DECISION CLASS, LINKAGE AND SEQUENCE IN ONE CENTRAL-SATELLITE DECISION COMPLEX: STUDENTS’ SUMMER OCCUPATIONAL CHOICE Thesis for the Degree of M. A.. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY NANCY McCLAIN. BEAN. 1968 I III; IIIIIII II II I III III III I ABSTRACT DECISION CLASS, LINKAGE, AND SEQUENCE IN ONE CENTRAL—SATELLITE DECISION COMPLEX: STUDENTS' SUMMER OCCUPATIONAL CHOICE by Nancy McClain Bean The purpose of this descriptive study was to explore class, and linkage relationships that exist between a central and its complex of satellite decisions, to explore the sequence of satellite decisions crisscrossing among task areas, and to compare the findings with a previous study concerned with the central-satellite decision complex;: A central decision is recognized by its generation of several satellite decisions which are made to complete its action. Students' summer occupational choice was considered to be the central decision in the decision complex under study, Seventy-four Michigan State University students enrolled in HMC 331 courses completed a self—administered questionnaire, Data analysis of the central—satellite decision complex revolved around three conceptualizations. First, all decisions were classified as strategic, synonymous with central decision, and the satellite decisions as tactical, policy, program, and control. Decision linkage, the second conceptualization, included three components of form, scope, Nancy McClain Bean and range. Forms of decision linkage are divided into series, radial, and compound with further subdivisions in each form except compound. Both class and linkage designations were based on decision content. Lastly, sequence of satellite decisions was viewed in relation to the total central-satellite decision complex. A decision profile, an adaptation of a Mercator map, was used to diagram the central—satellite decision complex. The strategic decision was placed at the top of the decision profile, and the satellite decisions along with sequence numbers in bands underneath it. Results indicated that of the 1236 satellite deci- sions reported by the 74 respondents, 44 percent were classified as tactical, 37 percent program, 17 percent policy, and only one—half of 1 percent control. The mean for all satellite decisions reported by the respondents was 16.7. The variables of age, educational level, students' major, and summer occupation tended to affect the number of satel— lite decisions, Seventeen combinations of linkage forms appeared in the decision profiles, The following forms were reported equally by 30 percent of the respondents: 1) single radial and 2) single radial, multiple radial, single series, and multiple series in combination. Nancy McClain Bean Scope was the linkage component used to describe the number of satellite decisions in the bands of the decision profile, Approximately 74 percent of the decisions were in Band #1, 20 percent in Band #2, and 6 percent in Bands #3, 4, and 5. Range describes the number of bands through which the satellite decisions extended beyond the central decision, About 40 percent of the decisions extended through two bands, while 34 percent extended through three bands, The longest linkage range extended through five bands, Decision aammume is the chronological ordering of satellite decisions following the central choice, More deci— sions sequenced #l or with low sequence numbers were made in the task area of Housing, followed by Transportation, and Clothing. The highest sequence numbers (number assigned to decisions made farthest timewise from the central choice) were in the task areas of On the Job followed by Leisure, Decision class, linkage and sequence were analyzed in the following areas: 1) Clothing, 2) Housing, 3) Meals and Maintenance, 4) Uses of Earned Income, 5) Transportation, 6) Leisure, 7) On the Job, and 8) Other, In conclusion, the content of the central decision does affect the satellite decision classes, and decision linkage, and may affect decision sequence in a central- satellite decision complex, DECISION CLASS, LINKAGE, AND SEQUENCE IN ONE CENTRAL—SATELLITE DECISION COMPLEX: STUDENTS' SUMMER OCCUPATIONAL CHOICE by Nancy McClain Bean A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Home Management and Child Development 1968 r ‘._o I ‘1 ,4 'r: ‘1‘ \ x-l ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to express her appreciation to the Chairman of her Guidance Committee, Dr. Jean Davis Schlater, for her understanding, patience, and guidance of the re- search and author. She is appreciative of the help and thought provoking challenges given by the other members of her committee, Dr. Beatrice Paolucci and Dr. Jay W, Artis, Also, the author expresses a special appreciation to her husband, Fred, for his help and to her parents who inspired this educational pursuit. In addition the author wishes to express her thanks to her independent coder, Ellen Voland, for her time and help and lastly, a thanks goes to the HMC 331 students for their cooperation in this study, ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I INTRODUCTION AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK Introduction . . . . . . . Definition of Terms , , , . . . . . . . . . . Conceptual Framework . . . . . . . Objectives , , . . . . . . Assumptions , . . . . . II REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . Decision Classification , . . . . . . . Decision Interrelatedness , . . . . . . . . . Decision Class and Interrelatedness Research in Home Management . . . . . . . III METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Selection of Central Decision . . . . . . . . Selection of Sample , . . . . . . . . . . . . Instrument . . . . . . . . . . . . Collection of Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . Analysis of Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reliability of Data Analysis . . . . . . . . IV DESCRIPTION OF THE SAMPLE . . . . . . . . . . . Demographic Characteristics of Sample , . . . Students' Summer Occupation . . . . Rank Ordered Reasons for 1967 Summer Occupational Choice . . . . . . . . . . . . V FINDINGS . . . . . . . . . . Decision Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . Decision Task . . . Decision Linkage . . . . . iii 30 30 31 32 33 33 41 43 43 46 52 55 55 62 66 Chapter Page Decision Sequence , , . , , , , , , , . . . . . 74 Comparison of Findings With Plonk's Research . 94 VI SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 Summary of Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 Implications of Study . , , , , , . . . . . . . 106 Limitations of Study , , , . . . . . . . . . . 109 Implications for Research . . . . . . . . . . . 112 LITERATURE CITED , , , , . . . . , , . , . . . . 118 APPENDIX A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 APPENDIX B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 iv LIST OF FIGURE AND TABLES Figure Page 3.1 Decision Profile . . . . . . , . . . . 35 Table 4.1 Marital Status by Age . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 4.2 StudentS' Major . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 4.3 Students' Income Source of Educational EXpenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 4.4 Students' 1967 Summer Occupation . . . . . . . 47 4.5 Occupational Experience for 1967 . . . . . 48 4.6 Students' State of Employment in Fall 1967 . . 48 4.7 Occupation by Length of Time Employed . . . . 50 4.8 Occupation by Location in Michigan . . . . . . 51 4.9 Rank Ordered Reasons for 1967 Summer Occupation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 5.1 Number of Decisions by Class . . . . . . . . . 56 5.2 Number Intervals by Decision Class . . . . . . 57 5.3 Combination of Decision Class on Decision Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 5.4 Decision Class Statistics . . . . . . . . . . 59 5.5 Age by Decision Class . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 5.6 Educational Level by Decision Class . . . . . 60 5.7 Students' Major by Decision Class . . . . . . 61 5.8 Summer Occupation by Decision Class . . . . . 62 5.9 Number of Decisions by Task and Class . . . . 64 5.10 Number of Decisions by Class and Task . . . . 65 5.11 Forms of Linkage on Decision Profiles . . . . 67 5.12 Combination of Linkage Forms on Decision Profiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 5.13 Number of Decisions Within Linkage Forms . . . 69 5.14 Linkages Between Decisions in Task Categories 70 5.15 Number of Decisions by Band, Class, and Scope 72 5.16 Decision Linkage Range . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 5.17 Decision Linkage, Range, and Scope . . . . . . 74 5.18A Number of Decisions by Class, Task and Band . 75 5.18B Number of Decisions by Class, Task and Band . 76 V Table 5.18C 5.18D 5.19 5.20A 5.20B 5.20C 5.20D 5.21 Number of Decisions by Class, Task and Band Number of Decisions by Class, Task and Band Number of Decisions by Range and Task Decision Decision Decision Decision Decision Areas Sequence Sequence Sequence Sequence Sequence by Decision Task Areas by Decision Task Areas by Decision Task Areas by Decision Task Areas Statistics by Decision vi Lass 77 78 79 82 84 86 87 91 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK Introduction In the world today, we are beginning to recognize that few events just happen. Most events that take place are controlled or influenced to some degree by situational factors, previous decisions and experiences. The additional technological and behavioral knowledge available increases the possibility to predict situations and to keep unantici- pated events and consequences at a minimum. Decision-making analysis can make this possibility a reality. Decision- making according to Simon is ”finding possible courses of action and choosing among the courses of action" (1:1). The actual course of action chosen is the decision. Decisions may be viewed in different ways. Some deCisions may have the power to stand alone while others rely on previous decisions. Cooper (2) views decisions in an endless stream. He comments: A single decision is merely a moment in time. Once it is made and carried out into effect, 1 2 it precipitates changes in the environment of the decision. The new problems are created for which new solutions are required. Hence, if you think you have settled things and that you can relax for a while, you are deceiving yourself. The ever-present forces of change compel an endless updating of decisions and actions. New conditions, new experiences and information are always coming up to require the modification of goals, policies, programs or procedures and the creation of new ones, (2:9) Paolucci (17) viewed some decisions as having an over lapping effect and may be interrelated and interdependent. The interdependence and/or interrelatednessl of these decisions if plotted will structure various patterns. Patterns are like models or tools, "they allow one to com- municate information about a complex, abstract idea in a concrete and efficient manner by providing a logical aid for comprehending, analyzing and predicting the structure and actions of reality" (17:17). It is through the use of structured patterns as a tool that may enable people to visualize, predict and understand the complex decision re- sults of present events, - Structural patterns illustrating the interdependence or linkage of one decision in relation to another are not enough. Decisions are not randomly evolved from previous 1The terms interrelatedness and interdepence are used synonymous in this thesis. decisions. However, those decisions which do evolve from a prior decision are linked together by relations among objectives or dimensions of manageability of resources. Alderson (12) believes that another way to deal with decision interdependence is to classify the ties of linkage: a) over time, b) over space, and c) among components of an organiza- tion structure. By looking at linkage ties over time and space, the magnitude, far reaching effect, or influences of one decision could be visualized. Since all decisions are not equal in importance in the problems they handle, effect on present and future courses of action, and in the time required to make them; several researchers have grouped decisions for studying these various relationships. Niles (3) illustrating some elements of importance divided decisions into four groups: 1) routine, 2) minor, 3) major, and 4) critical. Each (13) supports the concept that there is a continuum of importance with decisions ranging from the very trite through a middle group and on into life's most important decisions. Alderson (12) on the other hand, approaches the decisions militarilisti— cally from the point of two generic categories of strategic and tactical decisions. Later, he further categorizes tactical decisions into three classes of program, policy, 4 and control. Alderson further states: . . . the logical sequence moves from strategy to program to policy to controls, but one category is not necessarily disposed of com- pletely before taking up the next . . . . The choice of strategy is one of the major factors which sets the framework for other types of decision. But the final test of the strategy is how well it can be implemented. (12:185) Succintly, Alderson has stated that there is a strategic or critical decision and several lesser decisions made to implement the strategic decision. These strategic~decisions we also might term central decisions and the lesser _decisions satellite, which combined together form a decision complex. Plonk (24) pioneered a study in the field of home management using a central-satellite decision model. She studied one central—satellite decision complex and the con— tent linkage of each decision within the complex. Plonk's results seemed to indicate that decision class and linkage are concepts to be included in managerial decision theory. Schlater (l4) directed application toward the manager stating: Understanding the relationships between and among decisions can help the manager allocate time to decision—making in accordance with the decision's perceived centrality and can generally place the manager in a better position to predict managerial outcomes. (14:97) Since Plonk's (24) conceptualization is exploratory in its approach, there is a need for further verification, 5 clarification, and application of her generalizations and conclusions. This research, in the main, is a replication of Plonk's study to ascertain further generality of her findings. Therefore, the question posed for this study was: How will the decision class and linkage patterns differ from one central-satellite decision complex to another? Definition of Terms Decision—maker — and a respondent are synonymous in this study. Decision — is a course of action chosen by a re— spondent between or among alternatives. is a diagram depicting class and content linkage between the central decision and satellite decisions of a respondent. Decision profile Decision symbol - is a code letter which categorizes a decision into its decision class on the decision profile. Decision class - is a specific type of decision which has certain identifiable characteristics within a classification system. is the connecting of one decision to another on the basis of decision content. Linkage is described in terms of form, range, and scope. Decision linkage is the chronological ordering of all satellite decisions following a central choice. Decision task area — is a content area in which decisions are made. Decision sequence the gainful occupation in which the re— spondents participated in the summer of 1967 and is also the central decision of study. Occupational choice 6 Conceptual Framework The conceptual framework in this study is basically adapted from Plonk's (24) research. She views the organic unity of a central decision as the core of the study and then probes into class and linkage relationships that exist between a central decision and its complex of satellite decisions. A decision complex is thought to be interrelated through decision classes and linkages. The generic classes of decisions are central and satellite. The specific classes Plonk considered are strategic, tactical, policy, control, and program. Since strategic decision is the only type in the generic class of central decision, the two terms strategic and central decision are synonymous. Once a strategic (central) decision is made, the success or non—success depends on the