research effort usually is dependent Upon the c00peration and support of many indi- viduals. This thesis is no exception and I wish to express my deepest gratitude and appreciation to the many persons who aided and encouraged me in this endeavor. The field research could not have been conducted with- out the full c00peration and assistance received from person- nel of the Air Force Logistics Command. It is impossible to list all to whom I am indebted; however, the following person- nel deserve special recognition: Colonel Eugene Parkerson, Mr. Robert Alexander, Mr. Lex Pierce, Mr. Glen Berlo, Mr. Juluis Billeter, Mr. G. Somers, Mr. C. Palfreyman, Mr. Mike Mullen, Mr. Jack Currington, Mr. Willet, and the 743 item managers who made available the time and effort required to conscientiously complete the survey questionnaire. The author is especially grateful to the Dean of the School of Systems and Logistics, Colonel Roy W. Amick, and my department head, Lt Colonel Don Ford, for making it possi- ble for me to apply the sustained effort required to complete the thesis; and to my colleagues on the faculty whose thoughts, VieWpoints and willingness to act as a sounding board helped immeasurabaly. ii ‘1 Professors Dalton McFarland and Bruce Coleman served as members of the dissertation committee. Their reSponse under demanding work schedules and severe time constraints was a definite inSpiration. The debt I owe to Professor Stanley Bryan, chairman of my dissertation guidance commit- tee, is not likely to be fully repaid. Finally, this work is dedicated to my wife Peggy whose infinite patience and unfailing confidence provided the moti- vation to overcome all obstacles; and to my children Diane and Charles whose behavior reflected an understanding far beyond their youth. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION Background Automated Systems Impact on Management Functions . Organizational Environment Dollar Indicators of Size Unit Indicators of Size . . . Application of Technology Limiting the Problem for Empirical Research . The Specific Research Area . Overview of the Thesis Organization II. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK The Role Theory Approach Basic Terms and Definitions Conceptual Basis for Study Design Organizational Factors in Role Analysis . Role Consensus Role Consensus as a Variable Affects of Nonconsensus III. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY Method of Data Acquisition Questionnaire Design and Construction Field Test . . . . . Sample Selection and Size Questionnaire Administration . Questionnaire Mailings and Returns iv PAGE viii xiii 11 12 13 l4 17 19 21 23 23 26 3O 31 33 34 35 38 38 39 42 44 46 47 CHAPTER Statistical Techniques . Limitations of the Study IV. PROFILE OF THE AIR FORCE EOQ ITEM MANAGER . Item Manager Biographical Data Civil Service Grade and Within Grade Step Data . Age and Sex Data . . Education and Work Experience Data. Training Background Factors Weekly Work Load Distribution Data The Number and Nature of Items Managed A general Composite Item Manager Profile V. EOQ ITEM MANAGER ROLE RELATIONSHIPS WITH ADP SYSTEMS . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction Background . . Within ADP Systems Analysis of Product Necessity . . . . . . . . D062 System Products D032 System Products General Findings Between ADP Systems Analysis of Product Necessity . . . . . . . . . Direction of Response Intensity of Responses Summary of Findings . Item Manager' 5 Perception of. ADP Systems' Efficacy . Selection and Description of Variables Within Systems Analysis of Efficacy Between Systems Analysis of Efficacy Direction of Responses . . . . . Intensity of Responses Comparison of Product Necessity and System Efficacy Findings Item Managers Attitude Toward Automation . Item Managers Attitude Toward His Supervisor Summary VI. THE EOQ ITEM MANAGER'S PERCEPTION OF HIS ROLE Introduction PAGE 49 51 53 53 53 55 56 58 60 62 64 67 67 67 68 71 76 80 81 83 85 85 88 89 92 97 97 99 101 103 105 107 110 110 CHAPTER VII. VIII. ANALYSIS OF ADP SYSTEMS' AMBIGUITY . . . . . Career Evaluation Job Satisfaction . Role Conflict and Ambiguity People Versus ADP Systems as Sources of Conflict and Ambiguity Highest Ranked Anxiety Items Lowest Ranked Anxiety Items . Summary ROLE CONFLICT AND Introduction Hypotheses Contriving Two Groups for Hypothesis Testing . . Results of Testing High and Low "Product Necessity" Groups Anxiety Prediction Job Satisfaction Prediction Results of Testing High and Low ADP "Systems Efficacy" Groups . . . . Anxiety Prediction . The Job Satisfaction Prediction Implications of Hypotheses Test Find1ngs Analysis of High and Low Group Biographical Data . . . . . . Age and Sex Data Civil Service Grade Data Education and Work Experience Data Training Data . Allocation of Work Time Data Data on the Number and Nature of Items Managed . Summary and Implication of Findings SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . Introduction General Findings Item Manager Profile . . Necessity of ADP Systems Products ADP System Efficacy . . . . . . Career Evaluation . Job Satisfaction . Role Conflict and Ambiguity . Analysis of ADP Systems Role Conflict and Ambiguity . Implications of the Study . 0 vi PAGE 111 116 124 I32 138 140 142 I44 144 144 145 147 149 152 152 154 157 159 159 160 161 163 165 167 169 I72 176 I76 177 179 181 182 183 I85 187 APPENDIX A THE QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY DOCUMENTS B TABULATION OF RESPONSES TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY . . . . . . . . . C DESCRIPTIONS OF THE D062, D032 AND D143B AUTOMATED DATA PROCESSING SYSTEMS . . . D PERCENTAGE FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONSES TO PART II OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE E PERCENTAGE FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONSES TO EFFICACY QUESTIONS, PART III OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE . . . . F LARGE SAMPLE PARAMETRIC TEST OF THE EQUALITY OF THE MEANS OF TWO RANDOM VARIABLES . . . BIBLIOGRAPHY vii PAGE 190 193 215 249 254 256 257 LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1 EOQ Item Manager POpulation and Sample Size . . 4S 2 Questionnaire Mailing and Return Data 48 3 Civil Service Grade Level Data for the EOQ Item Manager Sample . . . . . . . . . 54 4 Age Distribution of the EOQ Item Manager Sample . . . . . . . . . . . 55 5 The Educational Level Attainments of the EOQ Item Manager Sample . . . . . . . . . . . 57 6 Number of Years EOQ Item Managers Reported Having Worked in Civil Service and the Number of Years They Worked as Item Managers . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 7 Types of Training EOQ Item Managers Reported Having Received . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 8 Types of ADP Systems in Which EOQ Item Managers Reported Having Received Training of Any Type . . . . . . . . . . 59 9 Average Number of Hours Per Week Item Managers Stated They Worked on Item Management Job Activities or Functions . . . .-. . . . . . . 61 10 Average Number of Hours Per Week Item Managers Reported Spending on D062 and D032 ADP System Products . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 11 Average Total Number of Line Items EOQ Item Managers Reported Managing . . . . . . . . . 63 12 Average Number of "Problem" Line Items Requir- ing Special Effort (out of the total number of line items managed) Reported by the EOQ Item Manager . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , 63 viii TABLE PAGE "Direction Only" Percentage Distribution of Item Managers' ReSponses Evaluating the Necessity of D062 System Products , , , , 72 13 14 "Direction Only" Percentage Distribution of Item Managers' Responses Evaluating the Necessity of D032 System Products . . . . 78 15 Number and Percentage of Item Managers' Responses as to the Necessity of Each of the Three ADP Systems' Products . . . . . 82 16 "Direction Only" Frequency Distribution of Item Managers' Responses to the Necessity of Each ADP Systems' Products . . . 84 17 "Full” Percentage Distribution of Item Managers' Responses on the Necessity of Each ADP Systems' Products . . . . . . . . 87 18 "Direction Only" Percentage of Item Managers’ Responses to Criteria for Evaluating the D062 Systems' Efficacy . . . . 93 19 "Direction Only" Percentage Distribution of Item Managers' Responses to Criteria for Evaluating the D032 Systems' Efficacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 20 "Direction Only" Percentage Distribution of Item Managers' Responses to Criteria for Evaluating the D143B Systems' Efficacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 21 ADP Systems' Efficacy Variables Arranged in Rank Order by the Highest Response Rate for the Combined Scale Categories of Extremely, Quite, and Slightly . . . . . . . 95 22 ADP Systems Efficacy Antonym Variables Ar- ranged in Rank Order by the Highest ReSponse Rate for the Combined Scale Categories of Extremely, Quite, and Slightly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 23 ReSponses to Question Surveying Item Manager's Attitude toward Automation . . . . 105 24 Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Item Managers' Responses to Questions Pertaining to their Supervisors . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 ix TABLE 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 33 34 35 36 Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Item Manager Responses to the Career Evaluation Survey Instrument . Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Item Managers' Responses to the Job Satisfaction Survey Instrument . "Direction Only" Percentage Distribution of Item Manager Responses to Items in the Job Satisfaction Survey Instrument Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Item Managers' Responses to the Item in the "Anxiety" Survey Instrument "Direction Only" Percentage Distribution of Item Manager Responses to Items in the "Anxiety” Survey Instrument Percentage Frequency Distribution of Item Managers' Responses to Role Overload Items in the "Anxiety" Survey Instrument Percentage Frequency Distribution of Item Managers' Responses to Role Ambiguity Items in the "Anxiety" Survey Instrument Percentage Frequency Distribution of Item Managers' Responses to Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity Items Related to PeOple . Percentage Frequency Distribution of Item Managers' Responses to Role Conflict and Role Ambiguity Items Related to ADP SYStemS O I O O O O I O O O O O O O O 0 People and Systems Sources of Role Conflict and Ambiguity Questions Ranked on the Basis of Data Provided by Table 29 . . "Direction Only" Percentage Distribution of Item Managers' Responses to the Four Highest Ranked Items in the "Anxiety" Survey Instrument . . . . . . . . . . . "Direction Only" Percentage Distribution of Item Managers' Responses to the Four Lowest Ranked Items in the ”Anxiety" Survey Instrument . . . . . . . . . . PAGE 112 118 119 126 127 128 131 134 136 137 139 I41 TABLE 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 SO 51 Mean Scores for Anxiety Survey Items by the Low "Product Necessity" Group and the High "Product Necessity" Group . . . . . Mean ADP Systems' Anxiety Score for the High "Product Necessity” Group and Low "Product Necessity" Group . . . . . Mean Scores for Job Satisfaction Survey Items by High "Product Necessity" Group and the Low "Product Necessity” Group . . . . . Mean Job Satisfaction Score for the High "Pro- duct Necessity" Group and the Low "Product Necessity" Group . . . . . . Mean Scores for Anxiety Survey Items by the High "ADP Systems Efficacy” Group and the low "ADP Systems Efficacy" Group . . . . Mean ADP Systems' Anxiety Score for the High "Systems Efficacy" Group and the Low "Systems Efficacy" Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mean Scores for Job Satisfaction Survey Items by the High "ADP Systems Efficacy” Group and the Low "ADP Systems Efficacy" GrOUp Mean Job Satisfaction Score for the High "Systems Efficacy" Group and the Low "Systems Efficacy” Group . . . . . Age Distribution for High and Low Groups Sex Characteristics of the High and Low Groups . Civil Service Grade Level Data for High and Low Groups . . . . . . . . . Educational Level Attainments of the High and Low Groups . . . . . . . Number of Years Civil Service Experience for High and Low Groups . . . . . Number of Years EOQ Item Manager Experience for High and Low Groups . . . . . . . Types of Training Reported by High and Low Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi PAGE 148 149 150 152 153 154 155 157 159 160 161 161 162 163 164 TABLE 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 Types of ADP Systems in which High and Low Groups have Received some Training . Average Number of Hours per Week High and Low Groups Worked on Item Management Job Activities . . . . . . . Average Number of Hours per Week High and Low Groups Reported Spending on D062 System Products . . . . . . Average Number of Hours per Week High and Low Groups Reported Spending on D032 System Products Average Total Number of Line Items High and Low Groups Reported Managing . . Average Number of "Problem" Line Items Re- quiring Special Effort High and Low Groups Reported Managing . . . . . . . . . Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Responses to the D062, D032 and D143B ADP Systems Product Necessity Survey Questions (Questionnaire Part II) . . . . . . . . . "Full" Percentage Frequency Distribtuion of Item Manager Responses to the D062 Systems Efficacy Measurement Criteria . . . "Full" Percentage Frequency Distribution of Item Manager Responses to the D032 Systems Efficacy Measurement Criteria . . . . . . "Full" Percentage Frequency Distribution of Item Manager Responses to the D143B Systems Efficacy Measurement Criteria . . . . xii PAGE 164 165 166 167 168 168 249 254 254 255 FIGURE LIST OF FIGURES Percentage Frequency Distribution of Item Managers' Responses to all Items in the D062, D032 and D143B Systems Product Necessity Survey. . . . . . . "Direction Only" Percentage Frequency Distribution Comparing Item Managers' Responses to Efficacy Criteria for Each of the Three ADP Systems "Full" Percentage Frequency Distribution Comparing Item Managers' Responses to Efficacy Criteria for Each of the Three ADP Systems . . . . . . . . . . . Percentage Frequency Distribution of Item Managers' Responses to all Items in the Career Satisfaction Survey Instrument Percentage Frequency Distribution of Item Managers' Responses to all Items in the Job Satisfaction Survey Instrument. xiii PAGE 86 98 100 115 123 v "u lrl v.- CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The purpose of this study is to describe and analyze, through the concepts and techniques of role analysis theory, the Air Force item manager role and its relationships with selected automated data processing systems and activities. ‘We are living in a world of exploding knowledge and technol- ogy. This explosion has had a dramatic impact on our socie- ty, its institutions, and individual workers, managers, and consumers. Two hundred years ago the gap between theory and invention was fifty to one hundred years but today it has decreased to approximately ten years. The constraints of time and distance have been radically changed by technology. Walter Buckingham stated that past experience indicates inno- vation of the scope of automation will undoubtedly produce serious economic and social problems.1 The technology of automation has an impact on a broad Spectrum of pe0ple and activities, but this dissertation is specifically concerned with the Air Force position of the Economic Order Quantity (EOQ) item manager. It is designed to investigate the influences that automated processes in 1Walter Buckingham, Automation: Its Impact on Business and People, (New York: Harper SfRow Publishers, 196I77"57”3. the BOQ item manager's work environment have on his job be- havior. The main objectives of the study are: 1. To identify the basic characteristics of the per- sons performing the functions of EOQ item manage- ment in an automated systems environment from biog- raphical and job activity survey data. 2. To analyze the EOQ item manager's role relation- ships with automated data processing (ADP) systems and the system's products. 3. To investigate the EOQ item manager's role behavior in terms of perceived career satisfaction, job sat- isfaction and anxieties related to role conflict or ambiguity situations. 4. To search for dysfunctional role behavior resulting from role conflict and role ambiguity related to ADP system's factors within his work environment. Background Changing Technology and the Management Function Dr. Buckingham described "science" and "technology" in the following manner: Science is knowledge, systematized and formu- lated to discover general truths. Technology is science applied to the industrial arts. While science is concerned with understanding technology is concerned with practical uses. Technology includes the development of tools that permit the specialization of labor according to vary ng abilities. It embraces mechanization of manufacturing, transporta- tion commerce and agriculture, the deve10p- ment of new forms cf energy, the standardi- zation of parts, the mass production of goods and services, and automatic control systems.2 The progress of technology in the modern era can be separated into three general phases. First, came mechani- zation which created the factory system. The factory system, with its specialization of labor, separated labor and manage- ment in industrial organizations and created the environment for Frederick W. Taylor's and Henry Fayol's work in deve10p- ing some basic theories of management which have withstood the test of time and which are considered to be major con- ‘tributions to present day management theory. Taylor's prin- ciples for improving efficiency and control of managerial processes were developed primarily from observing shop Oper- ations in organizations with several production activities and large numbers of people. Fayol's studies identified universal principles of management as they apply to planning, organizing, and control. In particular, Fayol deveIOped the I'principle of the universality of management functions to all levels of management and to all types of organizations. It was the progress in technology that brought about the mechanization of industry and mechanization resulted in changing management practices. The new environment which this generated lead to the identification of management prin- ciples by Taylor and Fayol. A second identifiable phase concerns the extension of mechanization into large mass production organizations whose zlbid., p. 2. .A' 'O- ‘. ‘. . ‘I. c (1' I L 9. . u w '1 - ..‘ n (I! large capital investment requirements caused a separation of organization ownership from organization management. The pressures of World War II for better management and increased productivity fostered the growth of both technology and man- agement theory. This era promoted the deve10pment and growth of new theories in management. Such writers as Elton Mayo and F..J. Roethlisberger studied individual and group behav- ior within the organization and laid the foundation for a systematic approach to the analysis of human relations in in- ‘dustry. The result has been extensive additions to and modi- fications of the traditional "school” of management theory initiated by the writings of Taylor, Fayol, and other pio- neers in the field. The third phase of advancing technology relates to auto- mation and has added the elements of automatic control and programmed decision making which is turning the industrial organization into a more highly integrated "whole system." The effects of automation on management practices and related theory are still in various stages of change and development. However, writers such as H. A. Simon and J. G. March are add- ing a new perspective to management by their systems approach and decision making theories. An extremely important factor to recognize is the com- pression of time resulting from the application of advancing technology. The manager of today does not have five to ten years available for on-the-job training. Change comes rapid- ly and managers must expand their knowledge and comprehension m. :- u v "A ovq ‘1‘. i. in order to keep pace. It is no longer adequate to say man- agers accomplish goals by managing people, work, material, and money. Technology is now forcing him to be a manager of 'kystems." The Air Force can no longer rely upon on-the-job training, some unstructured ancillary education programs, or even command experience to deveIOp the type of management talent required by a dynamic and complex automated logistics system. Automated programs are ”tools for managers" which require new (and perhaps greater) skills, talents, and knowl- edge differing from those of the past if they are to be used fer more effective and efficient attainment of organizational goals. The potential for increased productive output, lower per unit cost, and faster customer service is great but the corollary of high costs for ”mistakes” is sometimes forgotten. Automated Systems Impact on Management Functions A limited survey of the literature on this subject re- flects a variety of fairly generalized descriptive statements, and a priori conclusions and projections. However, deSpite the volume of recent writings, there appears to be very little in the literature to assist those responsible for developing and administering programs which must consider the direction and rate of technological changes, and the economic and or- ganizational effects of these changes. In other words, a manager at any level in Headquarters, Air Force Logistics (bmmand would find very little to help him understand the cause and effect relationships of actual or probable "prob- lems" brought by automated systems or programs. In many re- .. ‘r . _. . 'b -\ ~§ .. I‘. 1;, In 0 " . r ‘l 'u . I \ :Y‘ ~,._ 0.. ‘\ .,. '1‘ spects he is "flying blind" with no instruments to guide his path and steer him around serious pitfalls. This position is supported by Dr. Norman G. Pauling, who has been the Chief of Automation Impact Studies Division, in the office of Manpower, Automation and Training of the ILS. Department of Labor since August 1962.3 His article expressed personal views based on experience gained from this research program. The following statements are quoted to illustrate a few ofifis major points.4 The deficiencies in our knowledge are espe- cially acute in the case of personal and institutional effects of automation and re- lated technological change on workers. In this statement the term ”workers" can be expanded to in- clude managers although they are normally separated in organ- ization and management theory writings. In general, the existing literature in this area has failed to yield findings from which one may generalize with sufficient confidence to approach solutions to the social and eco— nomic problems accompanying technological change. The reporting of research findings has gener- ally been descriptive rather than the product of analytic statistics, with the result that, despite some interesting empirical data, we know very little about relationships among these data. Where mathematical treatment has 3Norman G. Pauling, "Some Neglected Areas of Research on the Effects of Automation and Other Technological Change on Werkers,"‘The Journal of Business, vol. XXXVII, Number 3 (July 1964), pp. 261-273. 4Ibid., pp. 262-3. 7 revealed relationships among the data, we are still unable to give any sort of analytical explanations of these relationships, owing to the absence of any generalized model. The data have, therefore, failed to produce any useful predictive measures or to suggest ap- propriate policies for the amelioration of the problems which they describe. The author also stated that there is a great need for study replication and that the available literature needs codifi- cation and synthesis. He identified the following areas as having received virtually no attention, and therefore, should be the subject of intensive research. 1. Changes in the work role and working conditions re- sulting from technological change. 2. The effects of these changes in work role and work- ing conditions on workers. 3. Factors affecting individual occupational choice, commitment, and adjustment to changes in the work role. 4. The effects of technological displacement on workers. Dr. Pauling's findings can be restated in terms of man- agement's work role. For example, his second statement of an area requiring research can be restated as, "the effects of technological changes on the role and working conditions (en- vironment) of organizational managers.“ Current writings provide similar material. Leavitt and Whisler foresee information technology lead- ing to radical changes in administrative practices. They de- ifine ”information technology" as including high-speed, large Quantity information processing, application of mathematical .t- methods to decision making, and computer simulation of high— order thinking. They go on to predict: (1) new sources of managers who will be able to enter the organization at nearly any level, (2) greater centralization with top management assuming more of the creative functions, (3) most middle man- agement jobs becoming highly structured and declining in status and compensation, and (4) the line between t0p and middle management becoming similar to that between hourly workers and first-line supervisors.5 However, another author disagrees with the frequently stated prediction that the increase in automation will re- verse the trend toward decentralization of business manage- ment decision making and that it will also reduce the need for lower and middle management.6 Lipstreu and Reed conducted a two year study of the effects of transition to automation in industrial concerns. In phase one they developed 46 potential effects (hypotheses) of automation, supervision and the work force which were used to survey the 500 largest industrial organizations. This 5Harold J. Leavitt and Thomas F. Whisler, ”Management in the 1980's," Harvard Business Review (November-December, 1958), pp. 41-48. 6John F. Burlingame, "Information Technology and De- centralization," Harvard Business Review (November-December, 1961), pp. 121-125 information was used to empirically test pertinent hypotheses by intensive study of one industrial firm undergoing a major technological change.7 Even though this research effort did not include "office" automation of the integrated data processing varie- ty, several of their findings could be extended to "office" automation and replicated. The following are a couple of examples. 1. "Automation poses greater adjustment problems for supervisors than for workers who are transferred to automated jobs.” About 50% of industry reSpondents agreed with this hypothesis. In general the study of firm X also supported this statement. Supervisors tended to identify more closely with their jobs than non- SUpervisory personnel. Their behavioral patterns, based upon their conception of the organization and their "job," has brought them relative success. Now they are required to completely reorganize their perceptual fields, and the case of company X was that no well-deveIOped program was employed to assist them in augmenting their fields of knowledge and ad- justing to the new environment.8 . 7Otis Lipstreu and Kenneth Reed, Transition to Automa- 3333, (Boulder, Colorado: Series in Business No. l, Uni~ vers1ty of Colorado Press, 1964). 81bid., pp. 108-9. 10 "Automation tends to shift supervisory emphasis from employee to process." This hypothesis was based upon the fact that supervisors now had greater responsibility for keep— ing machinery Operating and, therefore, would be more likely to think of themselves as being super- visors of machines rather than men. A majority of executives surveyed agreed with this hypothesis but no real conclusion could be drawn from the data. In company X, it appeared that immediately after tran- sition to automation emphasis shifted from employees to process. The supervisors tended to exhibit an incredible-preoccupation-with-machinery attitude.9 ”Automation makes supervisory, human relations skills less important." Since it is necessary for supervisors to become more "machine oriented" it might appear that he need apply less human relations knowledge and more techni- cal skills. However, the study indicated that just the opposite seemed true. "The isolation of work stations, the increased speed, and the new imperson— ality of work appear to require that supervisors de- velop not less but far more skill in interpersonal relations."10 9 10 Ibid., pp. 109—10. bid., pp. 110-11. M 11 This study by Lipstreu and Reed indicates that automa- tion does have a severe impact upon the lower levels of man- agement by changing his work environment. The pressures which he had learned to master in his old role and thereby gain success have now changed and perhaps increased. In the Air Force logistics system with its rapid tran- sition to more and more automated programs, we can logically surmise that logistics managers are being forced to c0pe with new and ever changing environment for which they may not be adequately prepared. The technology is increasing faster than the manager's comprehension. Even though work is being done on this problem, more knowledge and facts are required to prepare the manager to effectively function in the new automated systems environment. Organizational Environment The numerous technological breakthroughs during the past ten years have made possible drastic changes in the use and relationships of human and mechanical resources. Professor Kahn and others point out that conflict and ambiguity are two major characteristics of our society and that neither of these conditions will be easily resolved for they are among the unintended consequences of two deeply ingrained trends in modern industrial life--the increasing dominance of physical science and growth of large scale organizations.11 The Air 11Robert L. Kahn, et al., Or anizational Stress (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1964), p.—3. 12 Force Logistics Command (AFLC) definitely exemplifies both of these trends. The following data present a brief de- scription of the size and complexity of the Air Force 10- gistics support organization. Dollar Indicators of Size12 An expression of logistics organization and Operations in terms of the familiar dollar measurement scale provides a means for comparative evaluation of the system's magnitude. }The following are a few indicators of organization size ex- pressed in dollars. The Air Force Logistics Command's investment in real property (excluding aircraft and missiles in the Command) is approximately 1.2 billion dollars and the operating budget totals some 2.2 billion. A major operation is the management of a world-wide inventory valued at about 10.0 billion; 67% of which is de- ployed to bases throughout the world. Added to this inven- tory annually is some 3.7 billion dollars with an equal amount being consumed or disposed of by other means. Ex- penditures for repair of components and accessories total 1.2 billion annually, and another major expenditure is 1.0 billion for civilian payrolls. The value of purchased com- puters comes to 49.7 million and computer rental and mainte- nance eXpenses total 11.2 million. k 12The figures presented represent Air Force Logistics Command operations for Fiscal Year 1969 and were obtained from personnel responsible for preparing reports in the vari- ous areas. 13 Overall, AFLC is responsible for the management of about 11.7 billion dollars of funds. As indicated by this brief summary, Air Force logistics support Operations involves billions of dollars and is in a sense comparable to the nation's largest corporations. For example, in 1967 General Motors ranked firsr in sales volume with 20.0 billion and assets of 13.3 billion; Standard Oil of New Jersey ranked second with 13.3 billion in sales and 15.2 billion in assets; and Ford Motor Company ranked third with 10.5 billion in sales and 8.0 billion in assets.13 Unit Indicators of Size Another way of looking at the magnitude of logistics support Operations is through indicators of volume and numbers of items. The following are some representative figures of AFLC organization and operations. Total personnel authorized (Jun 68) . . . . . . . . . 139 Thousand Number of computers in Operation (Sep 68) . . . . 132 Warehouse Space (Jun 68) . . 27.7 Million Sq. Ft. Maintenance Shops 5 Hangar Space (Jun 68) . . . . . . 20.1 Million Sq. Ft. Administrative Space (Jun 68) . . . . . . . . . 10.3 Million Sq. Ft. Line Items of Inventory carried (Jun 68) . . . . . 1.7 Million 13"Fortune's Director of the 500 Largest 0.8. Industrial (brporations," Fortune, June, 1968. 14 Number Of retail demands received (FY 68) . . . . . 15.0 Million Components and Accessories repaired annually (FY 68). 2.8 Million Tons of Freight Moved (AMA originated, FY 68) . . . . 568,848 Tons A more detailed breakout of the personnel strength figures show that the organization is composed of 3,524 Air Force Officers, 12,627 Airmen, and 122,849 civilians. Fifty- eight thousand of the 122,849 civilians are General Schedule (GS) employees of which about 15,000 are high grade positions (GS-ll and above). When the 3,524 officers are added to the high grade civilians, there are some 18,524 employees who would fall into a general classification of managers. The annual total base pay for the 15,000 civilian managers alone comes to some 182.8 million dollars. Application of Automation Technology_ The Air Force logistics support organization has been a leader in promoting automation of management information systems and procedures for management and control of logistics support functions. Automated methodologies have been develOp- ed for the repetitive routine subprocesses and, with in- creasing knowledge, experience and improved hardware, the organization has continued to expand and integrate individual components into larger interrelated systems. Currently, the Air Force Logistics Command (AFLC) utilizes 170 separate automated processes within the logistics management structure. These processes vary in size and complexity but some indica- 15 cation of general magnitude may be illustrated by the inven- tory Management Stock Control and Distribution System (D032) which took three years to develop and 300 man-years of effort. The D032 system receives automated data inputs from 32 other automated systems and provides inputs for 36 auto— mated systems.14 The magnitude of operations by itself gives an indica- tion of the management efforts and problems involved in oper- ating an effective logistics support system. However, the military must also cope with a high degree of uncertainty which further complicates management planning and program- ming functions. Providing for national defense today carries a world-wide commitment. The uncertainty of possible out- breaks of conflict makes the planning of force deployment difficult and subject to rapid change. This environment cre- ates a need for a fast, accurate, and responsible logistics system composed of the "best" man machine methodologies and programs available. There is no question that this requires continuous application of the best management organization and techniques available. One of the characteristics reflecting these changes is that the first tier of management in logistics support organ- izations is one of managing logistics within the framework of a large number of automated systems as contrasted to a decade —‘ 14U.S. Department of the Air Force, Air Force Logistics Command, Interface of Automated Data Processing Systems, (erght-Patterson AFB,’Ohio, 12 January71968). 16 ago when the task was one of managing logistics based prima- rily on the efforts of a large number of peOple. People maintained physical records and physically filled requisi- tions and physically computed requirements and stock levels as well as performing many other physical logistics activi- ties. Today many of the more routine activities have been programmed for computer Operations changing the logistics managers working environment. Professor Kahn, g£_al., point out that such change invalidates the experience of the indie - vidual, and that as his experience becomes more and more irrelevant, his dependence on expertise approaches the infi- nite. The world for which their advice could have been useful we have no longer with us. One does not speak the language Cg computers from common experience . . .1 This continuing trend in the automation of "Office work” and routine decision making is creating a changing environ- ment for the formal management role in the organization's hierarchical structure. For the Air Force to cope with and take advantage Of the creative forces generated by advancing automated methodologies, empirical testing and evidence is required to factually reflect the fundamental expectations and behavior of individuals performing such managerial roles. Top levels of logistics management require an understanding 0f the environmental impact of automation to overcome unan- lsKahn, Op. cit., p. 4. a.