execution of supplemental or satellite decisions. The satellite decisions complete the action of the strategic decision and consequently are linked to it content wise. The specific classes of satellite decisions in Plonk's study are: tactical, policy, control, and program. The specific classes of satellite decisions in this study are similar to those Plonk used; however, some classes have been modified. Specifically, a tactical decision was modified from an "instrumental decision made to begin or continue action for the execution of the strategic (central) decision" 7 _ (24:6) to a decision which specifies the scale, character and sequence of activities which strategy requires. A pro— gram decision was modified from "a decision that results in a new routine for primarily recurring activities in a new situation" (24:7) to a decision that is routine or repetitine for certain course of action. However, if contingency occurs modification of the routine can be made for a short term basis. Decision Classes A strategic decision is a key decision which sets the basic pattern of a plan. The strategic decision embodies the core idea concerning the means to an end and often after the decision is made, a reallocation of the decision—maker's resources takes place for an indefinite period of time. A strategic decision is recognized by its generation of several satellite decisions which are made to complete its action. The strategic decision sets boundaries for satellite decisions and in addition may determine a number of non-choice situa— tions or consequences. Summer occupational choice is assumed to be the strategic decision in the decision complex under study. A tactical decision specifies the scale, character, and sequence of activities which strategy requires. The 8 tactical embodies the core idea and translates it into an Operational plan. However, some degree of flexibility is usually provided for adaption to unforseen conditions, but it may be a detailed prescription that governs the sequences of responses of activities to complete the strategic decision. Examples of tactical decisions from this study are: selection of a place to live in relation to the location of occupation and selection of appropriate clothing needed for the occupation. A policy decision specifies a decision rule, or guide indicating how certain situations are to be handled if and when they arise. Basically, when decisions which fall into this category are encountered there is no need to do anything more than apply the rules which have been previously estab— lished. Examples of policy decisions are: to save most of earned income for college, who to contact in case of emergen— cies or if work problems arise, and how to perform certain work tasks. A control decision regulates, changes simplifies or adjusts a decision in any of the satellite classes. Control decisions either specify or guide the taking of future actions but such decisions are specifically geared toward altering the actions of previously made decisions so as to continue 9 completing its action in relation to the strategic decision. Examples of control decisions are: typing at a reduced speed in order to make fewer mistakes and taking a packed lunch to work rather than buying lunch. Program decisions are repetitive and routine to the extent that a definite procedure has been worked out for handling them, thus they need not be treated as novel each time they occur. Program decisions are plans for certain courses of action to be taken regardless of the occurrence of future events. However, if contingency occurs in future events, then decisions are made to follow one course of action if certain events occur, and to undertake other actions if other events take place. Examples of program decisions are: taking a lunch to work and, on occasion when a lunch was not taken, to eat lunch at nearby drugstore; shopping for groceries every Friday evening; and riding the bus to and from work. Decision Linkage The content of each decision serves as the basis for linkage analysis. The linkage used to describe decision interdependence contains three components: form, range, and sc0pe. Form refers to the visual appearance of the linkage among decision symbols on the decision profile. Linkage forms may be divided into three types: series, radial and compound. a... A. 1-....Ifitadnflda j 9 completing its action in relation to the strategic decision. Examples of control decisions are: typing at a reduced speed in order to make fewer mistakes and taking a packed lunch to work rather than buying lunch. Program decisions are repetitive and routine to the extent that a definite procedure has been worked out for handling them, thus they need not be treated as novel each time they occur. Program decisions are plans for certain courses of action to be taken regardless of the occurrence of future events. However, if contingency occurs in future events, then decisions are made to follow one course of action if certain events occur, and to undertake other actions if other events take place. Examples of program decisions are: taking a lunch to work and, on occasion when a lunch was not taken, to eat lunch at nearby drugstore; shopping for groceries every Friday evening; and riding the bus to and from work. Decision Linkage The content of each decision serves as the basis for linkage analysis. The linkage used to describe decision interdependence contains three components: form, range, and sc0pe. Form refers to the visual appearance of the linkage among decision symbols on the decision profile. Linkage forms may be divided into three types: series, radial and compound. 10 In series linkage one decision follows another in time and in dependence of action. It would be illogical to make Decision #3 until Decision #2 was made and Decision #2 could not be made till Decision #1 was made. Consequently, Decision #3 depends on Decision #2 for setting the course of action, just as Decision #2 depends on Decision #1 to set the course of action. In radial linkage, one decision is made and then subsequent decisions are linked to it but not to each other. Compound linkage is composed of a combination of series and radial decisions linked to the strategic decision. Range refers to the number of consecutive satellite decisions in a vertical linkage on a decision profile. Sc0pe refers to the total number of satellite decisions in each horizontal band on a decision profile. Decision Sequence Decision sequence is the chronological ordering of all satellite decisions following a central choice. The satellite decision made directly following the central choice is assigned number 1; number assignments continue till the last decision made furthest from the central choice is assigned the highest number. Decision sequence is thought to be the thread which weaves all classes and linked decisions together crisscrossing, intertwining, intermeshing among task areas to fabricate the central-satellite decision complex. ll Objectives The objectives of this study are: To identify and classify the satellite decisions resulting from a central decision, i.e. summer occupational decision. To determine the structure of the linkage between a central and its satellite decisions. To explore by decision sequence the crisscrossing of satellite decisions among task areas. Assumptions This study is based on the following assumptions: The student's summer occupational choice is a central decision. The decisions resulting from a central decision can be classified in a decision typology. Decision interdependence based on decision content is an identifiable concept. Decision sequence in no way presumes to measure decision importance or magnitude. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE This research investigated decision interrelatedness by examining decision class, linkage, and sequence in a central—satellite decision complex; hence, the review of literature was limited to decision classification, and interrelatedness. There is relatively little research con- cerning decision sequence. Decision Classification Richards and Greenlaw (5) have suggested the decision classification of deterministic and stochastic which is commonly used in game theory and computers. In a deterministic relationship, the value of the dependent variable is absolutely determined by the values of the other vari- ables in the relation. Such relationships maybe linear or curvilinear or step or kinked . . . depending upon just what rela- tions management is attempting to utilize or simulate. A relation among two or more variables is classed as stochastic, if at least one of the variables assumes multiple values, the frequency of occurance of which may be described by a probability distribution.(5:511) 12 13 Using this decision classification the characteristics of the classes hinge on the values attached to the variables in the relationships. The problems with this classification in the area of home management are: 1) how to determine all values for each variable in the relationships, and 2) how to measure the importance or degree of priority in which one value is held over another value in relation to one variable or several variables. Though this classification does not appear feasible for home or family management in practice, it has lent itself to the development of the mathematical concept of game theory. Game theory has had a great impact on the study of decisions which can simulate real life. Game theory in its present stage of develOpment functions well in the area of business, but appears unsuitable fortme in family manage— ment decision. Johnson and Kobler (15) in working with game theory have found that the "human decision system is incom— pletely defined and the parameter varies from one decision to another in ways so subtle as to elude identification" (15:878). The same decision classification that is used in game theory may be used by the computer. The computer can be programmed to make decisions either deterministic or l4 stochastic in nature, and then man is to focus and utilize the computer's final decision. However, as Hunt points out: We view the decision-making in a complex organization (business) as emerging from a continuing social process composed of small acts and carried out by different people at divergent points in time. We reject the notion that one specific deci- sion can be made the focus of analysis. (16:88) Hunt has just refuted the use or overdependence of relying on the computer to make the decision. He puts an emphasis on the small decisions that take place at different points in time, and besides, even if a computer is utilized to help make decisions, someone had to make some decisions about the information to be fed into the computer. No matter what the probabilities are of the values of variables, the statistics, computer, and game theory can not completely define all the parameters of the human deci— sion system, thus confining this classification only to simulation of life. Various authors such as Gore, Katona, and Simon view decisions with a polarity approach. Gore (6) sees decisions classified as adoptive and innovative. He describes an adoptive decision as one . . . for which there is general agreement on goals and general acceptance of a pattern of activities appropriate to achieving them, but for which there is a need to adjust 15 activity in order to raise the level of goal achievement to an acceptable point. (6:184) He further states that the innovative decision is: . . . a relatively infrequently used class of decision which has its object the sub- stitution of one goal for another . . . . Since it typically involves uncomfortable changes in status, role, and other patterns of activity, the innovative decision is a stressful experience. (6:185) Gore seems to place great emphasis on the sociological aspects of the decision-maker and defines his classifications accord— ing to the degree of conformity and the price on non-conformity to achieve the decision-maker's goal. Katona (11) describes decisions as genuine and habitual or routine. A routine decision describes actions developed into habits through repetition. While genuine decisions "lead to responding to a situation in a new way” (11:49). Simon's (l) programmed and non—programmed decisions are similar to Katona's routine and genuine but further elaborated. Simon states: Decisions are programmed to the extent that they are repetitive and routine, to the extent that a definite procedure has been worked out for handling them so that they don't have to be treated de—novo each time they occur. (1:5) Decisions are non-programmed to the extent that they are novel, unstructured, and l6 consequential. There is no cut-and-dried, method for handling the problem because it hasn't arisen before, or because it is so important that it deserves a custom—tailored treatement. (1:6) Later Delbecq (18) identified three classes of deci- sions: routine, creative, and negotiated. He defines routine decision-making in Simon's (l) terminology of "Programmed” and in Thompson's (7) terminology of "Computa- tional." "Here agreement of the desired goal is reached, and technologies exist to achieve the goal” (18:332). The creative decision in Simon's (l) terminology is "heuristic" and Thompson's (7) terminology is ”judgemental." The central element in the decision-making is the lack of an agreed upon method of dealing with the problem; this lack of certitude may relate to incomplete knowledge of causation, or lack of an appropriate solution or strategy. (18:334) Lastly, negotiated decision-making is: . . . concerned with a strategy for dealing with opposing factions which because of differences in norms, values or vested interests, stand in opposition to each other, concerning either ends, or means or both. (18:336) Even though Delbecq's classification deals with decision- making in business organization, with slight modification, there are potential applications for home management. A substitution of the term ”family” for ”organization" in Delbecq's following statement gives it meaning for home 17 management. In a real sense management of the decision- making process is management of the structure and functioning of decision groups, so that these decision-making processes become congruent with changes in the nature of the decision-making task being undertaken at a particular point of time within the organiza— tion. (18:339) NBach (l3) approaches decision classification by view- ing the degree of rationality in decisioning. Bach outlines three models of decision-making: rational, irrational, and non-rational. In rational decision-making, the optimal alternative is selected from the basis of complete knowledge of all other alternatives. Irrational decision—making focuses on the "psychodynamic structure" of the person and not on the situation. Non—rational decision-making applies to situations where insufficient knowledge or facts are known, the results are irrevocable and the opportunity will not repeat itself. (13:17) Diesing (8) describes decision-making by types of rationality rather than degrees of rationality as Bach did. The five types of decision-making are: technical rationality, economic rationality, social rationality, legal rationality, and political rationality. He describes each type as follows: Technical rationality appears in actions which are undertaken for the sake of achieving a given end. When rri (I: 11) 18 the actions are repeated they may become standardized and turn into techniques (8:9). Economical rationality appears in the allocation of alternative ends, scarcity, common means and media of value measurement; as well as the exchange of plurality of units and different ranking of values among the units (8:18). Social rationality appears in the involve— ment of two or more people. It is the integration developed through a selective process in which both the individual and the social systems try to reduce conflicts and tensions within roles and between roles (8:77). Legal reationality includes those decisions where rules are used as guides and are applied to situations. Political rationality relates to the decision- making structure (8:70). In his earlier work Diesing (19) defined only two categories of decision: economic and non—economic. The premise for economic decision—making was to optimize satis- factions while the non—economic decision-making was based on problem solutions characterized by cultural value conflicts as well as mis-handling the problems. Diesing (20) then followed the article on economic and non-economic decisions with an article on socioeconomic decisions. Succintly, socioeconomic is a combination of economic and non—economic decisions with the underlying basis on "important goals and important elements of internal l9 conflict" (20:6). Bymer (28) discusses the decision classification of social and economic. These two broad categories have some characteristics of Diesing's economic, non—economic, and socioeconomic decision—making. Family decisions are quite often grouped by social and economic decisions and are dis— / cussed as if they were separate. Social decisions according to Bymer, are concerned with major turning points in family development, while economic decisions are concerned with the uses of resources (in the main, financial resources). Bymer feels that family decisions cannot be segregated into social and economic categories. She states: The so-called turning point decisions, whether or not to move to another city, to undertake a business of one's own, to get out of independent farming and become a wage earner may be social decisions but they are also economic. These are deci- sions and once made, these decisions in turn provide restraints and direction for a multitude of smaller decisions that follow. Family decisions are not economic or social. They are economic and social. (28:3) Richards and Greenlaw, and Alderson from the area of business management, each have an approach to decision “ classification with slight variations and many common com- ponents. Richards and Greenlaw (5) have two generic classes of planning and controlling. They state: “Y L: r . u.