‘ .n u.‘ 17 ticipated dysfunctional aspects and to initiate actions based upon objective information rather than upon guesses or an emotional response. Limiting_the Problem for Empirical Research The problem is that the implementation of automated processes in the Air Force Logistics Command's organization has changed logistics managers' work environment. Techno- logical changes produce new areas of specialization which have a direct bearing upon many of the job activities and their organizational relationships. With this increase in automation of "office functions," actual operations being performed emphasize process flows and synergistic functioning of a ”system" as well as performance within a bounded func- tional area. The buffers between specialized functional activities are being bypassed to the point where the actions of one individual or organizational process has a direct in- put into one or more other specialized functional activities thereby directly affecting the job activity and job behavior of these individuals. One of the great inherent needs of any organization is dependability of role performance. The interdependency of Organizational production processes require each member to carry out his role in a predictable manner. Further, as an Organization becomes more complex with more Specialized activ- . 4 a 4 G u I A .-\.a Q ,6 .. 1 Y. . 0 . .. a b. t; a\. bu :A . .\ .~\ I;‘ .. ‘ .«u -v .. a r: n.‘ W.. . I. .. a . _.a a . ~ e :6 .. u i. .u- .nt. . ~p\- «~u n.\. .u ..H a .u . .~.- . u . . .n . .44 a u I . p 1 ..I U 1 O s a . . t . . n. O» ..a .v. .u. ..- .. o. a. v. ».§~ ..~ .a up. .. . a . . tun]. v u 18 ities, the degree of interdependence increases requiring greater conformity in the performance of organizational roles.16 The Air Force Logistics Command (AFLC) has undergone major changes with the deveIOpment of computer sciences and the implementation of automated methodologies. The result appears to be that logistics managers are put under pressure for an even higher degree of dependence and conformity in the performance of their roles. However, the relatively rapid and far reaching changes resulting from implementation of computer technology tends to create a working environment that is less familiar. In other words the more complex auto- mated system demands greater reliability and conformance in role performance but at the same time creates conditions of greater uncertainty regarding role performance expectations. Professor Weick points out that organizational stability and lengthy periods of interpersonal contact increases famil- iarity with organizational pro:esses which results in greater predictability of individual or group behavior.17 Or in other words, changes within an organization reduces conform- ity and predictability in job behavior. The results of environmental changes in the Air Force Logistics Command appears to be that logistics managers are _— 16Joseph A. Litterer, The Analysis of Organizations (New York: John Wiley 6 Sons, H1C., 1965), pp. 319-3297 17Karl E. Weick, "Laboratory Experimentation with Organizations," Handbook of Organizations. Edited by James (L March. (Chicago:7TRand MCNally 6 Company, 1965). p. 214. 19 being exposed to increasing degrees of role conflict and ambiguity. Discussions with people in the organization cre- ate the impression that logistics managers frequently feel that the “system” is running them and that they are unable to direct and control their functional work efforts effectively. Professor Kahn, et al., theorizes on this subject as follows: . . . it is not the conformity requirements alone that creates problems of conflict and ambiguity. Conflict and ambiguity seem rath- er to be emergent problems, arising from the demand for successful conformity under condi- tions of ceaseless and accelerating changes. To the costly ideology of bureaucratic con- formity is added the igony of conflicting and ambiguous directions. The Specific Research Area Time and resources necessitated study of only a small segment of the effect of automation technology on the employ- ees of the Air Force Logistics Command organization. There- fore, the research effort was limited to the Economic Order Quantity (EOQ) item manager and his relationships with Auto- mated Data Processing (ADP) systems and system's products. The item manager's position within the Air Force has Op- erational responsibility for stock control. The Air Force de- fines stock control as the management required to insure that materiel and supplies are adequate and are stocked geographi- cally to meet current military requirements most economically An item manager is assigned a specific group of items and it 18Kahn, 0p. cit., p. 6. 20 is his responsibility to: (l) compute the Air Force require- ments for these items, and (2) control the distribution of assets world-wide to include rationing when necessary for items in short supply. The title EOQ Item Manager identifies those item managers in the Air Force responsible for the man- agement of assets meeting the economic order and stockage criteria.19 The current stock control system has become standardized at all of the Air Materiel Areas (AMA's), using a 7080 com- puter data system with package programming and file mainte- nance being accomplished at Headquarters AFLC. The end re- sult is that the EOQ item manager in performing his stock control functions is almost totally dependent upon the re- ports and other management data provided by two major ADP systems: (1) D062--EOQ Buy Computation System, and (2) D032-- Item Manager, Stock Control and Distribution System. In ad- dition, he receives a few reports from a relatively new ADP system: D143B--AMA Edit, Index, and Routing Subsystem. Relying upon role theory concepts and research methods,20 the basic field research effort considered automated proc- esses as being, in effect, "role senders” exerting pressure upon EOQ item managers (the focal role) and thereby becoming an important factor in formulating item manager role behavior. 19U.S. Department of the Air Force, U.S. Air Force Su111; lbnual, AFM 67-1 (Washington D.C., 14 October 1968), Vol. "', Part one, Chapter 8, p. 8-1. 20The conceptual framework and definitions involved in role theory are presented in Chapter II. 21 It was theorized that automated processes influence the formulation of role behavior in a manner similar to individ— uals who hold expectations about what the incumbent of a focal role should do. In other words, from a conceptual vieWpoint a programmed procedure can place demands upon a manager to perform job related activities which in effect can be similar to demands imposed by human superiors. protheses Two general hypotheses were developed to direct the de- velopment and structure of the empirical research effort. 1. Automated processes within the EOQ item manager's organizational environment act as a role sender im— posing demands upon the item manager role which are factors in influencing EOQ item manager role behav- ior. 2. If automated processes are in effect role senders influencing role behavior, then automated processes are potential sources Of role conflict and role ambiguity. Overview of Thesis Organization Chapter II contains a discussion of the conceptual frame- work for deveIOpment of the research design,and Chapter III presents a detailed explanation of the research methOdOIOgy including sample selection, survey instrument construction and administration, and analytical techniques. Chapter IV de- scribes some basic characteristics of EOQ item managers by 22 presenting a biographical and work data profile. Analysis of the survey data and findings are presented in Chapters V through VII. The last chapter contains a summary of the research effort, its findings and conclusions. CHAPTER II CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK The Role Theory Approach Role theory is the part of social psychology which deals with the behavior of individuals and their cognitions of various dimensions of their environment. It provides a practical means for developing an empirical study since it offers a useful way of looking at group member behavior and cognition, and can be operationalized to actual situations.1 Since the environment of an individual occupying a position is a key to effective job behavior, and since pressures on the individual affect his perception of the environment, role theory concurrently offers a way of look- ing at the item manager as an active and a passive factor in analyzing role behavior. Intuitively, it may be inferred that understanding the environment and eliminating dysfunc- tional pressures are key elements to making the item mana- ger's future performance more effective. Many definitions of the term role have been presented in scholarly literature representing different disciplines and varying vieWpoints within a discipline. Gross, Mason 1Bruce J. Biddle, The Present Status of Role Theory, (blumbia, Missouri: UnTversity of MissofiTi Press, 1961, p.2. 23 24 and McEachern, after reviewing much of the literature on role, determined that most authors' definitions and concep- tualizations of role contain three basic ideas or elements: (1) social locations, (2) behavior, and (3) eXpectations. Their conclusion was that even though some fundamental dif- ferences existed, most authors on role were addressing the same phenomena--individuals in social positions behave with reference to expectations.2 People do not behave in a random manner; their behavior is influenced to some extent by their own expectations and those of others in the group or society in which they are participants. Some authors have included this idea in the concept of status or position, others in role, but nearly all include it somewhere. Role theory deals primarily with patterns of behaviors or other characteristics which are common to persons, and also with a variety of cognitions held about those patterns by social participants. The conceptual distinctions of role theory center around a description of the behavioral pat- terns or of the cognitions.4»5 Gross, Mason and McEachern in their review of the 2Neal Gross, Ward S. Mason, Alexander W. McEachern, §§plorations in Role Analysis (New York:' John Wiley and Sons, 1965), p. 17. 3Ibid., p. 17. 4Biddle, op. cit., p. 2. 5Professor Biddle states that the concept of cognition, as applied in role theory, deals mainly with two types of orientation: beliefs and values. He goes on to explain these as follows. ”Expectations-~a cognition consisting of a belief . . . held by a person for an aspect of another. hhrm-—a cognition consisting of a value . . held by a per- son for an aspect of another. p. 12. 25 literature on role theory suggest that definitions and con- cepts of role theory fall into three broad classifications: (l) Normative cultural patterns--what is eXpected of an incumbent of a particular role or status. In short, role is viewed in terms of behavior standards and not actual behavior. (2) Orientation to the situation--role viewed as an individual's definition of his situation with reference to his and others' social positions. (3) Behavior of actors occupying social positions-—role defined in this manner refers to what actors actually do as position OCCUpants.6 In essence, role theory is fundamentally concerned with two aSpects of the relationship among men: the normative, and the behavioral. The very fact that such a dichotomy is useful immediately presents some problems from an Operational vieWpoint. First, in the literature on role, researchers have reached no precise definitions of the terminology used. Biddle stated that the reception of the role orientation was enthusiastic but that little integration had appeared. Authors are at odds with one another over terms, concepts and prOpositions constituting the field, or indeed ovep what phenomena role theory purports to deal with. However, Professor Biddle also goes on to point out that role concepts have utility and seem to be easy to Operationalize since a large number of reported theoretical 6Gross, Mason and McEachern, op. cit., pp. 11-15. 7Biddle, Op. cit., p. 3. 26 and empirical studies are making use of the same role terms and concepts. Secondly, each side of the above dichotomy may be sub- divided. For example, in a normative sense, a role can be segmented into expectations for the behaviors involved as well as the expectations for personal attributes and quali- ties. Gross, Mason and McEachern also suggest that most authors have used the role concept to embrace the normative element of social behavior.8 However, this study primarily relates to the behavioral aSpects of the Air Force item manager role in relation to one major element of his work environment, and will only briefly consider some of the attributes involved. Basic Terms and Definitions Linton who is credited with initially solidifying the role concept describes a role in terms of status: A status, in the abstract, is a position in a particular pattern (of social behavior) . A status, as distinct from the individual who may occupy it, is simply a collection of rights and duties. A role (then) represents the dynamic aSpect of status. An individual is socially assigned to a status and occupies it with relation to other statuses. When he puts the rights and duties which consgitute a status into effect, he is performing a role. It is clear that Linton views role not as normative but as behavioral, and is using the term status, in a sense, as the normative. 8Gross, Mason and McEachern, Op. cit., p. 17. 9Ralph Linton, The Study of Man (New York: D. Appleton- Century Company, 1936), pp. 113-114. 27 Cross, Mason, and McEachern do not believe that status is as inclusive as Linton suggests. They distinguish between status and office in the following manner. The term status would then designate a position in the general institutional system, recognized and supported by the entire society, spontaneously evolved rather then created, rooted in the folkways and mores. Office, on the other hand, would designate a position in a deliberately created organization governed by Specific and limited rules in a limited group more generally achieved than ascribed. 0 With respect to an occupational position, Davis indicated that a position may be both a status and an office--the first when viewed by the public, and the second when viewed by a particular firm.11 So in terms of these distinctions, Office will be analogous to position, and this study will use the term position in its examination of the item manager role. Role Defined. "A role is a set of related cognitions maintained for a person or position by himself or another."12 An individual's role then is defined by: (1) his own eXpec- tations and (2) the eXpectaticns of others in his environ- ment. These eXpectationS influence his perceptions and behavior. If one wishes to look at the behavior of the individual, in a Specified work situation, he is in effect viewing the role behavior of that individual. Role behavior is the action or behavioral part of role. 10Gross, Mason and McEachern, Op. cit., p. 57. 11Kingsley Davis, Human Society (New York: MacMillan, 1948), pp. 88-9. 12Biddle, op. cit., p. 5. 28 Role Set. If a role then is a set of expectations about the behavior and attributes of an individual in a given position, a key factor in role analysis is the identi- fication of the definers of the role, i.e., those positions which hold relevant eXpectations for the focal position. The definers of a given role, including the focal role, may be referred to as a role set. Some role theorists adOpt the view that a position is an element of a network or system of positions. Professor Kahn used the term role set to reflect this construct. The organization is visualized as a vast fish net in which each knot represents a position and each line a functional rela- tionship. The positions are structured into a role set by Virtue of the work-flow, technology, and the authority structure of the organization.13 A person's role set may also include individuals who are related to him in other ways--close friends, family and others within or outside the organization who are concerned with his behavior in his organizational role. Role Expectations and Sent Role. Members of a person's role set depend upon his performance in some way--either through reward or through dependence which affects their own performance or status. Gross, Mason and McEachern state a particular position has no meaning apart from other positions, and an investigator focusing on a particular position must 13Robert L. Kahn, et al., Organizational Stress (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1964), p. 13. "a; 29 Specify the other positions with which his analysis will be concerned.14 This is due to the fact that incombents of these positions have a vital interest in the performance of the focal position and they deveIOp beliefs and attitudes about what should and should not be done as part of the focal role. These prescriptions held by members of a role set are called role eXpectations. The role expectations are commu- nicated in various ways to the focal person influencing his role behavior. Kahn, et al., expressed this concept as follows: The crucial point for our theoretical view is that the activities (potential behavior) which define a role consist of the expectations of members of the role set, and that these eXpectationi are communi- cated or "sent" to the focal person. 5 Sent Role and Role Perceptions. The numerous acts which make Up the process of role sending are influence attempts directed toward the focal person and are intended to bring about conformity with the expectation of the Senders. Such acts are labeled role pressures. The sent role then is the means by which the organization communicates to the position occupant the do's and don'ts associated with his position. However, individuals reSpond to the sent roles in terms of their perceptions which may be different. SO, there is not only a sent role, but also a received role in terms of an individuals perceptions and cognitions of what was sent. It is this received role, the individual's personal “B 14Cross, Mason and McEachern, op. cit., p. 50. 15Kahn, et al., Op. cit., p. 15. 30 perception of the situation, which acts to influence his role behavior. Conceptual Basis for Study Desigp If a role consists of a set of expectations about the performance and attributes of an individual in a given posi- tion, a key factor in analysis is the identification of the role definers, i.e., those who have relevent eXpectations-e the role set. However, specifying the complete role set frequently causes problems. Access to each member of the 'role set may be difficult because of the large number of individuals involved. Furthermore, the degree of influence of each member of the role set is often very difficult to identify. Consequently, including the eXpectations of all members of the role set may give as distorted a picture as not having identified some members. Role theory literature recognizes that any given posi- tion cannot be completely described until all other positions to which it is related have been specified. However, a com- plete relational Specification is impossible to deal with empirically SO a specific research problem normally takes into account only a limited set of role definers. Gross, Mason and McEachern State that in studying a particular position (a focal position), it may, for some purposes, be adequate to consider its relationships to only one other position (a counter position). They termed the concept a dyad model and it provided the basis for designing this study.l( 16Gross, Mason and McEachern, op. cit., p. 51. 5 31 /\ \ COUNTER POSITION I / /, \_/ 0" ; FOCAL POSITION I \ I Organizational Factors in Role Analysis In the literature on role theory we find a worker's role behavior to be the product of forces resulting from role relationships. This occurs because the role set constantly brings influence to bear upon the focal role incumbent which serves to regulate his behavior in accordance with his per- ception of the role eXpectationS held for him. In role theory, organizational variables are normally assumed to be sufficiently universal and stable to be treated as independent of the particular individuals in the role set. In other words, the basic concepts used in role theory con- cern relationships and behaviors between individuals occupy- ing given positions within the formal organization structure. Organizational factors (e.g., structure, functional Special- ization and division of labor, reward system, and physical prOpertieS) dictate the major content of a position, but a person executes the activities. Organizational factors are recognized as variables but are usually assumed to be inde- pendent Of the variables being measured and analyzed. Pro- fessor Kahn stated: What the occupant of that office is supposed to do, . . . , is given by these and other prOperties of the organization itself. Although human beings are doing the "SUpposing” and rewarding, the 0" n. ~n u. ‘4 '\ A . v «“ I .- . b" u _ .‘ -- . -5 'o 1 v 32 structural prOperties of organization are suffi- ciently stable so that they can be treated as independent of the particular persons in the role set. For such prOperties as Size, number of echelons, rate of growth, the justifiable abstraction of organ- izational propgrties from individual behavior is even more obvious. Computerized Processes as a Role Sender. Abstracting organizational properties is logically sound and justified for the research efforts reported by Professor Kahn and others. ibwever, it appears conceptually sound to extend the constructs of role theory analysis to Specifically include an organi- zational variable wherever it can be operationally defined muishown to be a major factor directly influencing role tmhavior in a particular position. Therefore this study is miattempt to relate an organizational factor-~automated pro- cesses-~to the behavior of a Specific management role--the item manager. From the concepts involved in role theory, it smmm logical to hypothesize that the item managers' per- cmptions of the computer activities affecting his job per- finmance will be a factor in formulating his role behavior. 'Hm computer performs certain programmed activities and executes routine programmed decisions which may be viewed as nfle sending intended to bring about conformity in the behav- hn'of the focal role incumbent. Even though the computer is mlinanimate object without the psychological character- istux of a human being, the item manager must still inter- aCtWith this "machine" in order to sucessfully perform his assigned tasks . \ l7Kahn, et al., 0p. cit., p. 31. .Ku ’11.. 1v 33 The communications with the computer are not oral, but in some written or other coded form that establishes a defi- nite interdependency which must influence item manager's role behavior. This relationship is important in the moti- vation of the item manager's role behavior. It is a defin- able factor influencing his attitudes and beliefs about what he should and should not do as an item manager. Therefore certain automated processes have been specified as the role sending counter position for this study. Item Manager as the Focal Role. The focal position selected for this dyad model design was that of an economic order quantity (EOQ) item manager. The rationale for this selection rests in two areas. First, a major portion of the item manager's job activities is directly dependent upon computerized processes, and it is therefore reasonable to eXpect the position incumbent to consider this factor in defining his own role and hence in his role behavior.18 Second, the position is clearly defined, and its relationships to computer processes are the most direct and highly struc- tured within the Air Force Logistics Command (AFLC). Role Consensus The focal role incumbent is an integral member of his own role set and his own views are most relevant. In a sense, each person is a role-sender to himself. He has a conception K 18A study by Robert N. Smith, "OOAMA Model IM Study Group Ifinal Report” (Unpublished report, Hill AFB, Utah, Ogden Air Ahteriel Area, 1966), found that item managers, on an average, ant 58 per cent of their time working with computer products. 34 of his position (and the counter-position) and a set of atti- tudes and beliefs about what he should and should not do while in that position.19 Analysis of the responses from focal individuals is a primary consideration in this thesis. Role Consensus as a Variable A matter of critical importance to the research design and subsequent analysis is whether consensus (agreement) on the role for a particular focal individual may be treated as an empirical variable subject to study and analysis. Many role concept formulations have assumed that consensus on role definition exists among members of a group. In other words, consensus is not treated as an important variable in role formulation. However, Gross, Mason and McEachern eXpressed the thoughts of several authors on the importance of consensus. It was their contention that consensus on role definition was an important factor affecting the functioning of social systems. After an extensive review and analysis of prior writings involving consensus, they came to the following conclusion: That the members of a social system, whether a dyad of a total society, must agree among themselves to some extent on values and eXpectations is a matter of definition. The point we have been trying to under- score is that the degree of consensus on expectations associated with positions is an empirical variable, ‘1 19Kahn, et al., op. cit., p. 17. 35 whose theoretical possibilities pntil recently have remained relatively untapped.20: 1 Affects of Nonconsensus Considering consensus as a variable, what then could result from nonconsensus? LOgically, conflict is a product of nonconsensus on role definition and this then can create tensions and anxiety for the incumbent of the focal position.22 Some authors have chosen to relate these tensions to role con— flict and role ambiguity. This study will also consider role conflict and role ambiguity separately since both can lead to tension and anxiety which may produce dysfunctional job behavior adversely affecting job performance. Newcomb, Turner and Converse believe that the sources Of role conflict problems encountered by the individual try- ing to carry on his end of a behavioral relationship may be classified according to whether the role prescriptions facing the individual are (l) unclear, (2) excessive, or 23 (3) mutually contradictory. In other words, an individual's role conflict may be due to (l) ambiguous role expectations levied upon him, (2) ”role overload" where the role demands 20Gross, Mason and McEachern, Op. cit., p. 43. 21For support of this position see A. R. Lindesmith and Anselm L. Strauss, Social Psychology, revised edition, (New York: Dryden press, 1956, pp. 383-385. 22C. Osgood, "Cognitive Dynamics in Human Affairs," Public Opinion Quarterly, Summer, 1960, p. 341. 23Theodore M. Newcomb, Ralph H. Turner and Phillip E. Converse, Social Psych010g%_(New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1965), p. 4. 36 become to heavy for him to fulfill, or (3) when there is no apparent way of simultaneously and effectively COping with two different role expectations. Nonconsensus and Operational Performance. The fact that nonconsensus or role conflict exists is relatively unimportant unless it can be related to operational per- formance. A study by Kahn and Wolfe of role pressures on the occupants of certain positions showed that where individ- uals were subjected to more demands than they could reason- ably fulfill, they experienced significantly more on—the-job tension, less job satisfaction and less confidence in the organization. However personality factors modified both the degree of overload experienced and the means Of COping with such overload.24 A study by Getzels and Cuba indicated that those instruc- tors at a military school who experienced role conflict also tended to be ineffective when measured by their peers.25 The implication related in a study by Smith indicates a Stronger relationship. In an eXperimental group, the researchers paid some members not to enter a discussion while the other members remained unaware of the arrangement. The productivity of the eXperimental group drOpped sharply u . 24R. L. Kahn and K. M. Wolfe, "Role Conflict in an Organ— ization," in Conflict Mana ement in Organization, ed. by K. Boulding (Afin Arbor, M1ch: Foundation for Research on Human Behavior), 1961- 25.1. w. Getzels and E. G. Guba, "Role, Conflict, and Effectiveness: An Empirical Study," American Sociological Review, 1954, pp. 164-175. 37 as compared to the control group. When the experiment was repeated and all group members were advised of the situation, experimental group productivity did not vary from the con- trol group.26 In summary, role theory presents a systematic way of looking at the relationships of group members and the effect each has on the other. It provided terminology and defini— tions which aided the construction, implementation and re- porting of the empirical research. 26E. E. Smith, "The Effects of Clear and Unclear Role EXpectations on Group Productivity and Defenses," Journal 2£_Apnormal Social Psychology, 1955, pp. 213-217. a In t it ~\. ‘- ‘ CHAPTER III RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY The stated purpose of this study is to describe and analyze, through the concepts and techniques of role theory and analysis, the Air Force item manager role and its rela- tionships with selected computer programmed activities. The methodology presented in this chapter was designed to fulfill this purpose. Method of Data Acquisition The role set for this investigation is comprised of one focal position (EOQ item manager) and one counter position (automated processes--DO62, D032, and D143B). Study of the role and role relationships required determination of an effective and economically practical method of data collec- tion. Despite the inherent limitations of mail survey meth- ods, this method best fitted the needs of the study for three reasons. First, the alternatives of personally interviewing and/or observing was economically impossible. Second, a highly structured method of data generation, which would allow statistical comparisons, was necessary. Third, anonym- ity to encourage "true" expression of personal judgments and Opinions could be more effectively conveyed by the mail sur- vey method. 38 39 Questionnaire Degign and Construction Part I--Item Managpr Profile and Classification Data. The objective of the first part was to generate information which would provide a profile of the item manager and also describe some of the basic factors and characteristics re- lated to the position. A screening question was included to insure that only EOQ item managers completed the survey. Twenty additional questions were asked under the following headings: personal data, organization and unit of assign~ ment, weekly work load data, work experience, education, training, and items managed. A space was provided for any comments a respondent wished to make. Part II--Necessipy of Computer Products. An EOQ item manager is provided approximately fifty-six separate and dis- tinct computer printouts. The purpose of Part II was to Ob- tain an item manager's evaluation of how necessary these pro- ducts were for the performance of his item management tasks. Each computer product provided EOQ item managers were identi- fied by product number and title. Each item manager surveyed was asked to evaluate the necessity of each product on a sev- en point semantic differential scale. Part III--Confidence in Automated Data Processing Systems. The purpose of Part III was to ascertain current atti- tude of the item managers toward the automated systems upon which they must depend for a major portion of the information required to do their job. Interviews with Headquarters Air Force Logistics Command (Hq AFLC) staff personnel and review 40 of information systems literature provided five basic vari— ables (timeliness, accuracy, usefulness, clarity, and depend- ability) which are considered necessary for an effective in- fonmation system. Each item manager was asked to rate each automated system on the basis of these five variables. In addition, a question was specifically designed to Obtain a measure of Opinion regarding man-machine relationship with these automated data systems. Two questions relating direc- tly to the item manager's supervisor were also included. Part IV--Career Satisfaction Instrument. Six items were constructed for the career evaluation part of the survey. The items were designed to obtain data on the item manager's attitude toward a career in item management in general rather than his attitude toward the Specific EOQ item manager posi- tion occupied at the time of the survey. Part Ve-Job Satisfaction Instrument. A job satisfaction instrument was constructed to obtain data on the item man- ager's attitude toward the position he currently occupied. The ten items were designed to gain an expression of opinion from the item manager concerning his personal feelings of satisfaction or dissatisfaction concerning Specific aspects of his job. Part VI--Job Related Tension Instrument. In Part VI the objective was to obtain a measure of job related tension and anxiety. The instructions to the respondent item managers Were as follows: All of us occasionally feel bothered by cer- tain things in our work. The following is a 41 list of things that sometimes upsets people. Please circle the number after each state- ment representing the phrase which mOSt occur- ately reflects how frequently you feel both- ered by each of these situations. The items generated were based upon two Objectives. 1. There must be several items in this part which could be directly related with key characteristics in the previous parts of the survey to allow comparisons and analysis. 2. There must be a number of questions which could allow an assessment of the source of an item manager's anxieties, if any. As previously indicated, writers in the area of role theory and analysis have found role conflict or ambiguity situations can deveIOp anxieties in the behavior of role incumbents. Items were included in an attempt to determine if certain conflict Situations produced job related tensions. The questionnaire became longer and more complex than was originally invisioned. Since it was not possible to ob- tain the breadth and depth of information required by using a short questionnaire, which is generally considered more conducive to generating responses, the decision was made to physically design the questionnaire in a compact booklet for- mat. This was more costly and time consuming but the result was a physically compact questionnaire with fifty per cent fewer pages. The 89.5 per cent response rate justified the intensiveness of the questioning and the additional cost of the questionnaire design and publication. 42 Field Test The original draft of the survey was developed based upon study and analysis of the Air Force Logistics Command's (AFLC) publications, academic literature, interviews with AFLC staff personnel, and a visit to the Warner Robins Air Materiel Area (WRAMA) at Robins Air Force Base, Georgia. Even with the best available advice and guidance, there was no assurance the survey would be understood by job incum- bents. Therefore, testing the questionnaire in the actual -item manager environment was considered essential. TO con- serve time and provide for direct feedback, a decision was made to visit two Air Materiel Area (AMA) organizations and personally administer the questionnaire to at least twenty item managers at each AMA. Sacramento Air Materiel Area (SMAMA). The first AMA visited was at McClellan AFB, California. Arrangements were made to administer the questionnaire to individual groups of at least five item managers from four branches selected by the branch supervisor. A private room was used to insure privacy and encourage free expression. The item managers completing the questionnaire were most cooperative and did not hesitate to express their comments. Apparently working in small groups where all group members were acquainted aided freedom of expression. The Sacramento field test resulted in two major changes and several minor wording clarifications. 1. In Part II, the computer products of two other auto- mated systems were added: (1) Item Manager Stock 43 Control and Distribution System (D032), and (2) AMA Edit, Index and Routing Subsystem (D143B). 