‘ ..., “r1 hi4 .7 5‘: n‘fi V 6*, .~' c.~ 20 Planning is any information output from a substantive decision transformation which either specifies or guides the taking of future actions . . . is geared toward overcoming existing or anticipated problems. (5:293) The class of planning decisions has been divided into two groups: programming and repetitiveness. Programmipg refers to plans for certain courses of action to be taken regardless of the occurrence of future events (5:304). Repetitiveness refers to standing plans or policies, broad generalized plan— ning imperatives (5:312). Richards and Greenlaw view controlling decisions as "subsets” of planning decisions. Control decisions either specify or guide the taking of future action but such decisions are specifically geared toward correcting deviations in systems perfor— mance from established standards. (5:319) Alderson (12) similarily views decision in two generic classes; however, he has borrowed his terminology from the military and they are: strategic and tactical. The strategy is a key decision which sets the basic pattern of a plan (12: 184). The tactical decisions then execute the basic plan of the strategy. Alderson further delinates tactical decisions as: program which specifies the scale, character, and sequence of activities which strategy requires; policy deci— sions are rules or guides indicating how certain situations are to be handled if and when they arise; and control makes 21 adjustments or changes in the existing pattern of behavior (12:185). Morris' (9) rebellion against "taking categorization to mean the strategy of coding out perception so that things one could distinguish as different are made equivalent" (9: 168), has used categories and made refinements on various definitions in the management field. Morris' definition of policy lends substantial support to Alderson's (12) position. As Morris states: When decisions which fall into X are encountered there is no need to do anything more than apply the rules which have been established for this category. (9:169) Alderson views the four classes (strategic, program; policy, and control) as constituting the substance of planning. Alderson further states: The logical sequence moves from strategy to program to policy to controls, but one category is not necessarily disposed of com- pletely before taking up the next. . . . The choice of strategy is one of the major factors which set the framework for the other types of decisions. But the final test of strategy is how well it can be implemented in the other three decision areas. (12:185) Alderson's apparent view of the relationship between the four classes of decision seems to reinforce Halliday's view. Halliday (26) in her research distinguished between the "crucial" central decisions through the family's lifetime, 22 and the small "day—to— day" decisions which implement the larger crucial ones. Gross and Crandall (10) also give support and state: ”. . . there are large and small deci- sions. The larger the decision the more it will affect future decisions” (10:73). Paolucci (l7) separated decisions into the generic classes of central and satellite decisions. Central decisions, as Paolucci describes, consist of key or significant choices. They control the situation, and set the limits in number and kinds of choices one will make in the future. Because of its extensive effect, the central decision should be made in the most conscientious and rational manner possible. Paolucci further describes, satellite decisions as dependent on the central decision. These decisions, in fact, complete the action of the central decision and in doing so bear directly on the success or non-success of the central decision. (17:17) Decision Interrelatedness A decision complex is thought to be interrelated through decision class and linkage. The linkage or connect- ing element of one decision to another is an approach to studying sequence and/or interdependence of decision. Cooper states: The single decision must be woven into a larger complex of activity, to assure 23 continued balance and consistency in the over all scheme of things. Usually this starts a chain reaction of judge- ments and decisions on related matters. (2:9) Continuing, Gore states: Initially fabricated through decisions, a pattern is often the product of a series of decisions. A simple pattern embodies a sequence of acts. A complicated pattern includes contingent sequences allowing for the accommodation of conditions not antici— pated as the expected conditions of responses. (6:115) Cooper also visualizes ”when broad decisions are made, a pyramiding reaction sets in for subsidiary decisions of all kinds must then be made" (2:9). There are, obviously, no set patterns to illustrate decision interdependence; however, some authors have projected some suggestions. Gore (6) defines sequence as a chain or "series of choices, each related to each other, each one built on the last, the whole providing a base for action" (6:186). Paolucci (l7) visualizes a chain or series pattern which is characterized by a straight line and necessitates sequential dependence of one decision upon another. She also feels that time and space considerations are essential in sequential choice. She states: Each decision in the chain pattern is directly 24 dependent upon the preceding choice. Although the chain can start or stop at any one point, single choices are dependent on preceding decisions. (17:17) Lancaster (25) relates a chain of decisions not only indicates a sequential dependence of decisions but also may connotate some direction. Plonk (24) views the generation of satellite deci- sions from the central decision basically as "radii" or spokes from the hub of a wheel. Lancaster (25) visualizes a 'decision web' schema. She states: The concept of 'decision web' indicates the interdependence of decisions, but does not seem to show direction as the chain tends to do. Because decisions seem to mesh and cross and relate, perhaps a conceptual model of a web of decisions in a spiral would be helpful. (25:8) Here we have considered patterns as a product of decisions. Gore (6) feels that there may be merit in view— ing patterns and decisions as reciprocals instead of as cause and effects. He comments further: Certainly a pattern is the product of a series of choices. However, because patterns seldom produce only the results anticipated, decisions to adjust patterns until they more nearly realize expectations are both desirable and inevitable. (6:115) Authors of home management literature have suggested that decision interrelatedness is an important managerial 25 concept. Schlater and Vincent define management as: . . . a dynamic, on—going process which encompasses those human actions directed toward the realization of values and goals; the prime feature of such goal-directed activities is the systematic series of actions which constitute the making and implementing of interrelated decisions under conditions of uncertainty and limited resources. (14:97) To extrapolate, ”making and implementing of interrelated decisions" seems to be the key idea of management. Paolucci states: ”Management in the home is viewed as a series of interrelated and interdependent decisions. No managerial decision stands alone" (17:17). She further states, "A successful decision leads only momentarily to the end of decision—making, rather, choice is followed by choice in a seemingly endless process” (22:4). Knoll (23) expresses that decision-makers are influ- enced by decisions previously made and by anticipated future demands. This relates the far reaching effect of one decision upon another. Knoll relates: We may be less inclined in the future to plot all decisions, great and small, on the same map. In the past, home management had tended at best to focus on decisions within the middle range of importance. Perhaps we have shortened our sights in home management in our attempts to use day—to-day illustra- tions and to be realistic. It may be that 26 we have not adequately visualized the complexities of one situation as compared with the complexities of another. (23: 336) The complexities in visualizing decision interrelated- ness is not a problem unique to the field of home management but it does require a special type of perception. Cooper (2) states this problem eloquently: The ability to see events and phenomena in a time relationship, reaching back to the past, progressing through the present and extending into the future, may be called sequential perception. This is the essence of understanding cause—and-effect relation- ships. The ability to think through the passage of time is basic to planning and programming. After all, a decision is merely a moment in time. It is consummated through an action which brings about reaction followed by some kind of intereaction and counter action. In order to pierce through the veil of uncertainty, the decision-maker must be able to perceive the probable responses to actions. (6:208) Decision Class and Interrelatedness Research in Home Management To date there have been three researches pursuing decision class and interrelatedness. Plonk (24) in 1964 pioneered in the study of decision complexes and conceptualized an approach for examining class and linkage relationships that exist between a central and its complex of satellite decisions. She applied her frame- work to a discrete sample of decisions concerning retirement 27 housing. Assuming the retirement housing choice was a central or strategic decision, she classified 1,325 decisions reported in her data in this manner: tactical, 59 percent; policy, 22 percent; program, 11 percent; and control, 8 per- cent. After plotting all respondent's decisions on profiles, she analyzed the interdependence of decisions by form, scope, and range. Form referred to the visual appearance of the linkage interdependence between decisions. The analysis showed 90 percent were single radii linkages, plus 17 other combinations of linkage forms appeared. Scope refers to the number of decisions in each band. Analysis showed 86 percent of the satellite decisions in Band 1 (made directly following the central decision), 11 percent in Band 2 and 3 percent in Bands 3, 4, and 5. Range described the number of bands through which satellite decisions were linked to the central decision. On one—half the respondents profiles, decisions extended through two bands, on one—third of the profiles through three bands, and the longest range was five bands. Lancaster (25) in 1966 studied decisions made by non—college educated homemakers. Diesing's (20) categories of social and economic decisions were used for decision classification in her study. She found 17 of the 35 deci- sions could be classified as social, 6 decisions as economic 28 and 9 decisions as a combination of social and economic factors. Even though three decisions were classified as neither social nor economic, it might be inferred that social or economic factors were involved although the homemaker when interviewed did not verbalize them. Lancaster also found six decisions revealed a relationship between decisions. Two of these seemed to have a central—satellite type of linkage and the other four appeared to be of the chain type where decision follows decision. In the present study, these two types of linkage are not considered as separate, but central- satellite is viewed as a decision structural model and series is one of the linkage forms within this model. Myers (27) objective in 1967 was to investigate the class, interrelatedness and management areas of satellite decisions ensuing from the central decision of wives to seek full-time employment. The 763 reported satellite decisions were classed as tactical, 22 percent; policy, 40 percent; control, 25 percent; and program, 13 percent, and placed in management areas of participation in community and social activities, 11 percent; and administering to personal and family well-being, 22 percent. Analysis of decision profiles (one for each respondent) illustrated decisions linked to the central decision through single linkage (54 percent), 2 linkages (35 percent), 3 linkages (8 percent), 4 linkages 29 (2 percent) and more than 4 linkages (1 percent). The longest decision chain linked nine satellite decisions and extended through nine linkages. Myers only discusses linkage forms in terms of chains or clusters. Chain linkage is equivalent to series linkage in the present study. CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY This exploratory and descriptive study was partially a replication of a previous study (24) concerned with a“ central—satellite decision complex. The difference between the two studies were in the particular central decision chosen for study, the group of respondents, and in part the instru- ment. This chapter describes the selection of the sample, the development of the instrument, the collection of the data and the procedures used to analyze the data. Selection of Central Decision Selection of the central decision for this study was crucial in that whatever decision was chosen, by definition must evolve several lesser decisions. The central decision, student's summer occupational choice, was chosen on the basis that it would evolve satellite decisions and that it was common to the total sample. Most college students every summer have an opportunity to choose how they wish to spend their time until they return to college in the fall. For many it may be continuing college studies, others traveling, 30 31 and some seeking employment. For those students who seek employment, various occupational Opportunities are open to them. These Opportunities may be a fore-runner to a life time career, or a means of earning money to continue their college education;the opportunities may be of short duration allowing the student to return to college in the fall, or the type allowing a student to work part time and attend college part time. The decisions students made to carry out their summer occupational choice provide the data for this study. Selection of Sample The sample consisted of Michigan State University students enrolled Fall Term, 1967 in the Home Management and Child Development course 331 (hereafter referred to as HMC 331) "Management and Decision-Making in the Family." This junior level course, concerned with decision-making theory, discusses the concept of central—satellite decision complexes as part of the course content. The sample was restricted to women on the basis that only one male was taking the course in the two sections offered. A further requirement of the sample was that they must be gainfully employed rather than continuing their academic studies or traveling. It was felt that the latter two pursuits 32 would elicit satellite decisions, but were eliminated~on the basis that they would broaden and complicate the decision task areas as well as possibly call for separate analysis. The Instrument A self—administered questionnaire was constructed for collecting data (Appendix A). The three parts comprising the questionnaire were: 1) questions asking for demographic information, their summer occupational choice, and reasons for selecting this particular occupation; 2) open—ended questions for listing decisions made as consequences of the occupational choice in relation to various decision task areas; and 3) numerical sequencing of all the decisions made in the decision task areas. The first decision made follow- ing the central decision was assigned #1 and the other satellite decisions were numbered consecutively. The questionnaire provided one column for students to record their decisions. Two other columns were provided, one for the student to sequence her own decisions, and another for coding the decisions by the researcher. During Spring Term, 1967 the questionnaire was pre- tested. Six students enrolled in the HMC 331 course took the questionnaire to determine its useability. The pretest were examined and analyzed to note format 33 changes, ambiguity in questions, instructional content, and feasibility of analysis. The questionnaire in its original form was found satisfactory with minor alterations. The pretest data when coded and analyzed did indicate the feasi- bility and useability of the questionnaire. Collection of Data The data were collected by administering the questionnaire in two regularly scheduled HMC 331 classes on November 14, 1967. The first portion of each class was given to lecture on the concept of central—satellite decision complexes. The students were then given the questionnaire to complete. Prior to completing the questionnaire verbal instructions were given (Appendix A). The length of time for questionnaire completion varied from twenty minutes to forty-five minutes. Analysis of Data The data were analyzed in the following ways: 1. The conceptual framework was used to classify each decision in their respective class. . A decision profile, plotting decision class and linkage, was constructed for the decision complex of each respondent. (Appendix B con- tains a selected representation of decision profiles, the criteria used for profile selection, and respondent's number indexing the selected profiles.) 