2. In Part III, the number of choices was reduced, in— structions expanded and the question format revised. Also, their suggestions resulted in adding a ques- tion on the supervisor's ability to provided techni- cal assistance concerning the automated systems. Parts IV, V and VI presented no problems and the item man- agers expressed a positive attitude toward being given an Opportunity to express their opinions regarding the role of item management. Ogden Air Materiel Area (OOAMA). The second AMA visited was Hill AFB, Ogden, Utah. Arrangements were again made to administer the questionnaire to individual groups from four branches. However, in one instance item managers from two branches were combined and completed the survey as one group. The result was a noticeable decrease in the expression of comments after the surveys had been completed. The corrections and additions developed from the Sacra- mento field test had been incorporated into the questionnaire for the Ogden test, and the respondents had no apparent diffi- culties with the survey. However, the additional questions did increase the average time required to complete the survey from thirty-five minutes to fifty-five minutes. The accept- ance of the questionnaire was still positive with active ex~ Pression of Opinions. It was noted that the D032 system seemed to cause more Problems than the D062 system. Apparently D032 tends to 44 "machine pace” the item manager more than does the D062 sys— tem. As one item manager stated, "The system dictates exact- ly how I must handle an action so if it doesn't fit you have to make an erroneous action; you ’play games' with the sys- tem." In general these item managers expressed consistent comments on their inability to effectively communicate with the automated aspects of their job. For example, one said, ”Even when there is an obvious error, there is no one you can go to who is able to correct it." In summary, the field test proved to be absolutely es- sential for clarifying and completing the questionnaire. A preliminary and relatively superficial analysis of the re- sults indicated the basic objectives of the research were valid and that the survey would produce the desired data. However, it was recognized that this small sample was not representative and that the conditions could have produced substantial biases. §§mple Selection and Size Since the research concerns the functions of EOQ item nmnagement in its working environment, the most desirable and logical source of factual data would be the item managers themselves. To fulfill the requirement of obtaining results Iddch could be generalized for the Air Force pOpulation of item managers, a sample was drawn from the population of item nmnagers located at five geographically dispersed Air Materiel Iheas (AMA'S). The Objective was to obtain a sampling of 45 approximately 50 per cent of the pOpulation at each AMA. Table 1 shows the number of item managers at each AMA and the number selected for sampling. TABLE I EOQ ITEM MANAGER POPULATION AND SAMPLE SIZE EOQ Ttem Wnager Adr'Materiel Area Population Sample Size Sacramento AMA 230 120 Ogden AMA. 249 120 Oklahoma City AMA ' 532 260 Warner Robins AMA 254 130 San Antonio AMA 400 200 TOTALS 1,665 830 The decision to survey approximately one half of the EOQ item managers was a compromise between the ideal Of a total census and the opposite extreme of the smallest accept- able random sample. A census was too costly and time consum- ing and a small random sample would not provide the desired degree of confidence in any consensus that occurred. Also a small sample would not provide a sufficient number Of cases in many of the subgroups to permit application of non- Parametric statistical techniques in the comparison and anal- YSis of data. In other words, a primary objective in determ- ing the sample size was to avoid having to rely on the less 46 powerful small sample statistical techniques. The result was a compromise decision to establish a sample size of about one half of the population. Questionnaire Administration The desired method of distributing the questionnaire was by mail to each randomly selected item manager. But, after visiting three AMA'S and talking to division chiefs, branch chiefs and personnel people, it was determined that individual mailing addresses were not readily available; it would require -a Special effort by each AMA; and it would cause excessive delay. However, each of the visited AMA'S stated that they would assist in administering the survey and would make dis- tribution of the questionnaire through the normal organiza- tional channels provided the survey was sanctioned by their headquarters. Another reason for going through organizational channels was that government employees are advised not to ans- wer questionnaires from outside sources concerning their jobs. The Supply Operations Division of the Air Force Logistics Command reviewed the research project and proposed question- naire, and agreed to assist in its administration. The author completed the working details which involved: (1) writing the transmittal letter of instructions, (2) informally coordinat- ing requirements with the five AMA's by telephone, and (3) physically assemblying and mailing the questionnaire package to the Requirements and Distribution Division Office at each AMA. The Requirements and Distribution Office at each AMA made selective distribution to item managers in each of the 47 branches. The item manager was provided with: a question- naire, a pre-addressed return envelope, and instructions to complete the questionnaire and mail it. Throughout the distribution process, respondents were assured that their reply would be held in confidence, used only in an aggregate, and their identity would remain anony- mous. This was considered essential for encouraging the re- spondent to reflect his true opinions and observations. Even so there is no guarantee that the individuals did not attempt to select answers which they might feel are the "right" re- sponses. To help overcome any such tendency, the question— naire was clearly identified with the School of Systems and Logistics with no reference to the Air Force Logistics Command. Opestionnaire Mailipg§and Returns A total of 830 questionnaire packages were mailed on 19 July 1968, to the Requirements and Provisioning Branch Chiefs Of the five Air Materiel Areas. The branch chiefs were in- structed to randomly distribute the questionnaire to EOQ item managers. Instructions on the questionnaires requested the item manager to complete it within two weeks from the date of receipt and mail it in the attached pre-addressed envelope. The first returns were received on 28 July, seven days after mailing. By the 23rd of August, thirty-five days after the mailing, 656 questionnaires had been returned without a need for follow-up action. This represented an overall re- turn rate of 79 per cent. Four of the five AMA'S had a re— 48 turn rate of 81 per cent or higher. The response from the other AMA was only 49 per cent. A telephone follow-up was made with the branch chief and this action raised the re- sponse to 77 per cent by the 6th of September, forty-nine days after the initial mailing. With the return of 743 questionnaires out of the 830 mailed, a decision was made to cut Off the returns and pro— cede with the tabulation and analysis of the data. The 743 responses represent an overall return rate of 89.5 per cent which is considered excellent for mail surveys and well above the average for doctoral dissertations.1 Table 2 gives a breakdown of questionnaires mailed and returned. LMHE 2 QUESTIONNAIRE MAILING AND RETURN DADA -‘_ Questionnaires Questionnaires Per cent A_ir_ Materiel Area 1 Distributed Returned Returned Sacramento AMA 120 ' 114 95.0 Ogden AMA 120 105 87.5 Oklahoma City AMA 260 242 93.1 Warner Robins AMA 130 128 98.5 Sap AntoniO'AMM. 200 154 77.0 TOTALS 830 743 89.5 1Carter V. Good, Introduction to Education Research (New York: Appleton~Century-Crofts, 1963), p. 283. The author reported that the mean percentage of questionnaire returns for 204 doctoral dissertations at Teachers College, Columbia University was 71 per cent; and 59 research studies reported in the "Journal of Educational Research" was 81 per cent. 49 Statistical Techniques The nature of the data and measurement scales develoPed in the questionnaire survey restricts the types of statisti- cal techniques suitable for description of the data and the The highest order of measurement An analysis or relationships. scale applied in the research questionnaire is ordinal. ordinal scale defines only the relative position of an object or individual with respect to a characteristic, and does not specify the actual distance between positions. In other words, with ordinal measurement scales we are limited to statements of "greater than", "equal to", or "less than"; we can not make correct statements as to how much greater or how much less.2 The fact that the interval positions on the scale are not known suggests the need for caution in interpreting the statistical measure used to represent response variability. Therefore, this study relied primarily on percentage frequen- cy distributions to reflect both the central tendencies and the dispersion of the responses to the semantic differential scales used in the survey instruments. The arithmetic means and standard deviations were also computed to assist in anal- ysis of the data. In addition to descriptive analysis of survey responses, a technique was required to determine whether a comparison of ., ZCIaire Sellit2.'efia1-i Research MethodS'in Social RelatiOns, reVised edition, (New or : enry o t ompany ', p. 411. ’ 50 responses by specific groups of item managers indicated agree- ment or disagreement in their responses to job satisfaction survey items and anxiety survey items. The statistical tech- nique for testing the significance of the difference between two distributions was the large sample parametric test of the equality of the means. Description of the technique is pre- sented in the appendix. The testing for differences between variables did not necessarily indicate a causal relationship. A cause and effect relationship requires a more exacting research design criteria than was possible in this study. However, testing for differences was important for gaining insights and search- ing for strong implications of possible causal relationships. With these inferences and implications it was possible to isolate and describe areas of general consensus concerning the inherent characteristics of the EOQ item manager role in its relations with automated processes. An IBM 1620, model II computer was used to tabulate questionnaire data, establish rankings, and compute percent- ages, means and standard deviations. 3Research literature states that there are three neces- sary and sufficient conditions for establishing causal rela- tionships in hypothesis testing. For example, Claire Selltiz, Sflgal,'gp. cit., p. 94, states these as: ..."(1) evidence of concomitant variation--that is, that the causal variable and the dependent variable are associated; (2) evidence that the dependent variable did not occur before the causal variable° 39d.(3) evidence ruling out other factors as possible deter: mining conditions of the dependent variable." 51 Limitations of the Study The design and implementation of almost any empirical study has limitations when tested against the proven theories and procedures of scientific research methodology, and this study is no exception. However, the presence of such limita- tions does not necessarily invalidate the contributions or findings of empirical research provided these compromises of the "ideal" research design are recognized and accepted. The imposed constraints of time and resources severly limit both the scope and content of the research effort. For example, a much more effective research program could have been designed had it been possible to complete a thorough initial pilot (exploration) study to seek out the most prom- ising variables and relationships for specific testing. Limitations are noted in the analysis chapters, but there are a few other general limitations which should be pointed out at this time. 1. The limitations of mail questionnaire surveys are well established and widely documented in research literature. It is extremely difficult to evaluate the accuracy of given responses or to eliminate all the semantic communicative difficulties. Also, it is not possible to describe the profile or nature of non—respondents. However, the aggregate return of almost 90 percent mitigates this limitation more so than the average research efforts using mail surveys. 52 Z. In assessing the effect of automated processes and products on the item managers' role behaviors it is important to realize that such behaviors are also influenced by differences in item managers' person- alities as well as relationships and personalities of other individuals in the role set. 3. Methodological limitations also occur. The ordinal nature of the data limits the number and certainty of conclusions which can be drawn. The statistical limitations have been previously noted. 4. Finally, there is always a question of the repre- sentativeness of the sample drawn even though the size and procedures warrant a high degree of confi- dence that it does represent the item manager popu- lation in the Air Force. Summary With role theory as the basic conceptual framework, a mail questionnaire was developed. The questionnaire was administered to approximately 50 per cent of the EOQ item managers at each of the five Air Materiel Areas within the Air Force Logistics Command. Descriptive statistical tech- niques were employed primarily due to the ordinal nature of the data generated by the mail survey. Means and standard deviations were also computed to assist in the analysis of the data. CHAPTER IV PROFILE OF THE AIR FORCE EOQ ITEM MANAGER The purpose of this chapter is to identify some basic characteristics of the incumbents of EOQ item manager posi- tions by presenting a biographical and work data profile. Since a primary research objective of the thesis is to exam- ine item manager role relationships with ADP systems, a log- ical operational objective is to determine the characteristics of the individuals who occupy the position. The next chapter will report the results of consensus analysis on Specified item manager environmental factors, and any role consensus analysis should address the questions: Consensus on what? Consensus by whom? This chapter addresses the question, "Con- sensus by whom?" Item Manager Biographical Data An important set of descriptive variables are the dem- ographic ones: job grade, age, sex, education, and work ex- perience. Some important insights as to the nature of the Work force can be gained by examining the distribution of these variables within the item manager sample. Siyil Service Grade and Within Grade Step_Data Table 3 contains a breakdown of the item manager sample by civil service grade with ingrade steps consolidated into 53 .. l_! 54 TABLE 3 CIVIL SERVICE GRADE LEVEL DATA FOR THE EOQ ITEM MANAGER SAMPLE Civil Grouped Service Grade Number Percent Time in Grade Steps of IM's N - 7353 Salary Range Steps Range GS 5 1 - 5 36 4.9 $5732 - 6489 1 - 6 years __98 5 6 - 10 13 41:8 6690 - 7456 7 - 13 Total 49 6.7 CS 7 1 - 5 236 32.1 $6981 - 7913 1 - 6 years GS 7 6 - 10 68 9.3 8146 - 9078 7 - 13 Total 304 41.4 GS 9 1 — 5 303 41.2 $8462 - 9590 1 - 6 years CS 9 6 - 10 70 9.5 9872 - 11000 7 - 10 Total 373 50.7 GS 11 1 - 5 6 0 8 $10203 - 11563 1 - 6 years GS 11 6 -_19 2 O 3 11903 -_;3263 7 - 10 Total 8 l 1 2nd Lt l 0.1 8Eight of the 743 respondents did not answer this section two groups. It also shows the annual salary ranges and time in grouped step ranges. The major facts these data illustrate are that the maj- ority of that the in grade $6981 to 1. item managers (92%) are in GS grades 7 and 9, and majority of this group (73%) have less than 7 years with annual salaries falling within the range of $9590. These factors imply the following: Item managers basically fall into two civil service grades even though they are performing essentially the same functions. There appears to be Opportunity for grade promotion 55 within the EOQ item management field for approxi- mately half of the item managers but the group that are GS 9 appear to have little Opportunity. 3. The majority of item managers will definitely re- ceive within-grade-step pay increases and can look forward to a salary of about $10,000 annually with- out leaving the career field of item management. Age and Sex Data Table 4 provides data on the age characteristics of the EOQ item manager sample.- TABLE 4 AGE DISTRIBUTION OF THE EOQ ITEM MANAGER SAMPLE Number Percent Age of IM's N - 7423 24 or under 34 4.6 25 - 29 78 10.5 30 - 34 70 9.4 35 - 39 85 11.5 40 - 44 134 18.1 45 - 49 152 20.5 50 - 54 104 14.0 55 or over 85 11.4 aOne respondent did not answer The age distribution indicates that the item managers as a group are chronologically mature since 64 per cent are 40 years of age or older. The modal group of 40 to 49 in- cludes about 39 per cent of the item manager sample. In gen- eral this age information implies a relatively stable career 56 civil service oriented work force with a large group being in their most effective and productive time in life. The median age is approximately 43 which indicates the group is neither young or old. A question asking the item manager to indicate his sex immediately followed the question on age. A rather surpris- ing result was the high prOportion of refusals to answer the male/female inquiry. Of the total 743 respondents, 81 failed to answer the question, 298 checked male, and 364 checked fe- male. This is in direct contrast to the response pattern for the remaining items in Part 1.1 There appears to be no log- ical explanation for this response pattern, and the "no res- ponse" group is large enough to cast doubts as to what the true male/female mix of the group is. However, the data seems to indicate that the work force is highly integrated on the basis of sex with the female group being prOportionately lar- ger. Education and Work Experience Data The modal educational group among item managers is the high school graduate which represents 48 per cent of the tot- al sample. Since another 30 per cent have some college in addition to completing high school, the general educational level of item managers may be considered as being generally above a high school level. It is also important to note that approximately half of the item managers have education beyond 1 . . . . The range of no responses for the remaining questions 1n Part I was one to fourteen with the average being about elght or approximately one per cent. 57 high school. However, the dominate educational group is the high school graduate and not the college graduate. Table 5 presents the data in detail. TABLE 5 THE EDUCATIONAL LEVEL ATTAINMENTS or THE EOQ ITEM MANAGER SAMPLE Number Percent Educational Level of IM's N - 741 Not a High School Graduate 25 3.4 High School Graduate 358 48.3 1 or 2 Years College 182 24.6 3 or more Years College 43 5.8 Bachelor's Degree 124 16.7 Master's Degree 9 1.2 a Two respondents did not answer this question Work Experience. Along with educational levels it was revealing to examine the general work experience backgrounds of item managers. The fact that 72 per cent have worked in civil service for 10 or more years definitely characterizes this group as career civil service or government employee. However, the majority of item managers have not been in the functional area of item management anywhere near that length of time. For example, about 56 per cent have been item man- agers 3 years or less. This indicates that the majority of the item managers in this sample have not been career item managers and that many of them are relatively inexperienced in the function of item management. Table 6 presents the data on civil service experience and item management exper- ience in detail. 58 TABLE 6 NUMBER OF YEARS EOQ ITEM MANAGERS REPORTED HAVING WORKED IN CIVIL SERVICE AND THE NUMBER OF YEARS THEY WORKED AS ITEM MANAGERS Years Worked in Years Worked as an Civil Service Item Manager Number Number Percent Number Percenta of Years of IM's N - 741 of IM's N - 741 0 4 0.5 9 1.2 l 34 4.6 103 13.9 2 40 5.4 173 23.3 3 35 4.7 128 17.3 4 10 1.3 38 5.1 5 12 1.6 49 6.6 6 13 1.8 41 5.5 7 18 2.4 22 3.0 8 19 2.6 34 4.6 9 23 3.1 20 2.7 10 and 533 71.9 124 16.7 over aTwo respondents did not answer these questions Training Background Factors The questions related to training were intended to draw a descriptive picture of how the average item manager is pre- pared to cope with the functional responsibilities of his position-~both formally and informally. The data provided by the respondents were not internally consistent. For example, the first question asked, "Did you receive any type of train- ing for item management?" Seventy-nine per cent answered yes and 20 per cent answered no leaving about 1 per cent who did not respond. The remaining questions dealt with Specific types or sources of training so responses to these questions Should not have exceeded the 79 per cent yes response rate to 59 TABLE 7 TYPES OF TRAINING EOQ ITEM MANAGERS REPORTED HAVING RECEIVED YES NO NO RESPONSE Number 2 Number 2 Number 2 Type of Trainigg of IM's N-743 of IM's N-743 of IM:§_ N=743 Any type training for item management 589 79.3 148 19.9 6 0.8 Formal course(s) of instruction 250 33.6 441 59.4 52 7.0 On-the-job training from fellow IM's 693 93.3 35 4.7 15 2.0 On-the-job training _ from supervisors 419 56.4 280 37.7 44 5.9 TABLE 8 TYPES OF ADP SYSTEMS IN WHICH EOQ ITEM MANAGERS REPORTED HAVING RECEIVED TRAINING OF ANY TYPE REPORTED TRAINING RECEIVED Number Percent Minna of IM'L N'743 D062 EOQ 672 90.4 D067 DSP ISSP 293 39.4 D017 DIA 256 34.4 D033 Base 43 5.8 D032 IM, SC&D 641 86.2 D041 CAT I & II 176 23.7 D034 SSM, SC&D 116 15.6 OTHER 145 19.5- 'I" 1: 60 the first question. Yet this occurred three times: (1) yes responses to receiving on-the-job training from fellow IM's was 93 per cent, (2) ninety per cent checked training re- ceived on the D062 system, and (3) eighty-six per cent checked training received on the D032 system. It is possible that item managers do not view on-the-job or systems training as being training in item management functions. The most explicit training question relates to formal courses of instruction where 33.6 per cent of the item man- agers stated that they had received formal instruction and wrote in the course title. From this it appears that the majority of item managers are informally trained for their job. In Operational terms this means item managers are placed in this position with very limited or no formal pre- paration and have to learn a complex set of operations and relationships from fellow IM's and supervisors. This can result in learning some wrong or ineffective practices as well as effective operations. Tables 7 and 8 present the survey data on item manager training. Kggkly Work Load Distribution Data The research undertaken in this thesis required some knowledge as to how much of the item manager's time was act- ually devoted to working with the major ADP systems which had been designed as an integral part Of his job function. If item managers did not spend a major portion of their time 61 TABLE 9 AVERAGE NUMBER OF HOURS PER WEEK.ITEM MANAGERS STATED THEY WORKED 0N ITEM MANAGEMENT JOB ACTIVITIES OR FUNCTIONS Number Percent Hours per Week 1 of IM's N - 736 24 or under 15 2.0 25 - 29 6 0.8 30 - 34 34 4.6 35 - 39 106 14.4 40 546 74.2 41 - 44 24 3.3 45 or over 5 0.7 aSeven respondents did not answer this question TABLE 10 AVERAGE NUMBER OF HOURS PER WEEK ITEM MANAGERS REPORTED SPENDING ON D062 AND D032 ADP SYSTEM PRODUCTS D062 System Products D032 System Products Hours Number Percenta Number Percentb Per Week of IM's N - 732 of IM's N - 729 0 - 4 20 2.7 52 7.1 5 - 9 51 7.0 101 13.9 10 - 14 132 18.0 242 33.2 15 - 19 137 18.7 137 18.8 20 - 24 152 20.8 125 17.1 25 - 29 129 17.6 45 6.2 30 or over 111 15.2 27 ‘3.7 aEleven respondents did not answer this question bFourteen respondents did not answer this question 62 working with ADP system products, then it would not be rea- sonable to view ADP systems as role senders influencing item manager job behavior. The results of the survey questions on work load are presented in Tables 9 and 10. The data supports the writer's initial assumption that EOQ item management requires the item manager to spend the majority of his effort working on ADP system products. The only results which did not coincide with information previously obtained from personal interviews with command staff personnel was that the questionnaire data reported proportionately more time Spent on D062 EOQ Buy Com- putation System computer products. .The commonly held opin- ion is that the D032 Item Manager Stock Control and Distri- bution System requires a greater portion of the item manager's time. However, the important point for this study is that the item managers do in fact spend the majority of their work effort and time relating to ADP system computer products. It supports the contention that ADP systems are a major factor in the item manager's work environment. Ihe Number and Nature of Items Managed The last area in developing an item manager profile con— cerns the number of items managed and an evaluation of how troublesome they tend to be. Tables 11 and 12 summarize these data. The majority of item managers (66.5%) are responsible for 200 to 800 line items with the modal group being 400 to 63 TABLE 11 AVERAGE TOTAL NUMBER OF LINE ITEMS EOQ ITEM MANAGERS REPORTED MANAGING Number of Number Percent Line Items of IM's N - 735 199 or Under 72 9.8 200 - 399 139 18.9 400 - 599 205 27.9 600 - 799 145 19.7 800 - 999 86 11.7 1000 or more 88 12.0 aEight respondents did not answer the question TABLE 12 AVERAGE NUMBER OF "PROBLEM" LINE ITEMS REQUIRING SPECIAL EFFORT (OUT OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF ITEMS MANAGED) REPORTED BY THE EOQ ITEM MANAGER Number of Number Percent Line Items of IM's N 8 7318 None 3 0.4 1 - 24 145 19.8 25 - 49 96 13.1 50 - 74 92 12.6 75 - 99 72 9.8 100 - 124 72 9.8 125 - 149 32 4.4 150 - 174 29 4.0 175 - 199 30 4.1 200 or over 160 21.9 aTwelve respondents did not answer the question 64 600 line items. This relates closely with the work load factors that have been developed for EOQ item management. However, a factor of great importance is the difficulty of handling a line item measured by its status and extraor- dinary efforts required in its management. EOQ items are supposedly processed in a routine sequence of actions. If everything goes smoothly and according to plan, the average EOQ item manager can manage the normally assigned work load without undue effort. However, if he has an excessive num- ber of critical items with backorders and stockouts, his job becomes exceedingly difficult to perform. Therefore, it is possible for an item manager responsible for 400 line items to have a more stressful job than the item manager with 800 line items. This can be a source of role conflict which is an item of particular interest in this study. The data in Table 12 indicates that a little less than half (44%) of the item managers reported over 100 "problem" items, with 22 per cent of this group claiming 200 or over. This seems rather excessive and indicates a potential source of role conflict. A Generalized Composite Item Manager Profile Because this research pertains to a specifically identi- fied group of specialists, whose reSponses are being used for consensus role analysis, a composite profile of the "typ- ical item manager" should be helpful in reviewing the re- sponse patterns and research findings. However, an important 65 point which must be kept in mind is that the following de- scription Of the "average" item manager will seldom complete- ly fit any specific individual. The following is a generalized descriptive profile of the "typical item manager" based upon an analysis of the re- Sponses to Part I of the survey. Age, Education and Sex. A male or female about forty years of age who is a high school graduate with some college credits. Position Grade. The civil service grade held GS-9 with from one to six years in grade and an annual salary of $8462 to $9590, depending upon time in grade. Work Egperience. The item manager is a career civil service employee with over 10 years of government employment tenure, but he has been working as an item manager for less than 4 years. Training. The item manager has not received formal training for the functions and responsibilities of item man- agement, nor in the ADP system products with which he must work. He has learned informally from his supervisor and from his fellow item managers. Work Activities. The item manager devotes all of his 30b time to item management functions, and spends about 14 hours per week on D032 IM Stock Control and Distribution sys- tem computer products, and 20 hours per week on D062 EOQ Buy Computation system computer products. 66 Items Managed Work Load. The item manager is responsi- ble for the management of about 600 line items, and if asked, he would feel that over 75 Of the line items gave him special problems which required intensive management actions on his part. CHAPTER V EOQ ITEM MANAGER ROLE RELATIONSHIPS WITH ADP SYSTEMS Introduction The primary Objectives of this chapter are: (1) to investigate and describe the degrees of consensus among item managers on the operational usefulness of ADP systems' products, and (2) to analyze and describe the attitude of EOQ item managers toward ADP systems and automation in general. Backgeound The Air Force defines stock control as the management required to insure that supplies are adequate and are stocked geographically to most economically meet current military . requirements. The two major functional factors involved in exercising stock control are distribution of assets and com- putation of the requirements. The position within the Air Force which has operational responsibility for stock control is titled Item Manager (1M). An item manager is assigned a Specific group of items and it is his reSponsibility to: (1) compute the Air Force's require- ments for these items, and (2) control the world-wide 67 68 distribution of Air Force assets to include rationing for items in short supply.1 The current stock control system has become standardized at all of the air materiel areas. The automated data system uses a 7080 computer with package programming and file main- tenance being accomplished at Headquarters AFLC. The end result is that the EOQ item manager in performing his stock control functions is almost totally dependent upon the reports and other management data provided by two major ADP systems: (1) D062 -- the EOQ Buy Computation System, and (2) the D032 -- Item Manager, Stock Control and Distribution System. In addition, he receives a few reports from a relatively new ADP system -- the D143B, AMA Edit, Index, and Routing Subsystem.2 Within ADP Systems Analysis of Product Necessity To evaluate the perceived operational usefulness of ADP systems computer products currently provided to EOQ item managers, each respondent was asked to rank, on a seven point semantic differential scale, each product on the criterion of necessity for the performance of his stock control functions. The specific instructions to the item managers were: Part II. We are interested in your profes- sional experience with the various computer 1 U.S., Department of the Air Force, 0.8. Air Force Supply Manual AFM 67-1, (Washington D.C.; 14 October 1968), V01. III, Part one, CHapter 8, p. 8-1. 2Adescription of the three ADP systems and system pro- ducts 15 provided in Appendix C. h. .\.. .. .. ... \ ...., 69 products available to you for support of your task of item management. In Part II we have listed by number and title all the D062, D032 and D143B systems' computer processed products which you may receive and use. The purpose is to obtain your evaluation of just how necessary you consider these products for the performance of your task of item management. Please circle the one number after each of the below listed computer products representing the phrase (e.g., absolutely unnecessary, etc.) which most accurately reflects your personal judgment as to the necessity of the information for your work. Each section in part II listed all of the computer pro- ducts generated for item managers by the three ADP systems. The responses by the item managers resulted in a distribution for each product ranging from "absolutely unnecessary" to ”absolutely necessary." Since the objective was to obtain some insights from the patterns of the response distribution, some method had to be used which would permit examination for consensus in responses and which would accommodate ranking the products on a continuum of consensus. A technique which Gross, Mason and McEachern used in their research was applied in part to this problem. They SUggest that measurement of consensus required consideration of at least two elements: central tendency and variability 0f the distribution. To consider only one of these would ignore important information.3 3Neal Gross, Ward S. Mason, Alexander W. McEachern, EX lorations in Role Anal sis (New York: John Wiley and rwas, 1965 , pp. 104-12. 70 If all responses were to fall into one response category there would be perfect consensus. However, this is not the usual case in empirical studies. For example, in Part II of this study there is only one product for which the reSponse pattern comes near this extreme. So the primary issue is one of analyzing the lack of consensus. The two "pure" types of distribution which can result in a lack of consensus are: (1) distributions with ”equal" frequencies in all response categories, and (2) bimodal distributions where the responses fall "equally" into the two Opposite extreme reSponse cate- gories. These extreme cases of lack of consensus indicate the difficulty in interpreting variability in distribution. For example, a strongly bimodal distribution with the same variance score as a "flat" distribution might indicate a much higher degree of disagreement. Even though the number of persons falling into the "necessary" versus "unnecessary" categories may be nearly the same, the convictions of each group is stronger. There are fewer persons with permissive responses. The differences in the lack of consensus would tend to be more a matter of degree rather than a kind of re- Sponse or, in other words, intensity rather than direction. With these points in mind, the standard deviation was calculated as a measure of dispersion and the mean as the measure of central tendency. These statistics, along with r88ponse frequency distributions, provided a relative basis for comparing item managers' evaluations of ADP systems' pro- duct necessity. Response distributions indicating 71 disagreement (lack of consensus) were examined for both direction of response (necessary versus unnecessary) and intensity of response (how necessary or unnecessary). Detailed data on item managers' evaluation of ADP systems' product necessity generated by Part II of the questionnaire survey are presented in Appendix D. Table 13 presents the data on D062 system product necessity in a form designed to facilitate analysis. D062 System Products A total of 34 individual products were evaluated within the D062 system. The only one for which there was an obvious consensus of necessity is provided below: Question 9: ”DO62.J11-09, EOQ Buy Computation Work- Sheet: Buy Notice” This product provides the item manager with a complete re- cord of data required to initiate procurement action. The "direction only" distribution (see Table 13) shows 98.2 per cent of the respondents considered the product necessary, 1.5 per cent unnecessary, and 0.3 per cent undecided. The "full" distribution (see Appendix D) shows 94.5 per cent evaluated the product as being "absolutely necessary." Since this document is so vital to the requirements buy process, a logical argument could be established that the responses should have reflected the 100 per cent necessity. In a sense it can serve as a basis for examining the response patterns of the other products. 