34 3. The numerical sequencing of all the decisions was employed to explore the crisscross patterning of decisions among the various task areas. 4. A comparative analysis was made between re- sults from this study and those from the Plonk (24) research. Decision Class The decisions reported by each respondent were classi— fied by the decision typology previously defined in the conceptual framework. Each decision class was given codes T, P, C, R for tactical, policy, control, and program decisions, respectively. Decision Profile Following the typing of each decision, a decision profile was constructed for each respondent. In form, the profile was a modified mercator map. The mercator map (Figure 3.1) basically is composed of one large circle near the top and center of the page. This circle represents the central or strategic decision. Below the circle are several horizontal lines which form bands. From the central decision various satellite decisions radiate like spokes of a wheel. The satellite decisions in the first band must be made before a decision can be made in the second band. The decision in the second band cannot be made until the decision in the first band has been made. 35 Figure 3.1 OEOUCH UOCHMM mucmc Ocmm OOHnmu mo mOmD 6cm IOHOHOE nonuo :QOh Onu c0: OHSmHOA.IHommcmHB. mpcOEDmO>cH .Ocm mammz mcflmoom mcHSDOHO .Oz Hmuoe OODHOQOHOD Emumoum Houucou suaaom HOOHDOOB me onmHumn ZOHmHUMQ UHOmBcH Hmflomm xOHmHDHSZ Hmflemm msmflnssz Hmflemm mamcam mmflnom mmmao OHQHDHOE mmflumm mmmao mamcflw mimom m0<¥ZHQ MO m 36 Thus each decision located in bands two, three, four, five, etc. must be attached to a decision in the preceeding band. The vertical lines perpendicular to the bands form columns which contain a label of a decision task area. These are the content areas in which various decisions were made. The typed decisions were plotted on the map by using the following criteria: 1) each typed decision was placed in predetermined groups called decision task areas, 2) each typed decision in each decision task area was placed in a band showing some relationship to every other decision in that area, 3) lines are drawn between and among those decisions which have direct dependence on the previous decision to form linkage patterns, 4) combined together the typed decisions and the linkage patterns produced a decision profile. Decision Linkage For describing decision interdependence or the connect— ing links joining decisions the following three constructs were employed: form, scope and range. §p£m_refers to the visual appearance of the decision symbols on the decision profile. The various patterns pro— duced by linking one decision to others may either form a chain or series with one decision followed by a decision in the subsequent band or the pattern may radiate out like spokes on a wheel with one decision in one band and several 37 (two or more) decisions in the subsequent band relating back to one decision. When two or more radii appear in the same band attached to either the strategic or another satellite decision, the decisions represented are not necessarily time ordered within the band. However, a decision attached in a subsequent band to a decision in the preceding band follows sequentially in action and time order and forms a chain or series of decisions. From the linkage patterns or form one can identify various variations of series and radial patterns as well as combine these two forms together to construct a compound pattern or form. Series Linkage: In series linkage Single Class Series has two or more decisions in the same typology class. Each decision is located in a separate band on the decision profile, to form when linked together, a chain or straight line. Multiple Class Series is composed of two or more decisions from different typology classes; each decision is in a separated band and linked together forms a chain on the decision profile. Radial Linkage: In radial linkage Single radial represents one decision located in Band 1 which is attachad and radiates out from the central decision. Multiple Radial has at least two 38 decisions in Band 2 linked to one decision in Band 1 and may or may not have radial linkages in subsequent bands. Inverted Multiple Radial has one decision in Band 2 attached to two or more decisions in Band 1 and has either no decisions in Band 3 or is followed by single or multiple radial linkage forms. Multiplex Radial has two or more forms of radial linkage in Band 2 and may have a single radial form in Band 2 or 3. Compound Linkage: A compound form is composed of a combination of series and radial linkages. Scope refers to the total number of decisions within a single band on the decision profile. For example, a decision profile may have 11 decisions in Band 1, 9 decisions in Band 2, 3 decisions in Band 3 and l decision in Band 4. Range refers to the number of bands through which a linkage passes. A single radial linkage will have a range of one band whereas a series decision may have a range of 5 or 6 bands. Decision Task Prior to developing the questionnaire, the researcher talked with various students about decisions made concerning a summer occupation. Following the discussions, the researcher noted general content areas in which most of the 39 decisions were made. The researcher derived the following seven content categories and added the eighth as a residual category: 1) Clothing, 2) Housing, 3) Meals and Other Maintenance, 4) Uses of Earned Income, 5) Transportation, 6) Leisure, 7) On the Job decisions, and 8) Other decisions. Clothing included decisions such as appropriateness of present wardrobe to occupational needs, purchasing of new clothing and uniforms. The category of Housing covered decisions regarding where to live, location in relation to the summer occupation, and living expenses. The area of Meals and Maintenance included those decisions of whether or not to eat lunch, provision for lunch, the amount of money to spend on food, and who would prepare the food. The category of Uses of Earned Income included decisions relative to allocation of income and yet save a ”substantial" amount or most for college. Decisions made in the task area of Transportation included how to get to and from work, the expense of commuting to and from work as well as vacation, and the problems of finding rides to work. Decisions made concerning Leisure included participation in activities on: days off and evenings as well as time left for vacation and travel. The category of Qp_phg_ggb_decisions included how to organize one's work, how to do the work, rate of 40 completing tasks, how to discipline children, and what to do if problems arise. The final category of Other decisions included whether to continue working in the fall or quit working and return to college and did the occupation meet previously established expectations. To illustrate the decisions by class and number for each task, the decision profile was divided into eight sections, one for each task area. On the profile each vertical column represents one task and is labeled below Band 5. Decision Sequence Each respondent was asked in the questionnaire to chronologically order the decisions made following the central choice. The first decision made after the central choice was assigned a number one, the second decision number two and so on. The last number given to a decision was the one made furthest, timewise, from the central choice. In some questionnaires, the respondents failed to sequence the re— corded decisions; therefore these data could not be rated in respect to decision sequence. On the decision profile the number following the decision symbol is the sequence number of that decision. Decision profiles of respondents numbered 46 to 74 did not 41 have decision sequence; therefore, the researcher numbered the decisions within task areas in order reported. In a few situations, a respondent failed to record a decision, but indicated that one had been made by the nature of a recorded decision which could only follow a pre— ceeding decision. To give continuity to the profile and sequence an X type decision was added to indicate a decision made but not reported on the questionnaire. A modified cross—tabulation chart was constructed to explore the crisscrossing and intermeshing of sequenced decisions among the task areas. Sequenced decisions were placed into cells in relation to the task area the decision was made and the task area of the preceeding decision. The; various sequence numbers in each cell are the keys used to.. explore and determine the crisscrossing of decisions and among task areas following the central choice. Reliability of Data Analysis In an attempt to reduce possible bias and error, an independent coder was given the data with the original decision classification definitions from Plonk's (24) re- search and asked to categorize the decisions. After classification, the researcher and coder compared their categorization of decisions on all the questionnaires. A 42 lack of agreement in the classification analysis indicated the need for greater clarification of the decision classes. Clarification of the decision classification resulted from further examination of the decision classification and analysis of coder and researcher classification differences. By using a modified decision classification, all decisions were recorded by both researcher and coder and agreement of classification was reached for all decisions. To check the linkage patterns, the independent coder checked every decision profile for diagramming of linkage forms. CHAPTER IV DESCRIPTION OF THE SAMPLE A description of the 74 women students includes: age, marital status, education, students' major college, students' major, income sources for educational expenses, and summer occupation. Age and Marital Status The vast majority of the respondents were 20 or 21 years old, 58 percent and 24 percent, respectively (Table 4.1). Over 90 percent of the students were single, while 1 percent were divorced and the rest were married. Suc- cinctly, the mode of the sample is 20 years old and single. Table 4.1 - Marital Status by Age Marital Age Total Total Status 19 20 21 22 24 Over 25 Number Percent Single 8 43 16 l 68 92 Married 2 l 2 5 7 Divorced l l 1 Total Number 8 43 18 l l 3 74 Total Percent 11 58 24 l 1 4 100 43 44 Educational Level Of the 74 students responding, 70 percent of them were in the third year of college, 22 percent were in the fourth year of college, and the remainder were in the second year of college. Students' Major College Ninety-five percent of the students had majors in the College of Home Economics, one student had declared no preference and the following four colleges each had one representative: Arts and Letters, Communication Arts, Justin Morrill, and Social Science. Students' Major Six of the 74 students did not report a college major. Of the remaining 68 students, over one—third of the students had chosen Home Economics Education as a major (Table 4.2). A little less than one-fifth of the students were Interior Design majors and about one—sixth of the stu— dents were Retailing majors. The following majors in the College of Home Economics each had a small representation: Child Development and Teaching, Dietetics, General Clothing and Textiles, and Foods, Non-Home Economics majors represented were Art Education, Sociology, Social Work, and 45 Speech Therapy. Table 4.2 - Students' Major Major Total Total Number Percent Home Economics Education 25 34 Retailing, Clothing and Textiles 9 12 Interior Design 13 18 Child Development and Teaching 6 8 General Home Economics 1 l Dietetics 4 5 General Clothing and Textiles 4 5 Foods 2 3 Art Education 1 l Sociology l 1 Social Work 1 1 Speech Therapy 1 1 Not Reporting 6 8 Total Number 74 99a aDoes not total 100 percent due to rounding. Students' Income Source for Educational Expenses Seventy-three of the 74 students reported source of income for their education (Table 4.3). Over 40 percent of the students had sole parental support for their education, and all of these students were single. About 14 percent of the students (all single) had a combination of self support 46 and parental support for their education. The remaining students represented various combinations of the following income sources: 1) self-support, 2) parental support, 3) scholarships and grants, and 4) other. Table 4.3 - Students' Income Source for Education Expenses Income Source Total Total Number Percent (l) Self—Supported 8 ll (2) Parental Support 31 42 (3) Scholarship and Grants (4) Other 3 4 Combination l and 2 10 14 Combination l, 2, and 3 5 7 Combination l, 2, and 4 3 44 Combination l and 3 5 77 Other Combinations 8 11 Not Reported~ 1 1 Total Number 74 101a aDoes not equal 100 percent due to rounding. Students' Summer Occupation Eight of the 74 students held 2 summer jobs; these are counted separately and therefore total 82 occupations (Table 4.4). The Dictionary of Occupational Titles (4) was used for categorization; 48 percent of the students (all single) were engaged in Service occupations, while 40 47 percent of the students including both married and single were engaged in Clerical and Sales occupations. Table 4.4 - Students' 1967 Summer Occupation Occupationa Total Total Number Percent Professional, Technical, and Managerial 3 4 Clerical and Sales 33 40 Service 39 48 Farming, Fishery, and Forestry 4 5 Benchwork 2 2 Miscellaneous 1 1 Total Number 82 100 aSome students held more than one job; both are recorded. Occupational Experience Prior to 1967's Summer Occupation Fifty-four percent of the 74 students had previous experience at their summer's occupation prior to working in the summer of 1967 (Table 4.5). The remaining 46 percent had no previous experience in their 1967 summer occupation. Students' State of Emplgyment in Fall 1967 Of the 74 students, 83 percent of them terminated their summer occupation prior to the start of the univer— sity's fall term, while the remaining students continued 48 working at their summer occupations (Table 4.6). Table 4.5 - Occupational Experience for 1967 Summer Occupation Previous No Previous occupation Experience Experience Professional, Technical, & Managerial l 2 Clerical and Sales 17 16 Service 20 19 Farming, Fishery, and Forestry 3 l Benchwork 2 Miscellaneous 1 Total Number 44 38 Total Percent 54 46 Table 4.6 - Students' State of Employment in Fall 1967 . Dis- . Cont1nued . Occupation Em lo ment continued p y Employment Professional, Technical, & Managerial 3 Clerical and Sales 8 25 Services 6 33 Farming, Fishery, and Forestry 4 Benchwork 2 Miscellaneous 1 Total Number 14 68 Total Percent 17 83 49 Length of Time Employed in Summer Occupation Forty-six of the 74 students worked 1-5 months at their summer occupation, while 16 percent of the students worked 6-10 weeks or about 1 1/2—2 1/2 months (Table 4.7). About 12 percent of the students merely checked whether they had worked months or years and the remaining 25 percent of the students represented various numbers of weeks, months, and years of work at their summer occupation. Geographic Location of Summer Occupation Sixty—seven of the 74 students held summer occupations in the state of Michigan (Table 4.8). Three students did not cite a city but mentioned the state. Forty percent of the students who worked in Michigan lived in cities ranging in pOpulation size of 10,001—50,000. Nineteen percent of the students worked in cities ranging in population size of 100,001-500,000. Of those seven students who lived and worked outside the state of Michigan, five lived in cities ranging in population of 1,001-5,000. The six states represented were California, Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Wisconsin. 50 .mcHOOOOH OH OOO usmouwm 00H Hmsvm poo mOOQOH .HOHESC HO COHHOOHHHUOmm DOOQHH3 mumwm HO mnucoe OOHOOHO mucOOsumm OW H H m OH H O OO O O OH H ucmonmm Hmuoe N H H v m H m mm m m mH H “@9852 HmpOB H msomcmHHOOmHz H H HHO3£OGOm H H H H muummuom Ocm .humnmflm .mCHEHmm H v H m HN H m m OOH>HOm m H H m N mH H N m mOHmm Ocm HOOHHOHU m H m HmHHOmmsmz Ocm .HOOHOHOOB .HchHmmOHOHm mx oHIO mIm NIH Ox mHIHH oHIO mIH ONIOH mHIHH OHIO mIH coaummoooo mumww mnucoz wxmmz . OmmonEm OEHB mo npmcmq ha COHDOQOOOO I h.¢ OHQOB 51 .mGHOGOOH OH OOO HGOUHOQ 00H HODUO Hos mOOQm OO 0 0H MH 0O h m N “smoumm Hmuoe m n OH OH 0m m O N HOQEOZ Hmpoe H OOOOGOHHOOOHE H H HHOBQOGOO N H H mnpmmnom Ocm .mnmfimfim .mcflfinmm H m O O OH N N H OOH>HOm H v O O HH N mOHmm Ocm HOOHHOHO H N HmconmOmoum 0cm .HmOHOHOOB .HmHnOmmcmz Omcom . . . . . . . . 000 000 m 000 00m 000 00H 000 0m 000 0H 000 m 000 H coapmmsuoo Immm oz 000 000 H H00 00H H00 0m H00 0H H00 m H00.H 3OHOm . coHumHomom cmmHSOHE CH COHHOOOH >9 COHHOQDOOO I m.v OHQOB 52 Rank Ordered Reasons for the 1967 Summer Occupational Choice The students gave a total of 337 reasons to justify their choice of summer occupation. The reasons are categor- ized and ranked in Table 4.9. A mean of 4.5 was computed for all the reasons reported by all the respondents. The category of personal needs received the highest number of reasons or 30 percent of the total. The two categories of working conditions and financial were second and third in total number of reasons with 18 and 17 percent, respectively. The category of free time and social life had the least number of total reasons. Analysis of the rank ordered reasons shows that the majority of students gave a reason of personal needs within the first five reasons stated, a financial reason within the first three reasons stated, and a reason concerning the availability of jobs within the first two reasons stated. Whereas, the majority of students gave reasons for working. conditions between the second and fourth reasons listed. A reason concerning job location or free time and social life most often occurred as the fourth or fifth reason stated. 53 NH HO H N N a m s OH 4H NH O Hmnoe Hum H H m e m 4 N mnsom Hues .m H H H OOGOHOmmm manpsm .O H H H H N H mHHHmcmm meHm .m H N N m N N e m mHHmcoHanmm OmhonEm I HOHOHQEM .N H H m e H mcoHuHOcou mcHHHos OmHHH .H moneHozoo oszmos om 00H N H N m mH mH ON mH 4N Hmnoe Hum H H m H m H cmmHHUHz :H no msom awry momHm HOLHO OEOm O>HH Op thcsuuommo .0 H H mmom :30 .m H H H H m ncmHmHHHO mcHnnmsom on .s H H N OEHB mo OmD O>Huusuumcoo .O H H m m m cmHOHHHO HOHB Hues 6cm mHmomm new: .m H m 6 m m Huoz cH ammumucH .4 H H N H m H OOOOHHOmxm mchanH .m H N a m m 0H Hoflmz How eucmHnmmxm .N N H H e e ammumm HHmm .H mammz HdZOmmmm HCOOHOQ HOQESZ OH 0 m b O O O m N H Hmuoa Hmuoe HOOHO xcmm commmm COHHOQOOOO HOEEdm nOmH How mc0mmmm OOHOOHO xcmm I 0.v OHQOB 54 Wow N Gmmz 00H hmm H m 0 OH 0m mm 0» Oh mh HOQEOZ HOuOB 0 NM N m N h m m w Hmuoa Ham N H N m N Hooromtanz Ho Hmsssm Ocmunm .m N H O m N N OHHH HOHOOm NOEHB Omnm .N H H w OOGOHHE >0m .H mmHH HNHUOm 92¢ MEHB mmmm HH Om N N NH HH w m Hmuoa Dom O H N H COHHOHHOQOGOHB m0 OOCOHGO>GOO .N N N O OH N v 0803 Op COHumHmm OH OOHHOOOH HOOHOO>OOO .H IZOHBNUOH mOb mH Hm H m N O NN OH HOHOB Ham H N N N O O now No NHHHHHOHHO>N .m H H N OH O OOOOHHOmxm m50H>OHm .N H N d How was hHucmmmHm .H mOb mo MBHHHm4HH4>4 nH mm m m m 0H mH OH Hmuoe Ham m N O O m A Nam mumsvaNIOooourmHm .m m m N m mOOmmOm HOHHO How mmcoz cnmm .N H H m m OmOHHOO How wmcoz :Hmm .H HOQ OHHHO o.AH H. H.O m.m m.» mHuz cmHmmn HoHHchH w.vH v.O m.N m.m NHIZ mcHHHmHmm 6cm mmHHuxme .mCHHHOHO HOHOCOO m.OH m0. >0. 0.0 m.N O.h ONHZ mOHEocoom OBOE HOHOOOO Ocm OOHmeOOm mOHEocOOm OEOm Hmuoa x Honucou EmHmOHm >OHHom HOOHHOOB Hoflmz cmmz mmmHO conHumo an “ohms .mucmvsnm I n.m mHnma 62 Table 5.8 — Summer Occupation by Decision Class Mean Occupation Tactical Policy Program Control X Total Professional, Technical and Managerial N-3 11.3 2.0 2.3 15.6 Clerical and Sales N=33 6.1 2.7 5.7 .l .03 14.8 Service N=39 8.3 3.0 6.7 .02 .02 18.1 Farming, Fishery and Forestry N=4 4.2 2.0 4.2 .2 .2 11.0 Benchwork N=2 5.0 5.5 6.0 16.5 Miscellaneous N=1 4.0 5.0 . 14.0 the total group decision class means. Occupational group of professional technical, and managerial had the highest mean for the decision class of tactical. Whereas, the miscellan- eous occupational group had the lowest mean in the decision class of tactical. However, the N for this occupation is extremely small, no conclusions can be drawn. Decision Task Areas As the decision profiles were being constructed, the recorded decisions were placed into eight predetermined decision task areas. The decisions in the various task areas were made in order to complete the action of the central decision. 63 Table 5.9 shows the analysis made of the decision classes by tasks. The most decisions, about one-fifth of the total, were made concerning Uses of Earned Income. Approximately one-sixth of the decisions were reported in each of the three decision task areas of On the Job, Leisure, and Clothing. More tactical decisions were made in the task area of Clothing than in any other area. Uses of Earned Income received the second highest number of tactical decisions while Leisure received the least number of tactical decisions. The most policy decisions, over 50 percent were made in the task area of Uses of Earned Income. This area having the highest number of policy decisions and ranking second in the highest number of tactical decisions, indicates that it played a crucial role in completing the central decision. The most program decisions, about 40 percent, were made in the task area of Leisure; Meals and Maintenance ranked second with 26 percent of the decisions. Of the very few control decisions made, 50 percent were made in the task area of Meals and Maintenance and 33 percent applied to the occupation and were made in the task area of On the Job decisions. For accomplishing the central decision, satellite decisions occurred in all of the eight task areas (Tab1e5.10). 64 00H OmNH 00H N 00H O 00H NOO 00H NHN 00H mmm Hmuoa O.N Hm O. N O.N O O MN HOSHO O.NH OHN 0m H mm N O.NH mm 0.0N mm OH NOH 30b OHH so m.nH OHN m.HO HmH O.N m m mH OHSmHOH O.N NNH m.OH On O.N O s mm coHumOHommcmHe 0.0H NON PH H m.H m 0.0m hHH HN OHH OEOOOH Omsumm mo mOmD O.NH OmH 0m m 0.0N 0NH 0.0 hH m OH OOOOOOHOHOE Ocm mHmmz O.m on m. H 0H 0O mchsom 0.mH mmH 0m H 0.H m m.N m Hm OnH mcanoHO X z X z x. z X z X, z X. z Hmuoa x HOHHCOO Emumoum HOHHOH HmOHuOmB xmma mmmHO OOHmHOOQ mmmHU UGO xmmB >9 mconHomQ mo HOQEOZ I m.m OHQOB 65 00H Hm 00H OHN 00H OHN 00H NNH 00H NON 00H OmH 00H 0b 00H mmH HOOOB m. H m. H COHmHUOQ X m. N O. H 0.N m Houucoo m.O N 0.0N mm m.mm HmH 0.00 mm m.m m 0.55 0NH h.N m Emumoum 0.0H O m.ON mm h.m m m.O O m.mO hHH N.0H hH O.H H h.N m NOHHON H.Oh MN N.>O NOH 0.h mH H.Hm mm 0.mO OHH N.0H OH O.mm 0O H.Om OhH HOOHHOOB OEOOCH Oucmc Hmnuo £00 OHSONOH coHumu Omcumm Imucamz mcamoom mcHHHOHU mmmHU OHH so . Inommcmufi . . . mo mmmD O mHOOE xmma xmma Ocm mmmHO >9 mconHOOQ mo HOQEOZ I OH.m OHHOB 66 Approximately 44 percent of the decisions were tactical and 37 percent of the decisions were program. Tactical decisions were primarily concerned with Uses of Earned Income, Clothing, and On the Job decisions. Program deci- sions included the two task areas of Leisure and Meals and other Maintenance. Though Housing and Transportation hold no predominance in the number of decisions, this does not decrease their importance. Housing and Transportation would seem to be areas for relatively long—standing, singular decisions in contrast to other areas such as Leisure, Meals and Maintenance which allow for frequent, "fresh" decisions. £212 In the conceptual framework, three major forms of decision linkage were identified: series, radial, and compound. Series linkage was subdivided into multiple class and single class; radial linkage was subdivided into single, multiple, multiplex and inverted. Compound linkage had no subdivisions. Forms of Linkage on Decision Profile — The decision profiles, first were analyzed for forms of decision linkage (Table 5.11). While 22 percent of the respondents had only a radial linkage form, 71 percent of the respondents had a 67 combination of radial and series. Only four percent of the respondents used a combination of series, radial and com- pound. Table 5.11 - Forms of Linkage on Decision Profiles Form Number of Total Respondents Percent One Form Radial 16 22 Combination of Two Forms Radial and Series 53 71 Radial and Compound 2 3 Combination of Three Forms Radial, Series, and Compound 3 4 Total 74 100 Combination of Linkage Forms on Profile - A detailed analysis of the decision profiles revealed 17 combinations of linkage forms (Table 5.12). Thirty percent of the link— age forms were divided evenly between single radial form and a combination of single radial, multiple radial, single series, and multiple series forms. Of the remaining 70 percent of the linkage forms, 28 percent were evenly divided between two combinations: 1) single radial and single series, and 2) single radial, single series, and multiple series. One-third of the respondents had a combination of three linkage forms. Only two respondents recorded a 68 00H Ob Hmuoa m N m HmHOmm OOHHO>OH .mOHHOm OHQHHHOS .mOHHOm OHmch .HmHOmm OHOHuHsz .HmHOmm mHmaHm H H O OGSOQEOO :mOHHOm OHQHUHSZ .HmHOmm OHmHuHSZ .HmHOmm OHmch m N O OODOQEOO .mOHHOm OHmch HOHOmm mHmHuHsz .HmHOmm mHmch H H O OOOOQEOO .HmHOmm OOHHO>GH .HmHOmm mHmHanz .HmHOmm mHmch H H O mOHHOm OHQHHHOE .mOHHOm OHmch .HmHOmm OOOHO>OH .HmHOmm OHmsHm mH HH O mOHHOm OHQHOHDZ .mOHHOm OHmsHm .HOHOmm OHQHHHOE .HmHOmm OHmch H H m mmHHmm mHmHuHsz .HmHOmm OOHHO>GH .HOHOmm OHmch H H m mOHHOm OHQHHHOE .HmHOmm memHHHsz .HmHOmm mHmch O O m mOHHmm OHQHHHOZ .HmHOmm mHmHuHsz .HmHOmm mHmaHm HH m m mmHuOm OHmGHm .HmHOmm OHOHHHsz .HmHOmm mHmch OH 0H m mOHHOm OHQHOHOE .mOHHOm OHmch .HmHOmm OHmch A m N mmHumm mHmHanz .HmHOmm mHmch OH 0H N mOHHOm OHmch .HmHOmm OHmch H H N OOOOQEOU .HOHOOM OHmch m N N HOHOmm OOHHO>GH .HmHOmm OHmch O m N HmHOmm mHmHanz .HmHOmm mech mH HH H HmHOmm mHmch ucmunmm chOOcommOm mmmma HO HOHOB mo HOQEOZ HOQEOZ mEHOh mo OOHHOOHQEOO mOHHmoum COHmHOOQ co manom OmmxcHH mo mOOHumcHQEOU I NH.m OHQmB 69 combination of five linkage forms. Linkage Forms with Decision Totals in Each Form — A summary in Table 5.13 is given of the forms of linkage on the decision profiles. Approximately 80 percent were single radial linkage forms; however, only 58 percent of the deci- sions connected to the central decision by this form of linkage. Over 34 percent of the decisions are connected to the central decision by the following three linkage forms which total 17 percent; single class series, multiple class series, and multiple radial. Table 5.13 — Number of Decisions Within Linkage Forms Linka e Form Linkage Decision 9 Number Percent Number Percent Radial Single 733 80.3 733 59.3 Multiple 50 5.5 184 ‘14.9 Inverted 7 .8 24 1.9 Multiplex l .1 6 .5 Series Single Class 68 7.5 150 12.2 Multiple Class 48 5.2 109 8.8 Compound 6 .6 30 2.4 Total 913 100.0 1236 100.0 Decision Linkage Among Task Areas - Approximately 94 70 percent of the decisions were linked within the same task area, while the remaining 4 percent were linked between or across decision task areas (Table 5.14). Two percent of the linkage forms were between the decision task areas of Clothing and Uses of Earned Income. There were seven dif- ferent combinations of task areas which contained linked decisions. Table 5.14 — Linkages Between Decisions in Task Categories Linkage Decision Linkages Number Percent Number Percent Between Task Categories Clothing and Uses of Earned Income 18 2.0 58 4.7 Meals and Maintenance and Uses of Earned Income 12 1.3 37 3.0 Transportation and Uses of Earned Income 10 1.1 34 2.8 Housing and Uses of Earned Income 8 .9 20 1.6 Housing, Uses of Earned Income and Transportation 2 .2 7 .6 Uses of Earned Income and Other 1 .1 2 .2 Housing, and Meals and Maintenance 1 .1 3 .2 Subtotal 52 5.7 161 13.1 Within Task Categories 861 94.3 1074 86.9 Total 913 100.0 1236 100.0 71 1:02: SCOpe refers to the number of decisions within each band on the profiles. Approximately 74 percent of the total number of decisions appeared in Band #1 (Table 5.15). After the decisions were divided by decision class in each band, Band #1 had the highest number of decisions with tactical, policy, program, and x each having 66, 76, 83, and 100 per— cent of the decision, respectively. Sixty-seven percent of the control decisions appeared in Band #2. By definition, no control decision was in Band #1. Within Band #1, over 42 percent of the decisions were program. Whiha Bands #2, 3, and 4 had decision repre— sentation in the three classes of tactical, policy and program, the tactical decisions tended to be slightly higher in percent than the classes of policy and program. Analysis of Table 5.15 also illustrates as the band number increases the number of satellite decisions reported decreases. 3229:. Range refers to the number of bands through which the satellite decisions are linked to the central decision. Only 43 percent of the profiles illustrated satellite decisions linked to the central decision through two bands, but one— third of the respondents reported satellite decisions linked 72 0.00H N 0.00H O 0.00H NOO 0.00H MHN 0.00H mmm Hmuoa N. H N. H m m.OH H O. m m. H m. N O m.OH H H.m OH O.N O m.O mm m 0.5O O m.NH hm 0.0N OO 0.0N hOH N 0.00H N O.NO nmm H.On NOH 0.00 nOm H x z X z X z x z x Z x HOHHOOO Emnmoum >OHHom HmOHuOmB ocmm mmmHO 90mm OH mconHUOQ mo HO9EOZ mmoom Ocm .mmmHU .Ocmm >9 mconHOOQ mo HO9EOZ I mH.m OH9mB 73 to the central decision through three bands (Table 5.16). Less than 10 percent of the respondents had decisions linked to the central decision through Bands #4 and 5. Table 5.16 - Decision Linkage Range Number Number of Total of Bands Profiles . Percent 1 ll 15 2 32 43 3 25 34 4 3 4 5 3 4 Total 74 100 Further analysis of the satellite linkages found 80 percent of the satellite decisions which had no other deci- sions linked to them, i.e. their only link was to the central decision (Table 5.17). Less than one percent of the linkages extended through Bands #4 and 5. The decision linkage range by tasks and the number of decisions in each band by class is presented in Table 5.18. The longest linkage range which extends through five bands occurred in the three task areas of Meals and Mainten- ance, Transportation, and On the Job decisions. Although the task area of Leisure ranks third highest in the total number of decisions made, the range in this task area only 74 extends through two bands. Table 5.17 - Decision Linkage, Range, and Scope Number Number of Total of Bands Linkages Percent l 733 80.3 2 142 15.6 3 32 3.5 4 3 .3 5 3 .3 Total 913 100.0 Analysis of the decisions for each band by decision task area illustrates again, that 74 percent of all the decisions were made in Band #1 while less than 10 percent of the decisions are in Band5#4 and 5 (Table 5.19). Decision Sequence Forty-five of the 74 respondents chronologically numbered all the satellite decisions made following the central choice. Only the sequence data from these 45 respon— dents are included in the analysis. Number 1 was assigned to the first decisions made following the central choice, #2 was assigned to the second, and the highest number was the decision made farthest from the central choice timewise. Decision sequence was studied for various purposes. 