72 TABLE 13 "DIRECTION ONLY" PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF ITEM MANAGERS' RESPONSES EVALUATINGIIHE NECESSITY 0F D062 SYSTEM PRODUCTS (The questions are listed in rank order by highest response rate for combined response categories 5, 6, and 7.) Response Response Categories: Categories: (1) Absolutely (5) Sometimes unnecessary Necessary (2) very Often (6) very Often Ques- unnecessary (4) May or may Necessary tion Rankr' (3) Sometimes not be (7) Absolutely Std. NO. ing unnecessary necessary Necessary Mean Dev. 9 1 6.9 .3 98.2 6.86 .72 12 2 5.1 6.0 88.9 6.12 1.32 7 3 5.8 6.6 87.6 6.24 1.43 32 5.0 8.4 86.6 6.20 1.43 11 5 6.1 9.0 85.0 6.08 1.59 10 6 7.7 7.3 85.0 5.98 1.50 29 7 7.9 16.0 76.1 5.75 1.66 33 8 12.5 13.5 74.0 5.48 1.78 34 9 14.1 12.0 73.9 5.41 1.82 30 10 9.2 17.9 72.9 5.62 1.74 3 11 11.7 15.7 72.6 5.45 1.64 31 12 9.5 18.2 72.3 5.60 1.76 6 13 15.7 12.7 71.6 5.40 1.89 2 14 13.9 15.0 71.0 5.37 1.71 17 15 14.3 14.7 71.0 5.31 1.85 13 16 17.1 15.3 67.6 5.28 2.05 14 17 18.3 15.3 66.4 5.19 2.08 TABLE 13 (Continued) 73 Response Response Categories Categories: (1) Absolutely' (5) Sometimes Unnecessary Necessary (2) very Often (6) Very Often Ques- unnecessary (4) May or may Necessary tion 1 Rank- (3) Sanetimes not be (7) Absolutely Std. No. ing Unnecessary necessary Necessary - Mean Dev. 4 18 16.5 18.7 64.8 5.10 1.83 19 19 18.0 20.3 61.7 4.88 1.85 22 20 18.6 19.9 61.5 4.77 1.83 8 21 19.8 20.1 60.2 4.85 1.91 16 22 22.3 18.6 58.9 4.74 1.93 5 23 22.8 19.6 57.6 4.75 2.04 18 24 26.3 18.2 55.4 4.56 2.12 21 25 20.6 24.9 54.5 4.65 1.85 27 26 15.7 31.1 53.2 4.85 1.91 28 27 16.4 32.6 50.9 4.75 1.92 23 28 21.4 28.1 50.4 4.47 1.86 l 29 33.1 16.2 50.3 4.30 2.14 20 30 29.2 21.0 49.8 4.32 2.10 15 31 31.1 20.8 48.1 4.24 2.07 26 32 20.8 38.1 41.1 4.38 1.91 24 33 20.6 38.3 41.0 4.40 1.91 25 34 20.8 38.4 40.8 4.37 1.91 74 ”High” Necessary ReSponse Products. Six products on the "direction only" (necessary versus unnecessary) response distribution had necessary evaluations of 85 per cent or higher and a "low" standard deviation score. Question 9 (98.2% necessary; 0.72 SD): DO62.J11*09, EOQ Buy Computation Worksheet: Buy notice. (weekly) er with a complete record Provides the item manag tiate procurement action. of data required to ini Question 12 (88.9% necessary; 1.32 SD): DO62.J11-l4 EOQ Buy Computation Worksheets: Interrogation Reply. (weekly) nager with automatic or Provides the item ma data on an item requiring requested pertinent review. Question 7 (87.6% necessary; 1.43 SD): DO62.J11-07, transfer of Prime To: "gaining activity." (weekly) Provides item manager with historical and per- tinent data to be forwarded to the gaining Air Materiel Area (AMA). Question 32 (86.6% necessary; 1.43 SD): DO62.SlZ-03, EOQ Buy/Budget Projection Products EOQ Buy Com- putation Worksheets. (quarterly) Provides the item manager with a complete record of data required for item substantiation in sup— port of dollar projections. (quarterly) Question 10 (85% necessary; 1.50 SD): D062.Jll-10, EOQ Buy Computation Worksheet: Data Level Notice. (weekly) Provides the item manager with computed levels, assets position, and demand history indicating procurement action within 90 days. D062.J11«ll, Question 11 (85% necessary; 1.59 SD): Termination Notice. EOQ Buy Computation Worksheet: (weekly) Provides the item manage asset position indicatin terminated. ' r with computed levels and g excess procurement to be 7S "Observations. The D062 system products with the highest degree of perceived necessity deal predominantly with infor- mation for making operational decisions. These decisions are directly to purchasing (buy) actions and termination actions, or are used to obtain funds to accomplish procurement. The products are basic to the item managers operational task of requirements computation which is a major element of his stock control function. ”Low Necessary" ReSpOnSe'Products. Since no clear breaks or groupings developed in the ranking, the products with the lowest percentage of necessary responses were examined. This procedure was designed to highlight product characteristics which might help explain the differences in the response patterns. Those six products with the lowest percentage of necessary responses are listed below: Question 1 (50.3% necessary; 2.14 SD): DO62.J11-03, Manual File Maintenance Transaction List (weekly) Provides the IM with a record of each AFLC Form 46 file maintenance action that was posted during the current cycle. Question 20 (49.8% necessary; 2.10 SD): DO62-J11-23, Nonrecurring Demand Notice. (quarterly) Provides the IM with a listing of items with nonre- curring demands for review and subsequent action to purify item demand history. Question 15 (48.1% necessary; 2.07 SD): D062.J11-18, Two Years Zero Demand Items. (annual) Provides print out for review for justification of retention of assets at IM level. 76 Question 26 (41.1% necessary; 1.91 SD): D062.K77-01, EOQ/DSA Projection Executive Management Summary Report, Part III. (monthly) Part III provides the IM with the same data as Part 1, except the items are summarized by MMC/FSC within budget code. Question 24 (41% necessary; 1.91 SD): D062.K77-01, EOQ/DSA Projection Executive Management Summary Report, Part II. (monthly) Part II provides the IM with the same information as Part I, except the items are summarized by budget code. Question 25 (40.8% necessary; 1.91 SD): DO62.K77-Ol, EOQ/DSA Projection Executive Management Summary Report, Part 1. (monthly) Part I provides the IM with the quantity and dollar value of each category of items requiring buy actions prior to capitalization. Observations. The products with "low necessary" response patterns appear to be more indirectly related to the operation of requirements computation. In general, they provide the item manager with information to "purify" data and take general management actions to facilitate better decision when procurement action is required. Also, the three lowest ranked products (questions 24, 25 and 26) generally require a decision by the branch chief with the item manager taking care of the details. 2932 System Products A total of 18 individual products were evaluated within the D032 system. Again, a decision was made to compare the highest ranked products to the lowest ranked on the basis of 77 necessity. The data for this analysis are provided by Table 14.4 ”High” Necessity Response Products. The five products with the highest percentage of necessary responses were: Question 36 (88.1% necessary; 1.325D): D032.615-C1, Controlled Exceptions (daily) Provides the IM with a listing of requisitions with erroneous or incompatible input. Report contains original 80 columns of data plus control number and exception code and phrase to identify the type of error . Question 43 (87.1 necessary; 1.42 SD): D032.503-Cl, Transaction Register Hi-value and Manager Review (daily) Provides IM with a daily listing of transactions and ending balances of Hi-value and manager review items used to maintain close surveillanCe over Hi-value and Specially uncontrolled items. Question 41 (83.0% necessary; 1.698D): D032.ED1-C1, Transaction Register Category I Items (weekly) Provides IM an auditable document for accountable type transactions. Question 42 (83.0% necessary; 1.69 SD): D032.ED2-Cl, Transaction Register Category I Items (monthly) Provides IM with an auditable document for accountable type transaction prepared from the weekly/monthly transaction listing. Question 40 (81.6% necessary; 1.54 SD): D032.501-C1 and DO32.507-C1, Processing Master Record Print Out. (daily) Provides IM with the complete asset position of an item. It is produced either as a result of an interrogation or internal computer processing. 4The complete data on distribution of item manager re- Sponses within each response category is presented in Appendix E. ‘41 v I ‘V .. "DIRECTION ONLY" PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF ITEM MANAGERS' RESPONSES (The questions are listed in rank order by highest response rate for 78 TABLE 14 EVALUATING THE NECESSITY OF D032 SYSTEM PRODUCTS combined response categories 5, 6, and 7.) Response Response Categories: Categories: (1) Absolutely (5) Sometimes Unnecessary Necessary (2) very Often (6) Very Often Ques- unnecessary (4) May or may Necessary tion ~ Rank-- (3) Sometimes not be (7) Absolutely Std. NO. ing unnecessary necessary Necessary Mean Dev. 36 1 4.9 6.9 88.1 6.23 1.32 43 2 4.8 8.1 87.1 6.29 1.42 41 3 7.1 9.7 83.2 6.18 1.69 42 4 7.1 10.0 83.0 6.17 1.69 40 5 7.6 10.7 81.6 5.89 1.54 44 6 7.4 12.7 79.9 5.85 1.65 46 7 14.1 10.2 75.7 5.64 1.94 35 8 15.2 12.5 72.3 5.35 1.82 38 9 19.7 9.5 70.7 5.14 2.17 52 10 8.7 23.0 68.2 5.31 1.66 45 11 10.4 23.2 66.3 5.33 1.79 50 12 12.8 30.7 56.5 4.90 1.76 47 13 17.2 34.7 48.1 4.72 1.95 51 14 15.5 37.1 47.4 4.62 1.79 49 15 16.1 37.3 46.6 4.53 1.80 48 16 19.1 36.9 44.0 4.51 1.90 53 17 17.7 39.9 42.3 4.83 1.71 37 13 24,5 41.4 34.1 4.14 1.90 79 Observations. The primary characteristic of these products is that they are directly related to the Operational task of asset distribution. They provide basic information required for almost all Operating decisions concerned with distribution. This is consistent with the D062 products found most necessary and the distribution of response patterns are also very similar. "Low" Necessary Response Products. The five D032 system products with the lowest percentage of necessary responses were: Question 47 (48% necessary; 1.95 SD): D032.804-C1, Classified Item List (semiannual) To advise IM information or classified items. Used to insure proper storage and inventory of classified items. 1.79 SD): D032.632-C1, Question 51 (47.4% necessary; Previews Back Order Items Capitalized Listing-- (as required) To advise the IM that requisitions were on back order at the time of capitalization of an item to DSA. Question 49 (46.6% necessary; 1.80 SD): D032.PW1-Cl, Interrogation Replies on Controlled Exceptions-- By Command ock record account numbers on a Provides as st for a particular controlled exception given command area. essary; 1.71 SD): D032.293-Cl, Question 53 (42.4% nec Requisition Control Active Masters By Site/Age. (daily) Furnishes replies to interrOgations by site and/or age for all Open shipments. ‘1 M- D Q“ 1‘. I ~ I\'.‘ 80 Question 37 (34.1% necessary; 1.90 SD): D032.451-C1/C2, Defense Supply Agency Accountable Balance Trans- actions (as required) This requires IM to forward the document identifier "DEE" cards to the apprOpriate center receiving management responsibility for AF assets being capitalized. Observations. The D032 systems lowest ranking outputs pertained mainly general management information not requiring an "immediate" decision. The characteristic response pattern in these cases are more accurately described as reflecting "lack of agreement" rather than disagreement on the product's necessity. In other words, the reSponses are relatively evenly distributed rather than grouped at both directional extremes. A few of the products did tend toward disagreement (e.g., question 13, 14 and 38) discussions with AFLC staff personnel and indicated that these products were designed for a particular action which could be accomplished by using Other outputs. Apparently the item managers using the products reSponded strongly necessary while those who didn't use the product responded strongly unnecessary. General Findinge_ ADP system products required for operational decisions in performing the item manager's fundamental tasks of require- ments computation and asset distribution are preceived by item managers to be necessarY- Products providing information for general management I actions reflect a "lack of agreement" as to the product 5 necessity. 81 The data did not identify any product with a consensus of Opinion that it was unnecessary. However, the lack of agreement on the necessity of certain products indicates that many item managers are not using the products as in- tended or that the products are not applicable to all item managers due to peculiarities of the items managed. Between ADP Systems Analysis of Pr6duct Necessity The next focus of interest is on the areas of agreement 'and disagreement in the distribution of responses between the three ADP systems. In the previous consensus analysis the concern was with Specific ADP system products within each system ranked on the basis of necessity for the performance of item management tasks. The between system analysis is performed to investigate the possibility that item managers preceive the systems differently since each system relates to distinctly different stock control function. General Observations Table 15 presents a summary of item manager responses as to the necessity of each ADP system computer product. The data is expressed in two ways: by total number of responses in each reSponse category (e.g., absolutely unnecessary, etc.) and also by what percentage this number is of the total number of actual responses (item managers failing to answer were subtracted from the toal number of responses possible). 82 TABLE 15 .NUMBER.AND PERCENTAGE OF ITEM MANAGERS' RESPONSES AS TO THE NECESSITY OF EACH OF THE THREE ADP SYSTEMS' PRODUCTS D062 SYSTEM' D032 SYSTEM’ D143B SYSTEM (34 System. (18 System (3 System Products) Products) Products) Number Percent- Number Percent- Number Percent- ReSponse of Res- age of Res- age of Res- age Categories ponses N=24349 ponses N=1257l ponses N=2083 (1) Absolutely Unnecessary 2099 8.6 1021 8.1 225 10.8 2 very Often ( ) Unnecessary 1208 5.0 372 3.0 59 2.8 (3 Sometimes 3 Unnecessary 640 2.6 211 1.7 57 2.7 Nhy or May (4) Not be Nec- 4438 18.2 2728 21.7 643 30.9 essary (5) Sometimes Necessary 3174 13.0 1303 10.4 337 16.2 (6) very Often Necessary 3457 14.2 1557 12.4 301 14.5 (7) Absolutely Necessary 9333 38.3 5379 42.8 461 22.1 NO Res- (03 ponses 913 3.6a 803 6.0a 146 6.6a aPercentage is computed on the total number of possible responses fOr eadh ADP systenlby 743 item managers (D062: N=25262; D032: N=13347; D143B: N=2229). 83 Perfect consensus would be all reSponses occurring in a single category. However, perfect consensus did not occur for any product. Therefore, the response patterns will be compar- ed and analyzed for consensus on direction of responses (necessary or unnecessary) and also the intensity of such responses within each direction. Direction of Reeponse Consensus on direction of reSponse was examined first. Table 16 presents these data for each ADP system by combining reSponseS in the three necessary reSponse categories and the three unnecessary response categories. Several observations may be made regarding the directional distribution of the item managers' reSponses. Unnecessary Responses. For each system, the proportion of responses falling into the unnecessary directional classification is practically the same. This implies that there is almost complete unanimity among item managers on the prOportion of unnecessary computer products in each system. However, the fact that about 15 per cent of each system's computer products were evaluated as unnecessary to some degree does not mean any single product can be eliminated. All that may be stated for certain is that each system has the same prOportion of unnecessary responses and that this represents an agreement of general attitude on unnecessary Products between ADP systems. 84 TABLE 16 "DIRECTION ONLYU FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF ITEM MANAGERS' RESPONSES TO THE NECESSITY OF EACH SYSTEMS' COMPUTER PRODUCTS ReSponse Response Categories: Categories: (1) Absolutely (5) Sometimes Unneces- Neces- sary sary (2) Very Often (6) Very Often Unneces- Neces- sary sary (3) Sometimes (4) May or May (7) Absolutely ADP Unneces- Not Be Neces- Systems sary Necessary sary D062 EOQ 16.21 18.23 65.56 (34 System Pro- . ducts) D032 IM SCGD 12.76 21.70 65.54 (16 System Pro- ducts) D143B 16.37 30.87 52.76 (3 System Pro- ducts) Necessary Responses. The proportion of reSponses falling into the "necessary” direction is essentially the same for the D062 and D032 systems (about 66 per cent), but noticeably less for the D143B system (53%). This indicates that item managers view the necessity Of the three ADP systems' computer products as being about the same. However, the reSponse pattern of the D143B system warrants further comment. This system is comparatively new with few products and is relatively unfamiliar to item managers. This condition apparently leads to less positive directional responses (unnecessary and necessary) and more undecided 85 responses since the undecided responses do increase by about ten per cent. The necessary responses decrease about 13 per cent, but the unnecessary responses stay in the same prOportion as the other two systems. Intensity of Responses The intensity of the item manager response patterns is reflected by the "full” percentage frequency distribution presented in Table 17. The distribution of item manager reSponses for the D062 and D032 systems clearly indicates general agreement on product necessity evaluations between the two systems. It also infers that item manager's attitudes toward the two ADP systems are essentially the same. Of greater importance is the intensity of the reSponses as to the necessity of the systems products for the performance of their item management functions. Approximately 54 per cent of the total responses fall into the two highest necessary response categories while only about 12 per cent fall into the two highest unnecessary response categories. The results for the 143B system, because it is relatively new and untested, does not reflect this positive consensus of necessity. Rather it reflects uncertainty which is logically consistent under the circumstances and tends to lend validity to the reSponse pattern of the D062 and D032 systems. Summary of Findinge_ Figure 1 graphically compares and illustrates the findings of this analysis. fifi‘hIHUtHI‘ 86 >mka340mm< >¢m¢mm> 31.529. :1 mo >m mnV—o I “Chan—Omn— Smhmrm «Mao nausea”... 22.33 38 § >mmm> \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\N \ n mm“ .c« \ m ..on m \ “““ -mn a {OW u0< 0 ma m NH o om md Ne 0.x :mEOumtAm 1 68.: H2 H.NN m.¢H N.©H m.om n.N w.m m.oa mmvam m.Nv v.NH v.oa u.HN N.H o.m H.w Nmon m.wm N.¢H o.mH N.wH c.N o.m 0.x Noon bmmmouoz hemmoooz hemmoooz hemmo b38855 immmoooaea b33885 madamxm 3330mm? :33 io> mwfipoEom .662 on p02 mafiuoeom coumo 4C8? 433396.91. m5. xnz_Ho em: 1 5 Ge E E 5 S 3 l whobnomm .mEMHmwm mm< :UHHmmmumz mzH 20 zth mo onbanmHmHQ muHomOH so» mam: ou xuwaflnm m.nomw>hogsm Hoe» ”mm ponwhumow amen on xms momfi>Hom=m o: OHQOOQ saws mmcaamop m.p0mfl>hogsm use» .oz .02 .oz .oz .02 coco ~A.5_> A3 AS eooo xahfimm AB U000 xho> uoz E Moon 3 mcoflumoso EBHEE «BE 8. oszEEmm mzofimmbo 2. mmmzommmm .mmmu -mam Raoaam eoammaoam Logo Nam: SNANSL Nam: sco> -Hoz--o>wmmmm Amy SSS SSS Sac .EfififiaflmzH.agfifimwzcbh35mfihzw gonmflnvop wmmzoammm .mmmu9»me :whmezS. ma. ZH EH E DH Nmmzommmm .9832: E: "Ho onSmHNONHHH mufizmumma HHzS. SENSE mm man/SQ. 127 TABLE 29 "DIRECTION ONLY” PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF ITEM MANAGER RESPONSES TO ITEMS IN THE ANXIETY SURVEY INSTRUMENT (Questions are listed in rank order by highest response rate for combined response categories 4 and 5) ReSponse Response Categories: QueSv Categories: (4) Rather Often tion Rank- (1) Never * (3) Some- (5) Nearly all Std. No. ing (2) Rarely times the Time Mean Dev. 3 1 42.5 25.2 32.3 2.89 1.31 4 2 44.6 29.1 26.3 2.82 1.21 15 3 45.8 29.6 24.5 2.70 1.18 1 4 40.6 35.1 24.3 2.78 1.11 11 5 38.9 39.3 21.8 2.78 1 01 10 6 47.2 35.4 17.3 2.60 1.04 9 7 49.8 35.6 14.6 2.55 .96 2 8 58.7 27.1 14.2 2.41 1.02 6 9 63.2 22.7 14.1 2.33 1.05 13 10 60.9 27.0 12.0 2.37 1.00 7 11 68.7 21.1 10.2 2.13, 1 02 12 12 71.1 19.9 9.0 2.14 .99 l4 13 77.1 15.2 7 7 2.00 98 8 14 79.3 13.4 7 2 1.86 96 17 15 70.2 23.7 6.1 2.08 .89 5 16 73.2 20.8 6.0 1.99 .95 16 17 72.1 23.0 4.9 2.04 .87 128 Role Overload. A very prevalent form of conflict is role overload. TO examine his proposition and establish a possible source of conflict, a group of five questions were devised. 4. 10. 11. 15. Feeling that you have too heavy a work load, one that you can't possibly finish during an ordinary workday. Thinking that you'll not be able to handle the demands imposed upon you by the 0062 and 0032 systems' computer generated printouts. Bothered by the fact that the 0062 buy computation system provides too many unnecessary products which detract from other required activities. Bothered by the fact that the 0032 IM Stock Control and Distribution System provides too many unnecessary products which detract from other required activities. Thinking that the amount of work you have to do may interfere with how well it gets done. TABLE 30 PERCENTAGE FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF ITEM MANAGERS’ RESPONSES TO ROLE OVERLOAD ITEMS IN THE ”ANXIETY" SURVEY INSTRUMENT (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Nearly Some- Rather A11 Std. Question Never Rarely times Often The Time Mean Dev. 4 12.9 31.7 29.1 12.3 14.0 2.82 1.21 7 30.9 37.8 21.1 7.4 2.9 2.13 1.02 10 14.8 32.4 35.4 12.0 5.4 2.60 1.04 11 10.1 28.8 39.3 16.3 5.5 2.78 1.0] 15 17.3 28.5 29.6 15.3 9.3 2.70 1.18 AVERAGE 17.2 31.8 30.9 12.7 7.4 u ref ‘LJ m 129 Questions 4 and 15 in this group were directly concerned with the total work load, and within this group received the highest proportion of responses indicating that they were a source of anxiety. In fact, these two items ranked second and third when all 17 questions were rank ordered on the basis of combined responses in categories (4), ”rather often" and (5), "nearly all the time". (See Table 29 for a ranking Of all 17 questions). The percentage Of responses for question 4 in these two categories was 26 per cent and for question 15 it was 25 per cent. Since about 45 per cent responded "never" and "rarely”, the distribution of responses indicates that work or role over load is an item of concern for over half of the item managers--about 29 per cent sometimes and about 25 per cent rather often or nearly all the time. The remaining three questions were directed at work load originated by ADP Systems and the reSponses indicated that they were of a lessor concern. Questions 10 and 11 referred to unnecessary ADP system prodicts detracting from required activities. These questions ranked high (fifth and Sixth) among the 17 items in the combined categories "rather Often” and "nearly all the time”. Question eleven's response rate was 22 per cent and question ten's response rate was 17 per cent. This distribution Of response also indicates that the volume of ADP system products seems to be a source Of concern to over half of the item managers. Question 7 changed the emphasis to ADP system demands being excessive, The "rather often" and ”nearly all the 130 time" reSponse rate was 10 per cent which drOpped the item to a ranking of eleventh out of the seventeen. The reSponse pattern for this question appears to support prior findings that a majority of item managers view the ADP systems products as a tool to be used by them rather than a rigid task master. The average response distribution for these five items does indicate the existance of role overload in varying degrees for about 51 per cent of the item managers. This response pattern is supported by the responses to question 8 in the job satisfaction survey which indicated that about 33 per cent of the item managers are dissatisfied with the prOportion of work time available to accomplish tasks generated by computer products. Since role overload is a source of conflicting expectations levied upon item managers, many of these item managers apparently are experiencing varying degrees of tension and anxiety. Role Ambiguity. Another source Of tension for a position incumbent is uncertainty or ambiguity concerning elements of his work situation. A group of five questions were develOped to examine this concept. The responses to these questions are presented in Table 31. 2. Being unclear on just what the scope and reSponsibilitieS of your job are. 3. Not knowing what opportunities for advancement or promotion exist for you. 9. Bothered by the fact that you can't get needed information from the automated data systems to prOperly perform your job. 16. 17. PERCENTAGE FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF ITEM MANAGERS' Not knowing just what the 0062 automated 131 processes require Of you in your job. Not knowing just what the 0032 automated processes require of you in your job. TABLE 31 RESPONSES TO ROLE AMBIGUITY ITEMS IN THE "ANXIETY" SURVEY INSTRUMENT (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Nearly Some Rather. All Std. Question Never Rarely times Often The Time Mean Dev. 2 18.5 40.2 27.1 10.3 4.0 2.41 1.02 3 16.6 26.0 25.2 15.9 16.4 2.89 1.31 9 12.6 37.2 35.6 11.1 3.5 2.55 .96 16 28.4 43.3 23.0 3.9 1.0 2.04 .87 17 28.3 42.0 23.7 5.1 1.0 2.08 .89 AVERAGE 20.9 37.6 26.9 9.2 5.2 The response distributions to the items in this group proved to be extremely diverse in the respect that it contained both the highest ranked and lowest ranked questions. Question 3 which queried lack of knowledge concerning‘ promotion opportunities had 32 per cent of the item managers respond that it bothered them "rather Often" or ”nearly all the time." Only 43 per cent responded "never" or "rarely". This finding lends support to the previous indication that item managers were less satisfied with the career aspects of item management than their job functions. Questions 16 and 17 were concerned with understanding the requirements imposed by automated processes. Responses 132 to these questions definitely indicated that this was a relatively minor source of ambiguity. These questions ranked fifteenth and seventeenth and had a "rather Often" or ”nearly all the time” response rate of only 5 and 6 per cent. This reSponse pattern also supports previous findings in Part III that item managers related positively and effectively with automation and that they were generally satisfied with the ADP system's products (questions 5 and 6, Part V). Questions 2 and 9 were about in the middle of the overall ranking. Question 9, which asks if the item manager is bothered by inability to Obtain needed information from the automated systems, ranked seventh with a "rather often" and "nearly all the time” response rate of 15 per cent. This result is supported by the finding in Part III that timeliness was the lowest ranked criterion in evaluating ADP systems effectiveness. Question 2 referred to clarity Of responsibilities and had a similar response distribution except for about an 8 per cent shift from "sometimes" category to the "never” and "rarely" categories. The average response distribution for these :five items indicates that role ambiguity is not as prevalent as role overload conflict, but it does exist. People Versus ADP Systems As Sources of ConflICt andAmbiguity Another undertaking in this part was to develOp information which might provide some insight regarding the 133 sources of role pressures and irritants. Two groups of questions were used. One was designed to relate role conflict and ambiguity to individuals and the other to ADP systems. Published role analysis research concentrates on human role sets and usually assumed that inanimate organization and environmental factors will effect all variables under study in a like manner. The purpose of these two sets of questions is a very limited effort to view ADP systems and people as separate sources of conflict and ambiguity by comparing reSponse patterns which reflect the position incumbent's perceptions. Peopie as Sources of Role Conflict and Ambiguigy. The following four questions were used to examine role conflict and ambiguity situations related to human sources. The percentage frequency distribution of responses are presented in Table 32. 6. Thinking that you'll not be able to satisfy the conflicting demands of various people over you. 8. Feeling that the individual demands of your, supervisor are in conflict with the 0062 and 0032 systems' generated job activ1ties. 12. Feeling unable to influence your immediate supervisor's decisions and actions that affect you. 14. Not knowing just what the people you work with expect of you. 134 TABLE 32 PERCENTAGE FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF ITEM MANAGERS' RESPONSES TO ROLE CONFLICT AND ROLE AMBIGUITY ITEMS RELATED TO PEOPLE (1) (5) (2) (3) (4) Nearly Some- Rather All Std. Question Never Rarely times Often > The Time Mean Dev 6 21.4 41.8 22.7 9.7 4.4 2.33 1.05 8 43.1 36.3 13.4 5.3 1.9 1.86 .96 12 26.7 44.4 19.9 5.3 3.7 2.14 .99 14 33.8 43.3 15.2 4.4 3.9 2.00 .98 AVERAGE 31.21 41.45 17.80 6.18 3.33 2.08 1.01 In this group, question 66 had the highest prOportion of “high anxiety" responses (14 per cent), bUt 63 per cent 0f the item managers indicated that conflicting demands from people over them "never" or "rarely” bothered them. The implication is that item managers do not receive strong role pressures from the superordinate positions within their work role set. EOQ item manager are stable and clearly delineated. This finding indicates that the operations of the The response pattern to question.8~“which queries for conflict between supervisory direction and ADP system requirements) collaborates this characteristic of routinized activity. Questions 12 and 14 were concerned with the relations of the item manager with the immediate members of his role set--his supervisor and his fellow workers. Seventy-one per cent of the item managers reSponded that they either "never” or "rarely" seriously disagreed with their 135 supervisor's actions or decisions. This result is consistent with the distribution of reSponses to the two questions in Part III pertaining to item manager's satisfaction with their supervisor where 65 to 60 per cent rated supervision "very good” or ”good”. Responses to question 14 indicates that relations with fellow workers is even less Of a source for tension. ADP Systems Sources of Role Conflict and Ambiguity. The group of questions used to investigate the item manager's perception of and behavioral response to elements of ADP systems upon which he is dependent in his work are listed below. Table 33 presents the percentage frequency distributions for the five questions. 7. Thinking that you'll not be able to handle the demands imposed upon you by the 0062 and 0032 systems' computer generated printouts. 10. Bothered by the fact that the 0062 buy computation system provides too many unnecessary products which detract from other required activities. 11. Bothered by the fact that the 0032 IM Stock Control and Distribution System provides too many unnecessary products which detract from other required activities. 16. Not knowing just what the 0062 automated processes require of you in your job. 17. Not knowing just what the 0032 automated processes require of you in your job. I“? A 136 TABLE 33 PERCENTAGE FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF ITEM MANAGERS' RESPONSES TO ROLE CONFLICT AND ROLE AMBIGUITY ITEMS RELATED TO ADP SYSTEMS (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Nearly Some— Rather. All Std. Question I Never Rarelyitimes ' Often The Time- Mean Dev. 7 30.9 37.8 21.1 7.4 2.9 2.13 1.02 10 14.8 32.4 35.4 12.0 5.4 2.60 1.04 11 10.1 28 8 39.3 16.3 5.5 2.78 1.01 16 28.4 43.3 23.0 3.9 1.0 2.04 .87 17 28.3 42.0 23.7 5.1 1.0 2.08 .89 AVERAGE 22.6 36.8 28.5 8.9 3.1 2.33I 1.02 The response patterns to two questions stand out. Questions 10 and 11 refer to unnecessary products provided by 0062 and 0032 systems, and the majority of the item managers indicated that this was bothersome at least sometimes (only 47 and 39 per cent respectively reSponded "never” or "rarely"). For the other three questions the majority of reSponses were "never" or "rarely” (7-69%; 16~73% and 17-72%). Examination of the overall average response pattern indicates that ADP systems do produce some conflict and ambiguity but relates to a relatively small percentage of the group. Comparison of People and Systems Sources. One way to examine the relative amount of rOle tension related to peOple and to ADP systems, was to rank order the questions on the basis of the highest degree of tension indicated. Table 29 Provided a ranking of all 17 items in order of highest 137 percentage of responses in categories "rather Often” and "nearly all the time." Table 34 shows how the two groups Of questions relate to each other when they are ranked. TABLE 34 PEOPLE AND SYSTEMS SOURCES OF ROLE CONFLICT AND AMBIGUITY QUESTIONS RANKED ON THE BASIS OF DATA PROVIDED BY TABLE 29 Percent Response in Categories: (4) Rather Often (5) Nearly all Question Number Ranking the time and Type Source 5 21.8 11 ADP Systems 6 17.3 10 ADP Systems 9 14.1 6 People 11 10.3 7 ADP Systems 12 9.0 12 PeOple 13 7.7 14 People 14 7.2 18 People 15 6.1 17 ADP Systems 17 4.8 16 ADP Systems Two points are emphasized by this presentation of the data. One, on the basis of these questions and their, rankings, no clear distinction can be made between ADP systems and peOple as sources of role conflict and ambiguity. Two, since nine of these questions account for 7 out of the 9 bottom ranked items, it becomes evident that, according to this survey instrument, neither people or ADP systems are identified as the primary sources of rOle conflict or ambiguity pressures manifested by expressions of anxiety. Also, these implications do not conflict with the information developed in Part III of the surveY- 138 Highest Ranked Anxiety Items Since the items designed to check ADP systems and people as sources Of rOle pressures produced fairly indeterminate results, it became necessary to examine those items which ranked highest as sources tension or anxiety. Four questions had about 25 percent or more Of their reSponses in the "rather often" and "nearly all the time" categories and never more than 46 percent in the "never" or "rarely" categories. These were: 3. Not knowing what Opportunities for advancement or promotion exist for you. 4. Feeling that you have too heavy a workload, one that you can't possibly finish during an ordinary workday. 15. Thinking that the amount Of work you have to do may interfere with how well it gets done. 1. Feeling that you have too little authority to carry out the reSponsibilitieS assigned to you. Table 35 presents the reSponse distribution in combined categories to emphasize the direction of the reSponses. The full distribution is given in Table 28. 