75 OOH OOH OH OOH OO OOH N OOH OH OOH Om OOH mHH Hmuoe O. H conHomO x Houucoo H.n H O.H H O.N m smumonm s.O H 0.0 m NOHHON. OOH m.mO OH OOH OO OOH N O.NO mH N.OO mm O.NO OOH HmoHuome x x z x z x z x z x. z x. z mmmHO m N H O m N H OOHmHomo Ocmm mcflmsom mcH9poHU mmmum xmma xcmm Ocm HOOB .mmmHO >9 OOOHOHOOQ mo HO9EOZ I «OH.m OH9mB 76 OOH H OOH OH OOH ON OOH HmH OOH H OOH H OOH NH OOH Om OOH OOH Hmuoe COHOHOOQ N O.H H OOH H m.m H O.N H Honncoo m.O H N.N N m.N m OOH H O.mm OH O.NO ON m.Ok OO smumoum OOH H O.mN O O.Nm ON m.mm Om m.m H H.HH O m.HH NH NOHHoO N.OO HH O.NO kO 0.0m Om N.OH O O.O OH HOOHuome x z x z x z x z X z x z x z x z x z mmmHO O m N O O m N H COHmHOOQ OEOUCH COCHMW MO mmmD QUCMCOHCHMZ UGO WHMOZ mmde HOOB OGOm cam HmOB .mmmHO >9 mconHOOQ NO 909852 I mmH.m OH9mB 77 OOH NH OOH NON OOH H OOH N OOH m OOH ON OOH OO HMHOB conHUOQ X HOHuCOO m.mm 0H 0.0m HmH 0m H ,m.mm H n.hm mH m.hO HO Emumoum 0.0 O O.HH m O.N m NUHHoN 0.0H N 0.0 mH 00H H 0m H >.OO N m.0m m 0.mN ON HOUHHOOB H z X z X z x. z X z x z X z mmmHU, N H m O m N H conHOOQ OHOOHOH coHumpuommcmuB mmmum HOME HOOO OOO xmma .mmmHO >9 mconHOOQ mo HOQEOZ I OOH.m OH9OE 78 OOH OOH N OOH ON OOH H OOH H OOH O OOH Hm OOH OOH Hmuoe O. H conHu nix m.O N HOHHEOU H.O N OOH H OOH H ON H O.NH O O.ON HO smnmoum OO H O.NH O ON H O.Om HH O.ON HO HUHHoO OOH OO H 0.00 HN OO N HHOO OH 0.00 Om HOOHuoma x x z x. z x z x z x z x z x z mmmHO m N H O O m N H OOHOHOOQ Hmsuo non mrn co mmmu< xmme qunuuuunuu comm 0cm MOOB .mmmHU >9 mconHOOQ HO HO9EOZ I OOH.m OH9mB 79 00H Hm 00H OHN 00H OHN 00H NNH 00H NON 00H OmH 00H 0h 00H mmH Hmuoa O. H O. H O. H O m. H O.H N O. H O. H H N O N.m H O.H O O.N m 0.0 OH O.N NH O O O OH m m.O N m.OH Hm O.m NH m.HN ON 0.0m Ob H.ON Om HN OH Hm Om N m.0m ON O.NO OOH 0.0m NON m.mn om O.NO HmH 0.mO O0H 0O mO HO MHH H x z x z x z X z X. z x. z x. z x. z Ocmm OEOOOH Oocmc 90990 900 OHOOHOH coHumu Omcumm .Imucamz mchsom mcH9uOHU O99 co . Inommcmue . . . . HO mOmD O mHmOZ mmwum HOOB conHOOQ xmma Ocm Omcmm >9 mconHOOQ HO HO9EOZ I mH.m OH9OB 80 The prime purpose was to explore the crisscrossing of deci- sions between and among task areas following the central choice. The research questions regarding decision sequence analysis were: Are a block of decisions made in one task area, followed by a block of decisions in another or are decisions either individually or in blocks, more intermeshed among various task areas? Do the decision sequence numbers determine any general trend or crisscrossing among task areas as the sequence continues? Do decision task areas with low sequence numbers have any relation to task areas with high sequence numbers? Exploration of decision sequence among the task areas ought to provide insight into these questions. Modified cross—tabulation tables were constructed to explore decision sequence eminating from the central deci- sion. Considering all decision reported by respondents as a totality, all decisions #1 within a task area were placed in the cell where the task area intersected itself. All sequenced decisions following #1 were charted in the following manner: first, the task area where the preceeding decision was made is charted on the vertical axis; second, the task area where the subsequent decision was made is on the horizontal axis; and third, the point where the hori— zontal and vertical axes intersects is the cell where the 81 decisions being charted are to be placed. For discussion purposes all charts will be read from left to right. Analysis in Table 5.20 A, B, C, and D shows the frequency distribution of reported sequenced decisions for each decision task area and also, for all the task areas. In Table 5.20 the number sequence of decisions is charted so the weaving of sequenced decisions among task areas will demonstrate the crisscrossing pattern. For example, the cell Transportation - Transportation (Table 5.203) has 10 decisions sequenced #1. To continue with one sequence, decisions sequenced #2 are located in 5 different task areas: Transportation, Uses of Earned Income, Clothing, Leisure, and On the Job. Some decisions #2 were in Trans- portation, these were placed in the same cell as #1 because they follow consecutively; however, some #2 were in another task area i.e. Uses of Earned Income, and were placed hori— zontally one cell to the left, Transportation - Uses of Earned Income. To continue, decision #2 was in Uses of Earned Income. To determine in which task cell decision #3 was placed, a move to the horizontal row labeled Uses of Earned Income is necessary because this is the task area where the preceeding decision was made. A review of those task areas where decisions #3 were made are Cloth- ing, Housing, Meals and Maintenance, and Uses of Earned 82 .mHHOO OOHO 9mm9 OOH9OOOHO9OHIHHOO m O99 mo OOO CH OOOOHQ OHO3 .H# OOOOOOOO .OOHO9O HOH9GOO O99 OGHBOHHOH >H9UOHHO mOOHmHOOO HH¢ "mBOZ .9O9Es: OOHOHOOO OOGOOUOm OOH9HOQOH m9OOOOOmmOH mo 9O9E5: mHODOO Z9 .9O9E5: OOHmHOOO OUGOSOOO O99 mHOOOO mm H OH H OH H Hm H m H mH N m H m m O H 0H H O H O H O H O H m H m H m H m m N N m O N H N H N OH H O N Ochsom H Nm H OH H OH H mm H NH H OH H HH N MH N 0H N HH m o H 0H N m m m H m H m O O H OH N m H O O O H NH H HH N n H O N m H HH N m N m H O O O H O H O m O m O H O H O O m H m H O O m H m H m H O m N m m H O H N H N N N H O O H OOHHHoHO Z w Z w Z w Z w Z w Z O Z w 9Z mm OEOOCH Oocmc mmum 9mm8 HO99O 90h OHOOHOH OOH9O9 OOcnmm IO9chz mchOOm mca99OHO OOHmHOOQ O99 co . Iuommcmue -. . . . . mo mOmD O mHOOz OGHOOOOOHO OOum HOOB conHOOQ 9OO5OOm9dm II II III OOOHO xmmB OOHmHOOQ >9 OOOOOOOO GOHOHOOQ I «0N.m OH9OB 83 OHOB .H# OOCOOOOO .mHHOO OOHO 9mm9 OOH9OOOHO9OHIOHOO O O99 mo Oco OH OOOOHQ .OOHO9O HOH9OOO O99 OOHBOHHOH >H9OOHHO mOOHmHOOO HHN "OBOZ .9O9EOO OOHmHOOO OOOOSUOO OGH9HOQOH m9cOOOommOH mo 9O9EOG mHmst Z mo mOmD O mHOOz mO9< XOOB COHmHOOO 9GO5OOm95m .9O9Edc OOHmHOOO OOGOOUOO O99 mHODOO OM H ON H OH H OH H OH H OH N OH N OH H ON N NH H OH N HH H OH O 0H H OH O HH O O H OH N O m O H NH H O O O H OH N HH H O N O H OH H O H 0H N OH H m N m H HH H O H O H OH H O H O H O H 0H Oocmc H m H O H O H m H m H m H O IO9CHOE H 0N H O H m H m H N H H H O H O Ocm mHmOE Z O Z w Z O Z O Z w Z O Z O 9Z mm 900 CON9O9 OEOOCH Oocms OOHO MOOB HO99O OHOOHOH . OOcnmm IO9OHO2 Ochsom OOH99OHU OOHmHOOQ O99 co Iuommcmua . . . . . OOHOOOOOMO OmscHucoo I m9 OOOOSOOO COHmHOOQ I m0N.m OH9OB 85 H ON m OH N O H OH .H ON N O H OH H O N OH H O H mH H ON H O H O H OH N m H O H MH H O H m H O H O H O H O H m H O H O N m N O H O H O H m H m m N O m N O NH m m COHumu m m H m 0H H H m H m o m m -uommamua z m 2 O z m z m z m z m m Z O mEOUGH momma mmud Mmma non COHumu Hm£uo mHSmHmH Umcumm Imucamz OCHmsom OcHnuoHU conHUmQ mzu co IHOOmCmHB . mo mwmb w memZ OGHOmmomHm mmnd xmma conHomQ ucmsvmmnsm Umchgcoo I mON.m wHQmB 86 H Hm H CO H ON N ON H ON H mN N NN H. ON O OH O OH N OH N OH O OH m OH O OH H ON O NH H OH m HH H OH m OH H ON m OH N O N mN H mH O O H OH H NH O O N OH H HH H O N OH H O H m N O H ON H HN H O N O H OH H O H O H ON H O H m H O H O H OH H O H OH H N N H H N H O -H -m H m musmHmA z O z O z O z O z O z O z O z O wEoocH momma mmu< xmma Hmzuo 90h mHSmamA coHumu Umcumm Imucamz Ocamsom OCHSOOHU coamaumn 03p :0 . luommCmHB . . . . . mo mmmD O mHmwz OQHOmwomum mmué xmme conHowO ucmsvmmnsm mmmn< Xmma :onHqu On mocmswmm conHomQ I UON.O mHQmB 87 O N N N mN N ON O mN O NN m HN N ON N OH N OH N OH N OH N OH H OH N MH H NH N ON H HH H HN O OH H OH O O H OH O O N OH O O H mH H OH H ON O O H HH H OH H OH O m H OH H NH N O H OH O O H O H OH H O H OH m m H O H O H m N HH H N O O H m H O H OH H O N H N O H O N O H N N m non mpg :0 Z O z O z O z O z O z O z O z O mEoocH momma mend xmma umnuo QOO mudmamq COHumu Umcnmm Imucamz Osamsom OsanuoHU Godmaomn map so . Iuommcmue . . . . . mo mmmD O mHmmz OGHOmwomHm mmua xmma conHqu ucmsvmmflsm mmmum xmma COHmHqu On mocmsva aonHqu I QON.O mHQmB 88 H ON H OH H OH H OH H mm H N N HN H HN H ON N H H N H NH H m H OH H OH Hmnuo z O z O z O z O z O z O z O z O mEoocH momma mmu< xmma QOO coaumu umnuo mHSmHmA . Owcumm Imucamz Ochsom OcflnuoHo COHmaomn mnu :0 Inommcmna . . mo mmmD O mHmmz OcHUmmomum mmud xmma conHqu ucmsvmmnsm wwscflucoo I mo~.m mHnma 89 Income, Decisions #3 were made in Housing, the #3 would be placed in the cell, Uses of Earned Income - Housing. Next, a move to the horizontal row of Housing is necessary. Charting continues in this manner. Charting for a given group of respondents can only be done through decisions #2 and thereafter individual respondents cannot be traced. The cell of Housing - Housing had the highest number (15) of decisions assigned #1. Self—intersecting task cells of Transportation and Clothing are ranked second and third. These three task cells together comprise about 76 percent of all decisions sequenced #l. A predominance of decisions sequenced with numbers in the twenties was found in the task area of On the Job decisions which indicates the majority of these decisions were made the greatest distance from the central decision. Leisure followed second in predominance to On the Job deci— sions in this respect. The content nature of these two areas indicates that high sequence numbers might be expected, Uses of Earned Income and Meals and Maintenance tend to spread the decision frequency throughout the total decision sequence range. However, there are some frequency clusters between decisions sequenced 5 to 10 and 11 to 20. A review of sequence range for each cell indicates 90 in the majority of task cells, the numbers do not run con— secutively through the sequence, thus a move from one task area to another is necessary to continue with the sequence. These moves also demonstrate that sequenced decisions crisscross among the task areas, A summary of decision sequence is given in Table 5,21, The total number of decisions, a decision sequence mean and decision sequence range have been computed for each cell. For example, from Table 5.21, the cells of Meals and Maintenance - Clothing reports N=5, M=9.0 and R=4-14. This information states for this particular cell that the sequence numbers range (R) from 4 to 14, 5 (N) decisions were reported in this range, and the mean (M) of these 5 reported decisions is 9.0. Analysis of Table 5.21 elicited several findings. A diagonal from the cell Clothing — Clothing down to Other — Other contains all self-insersecting task cells, The range for each of the 8 cells in the diagonal begins with #1. This is in accord with plotting procedures, Also since each cell had a #1 this indicates that out of the 8 task areas each one had at least one respondent report a decision in that area directly following the central choice. A review of all cell N's shows the highest number in the self-intersecting cells, Obviously, from these 8 91 .mHHwo mmum xmmy OcHuommeucHImHmm O man «0 mac CH OmomHm flaw H# Omocmdvmm mum moHono Hmnucmo msu OcHonHom OHOHMHOOEEH mconHomU HH< «HBOZ .ammE mucmsvmm conHomO mHmsvm 2 Q .Hmpcmvcommmu mo H0965: mm HHm3 mmv mGonHomU mo umnfisc mHmsvm 2m OHnm ONIOnm OHImum ONINum ONIHHO OHImnm OOINHO NHINum mEoocH OO.OHIE Om.OHu£ OO.OH2 OO.HHHS HO.NHHZ Om.OHn2 m0.0Hn2 mm.On2 Omcumm an OHHZ Oan OHHZ OOuz OHuz Onz mHuz mo mmmD ONMO OHIOnm OHImum mHImum ONINum ONIHnm OIOum OHIOHO mocmc OO.ONH£ OO.OI2 OO.OHH2 ON.Han MO.OHE ON.OHHZ mm.mnz OO.OHE mchmz an muz On mnz man Omuz muz mnz O mHmmz Nnm OHINum OHINHO OIHHm HmINnm OO.an mN.Onz OO.OHZ MO.HHE OO.OH2 onz mnz Ouz Nmuz oan mcflmsom OImnm OHIOnm HHINum MMINHO OINum Olmnm NMIHnmo OO.OH2 OO.OMZ ON.OHE OH.OHZ Om.mn2 mm.On2 O.OHH‘,HnH mnz Ouz Han mHuz oan muz omHZm mcflnuoHo @EOUCH OUCOE mefl MOOB HOLHO QOO madmamq :OHumu Uwcumm Imchmz Ocamsom OsafionU GOHOHUOQ mnp co . Iuommcmua . . . . . mo mmmD O mHmmz OGHUmmomHm mmum xmma conHowO ucmsvmmnsm mmmud xmma COHmHomQ On moHHmHumuO conHowQ I HN.m mHQmB 92 ONIHnm HNINnm NmINHnm mum ONIOHnm OHum OH.HHu2 OO.OHHS OO.HNHZ OO.mn2 OO.OHHZ OO.OHHZ OHZ mnz mnz an Nu Huz Hmnuo ONIOnm ONIHum ONImum Onm NHIOHO OHINnm OImum ON.mHn2 mO.NHuz NN.NHHE OO.OH2 OH.OHE Om.OuS OO.OHZ HOO Onz OOHZ Oan an Onz Onz muz may :0 HNIMHnm ONINn HMIHHO OHINum OHINHm OHImum ONImnm OO.OHHE OH.NHH2 OO.mHuz mm.Ouz Hm.OHuz Om.Ou2 OO.NHH2 muz OHHZ OOHZ muz MHHZ Nuz Onz OHDOHOH OHINHm ONINnm ONIHHO OHINHO ONImnm NHIOum OINHO ON.OHE mO.Hu£ HO.OHZ O0.0nz mO.OHE OO.OHE OO.mnz coHumH Onz OHZ ONHZ HHHZ Onz NH OHHZ Iuommcmua mEoocH momma mmnm Mmms Hon coapmu szuo mademq . Omcnmm Imucamz OCHmdom OGHSOOHU Godmaomn may :0 Iuommcmna . . . mo mme O mHmmz Ochmmomum mmud xmma conHqu ucmsvmmnsm UmscHucoo I HN.O mHQmB 93 cells, 45 of the decisions will be #1. However, the remain- ing number of decisions in these cells indicates that sequenced decisions were made consecutively from the preceeding decision in the same task area. The decision task cell of Housing — Housing has the lowest mean of 1.73, indicating that more decisions assigned low sequence numbers were made in this cell than any other. Whereas the decision task area of Other had the highest means (ranging 11.14 — 21.67 except one mean of 3.0) indi- cating the decisions made were assigned the high sequence numbers and were made some distance from the central choice. Self—intersecting task cells of Uses of Earned Income, and On the Job decisions tied for 69 reported decisions or the most decisions made in any one cell. The two cells Clothing — Clothing, and Clothing - Uses of Earned Income each had the widest range of 32 sequenced decisions. The highest number of decisions reported on any one of the 45 decision profiles was 33. The block of four cells of Leisure — Leisure, Leisure — On the Job, On the Job- Leisure, and On the Job - 0n the Job indicate an interesting relationship. Thirteen 0n the Job decisions were sequenced following Leisure deci— Sions, and 18 Leisure decisions were sequenced following (kliihe Job decisions. Together this totals 31 decisions 94 which gives some indication that there is some relationship between Leisure decisions and On the Job decisions and vice versa. The data seem to indicate that once working hours and days off were decided, then leisure activities were chosen to fill the time. On the other hand, many respondents decided upon vacation time or a special leisure activity and then determine working hours around these activities. This gives some indication of reciprocal relationship between these two task areas. A similar relationship is found between the four cells of Clothing - Clothing, Clothing - Uses of Earned Income, Uses of Earned Income - Clothing, and Uses of Earned Income — Uses of Earned Income. Comparison of Findings with Plonk's Research A comparison of this study's results and Plonk's research was done to further analyze how decision class and linkage patterns differ from one central-satellite decision complex to another. A comparison of decision sequence was not made since Plonk did not include this dimension in her research. However, prior to a comparison of the findings a few basic differences and similarities of the researches ought to be noted. Plonk studied 50 respon- dents who had retired. This research studied 74 college 95 students ranging in age from 19 to 27. The 50 respondents of Plonk's were given no formal knowledge about central- satellite decision theory prior to collecting the data. Whereas the 74 students were verbally instructed about central—satellite decision complexes. In both researches, decision profiles were constructed in the same manner; however, the decision sequence numbers ( number following each decision symbol) have different connotations in each study, sequence is not considered in this comparison. Plonk's research studied the satellite decisions resulting from the central decision of retirement housing. Data were collected by interviewing 50 respondents. This present research studied the satellite decisions evolving from the central decision of students' summer occupational choice. Data were collected from 74 respondents by a self- administered questionnaire. Both researches were analyzed by classifying the satellite decisions by a decision typology and examining decision linkage. Both studies classified the satellite decisions by the-following four classifications; tactical, policy, pro- gram and control. However, the present research used a HKxiified classification of tactical and program, while the Other two classes remained in the original form. The SPeczific differences between the original and modified 96 classes of tactical and program are explained in Chapter I. Plonk's 50 respondents reported 1325 satellite decisions; 59 percent of the decisions were classified as tactical, 22 percent were policy, ll percent were program, and 8 percent were control. The mean for all satellite decisions reported by the 50 respondents was 26.5. The 74 respondents of the present study recorded 1236.satellite decisions which were classified as 44 percent tactical, 17 percent policy, 37 percent program and only one-half of one percent control. The mean for all satellite decisions reported by the 74 respondents was 16.7 All 50 of Plonk's respondents reported tactical and policy decisions while 94 percent reported program decisions. All the 74 respondents of the present study recorded tactical and program decisions, and 95 percent recorded policy decisions. The predominance of certain classes of decisions relates to the central choice. The respondents making a choice about housing will be making certain decisions that will affect their life for several years, whereas the students working at a summer occupation, quite often have many policies and regulations previously established. In addition, the occupation may last only two or three months. Hence, the nature of the central decision chosen seems to give some indication of the 97 constraints, types, and content of the satellite decisions. Plonk's findings indicated that the variables of sex, age, occupation, education, income and duration of time between decisions and action tended to affect the number of satellite decisions. Also, the present study's findings indicated that the variables of age, educational level, students' major and summer occupation tended to affect the number of satellite decisions. Specifically, in the present study the particular occupation chosen seemed to be a major variable in the number of decisions evolved from the central decision. The variable of age indicated that the number of satellite decisions seemed to increase as the respondent's age increased. Plonk's linkage analysis indicated 93 percent of the linkages were radial. Of these, 90 percent were single radial, and the remaining three percent were multiple, in— verted and multiplex forms. Seven percent of the linkages were equally divided between multiple and single class series forms. The present research found about 86 percent of the linkages of the radial form. Of these, 80 percent were the single radial form and the remaining 6 percent represented multiple, inverted and multiplex. Series linkage forms composed a little over 12 percent. The par- ticular difference between the two results illustrate more 98 radial forms of decision linkage in Plonk's research while the present study had a higher percentage of decisions linkage forms other than radial. Both studies had 17 combinations of decision linkage forms appear on the decision profiles, but these were not the same 17 combinations for both studies. The most frequent combination of linkage forms reported in Plonk's research are single radial and multiple class series which were reported by one—fifth of the respondents. From the present study the following two combinations of linkage forms were reported equally by 30 percent of the respondents: 1) single radial and 2) single radial, multiple radial, single series, and multiple series. Scope was the linkage component used to describe the number of decisions in the bands on the decision profile. Plonk's research indicated that 86 percent of the satellite decisions were diagrammed in Band #1 which were directly linked to the central decision. Band #2 held about 11 per— cent of the satellite decisions while Bands#3, 4, and 5 had only 3 percent of the decisions. Approximately two-thirds of the decisions in Band #1 were tactical while most of the decisions in Bands #2, 3, 4, and 5 were control. The results from the present study indicated approximately 74 percent of the satellite decisions made were in Band #1 which 99 directly linked to the central decision. Approximately 20 percent of the satellite decisions made were in Band #2 and the remaining 6 percent were in Band5#3, 4, and 5. About 42 percent of the satellite decisions made in Band #1 were program while the tactical decisions tended to dominate Bands#2, 3, 4, and 5. The difference between the two researches is rather clear with one having a higher percentage of satellite decisions in Band #1 and both varied in the dominance of decision class. Range describes the number of bands through which the satellite decisions were linked to the central decision. Plonk's results indicate, that on one-half of the decision profiles, the range of satellite decisions extended through two bands to the central decision and in one-third of the profiles it extended through three bands. The present study indicated that about 43 percent of the decisions extended through two bands and 34 percent extended through three bands. Both researches reported the longest linkage range extended through five bands. From the analyzed data, Plonk found that the reported satellite decisions centered around six task categories: 1) choosing an apartment unit, 2) establishing an apartment, unit, 3) reducing possessions, 4) transporting self and possessions, 5) establishing self in the community, and 6) 100 forming living patterns. The present study predetermined the following eight decision task areas (categories): 1) Clothing, 2) Housing, 3) Meals and other Maintenance, 4) Uses of Earned Income, 5) Transportation, 6) Leisure, 7) On the Job decisions and 8) Other. The predetermined cate— gories derived from pretest data were used in the present study as guides for the respondents to focus their thinking in answering the self—administered questionnaire. On the other hand, Plonk derived the task areas ex_post facto from the responses given in the interviews. In conclusion, this comparison indicates that dif- ferent central decisions evolve differences in number of satellite decisions. The satellite decisions can be classi— fied by similar decision classes but the predominance of a certain class over another seems to depend on the central decision. Lastly, the satellite decisions form linkage patterns which also vary in range, form, and scope. Succintly, the content of these two central decision indi- cates that the satellite decisions will vary in number, class, and linkage forms. CHAPTER VI SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS This chapter summarizes the results of this explora- tory and descriptive study which focused on a central decision and its satellite decisions, and their class, linkage, and sequence; discusses findings; indicates limi— tations of the study, and suggests implications for further research. Summary of Study The researcher studied the central decision of students' summer occupational choice. Seventy-four Michigan State University students enrolled in the HMC 331 course completed a self-administered questionnaire. Data analysis of the central—satellite decision complex revolved around three conceputalizations. First, all decisions were classi— fied according to the classes explained in Chapter I. The central decision is synonymous with strategic decision. Satellite decisions were classed as tactical, policy, pro- gram, and control. Decision linkage, the second conceptualization, included the three components of form, 101 102 sc0pe, and range. Forms of decisiOn linkage are divided into series, radial, and compound with further subdivisions in each form except compound. Lastly, sequence of satellite decisions was viewed in relation to the total central- satellite decision complex. Demographic data, the central decision, and satellite decisions were all recorded on the questionnaire. The con— tent of each recorded decision served as a basis for decision classification and for determining linkage and interdepen— dence. Following classification of all reported satellite decisions, decision profiles were constructed for each respondent for analysis of class and linkage. Findings indicate that tactical decisions were the most frequently reported class while program, policy, and control followed in order, respectively. Of the 1236 satellite decisions reported, 44 percent were classified as tactical, 37 percent program, 17 percent policy, and only one—half of 1 percent control. The tendency towards tactical and program decisions ranking first and second is undoubtedly related to the particular central decision under study. Many of the occupations chosen by students already had previously established policies about dress, manner in which work was to be done, and the like. Depart- ing from this point, respondents made tactical or program 103 decisions to carry out and conform to these pre—established policies. The mean for all satellite decisions reported by the 74 respondents was 16.7. However, a further investigation of the frequency of total number of decisions reported indi- cates a bi—modal curve with many students' totals numbering 8 and 9 or 18, 19, and 20. This bi-modal curve may explain that those students reporting few decisions chose an occupation which seemed fairly regimented and established, while those students reporting many decisions chose an occupation which seemed rather flexible and creative to the individual. All the 74 respondents recorded tactical and program decisions while 95 percent recorded policy decisions and only 7 percent recorded control decisions. The findings indicated that the variables of age, educational level, students' major, and summer occupation tended to affect the number of satellite decisions. The key variable was the summer occupational choice. If the chosen occupation elicited few decisions, then age, educational level and students major had little affect on the number of decisions. However, if the chosen occupation was unlimited in decision opportunities, then the older and more experi- enced plus the higher the education level a respondent had, 104 the higher the number of decisions. Seventeen combinations of linkage forms appeared in the decision profiles. The following forms were reported equally by 30 percent of the respondents: 1) single radial, and 2) single radial, multiple radial, single series, and multiple series as a combination. Since single radial form is reported on 15 percent of the decision profiles, this indicates all the decisions are linked directly to the central choice which in turn suggests that certain occupations elicit decisions in particular task areas. Moreover, the other 85 percent of the respondents may have chosen occupations that require any number of decisions and in turn may weave various patterns of linkage. Scope_was the linkage component used to describe the number of satellite decisions in the bands of the decision profile. Findings indicated approximately 74 percent of the decisions were in Band #1 which linked directly to the central decision. Approximately 20 percent of the decisions were in Band #2 and the remaining 6 percent were in Bands #3, 4, and 5. About 42 percent of the decisions in Band #1 were program while tactical tended to dominate Bands #2, 3, 4, and 5. gange_describes the number of bands through which the satellite decisions extendedheyond the central decision. 105 About 40 percent of the decisions extended through two bands, while 34 percent extended through three bands. The longest linkage range extended through five bands. Decision sequence is the chronological ordering of satellite decisions following the central choice. Forty—five decision profiles were analyzed to explore sequence in rela— tion to all task areas. More decisions sequenced #1 were made in the task area of Housing, followed by Transportation and Clothing. The highest sequenced decisions (numbered in the twenties) were in the task area of On the Job decisions followed by Leisure. Meals and Maintenance, and Uses of Earned Income tended to have a wide range of sequence numbers, but tended to have frequency clusters between sequence numbers 5 to 10 and 11 to 20. Decision class, linkage and sequence were analyzed in the following eight task areas: 1) Clothing, 2) Housing, 3) Meals and Maintenance, 4) Uses of Earned Income, 5) Trans— portation, 6) Leisure, and 7) On the Job decisions, and 8) Other. These eight task areas were determined prior to analysis for use as guides for completion of the question— naire. A comparison of total numbers of decisions for each task area, and sequence number by task area indicates that decision task areas of Housing and Transportation excluding 106 Other have the lowest number of total decisions made and also the lowest sequence numbers which indicate they were made immediately or shortly following the central choice. Task areas of On the Job decision and Leisure ranked second and third highest for total number of decisions made, and also received the highest sequence numbers which indicate that many decisions were made in other task areas before decisions were made in these two. Lastly, the three task areas of Clothing, Meals and Maintenance, and Uses of Earned Income tended to have the widest sequence ranges but generally fell between the low sequence task area of Housing and the high sequence task area of On the Job. These three (Clothing, Meals, and Income) task areas vary in ranking of total number of decisions with the task area of Uses of Earned Income receiving the highest number of decisions in any task area. Implications of Study Several implications may be drawn from this study. Discussion primacy must reign with the central decision. Choice of the central decision is crucial since the entire study is based on its aftermaths. Students' summer occu- pational choice is a broad caption for a group of specific decisions which range widely in nature. Hospital aide, secretary, data coder, paper mill laborer, teacher, Good 107 Humor driver, and sales clerk are examples of occupations chosen by students which fall under this broad caption. Each Specific occupation has particular characteristics and demands all its own such as type of dress, kinds and amount of work, and hours of work. However, each specific occupation had some similarities with other occupations, for example, place to live in relation to occupation, trans— portation, and allocation of earned income. The delination between the broad and specific central choice is pertinent. Differences among the occupations are prime means for deter- mining the variance of data according to variables. Hence, when occupational choice is mentioned it refers to a heterogenous grouping of specific occupations. Decision classification contributed an important element to this study. The variations of classes of decisions from one decision profile to another indicated that some occupations were so pre—established as far as work policies, possible living quarters, and the like, that the decisions left for the respondents to make concerned details, such as the size of uniform needed for occupation. An occupation with fewer policies allowed for a respondent to make many types of decisions such as policies concerning work, and mode of dress. Though the decision classification relates in general to the nature of a possible occupation it also 108 eludes to the amount of freedom and responsibility a student as an employee has been given. An occupation which allows for more individual responsibility ought to evolve several decisions whereas an occupation with little responsibility ought to evolve few decisions on the respondents part. Frequency of reported decisions as a whole and by various task areas gives some indication of the nature of the occupation as to whether it evolves few or many choices. Decision linkage is a most important aspect of a central—satellite decision complex since it presents visually what has taken place. Linkage not only give a visual appearance but also indicates which decisions are linked to other decisions, and which are linked