139 TABLE 35 "DIRECTION ONLY” PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF ITEM MANAGERS' RESPONSES TO THE FOUR HIGHEST RANKED ITEMS IN THE."ANXIETY" SURVEY INSTRUMENT ReSponse Response Categories: Categories: (4) Rather Often (1) Never (5) Nearly A11 Question (2) Rarely (3) Sometimes the Time 3 42.5 25.2 32.3 4 44.6 29.1 26.3 15 45.8 29.6 24.5 1 40.6 35.1 24.3 Uncertainty concerning promotion Opportunities is clearly the most prevalent source of concern for the majority item managers. This factor cannot be related directly to ADP systems or even the immediate supervisor. It is primarily a function of the civil service regulations and local management policies and practices. Data generated by the survey does not provide any information as to why this is the item of greatest concern. There is some indication in the career satisfaction instrument that item managers have not attained the career goals and have aspirations to advance. Also during the pilot test Of the survey instrument, personal interviews with about 40 item managers indicated they were not satisfied with the promotion policy. At one of the air materiel areas there were several complaints that the E0Q item manager was not considered eligible for promotion because they lacked category II item management experience, and had no Opportunity to gain the experience on the present job. K—SI 'LJ r+ 140 The next two highest sources of concern are directly related to the job of item management but again cannot be attributed to the immediate supervision or ADP systems. Questions 4 and 15 indicate role pressure due to role over- load and would normally be attributed to the number of items assigned and the effort required to manage the items (e.g., large number Of problem items). The fourth item indicates that a sizable number of item managers feel they have too little authority for the reSpon- sibilities they have. It is possible that this may be partially due to the structure imposed upon their function by the ADP systems but none Of the data in this survey establishes this relationship. The only conclusion possible after examination of these four items is that ADP systems and immediate supervisors are not the primary sources of role pressures for item managers and that most of the present item managers have apparently adapted well to a highly automated job environment. It is also possible that some of the item managers who did not adapt to the automated environment have left the organization. Lewest Ranked Anxiety Items The four items which ranked lowest as a source of tension and anxiety were: 16. Not knowing just what the 0062 automated processes require Of you in your job. 5. Feeling that you are not adequately prepared to handle your job? 141 l7._ Not knowing just what the 0032 automated processes require of you in your job. 8. Feeling that the individual demands of your supervisor are in conflict with the 0062 and 0032 systems' generated job activities. Table 36 presents the reSponse distribution in combined cat- egories to emphasize the direction of the responses. The full distribution is available in Table 28. TABLE 36 ”DIRECTION ONLY” PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF ITEM MANAGERS' RESPONSES TO THE FOUR LOWEST RANKED ITEMS IN THE "ANXIETY" SURVEY INSTRUMENT Response Response Categories: Categories: (4) Rather Often (1) Never (5) Nearly All Question (2) Rarely (3) Sometimes the Time 16 72.1 23.0 4.8 S 73.2 20.8 6.0 17 70.2 23.7 6.1 8 79.4 13.4 7.2 Analysis of the four questions reflecting the lowest degree of anxiety preceived by item managers reveals that 3 0f the 4 (questions 8, l6 and 17) were designed to investigate ADP systems as a source Of rOle conflict and ambiguity. The reSponse pattern to these questions indicates that ADP Systems are not viewed as a source of conflicting or ambiguous exceptions. Question 5 referred to the individuals preparation to handle the job. Apparently item managers do not feel ill Prepared even though training was rated as next to the most 142 dissatisfying item in the job satisfaction survey instrument. A possible explanation is that item managers learned on the job and from fellow IM's. Therefore, they actually judge themselVes to be fully knowledgeable, but feel their job pre- paration should have been accomplished by more formalized training programs. Examination of these four lowest ranked questions strongly infers that ADP Systems are preceived as the least source of role conflict or ambiguity by the majority of the item managers. Summary The group Of questions used to check for role overload ranked high (2, 3, 5, 6 and 11) among a ranking of all 17 questions used in the survey. Items referring to the general workload situation ranked higher than items referring to specific sources such as ADP systems or ADP system products. The questions used to examine for rOle ambiguity had a wide variation in their reSponse distributions. Again, questions directed at the Specific sources ranked lowest. The requirements of ADP systems were relatively unambiguous but knowledge about promotion Opportunities were relatively ambiguous. Job responsibilities and information needed to do the job were ranked in the middle. An attempt to check ADP systems and people as distinguishably different sources of role conflict and role ambiguity produced indeterminate results. However, these 143 questions relating role conflict and ambiguity to ADP systems and people sources generally ranked in the bottom half of the 17 questions in the survey. This indicated that neither the peOple in the immediate role set or ADP systems were the primary sources of role conflict and ambiguity. This result led to further analysis of the data. An examination of the 4 top and 4 bottom ranked items indicated that the highest role conflict and ambiguity "anxiety" levels were related to the more general situational factors (e.g., excessive workload, too little authority for the responsibility and lack Of promotion Opportunity knowledge) rather than specifically to peOple or ADP systems in the immediate rOle set. The only reasonable conclusion which may be drawn from these data is that most item managers do not view ADP systems and their products as sources of role conflict and ambiguity producing job tensions and frustrations. The only data which did not consistently support this finding concerned an excess of unnecessary computer products (questions 10 and 11). CHAPTER VII ANALYSIS OF ADP SYSTEMS' ROLE CONFLICT AND AMBIGUITY Introduction In Chapters Five and Six an attempt has been made to explore and describe the EOQ item manager's perceptions of ADP systems and ADP systems' products, and the relationship of ADP systems to the item manager's attitudes and behavior. In this section an attempt will be made to investigate the proposition that, for a Specific group of item managers, ADP systems are an identifiable source of role conflict and role ambiguity. The question of interest here is whether or not anxieties expressed by item managers, which can be thought of as consequences of role conflict and ambiguity, are related to ADP systems and ADP systems' products. Two general hy- potheses were prOposed which were tested by relating the ex- pressed anxieties of two groups of item managers with differ- ing perceptions of ADP systems and the systems' products. Hypotheses The hypotheses examined are based on the following rea- soning. If an individual perceives an element of his work environment as being necessary and/or effective for the pur- pose of performing his role, then this element is not a pre- dominate source of conflict or ambiguity which may cause him 144 145 some feelings of anxiety. However, if an individual views a factor related to his job responsibilities as being unneces- sary and/or ineffective, then it becomes a potential source of conflict and ambiguity which tends to produce a state of tension and dissatisfaction within many individuals. It is further assumed that individuals will reflect such conflict and ambiguity conditions by a general expression of anxiety or dissatisfaction. This reasoning leads to the following hypotheses: H—l. The more EOQ item managers perceive ADP systems as being unnecessary, the greater will be their expressed anxieties and dissatisfaction concern- ing ADP system related job activities. A second very closely related hypothesis may be stated as: H-Z. The more EOQ item managers perceive ADP systems as being ineffective for fulfillment of their role as they perceive it, the greater will be their expressed anxieties and dissatisfactions concerning ADP systems. On the basis of these hypotheses, Specific predictions were made and tested. Contriving Two Groups for Hypothesis Testing The description and analysis presented in previous chap- ters indicated that ADP systems were the least predominate sources of anxiety or job dissatisfaction for the 743 re- spondents in the item manager sample. However, the data did not eliminate ADP systems as a potential source of rOle con- flict or ambiguity generated anxiety for some of the item managers. All parts of the questionnaire reflected about an 8 to 20 per cent response rate expressing attitudes in a 146 "negative" direction. Identifying those item managers ac- counting for most of the extreme directional differences appeared to provide a logical basis for investigating and testing for dysfunctional role behavior resulting from role conflict or ambiguity related to automated environmental job factors. The method devised to isolate any consistent directional difference in total sample response distribution was to con- trive two groups from the 743 respondents. One group con- sisted of those item managers who had the highest scores, and the other group consisted of those item managers who had the lowest scores. In other words, the procedure was to identify those item managers who accounted for the directional ex- tremes in the distribution of the total sample's reSponses to certain Specified parts of the questionnaire survey. High and Low "Product Necessity” groups. The first set of "high" and "low" groups was contrived from the respondents to the ADP systems product necessity survey (Part II of the questionnaire). A mean score was computed for each item man- ager responding to the 55 items in Part II of the survey, and these means were then ranked. The 148 respondents (20 per cent of the 741 IM's who answered Part II) whose means indi- cated that they evaluated the ADP systems' products as being the most necessary were identified as the ”high necessity" ,group, and the 148 respondents whose means indicated that they evaluated the ADP systems' products as being the least necessary were identified as the "low necessity" group. 147 High and Low ADP ”Systems Efficacy" Grogps. The second set of "high" and "low" groups was contrived from the same sample of 743 item managers, but on the basis of their responses to the ADP systems' efficacy survey (Part III of the questionnaire). The same method was used to identify the 146 (20% of the 731 IM's who answered to Part III) respondents in the “low efficacy" group and the 146 re- spondents in the "high efficacy" group. Results Of Testing High and Low ”Product VNecessity”ECroups Anxiety Prediction The group of item managers who evaluated ADP systems' products highest on necessity for the performance of their stock control functions should experience less conflict and ambiguity for those aspects of their job which are related to ADP systems generated activities. According to our first hypothesis, we would predict that the low ”product necessity” group will express a greater degree of ADP systems related job anxiety than the high ”product necessity" group. -To test this prediction, the responses by both groups were tabulated for the eight questions in the anxiety survey instrument designed to evaluate ADP systems as a source Of role conflict and ambiguity for item managers. Table 37 presents the mean scores for each group for each of these anxiety survey items. These data clearly show that for each of the eight items, the low "product necessity" group had a higher mean anxiety score than the high "product necessity” 148 TABLE 37 MEAN SCORES FOR ANXIETY SURVEY ITEMS BY THE LOW "PRODUCT NECESSITY" GROUP AND THE HIGH "PRODUCT NECESSITY" GROUP ADP Systems Anxiety Items from Part VI of the Questionnaire High Group Means Group Means Direction Predicted Correctly (+) or Incorrectly (-) According to Hypothesis 1 7. Thinking that you'll not be able to handle the demands imposed upon you by the 0062 and 0032 systems' com- puter generated printouts. 8. Feeling that the individual demands of your supervisor are in conflict 'with the 0062 and 0032 systems' generated job activities. 9. Bothered by the fact that you can't get needed infOrmation from the automated data systems to properly perform.your job. 10. Bothered by the fact that the 0062 buy computation system provides too many unnecessary products which detract from other required activ- ities. ll. Bothered by the fact that the 0032 system.provides too many unneces- sary products which detract from other required activities. 13. Feeling unable to influence the automated aspects of the buy com— putation system or stock control and distribution system which affect your work. 16. Not knowing just what the 0062 automated.processes require of you in your job. 17. Not knowing just what the 0032 automated.processes require of you in your job. 2.32 2.07 2.83 3.15 3.20 2.60 2.19 2.16 149 group which is in accordance with the prediction. Also, the difference between the means for each item is significant to at least the .002 level. The result is therefore inter- preted as providing support for the hypothesis. Table 38 provides a comparison and test Of the mean anxiety score for all eight items for each of the two groups. Since this test of the two groups' mean scores is significant to at least the .001 level, it further supports the hypothesis. TABLE 38 MEAN ADP SYSTEMS' ANXIETY SCORE FOR THE HIGH "PRODUCT NECESSITY” GROUP AND LOW "PRODUCT NECESSITY" GROUP Difference High Group Low Group in the t Anxiety Mean Anxiety Mean Mean Scores value 1.95 2.57 .62 5.20* *Significant to at least the .001 level gob Satisfaction Prediction Research by Gross, Mason and McEachern indicated that individuals who are exposed to role conflict are less satisfied with their jobs and worry more in general.1 This finding and the reasoning in develOping the hypothesis led to the prediction that the low "necessity group" will indicate a higher degree Of job dissatisfaction than the high "necessity group”. TO test this prediction the reSponseS lNeal Gross, Ward 8. Mason, and Alexander W. McEachern, §§plorations in Role Analysis (New York: John Wiley and Sons, I965), p. 278. 150 TABLE 39 MEAN SCORES FOR.JOB SATISFACTION SURVEY ITEMS BY THE HIGH "PRODUCT NECESSITY" GROUP AND THE LOW "PRODUCT NECESSITY" GROUP Job Satisfaction Items, Part V of the Questionnaire High Group Means Low Group Means Direction Predicted Correctly (+) or Incorrectly (-) According to Hypothesis 1 Are you satisfied that you have enough authority to do your job well? HOw satisfied are you with your present job when you compare it to similar jobs in the AMA? .Are you satisfied with the progress you are making toward the goals you set for yourself in your present job? Ame you satisfied that the people in your organization give prOper recognition to your work as an item.manager? .Are you satisfied with the 0062 computer system generated print- outs provided for your job? Are you satisfied.with the 0032 computer system generated print- outs provided for your job? How satisfied are you with job 'training and education available to you? HOW'satisfied are you with the pro- portion of available work time re- quired to accomplish tasks gen- erated by computer printout products? 1.98 2.00 2.37 2.17 1.68 1.70 2.25 2.32 2.97 2.80 2.96 2.66 2.55 2.50 3.41 3.12 151 TABLE 39 (continued) Direction Predicted Correctly (+) High Low or incorrectly JOb Satisfaction Items, Part V Group Group (-) according of the Questionnaire Means Means to Hypothesis 1 9. On the whole, are you satisfied that you are accepted as a profes- sional expert to the degree to which you feel entitled by reason of your position, training, and experience? 2.04 3.08 + 10. How satisfied are you with your present job in light of your career expectations? 2.08 3.12 + by both groups were tabulated for the 10 questions in the job satisfaction survey. Table 39 presents the mean scores for each group for each for the job satisfaction survey items. A comparison Of the mean scores verified our prediction Since, for every item, the low "product necessity" group has a higher mean score indicating a higher degree of job dissatisfaction. The differences between the means for each item also was significant to at least the .002 level. The result provides additional support for the hypothesis. 1 Table 40 provides a comparison and test of the mean job satisfaction score for the 10 combined items for each of the two groups. The test of the mean anxiety scores is Significant to at least the .001 level and provides evidence in support of the hypothesis. 152 TABLE 40 MEAN JOB SATISFACTION SCORE FOR THE HIGH "PRODUCT NECESSITY" GROUPS AND THE LOW “PRODUCT NECESSITY" GROUP Difference High Group Low Group in the t Anxiety Mean Anxiety Mean Mean Scores test * 2 06 2 92 .86 5.48 *Significant to at least the .001 level Results of Testing High and Low ADP "systems Efficacy" Groups The purpose of Part III Of the questionnaire survey was to Obtain a measure of the item managers overall confidence in ADP systems. In other words, does he preceive them as being effective in providing required information for the efficient performance of his stock control responsibilities? Lack of adequate information can be a source of role conflict and ambiguity for some peOple. Anxiety Prediction The group of item managers who preceived ADP systems as being highly effective in providing necessary information for their job tasks should experience less conflict and ambiguity relating to ADP systems factors. In view of our second hypotheses, we would predict that the low "efficacy group" would experience a higher degree of ADP systems re- lated job anxiety than the high "systems efficacy"group. 153 TABLE 41 MEAN SCORES FOR.ANXIETY SURVEY ITEMS BY THE HIGH "ADP SYSTEMS EFFICACY" GROUP AND THE LOW "ADP SYSTEMS EFFICACY" GROUP ADP Systems Anxiety Items from Part VI of the Questionnaire High Group Means Group Means Direction Predicted Correctly (+) or Incorrectly (-) According to Hypothesis 2 7. Thinking that you'll not be able to handle the demands imposed upon you by the 0062 and 0032 systems' com- puter generated printouts. 8. Feeling that the individual demands of your supervisor are in conflict with the 0062 and 0032 systems' generated job activities. 9. Bothered by the fact that you can't get needed information from the automated data systems to properly perform your job. 10. Bothered by the fact that the 0062 buy computation system provides tOO many unnecessary products which detract from other required activ- ities. ll. Bothered by the fact that the 0032 DM Stock Control and Distribution system provides too many unneces- sary products which detract from other required activities. 13. Feeling unable to influence the automated aspects of the buy com- putation system or stock control and distribution system which affect your work. 16. Not knowing just what the 0062 automated processes require of you in your job. 17. Not knowing just what the 0032 automated processes require Of you in your job. 154 To test this prediction, the responses by both groups were tabulated for the same eight questions in the anxiety survey instrument used to evaluate the first hypotheses. The re- sults of these data are presented in Table 41. A comparison of the mean anxiety score for each item by the two groups shows that the means are in the predicted directions. For every item, the low "systems efficacy" group had a higher mean anxiety response, and the differences were significant to at least the .001 level. This result substantiates our prediction and supports our second hypothesis. Table 42 provides a comparison and test of the mean anxiety score for the eight items for each Of the groups. The test of the mean anxiety score is significant to at least the .001 level and strengthens the case for accepting the second hypothesis. TABLE 42 MEAN ADP SYSTEMS' ANXIETY SCORE FOR THE HIGH "SYSTEMS EFFICACY" GROUP AND THE LOW "SYSTEMS EFFICACY” GROUP Difference High Group Low Group in the t Anxiety Mean Anxiety Mean Mean Scores test 1.93 2.73 .80 6.74* *Significant to at least the .001 level ID? Job Satisfaction Prediction The second hypothesis also leads to the prediction that the "low efficacy" group of item managers will have a higher 155 TABLE 43 .MEAN SCORES FOR.JOB SATISFACTION SURVEY ITEMS BY THE HIGH ”ADP SYSTEMS EFFICACY" GROUP AND THE LOW "ADP SYSTEMS EFFICACY" GROUP JOb Satisfactions Items, Part V of the Questionnaire High Group Nbans Group Means Direction Predicted Correctly (+) or Incorrectly (-) According to Hypothesis 2 1. Are you satisfied that you have enough authority to do your job well? 2. How satisfied are you with your present job when you compare it to similar jobs in the AMA? 3. Are you satisfied with the progress you are making toward the goals you set for yourself in your present job? 4. Are you satisfied that the people in your organization give proper recognition to your work as an item.manager? 5. Are you satisfied with the 0032 computer system generated print- outs provided for your job? 6. Are you satisfied with the 0032 computer system generated print- outs provided for your job? 7. How satisfied are you with job training and education available to you? 8. How satisfied are you with the pro- portion of available work time re- quired to accomplish tasks gen— erated by computer printout products? 156 TABLE 43 (continued) Job Satisfaction Items, Part V of the Questionnaire High (houp Means Group Thans Direction Predicted Correctly (+) or Incorrectly (-) According to Hypothesis 2 9. On the whole, are you satisfied that you are accepted as a pro- fessional expert to the degree to which you feel entitled by reason of your position, training, and experience? 10. How satisfied are you with your present job in light of your career expectations? 1.93 2.16 3.10 3.08 degree of job dissatisfaction than the "high efficacy” group. This prediction was tested by a comparison of each groups' mean scores for each of the 10 items in the job satisfaction survey. The results of this data is provided in Table 43. A compariONIof'the mean scores for each item between the two groups verifies our prediction in every case, and the differences are also significant to the .001 level. This further supports the second hypothesis. ‘ Table 44 provides a comparison and test of the mean job satisfaction score for the 10 items for each of the groups and the results are significant at least the .001 level. 157 TABLE 44 MEAN JOB SATISFACTION SCORE FOR THE HIGH ”SYSTEMS EFFICACY” GROUP AND THE LOW "SYSTEMS EFFICACY" GROUP Difference High Group Low Group in the t Mean Score Mean Score Mean Scores test 1.98 2.97 .99 7.05* *Significant to at least the .001 level Implications of Hypotheses Test Findifigs The fact that all the predictions based upon the two hypotheses were verified by analysis of data from the high and low groups' responses, and also the fact that all of the statistics were all significant to at least the .002 level, prOVides strong evidence for acceptance Of the two hypotheses. These findings imply the following: 1. ADP systems can have the effect of a role sender in situations where the incumbent of a focal role is dependent upon automated systems and their outputs for effective performance of his role. In this sense they can be a source Of role conflict and ambiguity for some individuals and do effect their role behavior. However, there is no way of judging from the findings of this study whether these individuals were generally ”anxious" and less capable Of COping with role pressures of any type from any source. Even so, the findings do imply that 158 ADP systems are, in a given situation, a potential source of role conflict and ambiguity. There is also a strong implication that individuals who do experience role conflict and ambiguity from their ADP systems environment are less satisfied with their jobs. It is not possible to determine how great an influence this may be but it does appear to be a factor contributing to increase job dissatisfaction. The degree would depend upon the individuals relative ability to c0pe with all the other expectations and pressures related to his position. The research findings also indicate that the individuals who perceived ADP systems outputs as being relatively unnecessary for their position tasks also feel that the systems are relatively ineffective. This raises the possibility that these individuals have never acquired sufficient technical knowledge to master the complexities of their automated environment. This could be a major factor contributing to rOle conflict and ambiguity situations and manifestations of anxiety and job dissatisfaction, 159 especially for any individual who is a "worrying" type. Analysis of High and Low Grogp Biographical Data The purpose of this section is to compare and analyze the biographical data of both sets of high and low groups which were used to test the hypotheses in the previous section. Since the two high groups consistently reported significantly less anxiety and job dissatisfaction than the two low groups, there must be some differences between the two groups. The biographical data for the groups may help to explain some of the differences. Age and Sex Data Table 45 provides data on the groups' age distribution. TMHE 45 AGE DISTRIBUTIONS FOR.HIGH AND LOW GROUPS High Groups Low Groups_ Product System Product System Age Necessity Efficacy Necessity Efficacy (1) 24 or under .7 2.1 7.4 5.5 (2) 25 - 29 4.7 9.0 12.8 15.8 (3) 30 - 54 6.8 10.3 13.5 9.6 (4) 35 - 39 14.9 13.1 7.4 10.3 (5) 4o - 44 17.6 15.7 14.9 11.6 (6) 45 - 49 25.7 16.6 14.2 18.5 (7) so - 54 17.6 19.3 16.9 13.0 (8) 55 and over 12.8 14.5 12.8 15.8 Mean 5.55 5.29 4.83 4.93 Std. Dev. 1.66 1.95 2.21 2.21 160 On the average, the high groups are older than the low groups with the primary differences being in the age groupings under thirty. However, the differences are not extremely great since the median age for the high groups is about forty five and for the low groups it is about forty one. Table 46 provides data on the groups' sex character- istics. TABUE46 SEX CHARACTERISTICS OF THE HIGH AND LOW GROUPS High Groups Low Groups ' Product System_ Product System Sex Necessity Efficacy Necessity Efficacy Mhle 34.7 39.7 50.0 43.3 Female 65.3 60.3 50.0 56.7 No Response 16.2 13.7 6.8 8.2 The primary difference is that the high groups have proportionately more females and more no responses. The distribution for the 743 item managers in the sample was 45 per cent male, and 55 per cent female. The low groups more nearly match this total sample composition of males and fe- males. Qiyil Service Grade Data Table 47 presents data on the civil service grades be- tween the two groups. 161 DOME 47 CFWHISERWHEIGRMXELEWfl.DADIFORIHGH/mmIUMIGMNflS High Groups Low Groups Civil Service Product System Product System Grade Necessity Efficacy Necessity Efficacy GS-S 3.5 4.9 10.1 5.5 GS-7 34.4 37.2 45.3 48.2 GS-9 60.0 57.3 44.6 44.1 GS-ll 2.1 .7 .0 2.0 The basic difference is that the high groups have a larger share of the higher grades. For example, the high groups have more GS-9's and less GS7's than the low grOUps. Education and Work Experience Data TABU348 EDWUUIONALIJRTT.AFUUNMHTESOF'HEEHHTIANDILM’GMNHS High Groups Low Groups Educational Product System Product System Level Necessity Efficacy Necessity Efficacy (1) Net a High School Graduate 3.4 6.9 2.7 3.4 (2) High School Graduate 61.2 51.7 46.3 45.5 (3) l or 2 Years College 22.4 24.1 21.1 20.7 (4) 3 or Nbre Years College 5.4 6.2 2.7 5.5 (S) Bachelors' Degree 6.8 11.0 25.2 23.4 (6) Mhsters' Degree .7 .0 2.1 1.4 MEEn 2.53 2.62 3.07 3.04 162 Table 48 presents data on the two groups educational levels. The primary difference is that the low groups have a noticeablely larger proportion of the college graduates. Or in other words, the high groups have a lower average edu- cational level. Tables 49 and 50 contain data on the number of years of civil service experience and the number Of years exper- ience as an item manager. LONE 49 NUMBER.OF YEARS CIVIL SERVICE EXPERIENCE FOR HIGH AND LOW GROUPS High Groups Low Groups Product System Product System Years Necessity Efficacy Necessity Efficacy O 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 l 2.0 3.4 6.1 5.5 2 2.0 2.8 11.6 8.9 3 0.0 2.8 4.1 7.5 4 0.7 1.4 2.0 0.7 5 1.4 2.1 1.4 3.4 6 1.4 1.4 2.0 2.1 7 0.0 2.8 6.1 3.4 8 2.0 1.4 3.4 4.1 _ 9 2.0 1.4 3.4 3.4 10 and over 88.4 80.7 59.8 60.9 Mean 10 42 9.91 8 68 8 75 163 EMHE H) NIMBER OF YEARS Em ITEM MANAGER EXPERIENCE FOR HIGH AND LOW GROUPS High Groups Low Groups Product System Product System Years Necessity Efficacy Necessity Efficacy 0 .7 0.0 1.4 0.7 l 8.2 9.7 17.7 16.4 2 11.6 17.9 26.5 28.8 3 13.6 14.5 17.0 13.7 4 7.5 2.1 4.1 5.5 5 8.9 10.4 3.4 4.2 6 6.1 5.5 6.1 7.5 7 4.1 5.5 2.7 2.1 8 11.6 6.9 4.1 2.7 9 2.7 3.4 2.0 2.1 10 and over 25.2 24.1 15.0 16.4 MEan 6.80 6.48 5.11 5.21 Examination of the data reveals that the high groups have more experience in civil service and also more experience as an item manager. Over 80 per cent of the high groups have worked over 10 years in civil service versus 60 per cent for the low groups. The same trend holds for item management eXperience where the medians for the high groups fall at 5 Years and the low groups at approximately 3 years. This im- plies that the high groups are more knowledgeable in the Op— erations of the organization and their item management tasks. Training Data Tables 51 and 52 present the data on training. 164 TABLE 51 TYPES OF TRAINING REPORTED BY HIGH AND LOW GROUPS High Groups Low Groups A Training Product System Product System Questions Necessity Efficacy Necessity Efficacy Any type of train- ing for item man- agement. 85.1 80.1 71.0 82.5 Fonmal courses(s) Of instruction. 42.1 42.3 27.9 32.8 On-the-job training from fellow IMs. 62.7 68.6 46.4 51.1 On-the-job training from supervisors. 95.9 92.3 95.1 92.9 TABLE 52 TYPES OF ADP SYSTEMS IN WHICH HIGH AND LOW GROUPS HAVE RECEIVED SOVIE TRAINING High Groups , Low Groups Type of Product System PrOduct ‘System Training Necessity Efficacy [ Necess1ty Efficacy 0062 EOQ 95.3 93.8 81.1 84.2 0067 DSP ISSP 48.6 43.2 24.3 32.2 0017 01A 46.2 39.7 23.6 28.1 0033 Base 8.1 6.2 5.4 4.1 0032 DWSCGD 91.9 86.3 70.4 86.3 0041 Cat I 6 II 27.7 26.7 18.4 21.9 0034 SSM; SCGD 18.2 17.8 10.1 19.9 Cther 24.3 20.5 13.5 10.7 165 These data reflect that the high product necessity and system efficacy groups have received prOportionately more training, especially in formal courses and from fellow item managers. Even though the data reflect some inconsistencies, the gen- eral picture which emerges is that the high groups have rec- eived more training in the areas of item management and sys- tems. They therefore should be better able to cOpe with the requirements of the position and its automated systems envi- ronment . Allocation of Work Time Data Table 53 presents data on the item manager's allocation of work hours to the function of item management. EMHE 53 AVERAGE NUMBER.OF HOURS PER WEEK HIGH AND LOW GROUPS WORKED ON ITEM MANAGEMENT JOB ACTIVITIES High Groups Low Groups Hours per Product System Product System WEek Necessity Efficacy NeceSSIty Efficacy (l) 24 or under .7 1.4 5.5 1.4 (2) 25 - 29 .7 1.4 .7 .7 (3) 30 - 34 1.4 3.5 5.5 6.9 (4) 35 - 39 9.6 6.9 17.8 19.3 (5) 40 83.6 84.0 65.7 66.2 (6)41 - 44 2.8 1.4 4.1 4.2 (7) 45 or over 1.4 1.4 .7 1.4 Mban 4.88 4.80 4.52 4.66 166 There is an indication that the low product necessity and system efficacy groups spend slightly less time on item man- agement tasks. About 84 percent of the low groups reported spending 35 to 40 hours of their time on item management ver- sus about 92 per cent for the high groups. The difference is slight but may reflect a difference in attitudes and com- mitment to their item management responsibilities. Tables 54 and 55 present data on allocation of time be- tween the 0062 and 0032 systems' requirements. Examination of the data revealed no Obvious differences between the high groups and the low groups. TMHES4 AVERAGE NIMBER OF HOURS PER WEEK HIGH AND LOW GROUPS REPORTED SPENDING ON 0062 SYSTEM PRODUCTS High Groups Low Groups Hours per Product System Product System week Necessity Efficacy NeceSSity Efficacy (1) 0 - 4 .7 2.8 3.4 2.7 (2) 5 - 9 2.1 8.3 14.3 9.0 (3) 10 - 14 14.6 16.0 15.0 13.1 (4) -15 - 19 11.8 13.2 21.1 20.0 (5) 20 - 24 25.0 17.4 18.4 21.4 (6) 25 - 29 20.2 17.4 17.7 20.7 (7) 30 or over 25.7 25.0 10.2 13.1 Mean 5.21 4 86 4 30 4.62 167 LMHE 55 AVERAGE NIMBER OF HOURS PER WEEK HIGH AND LOW GROUPS REPORTED SPENDING ON 0032 SYSTEM PRODUCTS High Groups Low Groups Heurs per Product System Product System week Necessity Efficacy Necessity Efficacy (1) 0 - 4 6.9 11.1 10.2 4.8 (2) 5 - 9 . 18.7 16.0 12.9 15.9 (3) 10 - 14 29.9 29.9 34.0 31.7 (4) 15 - 19 17.4 20.1 14.3 20.7 (5) 20 - 24 17.4 11.1 19.0 20.7 (6) 25 - 29 6.3 7.0 4.1 3.5 (7) 30 or over .5 4.9 5.4 2.7 MEan 3.52 3.44 3.53 3.57 Data on the Number and Nature of Items Managed Table 56 presents the data on the number of line items managed and Table 57 presents data on the number Of problem line items among the total number of line items managed. No noteworthy differences appeared between the high groups and the low groups in any of these data. This implies that the workload has no obvious effect on the item manager's eval- uation of ADP systems or the systems' products. It also in- dicates that the number of "problem" line items is not a fac- tor for differentiating the high and low groups. 168 TABLE 56 AVERAGE TOTAL NIMBER OF LINE ITEMS HIGH AND LOW GROUPS REPORTED MANAGING High GrOups low Groups Nunber Of Product System Product System Line Items Necessity Efficacy Necessity Efficacy (l) 199 and under 9.6 11.0 6.8 9.6 (2) 200 - 399 16.4 12.4 21.2 19.3 (3) 400 - 599 24.7 26.9 27.4 32.4 (4) 600 - 799 23.3 22.1 15.1 i 13.8 (5) 800 - 999 13.0 11.7 15.8 13.8 (6) 1000 or more 13.0 15.9 13.7 11.0 Mean 3.52 3.58 3.52 3.35 TABLE 57 AVERAGE NIMBER OF "PROBLEM" LINE ITEMS REQUIRING SPECIAL EFFORT HIGH AND DOW GROUPS REPORTED MANAGING High Groups Low Groups Number of Product System Product System Line Items Necessity Efficacy Necessity Efficacy (1) None 0.0 0.0 .7 .7 (2) l - 24 13.9 21.4 23.1 16.5 (3) 25 - 49 13.2 12.4 13.6 14.5 (4) SO - 74 15.3 17.9 9.5 10.3 (5) 75 - 99 11.1 9.6 8.2 9.0 (6) 100 - 124 6.3 6.9 10.9 8.3 (7) 125 - 149 5.5 4.1 2.0 4.1 (8) 150 - 174 4.2 2.7 2.7 3.4 (9) 175 - 199 2.8 2.1 4.1 5.5 (10) 200 or over 27.8 22.8 25.2 27.6 Mean U1 ‘0 0‘ U1 (N CD U1 U1 0‘ U1 to U1 169 Summary and Implications of Findings The general findings resulting from comparison and examination of biographical data for the groups with high evaluations of ADP systems and their products versus the groups with low evaluations are briefly summarized below. High Groups: l. The average age was higher. 2. There were proportionately more females. 3. They had a larger share Of the higher civil service grades. 4. They had more experience in civil service jobs. 5. They had more experience in the item manager pos- ition. 6. The item managers in these groups generally re- ceived more training, particularly in formal courses. Low Groups: 1. They had a higher level Of education with propor~ tionately more college graduates. Areas Of no Differences: 1. There was no indication of differences in the allocation of time to 0062 and 0032 systems' re- quirements. There was no significant difference in the range of the number of items managed or the number Of ”prob- lem” items managed. 170 Implications Of Findings. The pattern which emerged from the findings implies that an item manager's perception and evaluation of the effectiveness of ADP systems and the necessity Of the systems' products is partially a function of his experience and training. However, it is also possible that some Of the differences could have resulted from a "screening out" through transfers and terminations of those individuals most dissatisfied with the functions of item management. Over time the result would be an Older, more experienced, and more satisfied group Of item managers who were better suited for the position The results also imply that the more knowledgeable and experienced an item manager is about automated systems, the less the systems will be a source of rOle conflict and am- biguity contributing to dysfunctional behavior. However, it must be recalled that previous findings in Chapter VI ident- ified ADP systems as a relatively minor source of role con- flict and ambiguity for the majority of item managers. These results also indicate that college education may not be as important for develOping effective item managers as a well planned internal training program. Since the item manager is primarily a manager Of resources rather than peo- ple, technical training seems to be relatively more impor- tant than college education and management develOpment. The item manager Operates in a complex environment and technical expertise in his functional area may tend to relieve feel- ings of insecurity and anxiety. In other words, he will 171 perceive less role conflict and ambiguity. However, one must not lose sight of the fact that a certain percentage of these item managers must be developed to move into supervi- sory and higher level staff positions. CHAPTER VIII SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Introduction This dissertation focused on a study Of the EOQ item manager position and its relationships with automated data processing (ADP) systems. Some of the basic ideas from role analysis theory were used in examining the item manager's role behavior and attitudes. The study had four general Ob- jectives. 1. To identify the basic characteristics of the persons performing the functions Of EOQ item management in an automated systems environment from biographical and job activity survey data. To analyze the EOQ item manager's role relationships with automated data processing (ADP) systems and the system's products. To investigate the EOQ item manager's rOle behavior in terms of perceived career satisfaction, job sat- isfaction and anxieties related to role conflict or ambiguity situations. To search for dysfunctional role behavior resulting from role conflict and role ambiguity related to ADP systems' factors within his work environment. 172 173 Two general hypotheses were developed to direct the de- velopment and structure of the empirical research effort and support the research Objectives. 1. Automated processes within the EOQ item manager's organizational environment act as a role sender im— posing demands upon the item manager role which are factors in influencing EOQ item manager role behav- ior. 2. If automated processes are in effect role senders influencing role behavior, then automated processes are potential sources Of role conflict and role am- biguity. Role theory provided a conceptual framework for investi- gating ADP systems as viable sources Of role expectations in- fluencing the behavior and attitudes the position incumbents. A rOle theory postulate which is adapted to this study is that human behavior is in part a function of the role incum- bents perception of the position he occupies and also the ex- pectations held for him by members Of his role set. ISO, an individual's behavior and attitudes in a particular rOle are partially a function of the way he sees "his job" and what others expect of him in his job. If there is insufficient agreement between the way an individual views his position and the expectations held by others, conflict may be eXperi- enced to such a degree that the position incumbent suffers tension which may manifest itself in such ways as anxiety or dissatisfaction. 174 This study applied these ideas to a "man-machine" rela- tionship in lieu of the usual man-tO-man communicated role expectation. In a position in which the incumbent is highly dependent upon ADP systems and their products for the perfor- mance of his role, it was hypothesized that the automated systems would be an identifiable source Of role conflict and ambiguity. TO investigate, describe and test these concepts and ideas, the position Of EOQ item manager was selected, and the following methodology was applied in structuring the study. 1. To evaluate and test the postulate that ADP systems were in effect role definers in the sense that they imposed role expectations upon a position incumbent required measures of the position incumbent's per- ceptions of ADP systems as well as attitudes toward automated systems. TO meet this requirement, a sam- ple was drawn from the population of EOQ item man- agers within the five Air Force Air Materiel Areas (AMAS') 2. Mail questionnaires were sent to approximately fifty per cent of the EOQ item managers at each of the air materiel areas. The questionnaires were designed to elicit responses reflecting the item manager's per- ception of ADP systems and also reSponses reflecting his role behavior. The questionnaire content was 175 tested by a small pilot study and personal inter- views with item managers, AMA staff personel and Air Force Logistics Command staff personnel. Each questionnaire contained six major parts: (1) a biographical and work data section designed to generate information which would provide a profile of the EOQ item manager and also describe some of the basic factors and characteristics related to the position, (2) a section designed to Obtain the item manager's evaluation of just how necessary ADP system's computer products were for the performance of the item manager's position responsibilities, (3) a confidence in ADP systems section designed to obtain the item managers evaluation of the system's efficacy and also to ascertain their general atti- tude toward automated systems upon which they must depend for a major portion of the information re- quired to do their job, (4) a career satisfaction section was included to evaluate the item managers' views of item management as a life time occupation, (5) the job satisfaction section was designed to evaluate both ADP and non-ADP elements Of his posi- tion which might be sources of dissatisfaction, and (6) the personal anxiety survey was specifically de- signed tO evaluate aspects of the job which are po tential sources of role conflict and role ambiguity as manifested by a general expression of anxiety. 176 A number of the questions referred directly to ADP systems factors. A number of the questions were also designed so they could be related to key ele- ments in previous sections of the survey. Chapters IV, V, VI, and VII are devoted to examining each of these areas. While each of the chapters relate to one of the objectives, all of the data generated by the sur- vey was examined for reinforcing information or contradictory findings. General Findings Item Manager Profile Biographical data indicates that most item managers are career civil service employees with over 10 years tenure but with less than 4 years experience in an item management posi- tion. Formal training was not the primary method by which item managers gained knowledge about their position functions and responsibilities, and ADP system requirements. Most learned informally from fellow item managers and supervisors. Generally item managers had a high school education with about one quarter having some college. The overall informa- tion provided by the data indicate that the majority appar- ently are well qualified for the position of item management even though there is a definite absence of a well structured training program. 177 Necessity of ADP Systems' Products Item managers evaluated products from the 0062, 0032, and 0143B ADP systems as to how necessary or unnecessary each product was for the performance of their stock control func- tions. Between systems analysis of the percentage frequency distribution of responses to the 0062 and 0032 systems' pro- ducts found them to be so similar in both direction and in- tensity that it appears item managers perceive the two sys- tems' products to be essentially the same when judged on the criterion of necessity. Also, the intensity of the necessary response categories was high. Approximately 54 per cent of the total responses were in the two highest necessary response categories ("absolutely necessary" and ”very Often necessary”), while only about 12 per cent were in the two highest unneces- sary response categories (”very Often unnecessary" and ”abso- lutely unnecessary"). Even though 12 per cent is a relatively small portion of the total response, it does indicate certain item managers feel strongly that some products are unnecessary. For this portion of item managers ADP systems may be the source of role conflict and ambiguity leading to dysfunctional job behavior. The remaining 34 per cent of the responses were in the passive or uncertain response categories (”sometimes un- necessary, "may or may not be necessary" and "sometimes ne- cessary"). This lack of decisiveness on the necessity of certain products indicates that many item managers are not 178 using the products as intended or that the products are not applicable to all item managers due to peculiarities of the items managed. The results for the 0143B system did not reflect a gen- eral consensus of necessity. Rather, it reflected uncertain- ty with about a 50 per cent response rate in the "passive/ uncertain" categories and only 37 per cent in the two highest necessary response categories. This is undoubtedly due to the fact that the 0143B system is relatively new and there— fore rather unfamiliar to many of the item managers. The uncertainty reflected by responses to the unfamiliar 0143B system lends support to the author's general hypothesis that ADP systems can be potential sources of role conflict or am- biguity. The within systems analysis of ADP system product ne~ cessity revealed that the products required for operational decisions related to the item managers’primary task of re~ quirements computation and asset distribution have the high- est degree of consensus as to necessity. These products are required for such basic tasks as buy actions, termination actions, obtaining procurement funds, and asset positioning or'movement. The systems' products with the lowest necessary response rates are more indirectly related to the Operational tasks of requirements computation and assets distribution. In general, they provide the item manager with information to ”purify" data and take general management actions to facilitate more 179 effective decision making when operational actions are re- quired. The general characteristic of the response patterns for these products is more accurately described as reflecting "lack of agreement" rather than disagreement on the products necessity. The responses tended to be relatively evenly dis- tributed rather than grouped at the directional extremes. ADP System Efficacy In this section the item manager's focus was switched from evaluating individual systems' products to his percep- tion Of total system efficacy on the basis of five criteria: (1) useful, (2) accurate, (3) clear, (4) dependable, and (S) timely. The purpose was to measure the item manager's atti- tude toward the automated systems. Analysis of the responses to each criterion within each system revealed that usefulness was consistently evaluated the highest by item managers. It ranked first by about 7 per cent over the next highest criterion. For the 0062 and 0032 systems, 97 per cent of the item managers evaluated the systems useful versus only 2 per cent useless. The other clearly and consistently ranked criterion was timeliness. Of the five criteria, it ranked at the bottom for all systems by a clear margin, and for the 0062 and 0032 systems its antonym (untimely) also ranked highest. However, the consensus was that all systems are timely with the lowest response rate being 69 per cent for the 0143B system, and the highest response rate being 79 per cent for the 0032 system. 180 The 21 per cent untimely reSponse factor reflects lack of desired information and indicates potential ambiguity since the item manager can not "talk" to the computer. For the quality criteria of clear, dependable and accu- rate there were no distinguishable differences in the response rates. For the 0062 and 0032 systems they ranged from about 84 per cent to 91 per cent, and for the 0143B system the range was 70 per cent to 73 per cent. The results of the data analysis clearly indicated that ADP systems, when viewed as a total entity, are perceived by item managers as being highly effective, especially the two well established systems (0062 and 0032). For the 0062 and 0032 systems an average of 87 to 89 per cent of the item man- agers evaluated the systems as "effective" while only 8 to 10 per cent responded in the "ineffective" direction (eval- uated the systems as being to some degree untimely, inaccu- rate, useless, vague, and undependable). The relatively new 0143B system's "effectiveness measure" was noticable less (73 per cent positive and 14.5 per cent negative). This is indicative of the fact that it takes time to impliment new systems or methods in an organization. A period of adjust- ment is required for both the peOple and the system before the system is proven and generally accepted. Comparison of these findings with the findings of pro- duct necessity lead to some similarities and differences: (1) in both surveys the distribution of response to the 0062 and 0032 systems were so similar in both direction and 181 intensity that they could be viewed as one big system, (2) in both surveys there was a distinguishable difference be- tween the 01430 system and the other two, and (3) there was a difference in the intensity of consensus between the two surveys in that there was a_greater variance in the product necessity measure than in the system efficacy measure. The general findings for these two parts of the survey were reinforced by a question in Part III specifically de- signed to probe for the item manager's general attitude toward the concept of automation. Eighty per cent of the item managers reflected a positive attitude toward automated systems. In other words, they considered automation as ”a tool to be used to more effectively and efficiently perform their functions" rather than viewing it as ”a system requir- ing them to perform activities in response to programmed de- mands". The 20 per cent negative response score is compatible with preceding response distributions and indicates that some item managers may have problems relating to the ADP systems environment. Career Evaluation The career evaluation instrument consisted of six items designed to obtain information on the item manager's attitude toward item management as a career occupation. Analysis of individual responses indicated that three quarters of the item managers were well satisfied with government employment as a career, while the response patterns to questions re- ferring specifically to a career as an item manager had a 182 favorable response rate of about two thirds. This indicatet ~general acceptance of item management as a career but the response distribution also reflected a strain toward dissat- isfaction and an indication that many item managers had high— er aSpiration levels. The basic conclusion was that there is no strong evi- dence that item management is not perceived as a worthy ca- reer occupation even though there was some indication that many of the item managers may have tempered their career aspi- rations to accept their current career level. Job Satisfaction About two thirds Of the item managers view their jobs as being satisfying to some degree with the most representa- tive reSponse being "fairly well satisfied". The survey data indicated that ADP systems' products were the least source of job dissatisfaction with only about 10 per cent of the item managers reporting some degree of dissatisfaction. The two items reflecting the highest degree of dissat- isfaction were training and excessive work load with about one third of the item managers responding either "fairly dis- satisfied" or "very dissatisfied. Comparison of the data from the career satisfaction sur- vey and the job satisfaction survey revealed that item man- agers expressed greater satisfaction with their jobs than their careers. This was evident from a comparison of the two response distributions and also the well above average "very 183 dissatisfied” reSponse rates to two job satisfaction ques- tions concerning satisfaction with progress toward personal goals and career goals. The general conclusion, based on responses to data gen- erated by this survey, was that there were no major areas of job dissatisfaction for the majority of item managers, and that item managers were essentially well satisfied with ADP systems' products. However, there was a consistent 12 to 20 per cent negative "attitude" toward ADP systems. Role Conflict and Ambiguity A seventeen item survey instrument was devised to gen- erate information on possible sources of role conflict and ambiguity manifested by expressions of anxiety. The ques- tions were analyzed in contrived groups to evaluate the dif— ferent kinds and sources of role conflict and ambiguity. The essential findings were as follows: 1. Role over load was perceived as the most prevalent form of role conflict. The five role over load questions, as a group, had the highest "anxiety" re- Sponse rate. Within the group, questions which re- ferred to general work load situations ranked high- er than questions referring to Specific sources such as ADP systems or systems' products. The responses to these five questions indicated rOle over load was a source of role conflict for about 51 per cent of the item managers. Z. 184 The items used to examine for role ambiguity had a wide Variation in their response distribution. Again, questions directed at specific sources ranked lowest as a source of ambiguity. The requirements of ADP systems were relatively unambiguous but know— ledge about promotion Opportunities was a source of concern. This may be due to the fact that automa- tion is making item managers technical Specialists managing resources. With the computer taking over much of the routine clerical work, there are fewer .groups of clerical workers and fewer easily visible supervisory positions. Implementation of automated data systems requires a large group of technical specialists. For example, there are 4000 item man- agers in the Air Force Logistics Command with over 1600 being EOQ item managers. The hierarchy of su- ipervisory levels is prOportionately small causing the item manager concern about promotion opportunity. An investigation Of peOple and ADP systems as dis— tinguishablely different sources Of rOle conflict and ambiguity produced indeterminate results. The sur- vey data indicated that neither people nor systems were the primary sources of role conflict and ambig- uity. Examination of the highest ranked role conflict and ambiguity items indicated that the primary sources were related to the more general situational factuw 185 such as: (l) excessive work load, (2) too little authority for the responsibility, and (3) a lack of knowledge about promotion possibilities. Examination of the lowest ranked items strongly in- ferred that ADP systems were perceived by item man- agers as the least source of role conflict and am- biguity. Review of the findings from these data definitely indicates that the majority of item man- agers do not manifest anxieties relating to ADP systems conflict or ambiguity situations. Analysis of ADP Systems Role Conflict and Ambiguity The product necessity survey and systems efficacy sur- vey response scores indicated that about 8 to 20 per cent of the item manager sample reflected a "negative" attitude toward ADP systems. This indicated automated systems could be a source of role conflict and ambiguity for some of the item managers. To investigate the proposition that ADP systems can be a source of role conflict and ambiguity, two sets of high and low groups were contrived from the sample Of 743 item managers. The highgroups consisted of: (l) the 20 per cent of the item managers who evaluated ADP systems' products as being most necessary, and (2) the 20 per cent of the item managers who perceived ADP systems as being most effective. The low groups consisted of: (l) the 20 per cent Of the item managers who evaluated ADP systems' products as being 186 most unnecessary, and (2) the 20 per cent of the item man- agers who perceived ADP systems as being most ineffective. The responses of these groups to eight items in the anxiety survey instrument and the ten items in the job sat- isfaction instrument were analyzed to test the following hy- potheses. l. The more EOQ item managers perceive ADP systems as being unnecessary, the greater will be their ex- pressed anxieties and dissatisfaction concerning ADP system related job activities. 2. The more EOQ item managers perceive ADP systems as being ineffective for fulfillment of their role as they perceive it, the greater will be their ex- pressed anxieties and dissatisfactions concerning ADP systems. The predictions based upon the hypotheses were that the low groups would experience more anxiety and less job satis- faction than the high groups. The predictions were tested by comparing and testing mean scores for the high and the low groups for eight of the items in the anxiety survey in- strument and all of the items in the job satisfaction survey instrument. In every case the results were in the direction predicted and the differences in the mean scores were signi- ficant to at least the .002 level. Based upon these test results the hypotheses were accep- ted and it was concluded that ADP systems can be a source of role conflict and ambiguity for some people affecting their 187 role behavior. ‘Also, these individuals who do experience role conflict and ambiguity from their ADP systems environ— ment tend to be less satisfied with their jobs, which may lead to dysfunctional job behavior. Comparison and analysis of high and low groups' biogra- phical data implied that experience and training were factors influencing the item manager's evaluation of ADP systems and the systems' products as they relate to his function of stock control. In general the high grOUps were more eXperienced in item management, had longer tenure in civil service, were older, and had had more training. The low groups had a high- er average level Of education which tentatively indicated that technical training may be more relevant for an item man— ager, who is primarily responsible for management of re- sources, than academic education beyond a certain level. The data analysis also revealed no noticeable differen- ces in the high and low groups allocation of time between the 0062 and 0032 systems. Also, there were no apparent dif- ferences between the groups on the range and quantity of line items managed, nor in the numbers of "problem” items among 'the total number of line items for which they are responsible. This implied that their work loads were not a factor affect— ing their evaluations of product necessity or system efficacy. ImpliCations of the Study The foregoing summary of the study's findings and con- clusions based on the examination of the survey data suggest- ed the following recommendations. 1. 188 A substantial number of item managers are not using all of the ADP system products provided for their decision making and management functions. Because information is costly and its imprOper use or appli- cation may reduce productivity, an effort Should be undertaken to determine the basic reasons. Are there truly unnecessary products or are item man- agers just not adequately trained in their use? This question warrants some attention by higher man- agement levels in the logistics command. Item managers indicated significant dissatisfaction with the training they receive for the development and maintenance of required EOQ item management skills and knowledge. While there is a limit to the amount of formal training an organization can realistically provide, there is a strong inference that this function has not received adequate man- agement attention and has not maintained pace with the technological progress in the organization's operations. ADP systems require knowledgeable well trained personnel in order to generate accurate in- puts and to make effective use of the outputs. This places a premium on a fast and effective way to communicate with peOple when procedures change, problems occur, new elements are added, etc. The survey results for the 01430 subsystem gave ample evidence Of the difference in attitude toward, and acceptance of a new system. 189 The training requirements in a highly automated environ ment suggests the need for creative thinking in this area. To be highly effective item managers must not only be a Spe- cialist in his particular functional area, but he should also have a sound understanding of the requirements and function— ing of related systems. Much of the data he receives is a direct input from another system at a completely different organizational location. The size and complexity of the organization and the num- ber of people involved suggest the use of media assisted in- struction. For example, closed circuit television (CCTV) may be a very effective means of providing fast and accurate instruction to large numbers of item managers (and other personnel in the organization). This study indicates that automation seems to emphasize the need for effective in- house training capability quickly reSponsive to the needs of the operational situations. APPENDICES APPENDIX A THE QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY IDCLMENTS This appendix contains a sample of the letter of transmittal, guidelines for distribution of the EOQ item manager survey questionnaire, and the questionnaire booklet. REPLY TO Am 0': CU ”GOT: TO: DEPARTMENT OF THE All! FORCE HIADOUAR‘I’IRI Am roncc Loalsncs COMMAND WRIGHT-PATTERSON A"! route: lAsE. omo 45433 AFLC—M60 18 July 1968 15(1) Item Manager Research Survey WRAMA (NMR/Mr. Jack Currington) lbbins AFB, Georgia 31093 1. Major Paul E. Erzen on the faculty of AFIT, School of Systems and logistics (AFIT-SLFR) is conducting a research project on the EOQ item manager. The purpose of this research project is to examine, describe and analyze selected factors in the item manager's work environment which may influence his job performance and behavior. 2. The enclosed research instrunent was designed to obtain data direct- ly from Ea) item managers in nonsupervisory positions. Instructions for completing the survey are stated within the survey instrunent. 3. Hq AFLC (MCS) has approved the use of this data gathering instrument and is very interested in the potential information it will generate. The results may provide some valuable insights for developing item man- ager training programs and other support for item management. The survey was field tested for clarity and validity at OOAMA and SMAMA. It re- quired an average of forty-five minutes to complete which is not exces- sive considering the data it will provide. 4. Your assistance is requested in making distribution of the enclosed survey instrunents to a representative sample of E0) item managers in your organization. Since every Ea) item manager will not participate, it is very important to obtain a randomized sampling so that valid in- ferences can be made regarding the entire population. Guidelines for selecting item managers to complete the survey are contained in attach- ment 1. 5. Any questions concerning this survey may be addressed directly to Major Paul Erzen, AFIT-SLFR, Wright Patterson AFB, Ohio. His phone extensions are: 72527 or 72704. Your prompt and personal attention to this project would be sincerely appreciated. FOR THE (III/WINTER RDBEM‘ L. AIEXANIBR 2 Atch Directorate of Supply Operations 1 . Guidelines for Distribution DES Supply of En Item Manager Survey 2. 13(1) Item Manager Research Survey (260 cys) 190] _ 191 GUIDELINES FOR DISTRIBUTION OF EOQ ITEM MANAGER RESEARCH SURVEY_ Since it is too costly to survey the entire population of item managers, it is very important that a representative randomized sample be obtained. The number Of enclosed surveys should sample approximately half of the total population of EOQ item managers assigned to your organization. The following guidelines are provided to assist in selecting a repre- sentative sample. 1. Select only EOQ item managers in nonsupervisory positions. 2. Determine the approximate number of EOQ IMS assigned to the R80 Branch of each SSM and IM Division. a. From each R80 Branch randomly select a proportionate number of EOQ item managers. For example, if you have sufficient copies to sample one half of all EOQ IMS and one branch has 50 and another branch has 30, then select 25 from the branch with 50 IMS and 15 from the branch with 30 IMS. b. The selection of EOQ IMs to complete the survey should be as impersonal and random as possible. For example, if EOQ IMs have an organizational distribution code symbol for each individual item manager, then im- personal selection and distribution on the basis of such a code number would be considered random sampling. c. It is intended that the established distribution system be used to the greatest degree possible. 3. The survey states that all replies are to be anonomous and that no individual or organizational unit will be identified with any given response. The item managers should be encouraged to complete the survey as soon as possible and not later than two weeks after receipt. Also, they should mail the completed survey directly to AFIT-SLFR in the attached preaddressed envelOpe. This is necessary to insure anonymity of the reSpondent. _ x' ‘.'M ”W“ .- T v f . i 192 . i Emm or‘muuocoov/scwooc OF svsreus E LOGISTICS . warm-Pawnee; AFB, omo L "I‘I I' .' " " ‘ Eoo ITEM MANAGER RESEARCH SURVEY MU-OMMWWMWSMIMRBMINOMM MWoNIIonrmm-lfmx Theobloctlvoofmlcmrchprojoctioto mmmmmlnmmwsmmm‘ ' “mmumwmkflz Thomltofthbttudvmw mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm ”I. 9. “Mmeflnm—Kctlonoflmmmwnomlnluworklngonvlron- m"vmmmfl'lmil'!tholookedsourooo‘fl‘actualinformation. Youarothmforobolng Lfldhfllnflrhdfonbycomplotingthomhodmhwwoy. Yourcuisrnnco sumhmonlmporum and muldbcslnceroly mproclated. '3 memmlmronuunnwminmymyberdenafledwnhm 1"” Imumom. Tho Information will baubulmd and pmentad in wmmary form. melllboholdlnmlctoonfldmcetolmn you complete anonymity. " mmtlndxm Imuctlomforoomplctingthomrwyaremtodatrhe WM ouch Indlvlduol port of the survey. Please feel free to make any comments MMMyoufoolnuyoddtothcmchcffor-t. 5' P"ulil‘mllll'tothoamreywithintwowcekst‘romthcdateofrocelmandmailit Nth-Wm”... Ml lam fill in the requested information or check the applicable block. ’Bfegard the numbers in parentheses (e.g., (1), (2), etc.). These numbers ll" be used to assist in computer processing of the data. mortal Data: MY present position title is: (be specific) What is your present civil service grade and step or military rank? (1)13 635 (1-5) (80 El 6511 (1-5) MEI 635 (610) (8) E] GS11 (6-10) l3lCI 687(1-5) (9) CIan Lieutenant (41:1 69 (6-10) (10)El lst Lieutenant (5) D ass (1-5) (11):] Captain (6) El 689 (6-10) mm Other . LG-WPAFB—JUL 68 IM 1 3. What is your age? (1) D 24 or under (5) 1:] 40-44 (2) [3 25-29 (6) CI 45-49 (3) D 3034 (7) C‘. 50-54 (4) [:1 35-39 (8) 1:] 55 or over 4. Are you? [:1 Male E] Female Organization and Unit of Assignment: 5. At which Air Materiel Area (AMA) are you employed? (1) Cl WRAMA (4) C] OOAMA (2) [:1 OCAMA (5) U SMAMA (3) D SAAMA 6. In what type of division do you work? (1) E] M (2) E] SSM (3) [:1 Other Weekly Workload Data: 7. What is the total average number of hours per week that you work? (1) E] 39 or under (3) [:1 41.44 (2) [:1 40 (4) Cl 45 or over 8. What is the average number of hours per week you usually workm IM job activities or functions? (1) El 24 or under (5) [j 40 (2) [:1 25-29 (6) C] 41-44 (3) C] 30-34 (7) D 45 or over (4) [:1 35—39 Of the hours per week spent on IM activities and functions, how many , hours do you usually work on: 9, 0062 E00 Buy Computation System computer products? (1) El 0-4 (5) E] 2024 (2) El 59 (6) D 2529 (3) C] 10-14 (7) E] 30 or over (4) C] 15-19 10, 0032 Item Manager Stock Control & Distribution Systemoomwl products? - (1) [3 0-4 (5) Ci 20-24 (2) [:1 5-9 (6) CI 25-29 (3) [31014 (7) [:1 30 or over _(4) [115-19 -4" 2 WK: '1. Hm (PIE min; '4‘ Did rm} many you: have you worked in civil service or military? 1th round off to the nearest whole year) (1) D 0 (5) D 4 (9) D 8 (2) C) 1 (6) C] 5 (10) El 9 (3) CI 2 (7) Cl 6 (11) Cl 10 or over (4) El 3 (8) C) 7 How many years have you worked as an item manager? ’ "‘ l (1) U 0 (5) Cl 4 (9) C) 8 (2) C] 1 (6) C) 5 (10) E] 9 (3) Ci 2 (7) CI 6 (11) Cl 10 or over El 3 (a) E] 7 (4) N : What is your highest education level? , (1) C] Not a high school graduate (4) E] 3 or more years college my (2) C] High school graduate (5) E) Bachelor's degree (3)1] 1 or 2 years college (6) C] Master’s degree Mining: (”4“ Did You receive any type of training for item management? (”[1 Yes (2) E) No 55. Formal course(s) of instruction? (1) 1:] Yes (2) E) No If yes, Title: 6. On-the-job training from your supervisor? (1)D Yea (2)13 No mil. On-the-job training from your fellow IM's? (1) [I Yes (2) D No 8. Have you received any type of training in any of the following 5 up“ areas? (Please check all applicable items) - _ If (1) D 0062 £00 (5) [:1 0032 IM, scan (2) El 0067 DSP ISSP (6) [:1 0041 CAT I & HR (3) El 0017 DIA (7) El 0034 SSM, scan (4) D 0033 Base (8) C] Other What is the approximate average total number of items you manage? ) ("U 1990wnder (4) D 600-799 (2) D M399 (5) CI 8W9” (3)5 400599 (6) [3 loooumme 3 20. 0f the total number of items managed, about active, critical, require special effort, on? (5.1 support level, below reorder level, etc.) (1) [3 None (6) D'ioom .‘ W (2) El 1-24 (7) [15125149 _-. - (3) D 2549 (8) [3150174 . (4) {:1 5074 (9), [1.175199 , (5) E1 7599 (10)E1200orover- ”I 21. Type of items managed? r{_ nuulL (1)l:] Eco I2II:I soceile f?) Add any comments you wish: Part II We are interested in your professional experience with the puter products available to you for support of yourtdt 6f , ment. In Part II we have listed by number and title allthe P and 01438 systems' computer procmed products which . . and use. The purpose is to obtain your evaluation of m you consider these products for the performance of mammal“; . . 'Please circle the one number after each of the products EDWIN the phrase (9.9.. Metals . _. most accuratelvmflm your personal " the information for your work. 31' , Absolutely unnecessary Very often unnecessary Sometimes unnecessafv May or may not be necessary Sometimes necessary Very often neceesal'Y Absolutely necessary 0062.J11-03, Manual File Maintenance Transaction List . DOS2.J11-04, EOQ Exception Listing, Parts I, II, and III. Part | Part II Part I II 0062.J11-05, Procurement Source Code Changed to Local Manufacture or Local purchase or Other Services Stock Fund. 0062.J11-06, Change of Category 0062.J11-07, Transfer of Prime to: I ) (gaining activity). 0062.J11-08, EOQ Item Code Change Notice. D062J11-09, EOQ Buy Computation Worksheet. Buy Notice. DO62.J11- 10, E00 Buy Computation Worksheet. Data Level Notice. DMZJll-ll, EOQ Buy Computation Worksheet: Termination Notice. DOBZJ11-14, E00 Buy Computation W:orksheet Interrogation Reply 0062-J11 15, Index of Actions and Dollar Value Requirements, Parts l 8: II. Part I Part II 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21 . 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 30. 31. 1. Absolutely unnecessary ifisnéogb‘sy 2. Very often unnecessary ct UV 3. Sometimes unneceuery 2mm“, Inde: 4. grisly or may not be necessary Offend '33,; in LI 5. metimes necessary , 6. Very often necessary EDIEZSIZOB, Exce 7. Absolutely necessary D062.J11-18, Two Years Zero hull: Item Ma Demand Items . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 57 M633: DO62.J11-19, Three Years Zero and Distribu Demand Items . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 57 MIDI) 0062.J11-20, Four Years Zero Demandltems . . . . . . . 1234567:0032 0062.J11-21, Delete Coded EOO Items E 501'C1.Class Dropped From Master Files. . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 67 lmlmsm'com DO62.J11-22, Special Coded EOO Items. 1 2 3 4 5 6 I (303451-01 /C2,c DO62.J11-23, Nonrecurring Demand Notice.1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [mantableBalanc 0062.J11-24, Management Control Notice. 1 2 3 4 5 HIWWH‘E'“ D062.J11-25, Interrogation by Application 1 2 3 4 5 67 mic-332833? r 0062.V14-01, Items Peculiar to Obsolete 6 7 {0032mm e Applications. . . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 003250101 Proc 0062.K77-01, EOQ/DSA Projection I WED“; Executive Management Summary It“ (W liTrar Report, Parts I, ll, 81 III . . . 7 a eekly) Prtl ......123456 0032.50; Part II . . 2 3 4 7 a ”terns, (. Partlll .......123456‘IDI32.503 Tr 0062.K77-02, EOQ/DSA Projection Index of ' :2 Action & Dollar Value of Requirements 1 DO62.K77-03, EOQ/DSA Projection . . . 1 0062.812-02, EOQ Buy/Budget Projection Index of Actions 8t Dollar Value of Reauirements Action, Parts I, II, 8t Ill. Partl . . Part II Part III . . ‘ 6 rely www.32- fien unm nel unm33. may not M nes (W) hen new 34' ‘er new» 0062.812-03, EOQ Buy/Budget Projection Products EOQ Buy Computation Worksheets 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0062.812-04, Index of EOQ Items Offered ISSP in Long Supply . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 006231205, Excess Notice 1. Absolutely unnecessary - . 2. Very often unnecessary [Section 8' lstemkhléanager', 3. Sometimes unnecessary toc . oritro, 4. May or may not be necessary and Distribution 5 Sometimes necessary System (0032) 6. Very often necessary 7. Absolutely necessary DO32.501-C1, Class Notifications. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0032.615-01, Controlled Exceptions. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DO32.451-C1/CZ, Defense Supply Agency Acc0untable Balance Trans. 1 3 4 5 6 7 0032.505-C1, Item Management Jacket. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DO32.632-C1, Item Capitalized Listing — Previous Back Order. 0032.5 - 0032,5873 Proceesing Master Record Printout 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DO32.EDl-C1, Transaction Register Category | Items. (Weele) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DOB2.EDZ-CI, Transaction Register Categoryl Items. (Weekly) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0932.503-Cl, Transaction Register Hl-Value8t Manager Review. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0032.661-C1, ”X” Blocked Balances Listing 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0032.663-C1, "Y” Blocked Balances Listing 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DO32A.615—P1, Priority Distribution System Controlled Exception 1 2 DO32.804—C1,Claesified Item List. 1 2 2032.451~C1/02, Defense Supply Agency ccountability Balance Transfer 1 2 7 0032.PW1-C1, Interrogation Replieaon u r. I‘ f. ._ Controlled Exceptions — By Commend. '. n.) “"';" 50. DO32.DA1—DA7, Item Status Reports ’ 51. DO32.632-C1, Items Capitalized Listing‘—' ‘ »’ ' ‘ Previous Back Order 52. 0032.572-C1, Requirements History Interrogation ‘ up .._. as}, ..._ - . r7“.- : I. . ‘l on Reply. I; , b . ‘ 53. DO32.293C1, Requisition Control Active 3: Masters By Site/Age . k. ‘I Absolutely Ii " 7"," i 1. I 2. Very often u i Section c: AMA Edit, Index, 3, Sometime, "2 .. j and Routing 4. May or may nctfif 1;! 6. Very often r . fig 7. Absolume , -‘ I M I 54. DI43B.H81-02, Unidentified Data 1»- . iii 55. Dl43B.MT5-01, Cross Reference Records for } :3 Management Review. 1 2'“; D143B.MT5—03, Local Management Discrepancies 1 g, ‘ I?“ M by Inform-IO- 9" C m.) 1 °' ”fivltv I. fa I. -m “MIIY MI Cm ‘ 7t.—‘l.n mplc, on. Far *- ’_ MM” 03550023 0335009 oamm> .85 86.8.... .38: 05.3000... 30.:00< >.oE.ED >.oE..r >.0E0.uxm. . .050 05 >_Em..m >_oEo.axm .0 2.0 .352 "0.5 E06>w cozfiaano >3. 00m Noon 05 >9 000.55 co...mE.er. 0:0 8...... 2.... ... .05 $095009... .0 >858... .80:..0E.E= .o 80....0E: o... 8 on E33... 05 5.... 005.330 =Eo>o .3020... 50> 800:0. 232008 80E 50...? 0.8a 05 .o 08:... 0:0 05 .09.: 0.... 2.0 cc x020 c 002A. 88... 5.08 >9... 5.0.2.00 :03 £023 8 00.500 05 9.38.58 .3 .600 .830 .>.0Eo.=xo .66. 038 m can .000 .039 8 30.0 .>.0E.E: 8 20....“ tad. 20.0.9.8 0.0.009 3: .8 53:52.8 0 a: 88 E to... $5 on 0... 055085... ES. .0 .38 >55... 50> 3 >302... 80.9. £0.33 2:8»? 300E003 2.0 Co c2329... =Eo>o 50> £300 8 m. :_ to... .0 8092. 2.... .co 8 .05 92.0 58:00 8 00:8 63.000000... a. $0.28 So.— mou.>0..n .0000 >....m.. m. 33.50 .0 E00»? 0 6.0586 .0". 0.3.: :05 co 9...er «02.0 0 0.6: £0.53 9.0008 c...» *0 :0.nmo..oE. .2050 a 00.060 >=a8= 30.. 9.5.0... 0.000... .80 5005.6 50 0:03.000 030.0. .650 .830... 820 Ea...— :0.uoE.00c. >0 0000.50 m. 20.03.2090 :0 E a3 65w ._. . I isn't? on n 1 m3: . _ . ,, “um. mm. ll mmmMMMMmmmmmmmmwm ... 0...... M0 www.mmwmmmm 0.01.0 U @3090” a a M / 1. 000.0 80.00... .3003 00050005 0005004. 2065:: 206.... >.0605xm 05.50 20.5.5 .050 05 >_Em._w 0050 20605.3 .0 0:0 .05.02 .0. $506.06.. 0:0 800 0.60.0505 0:050”. 0:0 ~0.00:. £00 .006 000.003 5.003 000. 5000... 805000.. 2065:: >.06..... I 206055 05.50 20.5.5 .050 05 >.Em._m 05.50 >.0605xm _._., .0 0:0 .. hmfiwmflz .. .0. 50.06.06. 0:0 0000 0.60005 5.50.505 0:0 .2600 0.005 500:0: 60: ~80 0.: The D062 and DO32 automated data systems may be best described as: (Determine the one best response) 1. An organizational system which requires the item manager to perform activities in response to programmed demands. "L . 2. A tool to be used by the item manager to more effectively and efficiently perform the function of item management. Untimely Inl‘ccurata 3. A complex mechanical system which provides the item manager rigid data products requiring fixed reSponses from the item manager with little opportunity for him to exercise his personal judgment or to communicate his _....—— peculiar needs back to the system. 4. Just another machine which mechanically performs pro- ! grammed computations and processes data outputs which a manager uses with discretion in making decisions and performing job responsibilities. 5. None of’these: (Fill in your own description) our supervisor is also an important factor in your work environment. /ease select the one best response for the following two questions on Dervision. Your supervisor’s dealings with the people he supervises may be best described as: 1. He is‘poor at handling people. 2. He is not very good at dealing with people——does other things much better. 3. He is fairly good at dealing with people. 4. He is good at dealing with people——better than most. 5 He is very good at dealing with people-—it is his Strongest point. ~ ' . . ‘ . Your supervisor’s ability to help you resolve technical problems - related to automated methodology and computer products may be / described as: ‘l ‘ ‘ . '- Poor 4. Good ' 5 5 ,f 2- Not very good 5. Very good : 2‘ 3- Fairly good 11 Ple In answering the following questions consider item management asa career rather than just your present job. Please circle the numberol the phrase which best describes your personal thoughts and expect} tions for each of the following questions. 1. How much does item management give you a chance to dothe things at which you are best? 1. A very good chance 3. Some chance 2. A fairly good chance 4. Very little chance 2. Has item management lived up to the expectations you had before you entered it? 1. Yes in all respects 3. In only a few walls 2. In most ways 4. Not at all 3- If YOU "had it to do over again", would you enter the field of item management? 1. Definitely yes 3. Probably "0 2. Probably yes 4. Definitely no l 4. If a Young friend of yours with adequate qualifications a”.d W23; ment was looking for a career field, would you adVIse hlm ‘0 for item management? l 1. Definitely yes 3. Probably "0 2. Probably yes 4- Definitely no 5. In general do you feel that item managers are given adequate [$029M nition when compared to that received bY other managzfimhim AMA such as the technical services manager, or the pr manager? i 1. Yes definitely 3. In some ”Specs 2. In most respects 4. Not at all 6. If you had a chance to do the same kind of work for the 9m“ pay. but in another organization or company in the communitY. wou V0“ S"W 0" Your present job? 1. Definitely yes 3. Probably "0 2. Probably yes 4. Definitely "0 12 ll 5 ii W 2 ii'lourj 'ir satis nicomi 1felon s ‘1’in tl ii? ‘i lou 5 min 9} W you 5 item gg iliiem 96 W satis Wtatior W Satis .E‘iiatec in the w failed Which .Wion. W" Sails int 0i y . .1 ._\ art V . n ”meople frequently have various feelings of satisfaction and dissatisfaction . I imlmpgarding their work. In answering the following questions consider item Wmianagement as a working job. Please circle the number after each uationrepreeenting the phrase which best describes your satiSfaCtiO" ,‘ acnamzr dissatisfaction with your work. I l l ‘3 \ “7:1 5“) .i T y ..;'f o -' :‘.'l )-‘l i O 1. Very well satisfied 96W 2. Fairly well satisfied ' WW? 3. Passive——neither satisfied or dissatisfied 0W. 4. Fairly dissatisfied 5. Very dissatisfied iiiaiw Are you satisfied that you have enough authority to ital do your job well? , .. How satisfied are you with your present job when me?- you compare it to similar jobs in the AMA? 1 Are you satisfied with the progress you are making shim toward the goals you set for yourself in your present iiml'i‘i job? 1 2 3 4 5 Areyou satisfied that the people in your organ- , .. Ization give proper recognition to your work as an? an Item manager? 1 2 3 4 . Are you satisfied with the 0062 computer 3m. SYStem generated printouts provided for your job? 1 2 3 4 5 Are you satisfied with the 0032 computer SYStem generated printouts provided for yOur job? 1 2 3 4 5 ' .; H0W setisfied are you with job training and education available to you? 1 2 3 4 5 you! satisfied are you with the proportion of :aIIable work time required to accomplish tasks 9 nerated by COmputer printout products? 1 2 3 4 5 20'; the (whole, are you satisfied that you are to nigh as a profesmonal expert to the degree 3m. positio you feel entitled by reason of your - n, training, and experience? 1 2 3 4 5 . H - . ill” "3:"; :aftlsfred are you with your present job in W Your career expectations? 1 2 3 4 5 Part VI 13°“ All of us occasionally feel bothered by certain things in our work .111 m following is a list of things that sometimes upset people. Pleiisecm m, the number after each statement representing the phrase which most accurately reflects how frequently you feel bothered by each 0f m- m situations. Stock proiid 1- Never iiiich 2. Rarely mm 3. Sometimes 4, Rather often . Win! 5. Nearly all the time timed 6. Does not applv tion 1. Feeling that you have too little authority 3min! to carry out the responsibilities assigned 56 W: to you. 1 2 3 4 ionic flew 2. Being unclear on just what the scope and 4 5 responsibilities of your job are. 1 2 3 l, Niki lime: 3. Not knowing what opportunities for 4 5 I advancement or promotion exist for you. 1 2 3 Thinki “or 4. Feeling that you have too heavy a work 1 load, one that you can’t possibly finish 4 5 l‘ ”mkn during an ordinary workday. 1 2 3 ”M 5. Feeling that you are not adequately 3 4 557 "min prepared to handle your job? 1 2 M 6. Thinking that you'll not be able to satisfy the 3 4 51% W conflicting demands of various people over YOU- 1 2 in n l ( 7. Thinking that you'll not be able to handle the y demands imposed upon you by the 0062 and 3 4 5 i DO32 systems’ computer generated printouts 1 2 8. Feeling that the individual demands of your supervrsor are in conflict with the 0062 and 3 4 5i DO32 systems' generated job activities. 1 2 9' 8mm”? bY the fact that you can't get aaeeded information from the automated 3 4 5 l ta systems to Properly perform your job. 1 2 Ira 14 5! ). Bothered by the fact that the 0062 buy 1111195 in m computation system provides too many n WE‘- unnecessary products which detract from the 91m other required activities. 1 2 3 4 5 6 . .11. WWI. Bothered by the fact that the 0032 IM Stock Control and Distribution System #— provides too many unnecessary products M which detract from other required lardi activities. 1 2 3 4 5 6 .omeiim imam. Feeling unable to influence your ieaili i1? immediate supervisor’s decisions and Ioes iii: actions that affect you. 1 2 3 4 5 6 3. Feeling unable to influence the automated . aspects of the buy computation system or 1. stock control and distribution system which affect your work. 1 2 3 4 5 5 :11. Not knowing just what the people you work with expect of you. 1 2 3 4 5 6 115. Thinking that the amount of work you have to do may interfere with how well it gets done. 1 2 3 4 5 6 3- Not knowing just what the 0062 automated " processes require of you in your job. 1 2 3 4 5 5 .7‘ Not knowing just what the 0032 automated 1~ processes require of you in your job. 1 2 3 4 5 6 r ”"a'kSi (Please make any comments you desire on any part or question u, 13 in this survey. We sincerely appreciate the time and effort YOU have given us. Thank you.) APPENDIX B TABULATION OF RESPONSES TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY This appendix provides a tally of responses by the sample of 743 item managers to each question in the questionnaire survey. APPENDIX B TABULATION OF RESPONSES TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY NUMBER OF PART I RESPONSES 1. My present position title is: (be specific) 2. 'What is your present civil service grade and step or military rank? (1) 055 (1-5) ............... 36 (2) 055 (6-10) ............... 13 (3) 057 (1-5) ............... 236 (A) GS? (6-10) ............... 68 (5) G59 (1-5) . .............. 303 (6) 689 (6-10) ............... 7O (7) 6511 (1-5) ............... 6 (8) 6811 (6-10) ............... 2 (9) 2nd Lieutenant ............... l (10) let Lieutenant ............... 0 (11) Captain ............... O (12) Other ............... O No response ............... 8 3. What is your age? (1) 24 or under ................ 34 (2) 25 - 29 ................ 7e (3) 30 - 3A ................ go (A) 35 - 39 ................ 1 5 (5) ho - 4h ................ l3: (6) AS - A9 ................ 13 (7) so - 54 ................ 84 (8) 55 or over ................ 5 No response ................ l 4. Are you? (1) Male ................ 298 (2) Female ................ 33% No response ................ 5. At which Air Materiel Area (AMA) are you employed? (1) ‘wRAMA .................. ii: (2) OCAMA .................. 15h (3) SAAMA .................. 105 (A) OOAMA .................. 114 (5) SMAMA .................. 194 APPENDIX B (Continued) NUMBER OF RESPONSES 6. In what type of division do you work? (1) IM . ................ 655 (2) SSM . 76 (3) Other ................. 5 No response ................. 7 7. 'What is the total average number of hours per week that you work? (1) 39 or under . ................ l7 (2) ho ................. 677 (3) Al - LL ................. LO (h) 45 or over ................. 6 No response ...... . .......... 3 8. What is the average number of hours per week you usu- ally'work on IM job activities or functions? (1) 2A or under ...... . .......... l5 (2) 25 - 29 . . . .............. 6 (3)30-34 ....... 3i. (4) 35 - 39 ......... . . . ..... 106 (5)40 .......... 5L6 (6) A1 - AA ...... . . . . . ...... 24 (7) L5 or over ..... . . . .' ........ 5 No response ................. 11 Of the hours per week spent on IM activities and functions, how many hours do you usually work on: 9. D062 EOQ Buy Computation System.computer products? (1) o - A ................. 20 (2) 5 - 9 ..... . . . ......... 15% (3) 10 - 14 ................. 3 (h) 15 - 19 . . ............... 13; (5) 20 - 24 . . . . . ............ i: (6) 25 - 29 ........... . ..... 9 (7) 30 or over . . . . . ............ lll No response . . . . . ............ 195 APPENDIX B (Continued) NUMBER OF RESPONSES 10. D032 Item Manager Stock Control & Distribution System computer products? (1) 0 - A ............... 52 (2) 5 - 9 ............... 101 (3) 10 — 14 ............... 2A2 (A) 15 - 19 ............... 137 (5) 20 - 24 ............... 125 (6) 25 - 29 ............... 45 (7) 30 or over ............... 27 No response ............... 14 ll. HOW'many years have you worked in civil service or military? (please round off to the nearest whole year) (1) o ............... A (2) 1 ............... 3A (3) 2 ............... to (A) 3 ............... 35 (5) A ............... 10 (6) 5 ............... 12 (7) 6 ............... 13 (8) 7 ............... 18 (9) 8 ............... 19 (10) 9 ............... 23 (ll) 10 or over ............... 533 No response ............... 2 12. How many years have you worked as an item.manager? (1) o ............... 9 (2) 1 ............... 103 (3) 2 ............... 1;: (h) 3 ............... 38 (5) 4 ............... L9 (6) 5 ............... Al (7) 6 ............... 22 (8) 7 ............... 3h (9) 3 ....... . ....... 20 (10) 9 ............... 12 (ll) 10 or over ............... g No response ............... 196 APPENDIX B (Continued) NUMBER OF RESPONSES 13. What is your highest education level? (1) Not a high school graduate . . ...... 25 (2) High school graduate . ........ 358 3 l or 2 years college ......... 182 (A) 3 or more years college ......... A3 (5) Bachelor's degree . . . . . . . . . . . 124 (6) Master's degree ............ 9 No response . . . . . . . . . ..... 2 14. Did you receive any type of training for item manage— ment? (1) Yes ................... 589 (2) No . . . . . . . . . . ......... 1A8 No response . . . . . . . . . ...... 6 15. Formal course(s) of instruction? If yes, Title: (1) Yes . . . ..... . .......... 250 (2) No . . . . . . . . . . ......... hhl No response . . . . . . . . ....... 52 16. On-the-job training from.your supervisor? (1) Yes . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... hl9 (2) No . . . . . . . . . . . ........ 280 No response . . . ........ . . . . LA 17. Qn-the-job training from.your fellow IM's? (1) Yes . . . . . . . . . . ......... 693 (2)No 35 No response . . . . ........ . . . 15 18. Have you received any type of training in any of the following areas? (Please check all applicable items) (1)D062EOQ 672 (2) D067 DSP ISSP . . . . . ......... 293 (3) D017 DIA ........ ...... 256 (It) D033 Base . ............ . . 61.3 5 D032 IM, SC&D .............. 1.1 - (6) 1101.1 CAT 1 & IIR .............. 172 (7) D03!» SSM, SC&D . . . ........... 11 (8)0ther ....... 11.5 197 APPENDIX B (Continued) NUMBER OF RESPONSES 19. 'What is the approximate average total number of items you manage? (l) 199 or under ............... 72 (2) 200 - 399 ............... 139 (3) 400 - 599 ............... 205 (A) 600 - 799 ............... 145 (5) 800 - 999 ............... 86 (6) 1000 or more ............... 88 No response ............... 8 20. Of the total number of items managed, about how many are highly active, critical, require special effort, etc. ? (E. g, Back-order, below support level, below reorder level, etc.) (1) None ................ 3 (2) l - 24 ................ 145 (3) 25 - A9 ................ 96 (A) 50 - 7h ................ 92 (5) 75 - 99 ................ 72 (6) 100 - 121. ................ 72 (7) 125 - 149 . . . ............. 32 (8) 150 - 17h ................ 29 (9) 175 - 199 . . . . ............ 3o (10) 200 or over ................ 160 No response ................ 12 21. Type of items managed? (1) EOQ ..... , ........... 61th (2) EOQ and CAT IIR .............. 82 No response ............... l7 198 «mm we no as am as as on .anomopoo mo emceeo .eoraas.meoo .e mam om 50H oca ON am am mm .Ucdm xoopm mova>nom 90:90 no omonopdm Hwoog no opdpommdcmz Hwooq on vomcwno opoo condom pcosohzoohm .mOiHHh.Nmom .m dam mNH HOH mNH mm mm 04 mm HHH whom .4 mom mma 00H 00H om am am OJ HH phdm .m mow JMH mOH boa hm 4m mm mm H whom .HHH one .HH .H moons .meapnag eoapoooxm aom .aOiHHe.moon .m 40H mm HHH oHH om so mad em .pnaq echoes unease ooeeeooehnz ease Hosea: .moraae.moon .H b w m a m N H o mMmzommmm mo mmmzbz huwomoooc maopsaomn< huwmmooo: copmo hho> mhwmmooo: moaaposom hummmooo: on #0: has so hm: hpmmmooozcs moEHpoEom homomooocc: coumo hpo> hhmmmoooccz haopsaomn< oncoamon oz “mecca seesaw coppepsosoo asm com ."< soapeem C’F1010\d§U\VDP‘ HH Bmdm $263208 m fiozmmg 199 o8 02 SH m3. S mm on m .nsefi season onoN Bee» .9021 .othQdooa .5 «S Q: o: m3 R R ma N. .nsofi season 83 23» moan. .firfiedooo .3 m2 m2 m2 m3 em 3. ema e .nsofi season 9:5 not» oz. .erfledooa .3 man so 1:. a: 3 mm mm 3 HH ram .3“ mmm me S m: .2 .R om S H has .HH use H mppwm «apnoewnfisvom egos nodes as 2033. mo xooeH .Srflsdooa .2 S.N 03 8a .3 1: ma 3 a .aaoom 223332835 soonest; 833358 mom 8m .fitagdooa .3 «3 Q. 3 .3 .3 mm 8 m .oefioz seepage“. soonest: 8332158 2m com .fitHQdoon .3 cos Nda om 4m ma am ma a .ooapoz Ho>on spun "soonest: 833258 Pm 8m .oataasdoom .3 0% om m m m o m m .8302 am "soonest: 8332238 ham 8m goo-3.239 .0 8w we oma mfi em mm 8 mm .8302 omfieo oooo sofi 8m .Sragdeon .m 8m 2. mm 3 m 3 3 3 Amounts mfifiamv A V "3 ofihm mo someones .Srdutmooa .1. s w m a m m H o mmmzommmm mo mmmzpz Aposcwpcoov < cOfipoom .HH Bmdm $225208 m fiozmmoa 200 omH no me Hmm ma 5H am we soapoonogm «mmxaom .moubbm.moop .mm «om am an mam #H Hm <5 04 mpcmsmpflswmm Ho msam> gaaaoa a :Oflpo« mo xmuaH cOflpummogm «mm\oom .mouubx.mooa .pm 4nd on 50 5mm 0H mm mm 00 HHH pnmm .ww Hma mu no mmm oH om mo an HH pawn .mm oma 05 no owm 5H mm mm no H pawn HHH a .HH .H mpgmm .aponom.mn¢assm pcoamwmcmz o>fipsooxm soapomnoam .mwon .mm boH ooa oma mqa 0H mm am ea mafip¢OHfiaa< up coflpwmonnmch .mmuaau.moon .mm mmH ¢oH mmH ova mm 44 an «N .ooflpoz Hoppcoo pcoeawmqmz .qmnaab.~eon .Hm mmH «a mad qu 4m No mma oa .ooflpoz vcmaon wcflggsoopcoz .mmuaau.moom .om baa mma H .0 mammmoom: moEHmeom .m hpwmmoom: on no: has no mm: .4 znwmmmomccz mmEHmeom .m Ammoav_aopmhm COdeanpmHQ hnmmmmomCCS cmpmo ham> .N vcm «Hoppcoo xoopm .nmwwcmz EopH "m :OHpoom hpwammomcqs hHmdeomn< .H mmcoammn oz .0 HH 9m AwHHoQ d muowpo< mo XavcH cOHpoonopm pmmusm\ham com .moanm.~oon .mm 5 e m e m m H o mmmzommmm m6 mmmzbz AcoscflpcooV H soHpoom .HH emgm AvozfipcooV m NHDZHAQ< 202 mom NHH nu OHH H «H OH Hm maHHmHH mmocaHam cwHOOHm =H: .Honmoo.mmom .HH com HNH me No H HH mm pH mcHHmHH moocwme umHOOHm =H= .HounH.~moa .44 NOH mo mm on m H mm Hm .zmH>om_gomacmz a ous>me HmeHmom cOHHommaane .Honm0m.mmon .mH moq OH 0H we 0 m 44 Hm AHonozv .usmHH H muommHao ponHmom sOHHoumcmue .Honmnm.~mom .mq mOm H4 mH me o m m; mo AHonozv .mauHH H HHommeo HonHmmm :OHHommcaae .Hoqum.mmoa .HH V Hou50m.mmoo 0mm oHH mm up mH Hm mH Hm HHOHaHHm upooom Honmz muHmmooogm HouH0m.~moa .04 m H H o o o H 5Q. . Hovpo xodm muodrmnm . maHHmHH uoNHHHHHa¢o_EuHH Hoummo. «mom .am 004 00 HH 0p mH H4 mm m .meowH Hmoaowwcuz auHH .Houmom.~mom .mm oHH mm Hm mmm mm. mm NHH we .mcdpe occanm oHanqgoooH HocmmH HHagsm mmcmmon .mo\HonHmH.mmon .um HHH HNH cm Hm NH HH mH o .chHHaooxm uoHHoppcou .Ho.nHm.~moa .om Ham HmH OHH om mm OH NH Hm .mHOHHHOHHHHoz omuHo .HouH0m.~mon .mm H o m H m m H o mummzomwmd mo mmmasz $35208 m HuoscHHcoov m noHHoom .HH ngm NHH/5mm < 203 mummmmomc hHodeomn< .H mpdmmmom: cmpwo hhw> .0 mnwmmmom: mmermEom .m hnwmmmooc m9 #0: has no hm: .q znwmmmomccs mmEHpmaom .m Amqu V Eopmkmfldm hummmwomcad cmpHo mho> .N mCdeom wad .xGUCH .pva HHoH Hochoo cOHHHmHsuom .Houmom.mmom .mm mmm OHH HNH HoH m 0H Hm m4 .hHaom GOHmeonnoch HHOHmHm chmemHHHUom .HouNHm.~moa .mm de @m mm qmm HH mm 0H om Hmcno xowm m50H>on . mcHHmHH umuHHmHHamo mamHH .Hoymmo.~mon .Hm mHH mOH mOH HHN H .HN mm mm mHHoaom mHHHHm_EmHH .HHmeHa.~mon .Om mmH Hm mOH mmm H mm mm mm .cadaaoo Hm u maOHHaooxm umHHoHHcoo :0 moHHaom cOHHHmOHHmHaH .Hoqum.mmoa .HH HmH Hm HH mmm om mm mm Hm Hommcune ooadHam HHHHHnqusoooH HocmMH HHaasm omaouon .mo\Ho.Hm4.~moa .mH HON 00 do 4mm mH NN Hm mo .pmHH EmpH vamedeo .HoIJOm.Nmon .H¢ Hoq mm mm HH mH mm mm mH coHHaooxm coHHouHcoo amHmHm :OHHspHHHmHo HHHHoHHm .Hmanw.H~moa .mH H m m 4 m m H o mamzommmm mo mmmZDz AcoscHHcoov m coHHoom .HH ngm $03388 m Manama: 204 mmH Hm 8H mmm om HH mH HH $359233 €33sz H33 .moumE.mmHHm .Hm NHH mHH HHH How om HH 3 mH influx H8535: .HoH mvpooom monogamom mmouo .HOImaz.mm4Hn .mm HHH 0H mHH HHN HH Hm Hm HH 38 EHHHHcocHHs .8nHmm.mmHHm .Hm H H m H m m H o mmmzommmm mo mmmZDz H Eschcoov m fig“: awedannoov o COHpoom .HH ngm do MOH ow Hm Hm mmwzommmm 02 mo Ema;— 205 assuage: HH Hm .— mm 3 HH mam HoH «38.38 38> H S - Hm HH om mmm mHH .85 828: H H 3 H HH «Hm mOH .38: 3288:. OH mm om mH mH mHH Hal 3883 2252: 3 mH HH S 8 mmn mm 225... >356 330 222$ 35o «5 >325 830 22.883 a... 5826 83358 >5 com. .88 «5 >9 3.83 5:252. a... 88 2F .H .80 $8589.. 8 >083“! £538.23 3 865.23 a: 8 no ES»? 2.» 5.3 85:8.8 :82... .9328 23> 38:8 >383 «3:. :02! 28¢ 05 Ho 82%. 2.0 05 80...: cc: 05 :0 x35 a 8a... 885 .55 >2: 529.8 :30 :35! 9 858 2: 9.38.3.8 3H .68 .333 $85888 :53 £8» a was .68 .263 3 58.0 .2252: 3 >_aE_H :56. 9.02.250 8:89 25 .8 53:52.8 a a: 88 .= tan £5 at a... dcoanucaE ES. Ho *5 Pitta 50> 3 288:. 828 52! «EB»? 39:93 05 Ho cogag =Eo>o 50> 5890 8 a. _: ton. Ho 8095.. 2:. .co 8 ago .965 58:00 8 8:8 638882. x .83.... as 8233 .38 2.5 a. £58 3 58% a .2398 3“. €95 .35 S 3.8.. 82% a 25.. 5...; can! «5 Ho SEE .288 a 8.38 2.33 32 3.22. .38.. .8» .8258 a 9528.. 88.8 .26 .335 a... so: 8:233 .3 38:. a fiascaa S c. 3 ram :33... Acadfipcoov m gammd 206 EH 0: mm 00H NHH mflmzommmm 02 mo mummzpz no mo on Co mm mmmzomwmm 02 mo Ea;— 03%:ch ozon> 8233 28:83. >35th 0335395 26¢> 86.8: 8838:. 225:5 3 mm S 8 mm 3m S 238899 mm mm mm m. om am we .86 3 ma om d. 03 RN N.NH .38: mm mm 3 i. 2. own 3 88304 3.. mm 3 3 pm 48 3 23¢ $5.53 330 2236 .23 a5 2225 350 232.6 . ”g 5:832.“ 2.. 88 {52,35 8:8... 2a .52. £8 <52 an! 2F .m. m m R mm mm 8m m3 «33:88, NH NH mm 3 $ man on 58.0 a m N. m 3 man oom .283. m a mm ma R 03 a 88394 3 an R N.N Q. 3m 3H 2.5:. >3§bxm 8:6 222$ .28 .5 $5...» 8.5 22.33 3.... ”a; Stage?” 9.3 $3 rim cowaebno Dan .9350 “.85 .6093! EB. «80 2.... .N Avosfivcoov m ugh—En: 207 .APPENDIX B (Continued) NUMBER OF RESPONSES L. The D062 and D032 automated data systems may be best des- cribed as: (Determine the one best response) 1. 2. 5. An organizational system which requires the item manager to perform activities in response to pro- grammed demands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A tool to be used by the item.manager to more effectively and efficiently perform the function of item management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . A complex mechanical system which provides the item manager rigid data products requiring fixed responses from the item manager with little oppor— tunity for him to exercise his personal judgment or to communicate his peculiar needs back to the system. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . 80 Just another machine which mechanically performs programmed computations and processes data out- puts which a manager uses with discretion in mak- ing decisions and performing job responsibilities. . . 91 None of these: (Fill in your own description) . . . . 7 No response. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 50 #89 5. Your supervisor's dealings with the people he supervises’ may be best described as: 6. 1. He is poor at handling people. . . . . . . . . . . 53 2. He is not very good at dealing with pe ple-does other things much better. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 3. He is fairly good at dealing with people. . . . . . 180 4. He is good at dealing with people-better than most. 32b 5. He is very good at dealing with people--it is his strongest point. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ll3 No response. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Your supervisor's ability to help you resolve technical problems related to automated methodology and computer products may be best described as: 1. Poor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 2. Not very good . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7l 3. Fairly good . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129 A. Good . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239 5. Very good . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . 2h; No response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 APPENDIX B (Continued) NUMBER OF PART IV RESPONSES l. HOW’much does item.management give you a chance to do the things at which you are best? 1. A very good chance ...... . . . . . . . . . 17L 2. A fairly good chance . . ...... . . . . . . . 301 3. Some chance ...... . . ...... . 167 A. Very little chance ............ . . . 9h No response . . . ......... . . . 7 2. Has item.management lived up to the expectations you had before you entered it? 1. Yes in all respects . .............. 95 2. In most ways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . L21 3. In only a few ways . . . . . . . . . ..... . 166 A. Not at all . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 No response . ..... . . . . . . . . . 8 3. If you "had it to do over again", would you enter the field of item management? 1. Definitely yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223 2. Probably yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273 3. Probably no . . . . . . . . . . . ...... 165 h. Definitely no . . . .............. 76 No response . . ............... 6 A. If a young friend of yours with adequate qualifications and tamperment was looking for a career field, would you adv1se him.to aim.for item.management? l. Definitely yes . . . ..... . . . . . :2: 2. Probably yes . . . ..... . . . . . . . . . 204 3. Probably no . . . .............. 112 h. Definitely no . . . ........ . . . . . . 7 No response . . . . . . ..... . ..... 5. In general do you feel that item.managers are given adequate recognition when compared to that received by other managers in an AMA such as the technical services manager, or the pro- duction manager? 1. Yes definitely . . ........ . ...... 1%; 2.. In most respects . . ........ . ...... 28L 3. In some respects . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... 25h A. Not at all . . . . . . . ......... : 5 No response . . . ........ . 209 APPENDIX B (Continued) NUMBER OF RESPONSES 6. If you had a chance to do the same kind of work for the same pay, but in another organization or company in the community, would you stay on your present job? 1. Definitely yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2A0 2. Probably yes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 312 3. Probably no . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 A. Definitely no . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 No response . . ..... . . . . . . . . . . 7 210 S on E. R3 m3 Bob .30» no.“ Bursa mpsopfia covet Icom.aopmhm nopdnaoo Nmon on» npfiz.ooHMmedm do» 09¢ .0 mm mm ma fie SH soon .80» .8“ Susan 3535a conga loom 569mm» hopsnaoo Noon on» apfiz.uoammaudm sch oh< .m $ 3 w: New «3 tome Ioda_aopfl as me xnoz Ado» op ooauwcwooon 909099 o>wm cofipduwodmao 9:05 :a oaaoom exp pump coaMmHuwm sch on< .¢ om mHH we Ham 04H mach poomonn hook ca maomh50h you pom ooh mamow cap van: top wcaxda can 50% mmoamona map Spa: voHHmflpdm so» end .m .3 ea «3 mmm mom as: 23 5. upon sedan.» op fl fiasco so» nogz QOn poomoua Asoh £pfi3.fioh ohm cowmmapdn tom .N me RH so in 03 2?: non .80» as ou hpwhonpsw gmsoco o>dn ooh asap vowmmwydm do» and .H m d m N H o mmmzommmm mo mmmzbz Bfiamapamfle be; .m vowmmflpdmmfic hthom .4 voflMmedmmflu no nofimmwpdm honuwoc3Io>Hmmem .m 833.3» So: 392a .m 833?» #2. an; A uncommoh oz .0 > 85.» AvoszfipcooV m NHszgm< 211 om mm up 40H ONH NMH qwfi >m mo coaphoaonm esp £pfi3.doh ohm cOHmmflpdm sow «do» on mandafia>d soap voodoo use mcwcwdnp new £pfi3_doh one voflmmwpdm 36m .oa q m N mMmzommmm m6 mHmZDz Aeosfipsoov m anagrams. 212 mm it 03 gm SH 0 .59» ho>o oaaooa m50fl9s> mo accused wowpowamcoo can museums op maps on so: Ha.soa page menxsnne .0 0H mm «ma ppm 0mm m .DOn 930% cause: on vehemenm haopddvoUd poo one ooh cusp wcwaoom .m NOH om NHN Hmm do w .hdcxpoz.hhmzflono no mcahsv Seaman thHmmom p.:fio ooh #wnp oco .vaoa xno3_d h>mon oop o>dn_soh pump mcaaoom .4 man «an Hma ema oaa a .eoa you sense nonpqaoun no page loonu>©d you moapflnnpnoaao pds3.mcazo:x #02 .m am ma moa sow mma m .ona pen mach mo nonpaaapamnoamop and 0900» an» ass: push no humans: modem .N on man emu moa so a .soa op eocmamma nonpaaapamconmon one use shame on apauosusa cappaa cop o>ae_soa use» meaaooa .H m 4 m N H o mmmzommmm m6 mmmZDz mamas no: moon .0 menu on» Ham nausea .m cacao season .4 moaapoacm .m aflosam .m ho>oz .H o omoonmon oz H> emhon5m opdfioossfl pooh mucosamca op canons mnflaoom .mmapfl>wpod confi5don nonpo Eonm avenues scam: mpodvopa hammmooocqs hams oop moofi>opd sopmzm soapdpflhpmfin and Hoppcou xoopm 2H Nmom esp pomp poem esp hp vonozpom .mowpfi>flp0d umnfisvom ponpo Scum penance news: mposvonn hawmmoooau: home 00» movw>ona.aoumhm Gowns» -2980 be $8 2:. fifi pom.“ 2:. .3 Baossom .poh mach snownoa manononn op maopmhm sumo Umpmsopdd emp_Eonm cowpmahoucw common pow p.:do do» pomp poem 0:» hp vohonpom .mofipw>wpod vopmponom .maopmhm «mom was N009 on» Ava: poflamcoo ca one uomw>hondm pooh mo monmEou szvfi>flUCfi esp pomp wqaaoom .mpsOpsana vopenocom nopdgsoo .maopnhm Nmon and moon on» horse» sods oomogafl mucuaov esp cause: on sand on no: Ha.soh pun» mqfixoana .NH .OH e m mmmzommmm m0 mmmzsz AvosqucooV m NHDZMAA< 214 NH 5 pm Q9 mom +Now o .90“. .30» 5.” dob. mo 0.3.360.“ mommooofim eopmsopsw mmoa esp use: each mangoes 902 .aa 4H N. mm 03 «am mom m .90.“ .39» 5.“ do.» no 093d?» mommooona eopqeopsu moon can use: amen mangoes #02 .0H m we NHH mam mom ama m .mcoe meow ea Haoz_zos suns anomaopnn has as on 98: .99» #33 Ho 0.565 23 p.33 mega. .3 0 am mm OHH 4am mam a . .20» Ho sooexu 5.55 #33 50h oHQoon was? #36 magnum p02 :5” ma mm em mma mom omH m .xpo:.nsoa panama none: :8me 2.239.992»ch can Hoppcoo xoopm ho Bowman soapwpzaaoo has. 2.3 no mfiooamd mongoose one. oocodHHS.” on 39.28 mason .mH a m .2 m N H o mmmzommmm .mo $352 Aeosenucoov m fi§m< APPENDIX C DESCRIPTIONS OF THE D062, D032 AND D1438 AUIUVIATED DATA PROCESSING SYSTEMS APPENDIX C DESCRIPTIONS OF THE D062, D032 AND D1438 AUTOMATED DATA PROCESSING SYSTEMS A very brief description of the three ADP systems is provided to give the reader a general understanding of what each system involves. DO62--The EOQ Buy Computation System This system provides EOQ item managers data for the re- quirements computation for Cost Category II Non~recoverable and Cost Category III expendable items. The D062 system uses data inputs from other automated systems together with item manager file maintenance to maintain demand history and com- pute requirements levels. The system computes monthly demand rates, support levels, safety levels, data levels, reorder levels and retention levels on all items managed. An EOQ computational concept is used within the system and it com— putes all items 4 times per month to determine buy items, ter- mination items and quantities by applying the inventory of available assets to the criteria listed above. Outputs from these computations indicating actions to be taken are in the form of: (1) the EOQ master file--showing the levels, the available assets, and the item applications, (2) the stock control and distribution support levels for the military assistance program reimbursable levels, (3) the interservice support plans for requirements interrogation data, (4) the EOQ "buy" budget projection computation, and (5) management 215 216 reports and data to assist item management decision process. The system also provides other reports and management data to various levels of management on a weekly, quarterly, semi- annual and annual frequency.1’ 2 In one sentence, it is a system to collect and store data, perform programmed compu- tations, and provide management information for inventory control and management of assets meeting the economic order and stockage criteria. DO32--Item Manager, Stock Control and Distribution‘System Once the requirements are defined as to quantities it becomes essential to apply a uniform item management system for property accounting, inventory control, and world-wide distribution of the assets. Requirements computation and the distribution pattern are closely interrelated and must be compatible to achieve effective and efficient support. Item managers are provided D032 computer system products to facilitate efficient performance of item management func- tions. The system has replaced the need for manual review of each and every individual business transaction and thereby enhances the "management by exception" principle. This tech- nique is ideal for computer application and permits computer 1U.S. Department of the Air Force, Air Force Logistics Command, AFLC Lo istics Control Center System (134), AFLCM 300~70 (Wr1gHt-Patterson APB, Ohio, 26 May 1967). 211.8. Department of the Air Force, Air Force Logistics Command, Computation of Requirements for the BconOmic Order uantit Ti e Items, AFLCM 37-6 (Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, 35 June 19685. 217 processing of hugh volumes of transactions without human effort. This technique permits the item managers to concen- trate their efforts on those events which do not fall within the established parameters for machine processing. The Item Manager Stock Control and Distribution (IMSCGD) System provides for the accomplishment of a number of major tasks and processes. The following is a brief discription: World-wide Support. The IMSCGD System provides for timely support regardless of location. This includes distri- bution or re-distribution for initial and follow-on support, and rapid action on requisitions, follow-ups, cancellations and similar transactions. Materiel Control. The system provides such information as: asset status, location of assets, condition of assets, and the status of each storage distribution point. The com- puter can automatically select the Optimum point from which to make consumer shipments. Selective Item Management. The IMSCGD system provides for selective item management critical items, hi-value items, Technical Order Compliance kits, classified items, equipment, and any other item category breakout desired. Surveillance of Stock Control Actions. The system auto- matically performs or provides: edit, research, and record- ing of requisitions until supplied; status to customers; automatically releases back-orders; repair and overhaul sched- uling; and accurate transaction recording. 218 File Maintenance. The system mechanically maintains such files as: accountable balances; valid document and back- order files; voucher history; cross reference of old to new stock numbers; interchangeable grouping; requirements history; exception control; tranSportation data; document control; various tables such as stock record accounts, prime class, etc; reconciliation of depot due outs and base due ins; and inventory comparison and adjustments. Requirements Computation Data. Provides integrated means for mechanically accumulating essential detailed data necessary for valid requirements computations. Interchangeability and Substitution. The system pro- vides for automatic and mechanical processing of requisitions against all assets which are considered interchangeable or suitable substitutes for the prime item when it is unavail- able. Computer Reports and Management Products. The system is able to produce numerous reports and management products based upon its internally stored data. The D032 computer products provided the EOQ item manager are included in Part II of the questionnaire, and are analyzed in Chapter V.3’ 4 3U.S. Department of the Air Force, Air Force Logistics Command, Item Mana ement St0ck Control and DiStribution System ED§§ZZ, AFEEM 300-26 (Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, 24 ay . 4U.S. Department of the Air Force,’U.S.'Air Force Supply Manual, AFM 67-1, Vol. III, Part One, "Item Manager Stock ontrol and Distribution Procedures", (WashingtOn D.C., 21 August 1967). ' 219 D143B-~AMA Edit, Index and Routing Subsystem This is a subsystem of D143B-~Air Force Recoverable Assembly Management System (AFRAMS), which is being developed to improve the total legistics management of recoverable assemblies (XD and KP class items) and consists of a series of data subsystems designed to give managers "complete visi— bility" of these assets so that managerial decisions can be made "lead time away" to help reduce management by crisis. AFRAMS will create an integrated series of data systems en- abling management to make its decisions on a "total know- ledge" basis rather than on piecemeal or incomplete informa- tion. D143B is designed to provide all using systems with a particular segment of management data for all stock numbers. For the item manager it serves as his sole entry point for stock control data i.e., EXpendibility-Recoverability-Repair- ability-Cost (ERRC) codes, unit cost, unit of issue, etc.) which enter the Air Force stock list system at the AMA level. It also verifies stock record account numbers (SRAN's) and routes incoming products to data systems and Air Materiel Areas.5’ 6 sU.S. Department of the Air Force, U.S. Air Force Supply Manual, AFM 67-1, Vol. III, Part Five, "Air Force Recoverable Assembly Management System", (Washington D.C., 1 October 1967). 6U.S. Department of.the Air Force, Air Force Logistics Command, AMA Edit,'Index,‘and Routing Subsystem (D1433), AFLCP 300-191, Twright~Patterson AFB,POhio, II July 1967). 220 Change 3 AFLC? 300-3 4.8 «anon SE. mansion a5 5 Sudanese 2 .mnzmHnHoam B: 2.38% .2. .35 em e5 25 a pa ”upstage e5 pecans? 8.382. 8 Spanoao an 8%.»... one. .mmfim 2208288 a: new: mane .o .fioaom 539588 e5 85:3 x88 33 e5 .88 .389 .88 SC 82.85» e5 on: e5 28 .3 3 53...? Noon 23 as: 3% no roan 23.. .558 a; 8. SE .m .385 aopohm :oapepaaoo figeoaueononm upeoaongdom com on,» and .2003 59% peed—Ewes: Eonmonm designs as nonpauflflp 3234: 38nd 25 .288 33.8 8.2 as .2488 .838 88 2mm 23 .385 8.2.8 SSE at. 3 33 Sen acetone 335 one. .mémnm 88 BE 8<§E .5950 J .330 00.90.... pecansoona use bomopeo .800 5 newness weaves—Boon." vocabonn one 000302 .389 and 3.023 xno: soapenaaoo use Snot...” moose new: tonnage one 33.3 .333” eoapcsen cedxoagea e088 353:3 .nagoa. novnoon .mdgea 3.2V .oagoa heaven .325.” facade... .oepen once.“ hind“. cognac Bongo N08 35. 6.5% nausea com 2.5 end mead nausea uses.“ acorns hunanwuaaoo 0.39% mean condeopfida 0H3 noasnaoo 5:03 non non—.3. Pom Juan—cone pause Boga, 5 «pop 035. owe—Sena ov macadamia a.“ 0.3.“ nausea 3.333%? 5 .393 naps Seance: 23 anemone 3 vonflfion upon science 0.3..“ nova 8n 2n. 5033838 was 3. cones. 3 805 $258 .820 3.888 5. .28.: HH Pomona enoo end oasengoooméoz HH mnemonic .800 now coach-page managing? 3350.3 Sanka 32S. .Mmogm .m .868 E e5 «in 8a.: .mmpflomfia 952085 .m .828 833368 be 885 335.6 nova caisson $8 .35 a: 88 magnmmn Emma A D062-1 221 3 m Ian-£0 a. 808‘ do no... .8 lo. 00.. 393»!- fin john 3% 9.8.8» 3 Lou on 3 335:0qu 53 5a... E” 05 33.50.".— .68G :03. .0002: .350 no 8303.23.— dooOH .032...“— gsgoouqaouoflooduggod loo 8'3" no Fauna—E .3an not; a 23 33395 a.“ 8.33 05.3200 no.3) so 310 go 360893 no cacao." 1 5a: a 05 003 .{m go 8H 5.4:: {m d253, B .188 .8- ..8... 53 €888 38 no 8].? 23 go ago 05. .3..vo 38.90 05 $5 égaoggfisogiaug Egaguoouooouofiauaofioog .833 8a? B 8.. .8588 a .983 8883 .88 B 3:35... a 5 £88 82.. 2!: igggaoogaoognafié H .8... 5 38d: 83.?» v3.38 8 2.82.. a 838.8 n 9:... .333 848 3 onion. iaoo good: no 333 v5 .13.“ no coin add—non and Eu. 5&3 IH on... cognac H Pan— .3339.» vague ggséoafioaouoouaogum .353 8.8 B 8 .825 8H .23.“ 833.. .88 3 £808.“ a 5 3.8.. 83.. 8.; cocooggauogaooufifiaafia 35810.3 unoo 35 up and @330 Moos-anagofidiaofioovgm 3': 3:98.. .3» «838 .H E 5 38d :8 883 c.5838 uo 88.3.3 a 83.5.3 n E .33 8.5 2.3378 you 8.2% 883%»88838 .8388? 858.3«58E882Hfid .388 .898 e: 8 832 8.. 833338.. 3.41.38 5 888 588 Baum 2: B 8.5 .SammmHofiuoSfino [83583.8 8383-38 :88 agofioa'fibfiiSSovo—ugoa .353. 38.5558 9.8838 you «no»: aoiggtofianflgfigfl as; :3 1.5 in! 3.2 23 :8 A." mg Q5 2: a8 3 «85 3.: «non $8 «no: ugfifum 835.... again “Vaughan—m 835...— 053:8... 3358 83.5.. 53603 Domain 8 95m 803m .0002 .550 no .5 .5 3 609—18 8 .H .H 3.2.. .53..— 838.8. g 8388...“. 888.53. ca 125} HHH Ewan .H 3...; 838 .5 .t him as; 053 flu and .938; gm 0% :33 B i... .825 in filing 0383 n 3- H no.3. .825— 5...” as»!!! 33508 ago-2g 38 8382835 SIZE 83 Egg nOIa.N $3.? gugnoflao Nelda—tug Houaéflxu glaog Holaog Hag dOIaowg alaog Olin kg .50 lJb—h ‘1 .8 his. 0:4 Rush—5E: .250. iuwg so; Emu.“ 82.358 to 808 €58 .88 egg g IE W2-2 222 urns-001808533860"! 001301.50- W, . m .uyoooE I: can... 3 838 «8.933 o5 Buiyoquflonlfififiifiofiooofioyy .— oys— ix 2 bayou 83:2.— 8382639:ny 5388.85.35 ..o.u.8ooo1u8&nmfl 2am. figufigaofiifioflgy 9 Ex 3 hays £35... lug—3.8383 .oduyoaolofllfiuoofloyo BE guaonuovyoooyofiifioflooofloyy a 2 .2 52.5 agar. lacunae—.8338 .oflooflfioooiooyoduosofigoyyou 23 g 83.8 a. It! you 835.3 o 83.2.. .— IQ 3 fill. 835.... Ilsa SIB oyos y!» .38 a... v3 uogy ooofliaouuuonofioodfi yo . at: any-ya oylfioy :Soflyo 835$ a fix 5 din: agents '3 i 93a you» 8.3. an .23.: ouooboauoaofigoy uo 23 . ggayou lilyou casino; a E I all «8...qu clan—alleging 8333835633885? «auo Dogs. backward? IE h3u3yoy§§ly§uo I... 3.81? 833.. . . «auoblsfiifiofiooflsyouoyd IS. 8 58: $35.... épéviofiflluog 3:338 .‘gg'adassdvg 538.95 13.208 yo 3»...an 5a. E .5 838.: 9 IS 3.8: .535...— Sooaato: 8383-8 Pa 8- 1:3.38 .3333 . 33§g§§83«8n nag-gag goingagfiloflifiofié a IS. a 3.8.. 835.... "gflfifiigafi 3585598383! 38 [2893583538. .833 833g 3.333559H58q12y n IS. a 31.: again “3883339908 .. £833 agnoaaasvoydz cog-Dd soouooyoooyooioofiifiofilufioyy I} a 3.8: .533.— "3383393838- .38333333 75¢ _ 15585! uoooflooo fiifiofilqtoyy .— I} a 3.8: .535: San-aggluoi .32alaoavooylyou2833 gagflifiag .— IS— A auto: «.3qu hvyouluyyuoyouslyu . a W I a W I .118}..- ‘8 i is: 3:3. shunt“: I! on. .JMHA 0! ”m4!- vg yo 3» >5 . is: R6855 ia§§§~08v§8g 883 gull; W fidfiflj dug I'll ggt’sd. gig 223 £0.31: Eisiigigigl .3533! 33335.0 I55 '9 you £33m H335 an. non—608.3 3L no 3 38.33? a; 3 33 aahgfiwibfiafizggafia flgaigauojg gunooiéouofissgn nova. bgauagnnifiiagufia .3qu» how .83.. lanai? .38 Sfilqgaoo .38. E .5 .395 «o 8§8§2 you 3.35% a .353 8 a .83 Sfiflfifls not. E .5 no . gnuooabuaofissdouugm a and a} a} J a§~ a5 a} M? 7% 338: 283 hug - HHa H 3.3 .48 3 3.8 '3 .838n8m 3.5.8 858?... «838 33- .éuooqipéiug .3 an I!” .83....an «n58 Biafifigij gouging 833.334 hp 8330335" 00.30.43.390 as; nmédzog «hiking Haw-5.3.3 3n2h§§ $5.? H van a I ‘2‘.“ .08 It so '30 In bags I: his to In. - gagggggog 11062-1. i122 3 ‘r3— 2 fig 3 B 2 8 g t 2 32 :2 q if ggég '3 22 22§§§ §§§2* 2% g 3222i a 2 32: 5&2 i2 3; 53? a afiié “a a 2232.. * 3 E 2 5 22 a u§§23° 53 1 E3333 2 Lay? £23; £22? 222%" i3 ‘3 225:5: J : gs Egg Eggsség 53% 2:35 '3'; 33‘ 335?: 22 i; “3 HE 22‘2.:° 2 ' 22 222222 33 33} fiéga Egagk igfigm 33% 52 fi£¢3§§ a 2 222 2:2 22 2252 2" 2222 ~22 ‘2‘? 22.232 Egg; 5 232 233i g§§§ §§§§ 533 232::% Egg 2; £23325 : §;3' ° ° “ ° 9. a n 25.2 2 2 2 2 2 2 E22” 2 2 =2 :2 22:2 5 i“§' 3 3 2 2 3 2 “gift. ' g §§2211322 E E 22% E3 52'? 225 E s S 2 2f. €22 2; 2 2 2 2' 2’3 222 2‘2 .222 2 ‘ g g 2:: 2;“ 2% 2% 2 2 2222 2: 3 22 i2 5 E a 2. 2 2 2 2. 2 § 3 3 3 § 3 3 nun-cu sc- rot- a. an ct no: tun-non" A? natiaa to other military eervicee. engines prop-ed for recluation for infor- fimehaMeWISSP. unit coat and average AD dollar value, reflectir' the amber of itm and dollars for each cate- Beportevdllbepreparedtoreaohm, Reportewillbepreparedforeachm, eeparatedbyitane carriedintheDCBZandDOSl. syetm and a consolidated Am Report. Part e a , ayetm and a consolidated Am rerort. Part II will provide a cumulative report by unit separated by item carried in the 0032 and 1133!; cost, for each category of average AD dollar 8°17 . value . Q D Toprovideitudataforaimraftandaircralt D To provide data on 1.th scheduled for reel.- D Part I will provide a nonmflative report, by ‘—v— PM W? Hard o 3.1- - 1 ms (scan) Inc-5355 8.1 anal deity-db AalqrdZea Magnum “39rd - As “($38) 5.1 annualflqrd g Egg-H 325%; 5 . gig"; ‘3'?» 35: $3.53 §§§z§§§ 5‘ H“ 33‘“ 9:32 33 fia-H’i 35:. ii Sigaiéa EL: §§H§ 3‘? 5323’“ .3. "Ct. ”but". aaeaacu DC. '0“ IO. IQ. 226 .mcoauhoounm 3.30.580 33$; pounce: zogom hog I 233.9036 amass 8 massage 333.8 836$ «:0 in GE}: E a 2.3 .8353 codafioo no asuzoflom Houmoa.un .33 25090.50 Mo oodooop vommoooa on $2» 6.38 node» 83.585 Yuoohoo mo Ba 8.33 8. «.6 «\n a: H has uooofipm 8030898 3.23 3:45.“ £83985 Efiafioo calm hpflofio Sula moflfloflmv 83.3.3 $526 so 3-8.38 tango 835$ «:0 «\n E: H has nausea €38.28 8 91.638 3&odu 53.58% Radiance m1 520% $35.." uoflfloflmv 33.385 amass 8 nglsflom $5980 83me «no «\n 52 a has nausea vodfieooo 8 nonunion Honda.“ 5353.6 mmfin 3 8335.6 £6 26 $9. 32» avian." as wro «\n :98 H tom 3 25. 803393“. £5 25 395 886 Slandu 6233 a :2 935m 23805 on. wro «\n 88 a you 3 and. 8.5 aepoaqfiaa a dTmoo.u .omqunoFoflqufloan :58 Ho 8:83 0} age @333 82. 53: meadow-3?.” 3835. no E .5 8E3 8. «so 4} ES; E a .33. .53qu 233: o} 3938 Gigoénon 625......" 9:! €23 3&5 258 no 33.3 8333“. SB: 55.5 33 8.3335 83a a... «no «\u no a have .53qu 85895.: 32 258 3.3.5 31.89%3 .933 an 8.3.9 .353 8. muo 4} 38o a 3%. 23. .33. in» 36.5 3.80438 . l 4 .89 u dial-40. 3.40.0”: :23. in». fiasong £998.. in...“ s... saga»... :E .928. .2 goo-a darn. .330 :oavdfonoqauv one oidg 5 Q3352 .3300 6038936 no 00553.? Jaded?" page odes-opso you 33 H9350 £3568 use 5.3%88 936.3 x23 .353 canovngooe Ho eon-neg 33 5 8.333003 flan—8.6 hp weekends» ed 63E one .3583 oodaodwoa o..— omconooh 25300“ one can!" each.“ o... odd .eoaeooohm on. 3.56393 3 Ba 33308 83:55am. .338 no 833353 925 €938 350.3» Eu 9.55»qu aoflofia 3895. 3133.8 3 53.5. 3:. .o coo." . .38 Edda". «ago gone.» a Hire In: as due on 80m in)...” .ncowwwo an awed mquoofiaevqi odC “advawug .HHH Ho> .0939 gm 3. .afzodou Sofia?" 6..“ .59: on 88% .3 28 8.8m no.5 no.5. ozzgnao at! - econ nH and use no 0 0 33K 5...: 8252.3 2.3.88! 3!: 4” co H on: 7%.. gnhm gasping un- Hohuboo #603 pas—lg n83” gr. thin 50 g 95:001.”. E>m (kg @1805 HE E“ (#19 11332—1 227 .9! PH.- 30 p.380 cage!— 92? a .8 0318.31 3.3.33.3 q. .. o} 8 v.28... 3.. SE «.0 4} E: H has .35.... .32.! H8»... 83.3me «gag . éaes 33.1.59. 5 .3 o gdvdgg dd 0.... .3855 a. 8...... 5 a} g. .33.... 3... 83.8. «no 4} En H 3.2 .533 B as H.580 8.3....me H§~n8 .300." a.“ u... 3 3 3832. 38.9 .58. n8. 3.. 8.89... bong Buick «no «\u no. 4 has 08% 3393 3.5.3.3 3885 HVHmQanS 8.5 .Sbuanfl. I3» 3 .8358". 3.5.... .5 8 9 :33. .E.... 83.25 «to «\u 88 H 28 3.5.43 8 91.63. Helga... .8 85 Ian». 8H :53 .933 I... . sodium .5 5 a; 2.3th . REHE— banana—.130 god: .3 va- a. 3.3.8. 3.. v.33... .355: «to «\u 88 H . . .. :5. .135 3:3. gas 3.3.38 , 38.5 u. 5:5... 3.9—H... .bfion 8.. a... .9...- di H . . .95 3a 8 g. gag “.3... 38 c8 «85 _ .389... H .3. 3.. .353 a... a... 4} 83 H has. :3 .8336... .133 E 8.93%... .gfiaa 33.8 .5 sauna $3. «on . . . 1.5!... Ba 3 33.853 .198. 8.. a... «\n 503. H ha... 8.9 3.35. 3.58 hi game.— 8a.... 3% 8H .85 .93.... .au 3.. .3»... .a «.0 4} 88 H has .93 in. Ila—.8 E H?R«.un8 .833 ail—5o. 3% flianufpfiflHfiafl .a are «\n anon H had .89 Hfiggggg .393 '05 Ho .33 . dung 0A 0953 Audi. nag-on! than.“ 8.33 I a? 33...? no in... .55. .a «6 «\n on. 3 E- H »: 9.8.... 1:8»... 8 in... Edna.— l O n a n . 0 I d I... II... I... a... {g .m loll an... 4.2-33...! ital .3 cl. neuronal-d...» 15:88! no. is mu 3.! 4H .8 N !_ «n8 — . E 8:31:28. g E6 (#3 a; D032-2 228 .bE< on» 3 33 8: 84.5.3 8. .<8 3 8.33.88 5.: «o 9:23 832.8 .Bfiflfiflfl 8 <8 3 E83» 85:3 go <8 8. nodasafiaon 835$ .33 93.52.. .353 8. .8930 ”53000.3 gov—Elan no £93008 non hang.“ on 3.10 modicum .33 3&3» 06:93 O.H. .08 how 3.3. 03.3.3 on. 3.3.9 85¢; 60AM xodnvoou no 301 no 2533 noun. Ivan» 0.3302" no oooflruou 3‘6 3 9033509" non—Faun .oooonha H9380 you no»: on 3 gaining?" 95: 3.3.85 3. .3 3333 has 832$ .00! and 883.363 vogoono 925 093.3 eagle—5 «re 8 «.0 «no «Io Nlo Nlo Nlo “lo .32 E. a page 858 5% <8 a 833m 5% <8 H <\- 88 a <\u 85.688 a in g a d} 38 H <\- 08 o» 82 a .835 <\I duhaboo a0! 0 §0 28 2320 883 123.: be: $50.35 human. 0233 033.8634 <8 v.30 «dado 38.3 <8 Sig 098. own-so pa £03m 9.82 050% 9395 300005 :5. 3.5-38 wag—Em Scan 093. 0.33 3033.5 hugs—5.6 go .3 aha—KO Mel 2— “53.5.5 and to? on 453 0.33 335—8? .338 £38: a} 88 £03 I 383! $34.88 «98.1% 8:34.88 $3.88. 3:33.38 Hola.fln8 H§N§ .flibNéng "33 55 551355??? 8 3 a} 8 3288 33 8o: 835.8 «.6 <\- 4580 89. H Bunsen gun-5x H8080 8.23%.: T8588 . .8avduouhovfl ad 3 can: .3830 902 I hi #868 5 o} 8 .8288 33 89. 83.68 «no in dragon 88 a 333m 3 ~33: H888 3.333 génon .3582! . a.“ avdgnaiflo gun: Adina 3.3.3280 Sin 5.“: :H 23 339$ «Io «\h A25 5 a anoag .. 49.5 I idsm god: Elmsfing .Sflauohoefi 9- 3 oniofim P 83.3. , can: 5 o} no dour—coo." 33 no; «Io «\h am: 4 g 2.3»: H9580 SSH-d3 . .Nng I I C . :8 {gang 1.... an and... 5.... 3...... 3.9.34... ii... a. i It: all .28 mgquonun— E gala—28v g Em (#3 nub; D032-3 229 .nfinn:0Hadaoy macaw mfih mudvsaozd .vowdcda gang“ mndqyoonoo 3% pyoaomoyoa 5? E 23 ooofioyy «no «\n 935 2H H 53 youuoum 2H you p833. yfifiwofi: 53H filaménon .yopodupcoo hp cedanndn mcflon soapaudsuou .823 :23 no: you oauso ES «to {a my a 33 28 2832 .6 Qm 38.38,. .983 268 gutsy yomdqd: and 9Hd>lwm you nfloaaodoqayu Amom uovodmom unapoduadua 25 023583 uo wagon 33 833$ «.0 {a o5 28 E N 58 33qu 23.3 yo§i>na has 3.8“.“ .p08 and .O\m pagan an scan .nnaavducoo fiooyoo 8:: 8988... 5? E 23 ooofioyy «no {a A§\8 E a 38 youufim 833333 238 3.83“ .hHHdoaadabasd yo .noavdmduhoend uo papacy 1 ad oupoooy yopuda undonoooya 23 so 853:8 o. 3.8 ooofioyy «no in ES; E H has youuoam «Safiyy oyooom .253: goooooym 8.83“ .398 3 33 8333 you»! 3888.. 3?on oy. «to {a 898 H 38 25. 283.3 you; Suiné ~38 , .55 you 3% 8?on oy. «:0 «\n #8 A $3 2 8:. £33: E: 3.3“.“ gaging—dun. .uyoayoyfi you 33 .3»on oy. «no {a 88 a his 23. v9. 233: .239qu gun 8.3m.« o Ogflfivflmv :8: "<0 5 33 32.3 uo yon ooofioyy «no {a 93 S .58: £6an :3 £34 a... {o 598: 8.3.1“ .885 33:3 Gauge 3883 ISA ufiloqaom on» 5 38a uoydaoy 253.3 3813 you 2.28 noon uo 233.8“. 33 3:533 .38.:— oy. «no 4} 38 H J58: 8:. 38 you :33 no! :3.“ .ma you 36 coffin 8. «.0 4} «anon a has 25. 833. yooyo noon 8y 6.8... .By you 3:. oqtoyo on. «so 4} «$8 a as :5. £33: 3.825 mm Sifu 6.5 on» 3 33 2x .353 oy. uuo «9.3a 32 be: u 538: £6.35 . 9:26 :83 123.: on: 8.3.3 . I 0 s a I u I ¢ .000 i .05 at? i Hunky.- §nfi g do '8 cog- Epi .2 w p: E . 0032-fl 2250 .eevoo coaaneoxe no age: Aueauumoumv on» ya oyoyyo uo yoaoymoyo on» ooouyo< mug o you 0033. 33.3...» a 5d: '08 .35 no 25 d .3: E on» .353 0.... are «\n 3S5 E 4 .31.: £53 and .813 383:» .33 .nhdvoauobo Aggvdudugfi . . a 3 3303.15 83 83$ no 333 «no 4} ES: E 4 .58: £63 £3 85.3 68.8.83 8.43 .8333... «o In» 3 29 .2 .320 3o! 8 9'3 no 335 «.6 «\n 9&8 a a .3 2 «83 .3 326 and '3 35.33 g. .3338 an In» .5 an .823 so! 8 I3 6... .3 page“ 28 «no 4} 3S: H a 3 28 8} 8'85 inn-3.3 I3 6&9 $3593 23.5... 3 3% 392a 8. «no {u .88 a 2.3 28 .283 89 3A9. . g 3.8 you <8 3 v.33 3 3 33362. .3 .538 28 «no {u “3 a #3 38 3 3 <8 03$. 5. .3333 3 3.3.18 3 nova 36 18333 «a 83585 . .3 .852. mo 8. «o .3 .28 .315 «no 4} E: .n 3 28 3.64 83 5A8. .. ._ . I 0 ’9 . 32‘ II- I. — '3 i g g g I i i B I I 3 i { fig: :5 g fl *— 233 .385 £88 SSH—m , £3.35: 8.: .8» iauuflonfio on on. a 4.29874 T868 H 25. 888m :2 #33 gauge g. «vacuum gm .bopcgfi .8.“ 33 3:93 8. «no in 88 a .3 2 25. 8333 bopgflnfim 682 g. as m .58”: you 3% 32.5 a. «yo 4}. $8 a flaw ads 38 38¢ Ba Eula S.N 5033333935» banana: you hafifipod an.“ 90 3.3 36655 «lo «\n GAE 0 have .50qu v5 huydvod 50H Sig.“ .338 8.38 .2583 123:: 238 23 sec 338.3 bonanza.“ go 3. 383 venous—u no.3 5? page mom 5 32.3 on. «no 4} mam H .028 28 gpamohoufi 23m :5.“ .83 usage 353% you 33 Sign 8. «no 4} mmfln a .350 23. 3.38m mum 8:81" $830353 38.. 2:53 8.. «no 4} $8 a #283 25. «833323 mmfl comb: 338: 8.63. .Eofloauqflp ~38: avian 8. «no 4} $8 H L583 and 30332 08 33.: 3.83 8.31 835: x8: 3. no 33an 83:5 To 4} E2 3 .338: 835$ 33.3 8.3.: gm 8&8. 6.300." you»! 23 go 0,90% a.- 4GB: vapguov and a no 9.3.5.. 335a are «\u mom .. «in use? #5 39H agenda any-«9.38 .2000." no»: on» so 330% 3 41234 3.2.3.2. .333 a no 333 838m «.0 «\n mom 4 Iain £65m 33.3 3% cognac any-«9.38 .uoggqfi 5 No 3.502 d .3 P300." no»... 33 388.5 8 Yfiodfi 36 83 «no «\u E: u .5 3 Eng , 8368.23 38: undo-88m 3A8§n8 .8843 333“ 3 Sufi Sign 33 a no 235 .3 wro 4} ES; E u 3 g .335 33: 259:5 3.3. sandman I . n U a I ( nus-«Mm. gal-1 g Ila-Ion '- .9: Eu... big g m, as: .28 m 8: 8g_ Aggggvggfigfihg [032-8 234 Isazmlua9 or 11. run (consumes SHEET) $5. 3. g. :01. g. .1? Egg E23 ~33 E; E3 E3 E5 E3 E3; " a “‘8 E E E E E E E E E2; E233 E333 EEE “ E EE 3%: SEE. SE3 SEE SEE EEE EEE “ " '“’ " " 3E “E :33: ESE“ E E E3? EEEE E2; Egg. E2; 3;; 3E5 3°“8°"8«!:E gE’AEE’EEEAELngE" E55 3%? EEEE EEEE EEEE EEE; EEEE EEEE EEEE -3‘ 2": Q a a a a a a, ' E . . E ‘ E E E E a > > u } % g g, % EEE E a E EE EE EE EM; 5 5 " E" E" E" a? E" E“ E3 "E E E E E 3 “‘ g. - E E E E < , T E . . g g E E E E EE E E E E: E 3E E 3E E “55 E E E E- ‘E E ' ' ' E E ,. E ’E E? E? E E E? E? EE 3: 3% E? E3 E5 E3 E3 E5 352 .E E E E E. E E E E E E E E E E _, DO32-9 235 Abdul—Em $3 and has nance—x— dedag you . do». .395: Ila.“ an .52.. x03 8 Bataan». 838k .813 .3 383 no gain and koala do 3.3 nofiwroum AGE I gm 8.: I QEBQO 000093.— aodvdug you :30 Jamaal '3 an .8820 323 8 8333.. 8E 39874. n 3%.? all: A8335 n42 3382362 gm $2 and >3 I upon—3m 393m 50H Em $2 3 vggm I g nae-am I59 an as .92 .0385 j. 8&3. ‘ Henna. iE!-ZI aE .. toga 3.2% 33H 8.5:. .26 I in 9! I own—huts 0.39:5 . . 8.319.? new :30 Jim-nus g.“ in 3:50 8.: as: an." .2020 an!— 8 nods»; 002 :2 I anon—um 353.0. 'vH «Oldfi— Aim 8.: I omm\9.5 0039.3.— gflpfll‘ now «.30 :8; g.“ in 92 69(83 and." . 9393 an!» no nods? «GE :2 I 93an avian 59H §.N§ AS I in koala—Iv unconfin— 8335 you 2.3.0 anemia-l I89.“ 03 I in no; ca .9320 no.3 8 33.303... :2 his :H I 9333 333m 5H «clash—fins .36 I is hogv 003955 83433.2. how :00. .3: use.“ 34 £20 in hog and” . 593 no!» 8 039.33.» 002 Aggy 1H I shah—om 333m ’3. Nola—fins A: and .5356 bani—Iv 33AM...— sdadfludbb you :36 Joel—I ‘3 in a 3 .33 on: .888 x23 8 83523. 838..» n can: 5 .. 98.5. 3.23 Ian 8.2.«89 TEE . .8339." no.8 an. .as .8 n 833 no.8 in a: .33 you 9373 301A 3030 3 no 33 0035.5 IAIflIVQE v5.5 you 0.375 3 #9036 mm §.N§ .1? .58 Tea . 8955203283382 HAS: 30§89§§§§EQS.§ O v...” 88.. 583.34 «Sn— E abs—25V g Em (.56 fig 13032-10 236 . #583 I H 000 000.39 05, you 8359.5 3 00000 0509 H canon—.00 . 0003003009 .30 no 93003 003.200.— «Io «\I Age a N .33 .5003 I houndwom "Baggage avg Helg . as»: I :83 HHH 09 H 08 00f?“ M5. .39 080050 05 hp 00000009w HHH and HH 00.209000 0838332 a no 0505 80320 «:0 <- 035 E a 58+ 080% I 033030 83305; .31.: «0:30. .3039 I .030 H 008 0020A 05. now 3.50? 05 3 000000th 00300002» find «.0 $0.303 000.005 «Io avH H b09000 «\0 0&5 :H m 58 030500 I 033000 833389 .310: 3.80. D” 0000930 H8080 madam hon 0.330.380 v.3: 0.330.380 9530 3 30803. 8 38 835a «Io <0 H9580 mum 4 fig 33080 3 3333.0. #836 aqua. 0.3%: E .Aimgfiv 24.->500 n gang: 3 8333 B 388 8 33 835a To @8108 Soqus n .33 £605.30 I 3.51.: 033: 05.8025 3:03. Again 55 E- 95 .oE\Qfi .3 31s 58 Sign 50 05 .80. .0385 .3 8383 3 383. 8 3:. 8022a «Io «\0 02.5 E a t £605.00 .2 I 3.015 .803: 05.8800 .013. .0303 0.00 0013 .80 .128 up I 2823 .33 «203358 00.9.8.5 G0 3050000 you. 300 00E «to among do N Lg g in 090090 00.8005 00% §.N§ .0013 003. up I 23.3 ~03 3.3.0358 0030.3 00.235 8 3086000 you 0000 002 «lo 80:3 33.... fig Aug 0.0020 005908 00g HQIHB.N§ 42 in <5 0 .55 00009.3.— mlnxz 8303.000 you :30 .0000: Ila.“ m . A. an I in $2 05 55 an 0.00050 «.03 00 003.0330 0035.".— a 3%4 Agvg o Ifil 0.0305 I g 00va 'vH Julianna“— .Aalimgvadkav 0000903 mlxz «3%. .30 :30 600.300 I83 n r 34 0500 Sign a: 000 . 00.: 00000.0 803 00 0030.350 003 a 430.874 A5362 0 Ii g >3 I 0.395 050.5 SH #58! mum-43.38 .A'aHaodgoligv 0000903 MI: 3.3.0.4050 how :30 30,00! '3 n 0. A325 '3 dodgy in 03H 3.3050 301 00 00.3.1330 003g a 4.2783 Qonucg o Ii 000E a I fax—0m 03.30 SH §.§ s I 3;: big 0032-11 237 “5 ,J‘ v. .8: fl 8 «12.: «8a— .ngdvodafinp 90mm 90 33 in no? .0H>0H hooHSHHd .58.“... ooooo 9 9.2 no 33 g 3350b“ .BBapounadhp 902 no 33 g 33kg .3380." $9.339 v:- 33393 no 305333 05 no 33 can; .38“; .5 un- finou d? .3 953 SE .934 a wean—33 0 Eu a 39.43.; 4 3&5 no Savage-L a , onuoSum 825an an oggm onIoSIH: 39874... adhooom van—m Ea anonomgms 9.3an an 902 9,3an gm as v.39: agdooouuu afi a 3:8 as 94H a 9.38 #5358: “land. gland. dong. sag.— §«fiu§a a no 335 8% «no {I ‘33 .53qu 832m 8.333 a: «9.3-. .99. a. vegan-3 «833.53 dd. «0 g 8% «no 4} a2» flag 93% Sage Eon 3.43. .983 3 35483 qfidfinafla a mo 9.35 835k «to 4} «Sang 3.30.2 334325. $0! 8.9». T358- HHH a HH 3 . not... :fiuoulfihoflku... llama—naming 30383-3 2.. no nap-fin 8E «to <- AUQB E #5 «Santa . .. .80-Is. 8% 33:8. 8.8—. I o b . . 3...... I... an». “as...“ in... I. fig! E gig. g g; (#3 3...; 1132-12 238 33088 63.8%.» .3 23 cam now «to «\n i Ida. P30 33H asodanom Sufi—qua ‘ ads. A3383 nag-am £8888 cutout you 28 8m 838m «no {a 92 nu... 28 5d; 3.20 8332933 Suds.“ ononooofld cofionfi .3 833?»? 88.3 8. «no 23 4mg .63 on: 28.5 noflfiflpg E884 8.38. «42 .ngoavnooflo Ho .n ”nap-«A 833 Ba 8&3 8 833%.: 833nm To .3989.“ Bomozvqré ‘33 pang 3542 8398a nodoupgoo Slam 6.3.8 93 90.5533 hog hp 353.9088 4\ gm ideas". 335 8 33 836$ To - 82 L33 asopfium 833m fiafiosa 3838 Slammé mnnz .AavH gaggnnoov ands-Bo hp agapoono." m. L33. Sign «Saunas—.5800 can .283“? no 33 has «835 a 39874 30853.2 Ida. gong .. 98.5 3534 p83 ufiflao «quagunoa $2 5.3 3:38 .3 383038. n 33 M88.“ HE .. 3.3.3 Ba .Safingvou. 8 33 an 335$ To ings; 983% .68 98%?” 3 a 3.58 any-Hafiunoa . 385 fig 385 «83 3% 8.: .3“ Yugoaoo on 8. a 3%4 88088.: 3.5 . 25. 338m 38 3.5933. duniénon .3333? 9390 3333.3 982 83380 a go 9:35 835$ are in 4838 982 538 .53qu V Bo: 3.33.8 3333 Enu2&§ . cad ages «8323.2 33.3 :33: 88 o a no 3334 835.": «no 4} PE £6? H8980 Sana-ads 339.8 Houafiénoq .885 3828 833558 egg? HovH pas—tog 05 5 avg? 332:3 9:33 you 3813» 3523 go mflafluaoo 33 conga avian 8. «no 4} $8 5 25. 3312» £80 «£2.38 .3: 5 an $2.me goua— vovdgo unsaved hang and «.2500: mix: 38368 34:3 3 .8“ as: and 3 Lu m £88 3515. . hpanau its...” Be 3329 £38: a :5an 8 208535 _. 335$ 303%: ug- £34 #88 8.3.38 I O o . ‘0 it: .1 9.... an». fig .53.. I. 3...... .; a... a .5 infi firm gals—.209 gm E5 (bin 8...; 0032-13 239 AFLC? 30‘?" 3.3 833.3 a. no .38 3390080 3.53.39 you 33 Salsa .8?- n no 8.3 8 38 E «no 4} E: .393 833253 8.388 cal-.8 u§.«§ v .8893“— ; u 38.3.73 303i «\u . 3. flouguogtg «no E: 3i managers; 815.38 T only; .83 :5 a $5 3 2 £25. Baa 832.8!» new 3838. «.0 25.38 B: 8g 33838203 4.8.35 .Ioduahfiubd 0% 3 Sunni—Sou you 28 alga: 3E oxm .- .353 8. «no 4} Ba 28 3.56 5.8 o} 8883! Eng nomflvflb .35 c5 .3 SS 3 z 3.88: 8 no 383.3 you 3:. .358 8. wru :53 8 E: g 880 83138.3 .38 3 «8&8.— .83?33 .2 3.88s 3 383.383» 8m 3:. .353 8. are «all .89. :3. 8312383 .38 .18 6.8.5: .3338 I YES-noguogsgg \ E- 0835 £8.53ng . I . o I! am an...“ is: flier... a... a .. 327$; M241; 240 Change 3 AFLCP 300-3 .00! 3.»...8. .38 .098 .098 .0200 .033 .038 .38 .88 5.8 .58 .38 .030 .438 .080 .4030 .080 .28 3... 03.0.00. .3. 020 0.0.8 0...... 0558... gt .583... .3... 0. 0.3.8... .. 0...... 0.0.0.5.... .033. 0.... 20. a... .03.». no... 00.0 3.0.00.0... 000 .0000000 00.!" 00000 .303000 00000 0000000000 003000000 .5030: 0000.00 00 0000 000 00000000 .0008 .33.». 3.. 0.0.. S o. 30.3 .8080. 0.0.0.0.. .00 .0000». E3 E3 000E .5008 .0 .404 00000000000 000 00 000000000000 000000 ”00000000 000000000 000 4:4 000 0000.3 .0000 000.300.0000 000 00 000000000000 000 000000000 3000000 000000000000 no 00000....— 0.“ I 000000“ A3 .000 .05” .0020 0000 .0000.“ .00 0000 00 0000 0000 300000 30000 .«0 000000.? 0000000030 00.0 0002 #0000 000 000030) 00 0H3 000000.000 00000 3.4 900000 000 000.0000 0000000000000 000 000000000 0000000.." 00.30000 .00 0000000 25 0 30.000000000300080 00 00 00000000 0003 000003 AS .088..— 05035 .5 5 0.0.... 000 000 00000 0000 .00 000.030 00000 0050000 00000.00 0.000 0g .000 .02....» 00.0 00000 0000000000 .03 00.0 0300.“ 00000000 5.0.000 000000 0." 000 000000000000 0000000.." 3. 000 00 00.30000 3.30000 00m €010.0— hn0000§00 000 000000000000 000 000000000 00000000 «0 00000000000 .00 00000.0— 009 I 000008 AS .2628 .. 08...... o... €3.03... 033 .0. a. .33... .. .0300... .0. .0008... .05...- .0 .30. .0. .03.». 3.. 3.00.83. 3 .03.... 0.0.80. .30... 3.3.5.3 .0300. 0000000 000000 00000 0030.00» 00009000 Ana 00H 4000a 4:4 000 00 000050 003 00000 hd 000 00000000 3000 .8... a... J... .05 .Aomfiv 0000.... . 0.32.0.3... u 0.33.025... a 0.33.008... 2.... 3... 09.008 00000 .00.“ 0500 5.0.000 300 0 30.30000 000030000 00 IH 000 00 000.000 000050000 .nng 00H .Avnav 343 any I»... 0.33.3.8 0.. .9508 0.30 0.0.0... .08... 0...». 0.20 .5 3 30.3000. .080... 0.3. S. 0.. 0.33.88... :5 «0.0.0.... 0...: m. .3 0.. .5 0.2: .80 .08.... 0.3. S. 08 3.. 00.0.0.0.- «03.0.08 .0. 00.0.3. 50. 0.8.0. 05.. n. .38... 3 0.000... .0 .0 A0303 .33. 00.0.0.0.- 021.... .2985... 8.80 a .0. 0. .08.... 0.0 . .0 3.305 03.08... 0500... .0. no... .30. .04 00. .. .0080.» .n 43.8. 080. .0. .250 a... .8 I3.» .75 .5 .E .505 .0 A035 0. 3.0.0.. 380 0.. .0...” .000 0.. 3908 .0002. 004 38 02.4033 .500» A DILLBB-l 241 ohm“ nlhoh 0.5 uni-OHH?“ 83. a.“ 600.03 ‘ .mEHmHRmm a gang 4. .3813: a 0:3: as... :35 38.336 .333 .458 .328 «a 233-8 83 in 82. a? 3» .8 30388.. on 2? .825... in. .88» 2528.3 a! 8m: 84 .m . .39. n... 1... :98 £38 £38 .433 .388 .88 .38 5.8 .38 .R8 .8 .28 .38 .38 .28 .58 3% .23 0.85 groan '35 $58393 hon Ina-bu «Man 83 3 328..— ufla man-a 5533. Mo 80383 on» you I329»:- 03» 3 08nd and '3:- 800 long 803% .8030; .88». an- 80338...» M m 8.3.35...- oHC 3 .3333 3 33...? 38 .85.. an Ira «8.: 8582. 5.58..- .a .6828 2.. SE .n on. DMBB-Q 242 gingizigfla; 3.: M03 ml 1. 8 8 i .aaoauoanqaua cmumouxo Add ma0hn Ada) .haopauamoa wadnnuh and mn4nn non\Nnon dosh. "Mao: .nOHpounndhu «Anapuo choooh to: find noapmanOan pudd Hoop» unopua and: vacuum: cud voufluo noon opus Avast .opo .whmunnahp In." Juno-lg» .9320 303 .2343 unnasuwh wud>Ho>nH auhoouh nowpodnqahu nonn.Nmon 3H.» 5H: 8...»... 93” .HH 23 85.258 «so .28 H H83 an: 93.3 638.8ng 38 E \EBQHQ r .382 8-8.. 3 3313...... 8H... «.9 .33 H 85.8 93. En H.538: 35.93 dlhouud Hopoa 3009» van pound nonnflnhah .uvhoo¢u uoouu.auonahaa« an» :« anuaahomad . 353.. 23.38: 3 22.. £5: 8.38.. 8333....» o3 : 8.. v3.2... :2: 288‘ 83.88 Iain H888 .2535 2... 8E9... «6 .58 H SHE was... 6.3.9 3.5.8 Saab—H \Ekanfin .upav nanaouonaua «3.5.533 .H 3 H.385 3.. 33a... Anubhmnm nonamxumnoo. no 8333.33 Hag... a .33.. 838.... «.6 .343 H ~83 was. 3.3 25:. ~83 85.38 .ncoduoaunuha Aufianavuo uneven and nonm.~non n33 H8380 .2... 8 HHa you 882.8 288.4 \ «8 an odoroa and mum confide vouH>Ohm «so mMJHa H Hann nmHo>nw anowuou non -23.... 39.8.. 3.. v3.2... 3H8... on «.0 in H SHE PH: 20538 I» 98 .naowpoanaaua . unuoooh 0000089 09 no Ham! on «and anal . mn.Nnon nominal and .num .-\m pnwhhau poodhoh \ non. . om B .32... E 5353 «HH.H o... «6 .S H H.HH: mm: ”8.8% «E >35. 98 . a J s I u‘ o J. 1. '8 “In!" a; .85....- uuflfluflluwc 8.32.08 #3.“.- 8. UNI“..- rash... 3 EFF .8 bl! 3.3. ¢ E3 at: . n'lllll null! all...) \IQQIIIIHIE‘ * L :u:em<..n=uanamu 02Habo¢ 9:4.anzH .aHnu «xi BEEN?! 2413 0.) 43.3 00000 00.007000 0.0 00003300 00 00 00 00 0000 0000000000 00 {0 #0000» on 00000000 00000 000 uuauuuHH 090050 Ileana amopxmmon Nlu 0.300.:Mu“ 00 . 0000 04 con-000.0 .00Honasu 00H¢> :00: man no 0.300 030000 00\000 0000000 0000.000 0.300% 0 00 00 000 M0 0000 0 0 no 00 . . I |I“ 5 000.00 “0800 00000000 .0 0000.800 0 i . QM" . . ~ .0000 ., Eili‘zisig . .0000 . nmon No 000000 00000035" 0.0-000 00 .0000.“ .00 00000 000 000050 «.0000 000000. 000000000000 00.030000 H\D mo 000000 «non .00 000000 0 00 4 93.3 hp 000000000 000000000000 00m 0090500 «no .nm8 H.HH:— mgo {a 35E. mum—Bo mug—58 A\m Houdimnjn .03: .580 .930 gau00000000000 .omon . 00030000 000000 00 0000 0.3.000 0000 003.9000 000000000000 on“ 00000000 «:0 238 Man MAE. \.pnon\.nmon on. macaw—.0838 Roi—amino .000000 0.0000 000.3000 00 0000000000 GM 00.50000 000000000000 .00 00.n00oduu000 0,300.3” 5 .000000 050000000 000 .fi 000 000.3000 «:0 u in H.HH:— ubothum 8H8: mug: 500m anmmo «otgnénon .aupuhn unapuoaau guanosaoum .mHon op asunH hHHuanu on HHu: noHa: coauouuoa 300! H0 000000.330 100000000 000.3000 «:0 H! N.HS. Bog.— 08398 0.55 533 4485569. H0:H4m.,~m8 000§I 030030000 000050 0H0000o0 000 huaHHnwuoanooaH 000000 00 0m¢H0 00 00040 unassumm 000000 00.300000.“ 00 0000.000 0930 000.3000 «:0 23.53.25. gum mum: molnonmnjn .30000000 Cami 000000.000 00000 «0 00.0000 0 00 000000 04300.3” 03 0000003000.“! .00 00000000 00000000 «:0 a in H.HH:— g 983 legals: ..¢on.n§m4.nn an 000000000 00 0&3 000000000 00000 00 33933 bash 5800: 00530000 0000 00 00000000 0 00000000 «:0 u in HH.H: €050 Hog 0098 055. mOIHmH—mmjn .0 “A0 coauuaaoans no unannoooun 0HH¢0 0.00.0.0 000000. :Haa Houucao 1 000020: 00000 0000 . 0000000 000000000 Mo 0000500 000% «.6 gm .. mu H.HH:— g .3 E 030533 «Guam—unfla— .0000 No 0000030000 00.0 00000 0 00 000000 000 0 n 0050000.." 00 0000000000 haHuu 0H 00000.0 0000000 0H0: Houaaoo -00000 00000000. 00 00000000 000H>000 «:0 00000 n 00 Holman—flag.— 305030 01533-1. 244 Chunge 3 NH&£;EQ:3 .filtlsunxaiiainiad-Ilt.nlnfllari .0 3‘5 3 Icon and .voppfiansmou and cwpowhuoo wn hm: A0009. Empmhn kuunmo mnp hp wdfimmmuohn ounaooua can» muohuo new: mcowpom 03¢: >406 OHIO-.04 CII‘QI O U I unnwup mo0hm «:0 0m. .GOfipowanduu nmadnmunm whooou Ho weapon ad waAhdema hmnazc xooun on mcwcflwphoa «and pufia xUOpn pampASO wad myopadc xoopu umawfiuamqua mo psopcwua ouw>oum ~-o am: .uuonasn xoopm uonfi Mdano: ho vmwmapcmqua no psoucwua mvw>0hm Nuo mm .voppflanzmmh new umaowuhoo ma hm: .Amoonv Empmhu Huhpnoo an» AD wcwnnwooua muzaowha was» mucky» spfix macapowmcmup wocmampcfima «poo paHH xoopu no mcfipmfifl a nocu>oum «no omz .vovpfianaumh cam vapowhuoo an hazy .muohum Gwmpcoo awn» acowuom v 04m nonoaoua no wcwumaa a monfi>oum «-0 omz .xwm .muwpaflc wapaofianawv Macon vowmauzcvdn: mo uaoucwum mcw>0hm «nu xx\n .vouufiansnau vac vmnomhhoo on nqu .nupahn ome ms» nwsouz» wag .zwm\:H InumOOHQ pcm>ohn was» acowpflvnoo hohho manaowana0hm «:0 ::\Q .vouufiansnmh and Umuomuhoo .uonouamoou on ma: .aofipaoau Aswm\zH twpcoua ovzaooha was» muchhm mumu an“! oHnmowHQa0hm «:0 cm a «Hnwofimaua .noaa\mnon\mmoa\mmoa ca pa mm¢fla vmnmwdnmpmm muuoomh Ho coaumowhfipw> you a 0ha oa Nno you .émo: - I l W :8 I'II.‘.UIC H IflutO .08 HAH gage . ratio.o.3:» fi diphlxuai r lefl¥6 2415 3.4800 2 .8!- do 5:. .8 Ix! not 393»: .3»; an M35 «HE. Gian: moan mdummmuOQ as» aw Hmcoauah o no: ma <4mon awn: houawnfimaommoh was hdhoahom no hpwawpwmcoamou 2H was Nmon finned an» coax: how mdwh mocwhmmmm macho hmpmq: ago :H mhmnasn xoopm Ham :0 uncoou oocmuomwh mmouo m muw>0hn oh .uhmu om cu m: 0hm ch .9hq cs .mcowawthhounw cohvlundn: no a: 3DHH0M 0» and mhmaaus u and an no nmwcdzo unwa xooum awaunmhu Op .Aofldhm Goa. muonann xoouu no awn: uavhooou on 1:4 Haven 0:» mpoavv on .onm wcaufisuuu munoouu Ho omauaoouoq no cowpmcfiaumpou upfiahon can upswing“ noncu uhouuh Mo onaao» gawk pcoam can wcH>0hm whmpazc xooun vowmapcauans Ho usouzwha muw>0hm .voapfiapnamu vca umpoohhoo ma has .Aboonv aback» Hahpcoo 0:» ha wudmnoooua unflaomhq can» muchuo an“: anbdpommndhu coauzp quSm can hvwawna amuuasououca Ho :Humwa a amcw>oum Nno N30 N10 .mmon Am¢an\um¢aa \msoa\aaoo <¢mon .mnon\.aaog .émo xxx .zmm mapaOfiHm <. :x\q om Maxmwl Hug warble HAHdn :p.1 If: :8 OBSPC >¢Od 0.8.3.¢ KID‘S! O U I t .hII.O.U I. DItOD .08 wm<fi mmh is: b. 2:. .g is 0:4 xP , 246 Eilissniggflg ands .oaoho annua: wasp u¢wnuso an: nods: can gun: a an vouuooou ma «no: :22: you 08883 $96 mmfin 3» ca aw Ban xooun pnwuhfio Sumo pom Gama 9:030 can «vac ousuwompsm\omcdno Sufi .38 33:8 x03» 3E5 on «.6 .mmon a » m3. mfioonm E a: mafia 3.293 .acowpoaov no namadno hogan: unsound whooou x000» otapoua can hogan: xoooo and no you: a ma couhoooh Chuup 3 -. 3 m in :3: 8935 38 9H 93 «-0 :33 H a E: $3.833... ofiaomnfia Hence". ~83 838a ca 85%;. 32 fig Sammie .<:< ponponu on 42¢ Haooa an» Bonn mdauahwwa aw hufiafinuonomnuh noupnwwoa coal whopasn xoopo No name: voohouoh wawhaaunovu vuoooh a «:0 <2? c=H2H0hn ca mum \amméan H u E5. ammung. .5384 28.8355 mace mum: 35:93 :F 1x. mm fl .9. 2.8. 3.... 5 Dlflflkfl 247 Igiogggzl..gala0<53 a. I... Hun 330‘ 03-4 .ondno zoum «nu hméHn H Human nude mzo vomwmm0hm «no :2\ aka H HAHonm muo mmJHQ-wo H Megan; soosszm 20Hao0ha as «no mo& IZKQ w M aboaszn nmaommm< mozmmmmmm.mmomo JoumazmméHn .apau owqano node nH.noHondnmuoan and «and unuaamdnaa GH gonna .mspwum unounao ho H - 2H can no howdan! Huooq honvnd hmmdnmz ho H a Ema mmHoz¢3 3% . . . H314”: HE: Eb -EHE.gca . 3:3 2...: _ 4\ ,I'III ’IID ill I l} \ - ,I“-’>OI \CI! l-..‘ R ‘n‘! Ill-E Dlhflifl 248 54 exited updated for input to the 800 cmputa tion. provides affected by M ssin; or errors detected in ' by logistics ofD03 prine t ofpurgedoverage records where Slll and/or an changed. on are e a in; and/ D105 3m for other “As and 1311.33 and 1311.3? records logistics transfer. 1y M data which has been AFLC prepared sac-ca. with Quarterly sea-ca data to detenaine sed sing file . culpari Sfl,and can et/levels and usage data. applicable to previous quarter dability of the daily reported rejected, susgended in the proces of quarterly Ian-ca. edited and updated for input to Transaction Data Records for non/9039. those records affected transfer. e n ”ET-us ass :1 0'2 Provides shread-out of 0033/0037/ID58/ I l (:4 Provide sun, 37in and/or sun for 0-2 Provides overhaul contractors c-z Provides quarterly SBA-OR data for D“? ' anus caaa 0-2 Provid reco site. 0-2 Provid list exceptions 6-2 Provides Bil-.32 Quarterly Asset/Level] c-2 Provides printout of records proces 0-2 Provides sea-ca data which has been 0-2 Provides current 301), ace ems «cause ‘I me Lofifl sacrum and?" 1“ m’ MEL! 1 1111.3! QTlI-I 1 W2! mm GTE-Y 1 m {For DIM!) m1 1 11062! M! 1 91103" "E =3: ‘ -n=P TAP! TAPE TAP! (For 11]“) 7”" ”I "- W “T” MRI-I 1 D101“ QTRLI 1 D101. . QTRI-I 1 0110-32 TAPE TAP! TAP! PRINTOUT QTELI 1 m 1111.3? AID mum CHIPITHS 1 mm“ . mammals rm nil-am A! or too assu- mom Imam 0mm. com-moron nun: DIABM-Ol sea-ca REJECTS DMBW DATA FOR TRAISFEB WU‘ ‘WW DID/83¢! ] 1311-33-9 3 Bil-.38 ARE EU! an AS [IDICA '4? IDENTIFICA monument-0am.“ HISTOK! * WHEN D032 Duane-.1!) ‘ on sea a- common Ian-am 933an com sea-ca nit-3W cum-r comm snacn DlhBBQSl-Ol MR STATISTICS APPENDIX D PERCENTAGE FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONSES TO PART II OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE mm.a NH.Q m.um uwe q.ua oma n.ma HOH o.m . 4d O.H 0H >.H ma m.H HM J NH om.H wo.o m.w© Noe 0.0 Hm o.w we m.m 44 O.H 4H m.q mm m.N Hm m HH Om.H m®.m m.qm woe N.oH NJH m.oa om m.n 4m O.N ma N.m 4N d.N ma a CH NF. 36 9.5 0% s.m om is m m. m a. m o.o 0 HA m m a HO.H mmé m.mw oom Ema mo «.3 03 H.ON wfl 41m 4m mg. mm on mm mm m 91H 4N6 0.0N. men 0.0 02. o.m mm 0.0 m4 HA m H.N ma 9w 3 3 N. mm.H o#.m o.m4 NNm u.ma mo O.NH No N.NH H9 O.N HN 0.0 we H.o <4 mm m qo.N m§.4 H.Om mHN w.NH 00 o.mH 50H 0.0H 04H w.N om N.m om N.HH 4m mm m m: odm mfim 5m ES m3 9.: 8H 53 mfi NA om 9m mm >6 3 mm 4. $4 3A «.3 3w mum; m? 93 09 5.3 03 NA om m3 Hm o.m am 3 m EA RA 0.5m mow ma: «ma wt? moa 0.3 8H N.m um mi em 96 mm mm m 0H.N om.¢ w.mm 00H O.HH mm «.ma HHH m.wa aaa N.q om H.NH cw m.mH maa um H .>on camz m .02 w .02 R .02 N .02 m .02 R .02 M .02 mason .02 .unm Imom new» A 02 Imosc bhammwowz ahmmmmomz mpmmmmom2 hhmmmoomz >Awmmoowccz hummmmomCCD zhwmmooosca hampsaomn< Cosmo mgo> mmfiflpwEOm 0m #02 mosflpwfiom :mpmo hhm> hampzaomn¢ Hm: no hm: AS 1: AS 3v Amy 23 Ad fiHH ammpw MBHmmmomz Bopoomm .mzfifimwm mm< mMJHD 22< Nmom .Noon amp OB mMmzommHm mo onBDmHmamHD mU¢HZMommm 92¢ HoZHSOfimm mm mHm¢H 249 250 HO.H um.4 n.0H HMH m.HH Ob 0.0 5O <.wm mmw O.N OH o.m ON 0.0H mm Hm mm HO.H OO.¢ m.ON OMH N.HH O> m.o mO m.wm OON m.m pH 0.4 mm H.OH Om mO 4N OO.H b<.d H.OH OMH m.NH Om 0.0H NOH H.ON NON m.m mm q.m om m.NH 00 mm mm mm.H un.a O.mm nOH u.MH OOH n.4m OOH 0.0H m4H O.N 0H H.u wm w.m JO OH mm mm.H mO.q N.HN MmH m.qH OOH 0.0H mMH 0.0N 05H O.q mm H.O dd 0.0 H5 4m Hm OH.N Nm.4 4.HN mmH O.NH qo m.mH OHH O.HN qu m.m 4N ¢.m NO m.>H mNH OH ON mm.H mm.q 0.0N uwH S.OH NNH n.0H HqH m.ON wdH O.m NN u.O oq N.m OO OH OH NH.N Om.¢ 5.5N NON O.HH mm m.OH OHH N.mH MMH >.N ON N.m OO 0.0H NHH OH OH mmé RA. osm gm 3: OS 5.: 8H udH m2 m.~ S m4 mm O.N. Om m S mo.H ¢>.4 4.mm wnH 0.0H m4H N.OH OHH N.OH OMH 5.4 mm m.O Hm 0.0H mu m OH bO.N om 2002 R .02 R .02 R .02 N .02 R .02 m .02 R .02 canon .02 .uum Imam Soap 02 Imoda hummmoooz mpwmmoowz 290mm0002 hhwmmoooz hhdmm000202 haummooocCD hnwmmoooccm mHodeomn< copmo zhw> moaapoaom mm #02 moaHpoEom cmvmo 2no> hHoszomn< he: go Adz E G; E 3 3 3 3 AconcH¢:00v mm mumdfi 251 S.N 3m «.3 O3 4.0 we do 3 90 ok. O.m 3 O.m 3 H.NH mm m mm OO.H 4H.4 O.NH OHH H.m mm O.m HO O.Hq NON 4.m MN >.< Nm 4.0H NHH NO 5m Nm.H MN.O N.OO Hus N.>H ONH m.O Om o.O Hm MO.H NH m.H HH O.H mH a On NO.H mm.m O.mm HON H.OH HmH N.mH OHH m.NH Om m.m mN m.m OJ O.m N4 HN mm NO.H H¢.m m.O¢ qON N.OH OMH O.4H OOH O.NH um O.N HN m.4 mm 0.0 m4 mH dm wb.H m4.m N.N4 pom 0.0H mmH O.MH mo m.MH mo O.H 4H o.< Om O.m H¢ mH mm m¢.H ON.O 0.00 Mme m.NH No m.> mm O.m HO O. O O. O m.m ON OH Nm O§.H OO.m m.m< 04m 0.0H moH H.m JO N.mH mNH m.H O O.N pH O.m HO om Hm ON.H NO.m O.mq mam 0.0H mOH 4.0 OO O.NH ONH H.H m O.N pH u.m OJ mm on OO.H mb.m O.Hm 4pm 5.4H OOH O.m mO 0.0H mHH H.H w m.N mH m.4 Hm mN ON NO.H m>.¢ 0.0N OmH m.4H mm 0.0H wO O.Nm HNN O.H MH m.N pH O.NH Hm OO mN HO.H mm.4 0.0N 40m H.Hm Ho N.OH 45 H.Hm OHN O.N 4H O.m HN N.OH 45 Or 5N HO.H wm.¢ 0.0H de m.HH O» 0.9 NO H.Om me O.N OH O.m ON 0.0H mm OO ON .>om 000: R .02 R .02 R .02 m .02 m .02 R .02 R .02 oncoa .02 .upm Imam 00H» 02 Inodo Ahsmmoooz mnwmmoooz 290mmwowz zpammoooz hhdmmoomcdb AhmmmoomCCO hhmmmooocc: mHoHSHomn< cwpmo An0> moEprEom 0m p02 moEHpoEom Gouge Aho> hHopsHomn< has no hm: E T: 3 3V 3 AS 3 AvosnflpcOOV mm mumdfi 252 m>.H NO.H 0.0N qu O.MH om 4.MH No H.Nm 4mN O.H HH O.m mN N.OH ON om Hm ON.H 00.4 O.mN ONH O.mH mOH n.mH OOH n.0m HHN m.H a m.m ON O.m mm mm Om 84 m: N.m: 92 SH E 9.3 mg 2m Rm O.H a N.m N... 0.: «m N... E Oo.H Hm.a N.mN omH m.o 4O m.HH mm 0.0m mmN m.N ON N.m NN o.MH am pm we mo.H Nu.q m.oN HON o.m OO m.o JO n.qm qu O.H MH N.m NN O.NH Hm OO 54 Jo.H NO.m O.mm Noe O.HH Om O.m mm N.OH ON O.H MH 4.4 Nm O.m mm mH O4 o>.H mm.m O.mm OON N.OH NHH N.HH up N.mN OOH O.H u m.N OH H.N 04 Om me mO.H mm.m >.Mm own N.NH mNH O.m mO b.NH No 5. m m.H HH N.m mm 5H 4O N:.H mN.O m.m> NOm H.o mO H.m mm H.m Om m. m o. O N.m NN 4m m4 mO.H 5H.O m.q> mos 0.0 Oq H.N OH v.0 OO o. o J. m 0.0 «O HO NO 0O.H mH.O o.qb mOm 0.0 He N.N mH n.m OO o. o 4. m 0.0 m< mO H4 amH $6 N.mm 8m 93 SH H.HH mm N.OH t. m4 3 m.m 4w 9m 3 4w 3 m H H O o O H be mm .>on 0002 m .02 R .02 R .02 m .02 m .02 R .02 w .02 00:00 .02 .Opm Imom 00H¢ 02 Imoso mhdmmooo2 mummmoooz hhdmmoomz 200mmooo2 mhammoomcnz hhwmmooocca hhdmm000003 hHodeomp< nopwo kno> mmEHpoEom mm #02 mmaflpoaom copmo muo> hHodeomn< an: no hmz 3 GO 3 3 3 A8 3 Avosqucoov mm mumdfi 253 w Hm.H om.¢ m.Hm mmH n.4H mo m.mH OOH H.Nm mmm o.m om N.m . ea m.0H mu o4 Om on.H Nm.4 m.MN NOH H.OH NHH N.OH OHH 0.0N HON m.N ON m.N OH O.m mO OH mm 3.18.4 «Am E 0.3 8 0.2 a 2m Sm .5 S in .a 03 .3 S a HN.H mm.4 m.4H mm 0.0H Hp H.NH mHH 0.0m mvN N.m NN N.m NN N.HH >5 mm mm OO.H Hm.m 0.0M A OMN O.NH mHH m.>H HNH O.MN HOH H.H m m.N OH m.m um m; Nm .>09 :00: m .02 m .02 m .02 R .02 R .02 u .02 R 02 canon .02 .Opm loom GOHp 02 00050 husnmoooz mpanmoooz Anammoooz humanoooz husmnoooacm husmmooonc: hhemmooons: hHousHomn< covmo muo> moaHpoaom om H02 neaHpnaom 00990 hue> thoanonn< an: 90 hi: I E GO 5 3O 3 3 E 33.30.88 mm as. APPENDIX E PERCENTAGE FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONSES TO SYSTEM EFFICACY QUESTIONS, PART III OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE con O H ns¢‘ O.NN can: 33.2385 NH 3 3H Endgames OJMO> O.H O.m ¢.mH hamHo mmmHmmD O. O H N.m4 Hummmb mumpsoomCH m H.m H.OH opwndoo< H3532: DJIILIIflMWI. .llleHfl HH35. MHmEmnpxm AHHHAMHHO Amnpo map NHHSMHHO Hmaonpxm m.m O.m m.bN mmOHo mnonmD O.H O.H mnmwx‘ Hummus opaHSOOOCH mww H.H MASH opwhdoo¢ 32:35 m . HH H . H H. 3? 385 mHHmSmHHKm amwwm nonpo 0:» thmmHHm NHQEUHHKM H.H 3 N.m. nOHH N.HH .13 ml. lgfiHlo mmoHom: N.N N.N H.N 0.0H 0.0H .4213 HH.OH Human: opmnnoomcH .q .fl O .HH m . N. O .HH H .OH O .Hm N .OH 0.5.325 NHN-THE: m.m On Hfi H.HH 93 0.3 «.3 5an 325.3% 390 £235 Ego 25 AHIflmHHm 330 flmfipfia .HO NCO gospHoz <§Hmo egg MogHE Pamwm mmiuHQ BE. 09 9.528% 5852: EH ho zoEmeHQ Huang mw