directly to the central decision. The linkage between decisions also shows some logical order in which some decisions“are made before others thus relating to decision sequence. Also, decision linkage indicates an overall pattern which is directly evolved from the central decision. The linkage patterns, either from a part or whole point of view, are tools which can be used to portray that one decision links to another and that no deci- sion stands in isolation. Decision sequence relates a certain amount of logic regarding which decisions are made prior to other decisions. In some cases sequencing is helpful in determinflgydecision 109 linkage. Sequencing of decisions also reveals that all the decisions in one task area are not made consecutively within the area, but that there is a crisscrossing pattern among task areas. Decision sequence seems to give a sense of continuity to the complete decision profile. Through chrono- logically ordering all decisions, a decision complex as a whole has all its components (decision class and linkage) woven together. In conclusion, the content of the central decision does affect the satellite decision classes, and deCision linkage, and may affect decision sequence in a central— satellite decision complex. Limitations of Study Limitations of this study are discussed relative to the respondents, methodology, data collection and analysis. Respondents The students were asked in the questionnaire to recall the decisions made following their Specific occupa— tional choice. Though the data were gathered one and a half months into the fall term, most students would have at least a four to five month (June to October), if not longer, period for recall. Even though the students were familiar with decisions 110 through studying decision theory, their ability to express themselves coherently in a written manner affected the find— ings. Some students wrote their decisions clearly and concisely, other rammbled, and some were illegible. Methodology Students completed a self-administered questionnaire within a time limit. For some, this time was not long enough to complete the questionnaire in its entirity replete with sequencing. Several students commented as they handed in their questionnaires, "I did not have enough time to complete it," or "I ran out of time." Perhaps, a follow-up interview with each respondent might help supply missing information, clarify decisions, and complete decision sequence where needed. Data Collection and Analysis The period of recall was a limitation already cited but must be reemphasized again. Recall here does not only reflect period of time, but also the respondents ability to recall. The questionnaire was administered within a short time after the students had commenced fall term. It was hoped that the shorter the recall time and nearer to the actual summer experience, the more complete the data would be. However, recall is still a limitation because the central decision undoubtly was made some time in advance of 111 the actual work experience. An approach to data collection might be to have subjects keep a diary on a day—to-day basis following the actual choice. This would lessen the limita— tion of recall and also might provide more complete data. Since all decisions were not clearly and coherently written, decision classification was questionable in some cases. An approach of asking each respondent, given the decision classifications, to classify their own decisions might be an improvement over the researcher and another coder classifying the decisions. The respondents sequencing of decisions helped link the decisions together and show dependence. However, not all sequenced decisions were sequenced in a logical manner. For example, when a reported decision obviously followed a previously made decisions which was not reported, an X deci— sion was added to the decision profile to indicate an unreported decision. The addition of an X decision illus— trates the illogic of the reported sequence. Therefore, it might be an improvement for the researcher to construct the decision profile and then review it with the respondent. Respondents had some difficulty in sequencing satellite decisions in a chronological time order. In the beginning, some respondents found it difficult‘enough to recall and write the satellite decisions made following the 112 central choice, so to recall sequence proved even more diffi- cult for some. Students occasionally reported two decisions as if they were one and therefore, assigned only one sequence number. Perhaps, if the researcher would review the questionnaire with the respondent after completion, sequencing limitations mentioned would be lessened. Implications for Further Research The utilization of decision class concepts indicates need for further clarification. Such clarification would possibly evolve from further tests and wider applications to different central-satellite decision complexes, as well as to different populations. Findings indicated that centrality is the key determinant of the decision complex. However, the extent of decision centrality has not been explored and raises several lines of inquiry for the generation of hypotheses. Do the number of satellite decisions reported give any indi— cation as to the extent of centrality of a decision? Are numbers of decision linkages, complexity of form, or com— binations of different forms indicators of centrality extent? Could various classes of decisions be used to predict the extent of a central decision? To explore this conception of centrality, research 113 of occupational choice applied to different age populations such as those entering life-time employment following high school graduation and/or college graduation, as well as those who left the employment world and now are reentering ‘are some possible suggestions. Studies of various time periods over which consequences of decisions are in effect i.e. short time periods like three months an indefinite time period may affect centrality. Further studies might also explore other central choices, i.e. a decision to return to college for advanced studies, a decision of buying a house or changing place of residence, the changing from one occupation to another, a decision to marry, to have children, and to obtain a divorce. Not only does extent of centrality need to be explored but different central decisions need to be researched. There also seems to be a need to study central decisions with populations varying in age, and education levels. Decision linkage in this study was based on the con- tent relation of the central-satellite decision complex. Though analysis of linkage was determined by content in relation to the central decision, the reported decisions in themselves did not always directly hinge on the central decision. Examination of some decision linkages tended to be based on resource allocation. For example, many students 114 chose to live at home because it was most economical. How- ever, the actual living place may be determined by various resources and situations. Financial decisions in many pro- files linked with clothing decisions, food expenditure decisions and recreation decisions. Hence, an approach to analyzing decision linkages might be resource allocation. It is assumed that all decisions are influenced by situational and environmental factors. However, to what extent environmental factors determine the decision content or possible decision linkages is an area for exploration. For example, an 0n the Job decision relates to the central decision, but the specific decision concerning the job evolves from a particular situation. Questions might be raised as to what extent environmental factors influence decisions, and could they serve as a basis for determining decision linkage and sequence? Trends in decision linkage is another area which deserves investigation. Possible studies could center on several central-satellite decision complex studies to deter— mine if there are any tendencies toward certain decision linkages in certain task areas or are decision linkages individualistic. Exploration of decision sequence indicates need for further research. Findings suggest that the central 115 decision had some influence as to what satellite decisions would be made first. However, the findings also indicated that as the decision sequence progressed, the sequencing did not depend so heavily upon the central decision but on the existing environmental situation. This relates directly to the idea previously discussed concerning the influences of environmental factors. A further suggestion for study of decision sequence would be to investigate in several central- satellite decision complexes similarities and differences in content of decisions made first, second, and so on. Would similarities occur only in studies with similar central decisions, or would each decision complex elicit its own particular sequence. Another line of inquiry would be to study the sequence of decisions to determine if there is a relationship between decision sequence and a priority or ranking of decision importance. This study has shown interrelationships between and among decisions following a central choice. All of the decision interrelationships were focused on completing or carrying out the central decision. Some decisions were made before other decisions could be made; some decisions were unchanged while others were altered along the way; some decisions were made before other decisions indicating some sequence, and in total, all the decisions played a 116 role in executing the central decision. It would seem poss— ible that if choice follows choice from a central decision that the reverse might also be true. A complex satellite decisions leading up to the central decision ought to be studied. This proposition is in accord with Gore's (6) reciprocal concept discussed in Chapter II. It appears that several small decisions made in some sequences are woven together and culminate into one central decision. If this were the case the central decision could not be made without taking the smaller decisions previously made into account. Another suggestion for further study might be to examine a central decision that is about to be made and study the respondents projections or predictions as to what might evolve because of the choice. Though these pro- jections may not take place, this may be an indication that the respondents can visualize some ties between a given decision and what might be forthcoming. Studies along these lines might be helpful in that a more refined tool may be discovered to help people visualize interrelationships among decisions. Though the present study deals with decisions re— ported following a central choice, the next step may be to study in greater depth different influences on decisions, linkages, and sequence, plus a departure is needed to study 117 the satellite decisions which transpire choice. Possibly out of many different refined tool will evolve to help people interrelationships in an effort to more realistically help people strive toward prior to the central researches, a more visualize decision effectively and goal achievement. LITERATURE CITED Books 1. Simon, Herbert A. The New Science of Management Deci— sion. New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1960. 2. Cooper, Joseph D. The Art of Decision-Making. Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1961. 3. Niles, Mary Cushing. The Essence of Management. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1958. 4. U.S. Department of Labor. Dictionary of Occupational Titles. Vol. II, Third Edition (1965), pp. 1-2. 5. Richards, Max D., and Greenlaw, Paul S. Management Decision—Making. Homewood, 111.: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1966. 6. Gore, William J. Administrative Decision-Making: A Heuristic Model. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1964. 7. Thompson, J. and Tuden, Arthur. "Strategies, Struc- tures, and Process of Organization Decisions," Comparative Studies in Administration. Pittsburgh, Penn.: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1959. 8. Diesing, Paul. Reason in Society: Five Types of Deci— sions and Their Social Conditions. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1962. 9. Morris, William T. Management Science in Action. Homewood, Illinois: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1963. 10. Gross, Irma H. and Crandall, Elizabeth Walbert. Management for Modern Families. New York: Appleton- Century-Crofts, 1963. 118 11. 119 Katona, George. Psychological Analysis of Economic Behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1951. Periodicals 12. l3. 14. 15. l6. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. Alderson, Wroe. ”Perspectives on the Planning Process,‘ The Journal of the Academy of Management, Vol. 12, No. 3 (December, 1959), pp. 181-196. Bach, Kurt. "Decisions Under Uncertainty," The American Behavioral Scientist, 4 (February, 1961), pp. 14-19. Schlater, Jean Davis. "The Management Process and Its Core Concepts,” Journal of Home Economics, Vol. 59, No. 2 (February, 1967), pp. 93-98. Johnson, David L., and Kobler, Arthur L. "The Man— Computer Relationship," Science, 138 (November, 1962), pp. 873-879. Hunt, Pearson. "Fallacy of the One Big Brain," Harvard Business Review, 55 (July, 1966). PP. 84-96. Paolucci, Beatrice. "Managerial Decision Patterns," Penney's Fashion and Fabrics (Fall and Winter, 1963), pp. 13-17. Delbecq, Andre L. ”The Management of Decision-Making Within the Firm: Three Strategies for Three Types of Decision-Making," Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 4 (December, 1967), pp. 324—339. Diesing, Paul. "Noneconomic Decision-Making," Ethics, 66, No. 1 (October, 1955), pp. 18—35. . "Socioeconomic Decisions,” Ethics, 69, No. 1 (October, 1958), pp. 1-18. Schlater, Jean D., and Vincent, Warren H. "Graduate Interdisciplinary Course in Management," Journal of Home Economics, 54 (November, 1962), pp. 782- 784. 120 22. Paolucci, Beatrice. "Family Decision Making," Focus (April, 1965), PP. 3-4. 23. Knoll, Marjorie. "Toward a Conceptual Framework in Home Management," Journal of Home Eccnomics, 55 (May, 1963), pp. 335-336. Unpublished Materials 24. Plonk, Martha A. "Decision Class and Linkage in One Central—Satellite Decision Complex." Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Michigan State University, 1964. 25. Lancaster, Rita R. "Case Studies of the Decision- Making of Ten Non—College Educated Homemakers." Unpublished M.A. Thesis, University of Kansas, 1966. 26. Halliday, Jean Rowan. "Relationships Among Certain Characteristics of a Decision Event: Decision Procedure, Decision Context, and Decisionmaker." Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Michigan State University, 1964. 27. Myers, Anna Mae. "Class and Interrelatedness of Deci- sion Ensuing from the Decision of Wives to Seek Employment.” Unpublished M.S. Thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, 1967. 28. Bymer, Gwen. "Family Financial Management: Some Research Direction,” Address at National Seminar Workshop for Home Economics Administration, Lincoln, Nebraska, April 5, 1967. APPENDIX A 122 ADMINISTRATION OF QUESTIONNAIRE The questionnaire that you have in front of you is part of a research study presently taking place at Michigan State University in the Department of Home Management and Child Development. This study is concerned with the types and linkages of decisions. This questionnaire is asking you to recall and relate the decisions you made concerning your past summer's job (gainful employment). Your answers will be kept confidential and coded for research use only. It will take you about 20 to 30 minutes to complete the three parts of the questionnaire. Take your time and give your answers some thought. The success of this particular study depends on your recall of decisions made. Before you start, let us quickly review what a deci- sion is. A DECISION REFERS TO A SITUATION WHERE A CHOICE IS MADE BETWEEN TWO OR MORE ALTERNATIVES. As an illustration of some decisions, I would like to refer to my last summers occupation of being an Assistant Camp Director in a girls' camp in New York. Upon making this central decision, several other decision situations came into existence. The first decision I made concerned what mode of transportation I would use to get myself from Michigan State University to New York. I wanted to do some traveling and visiting of friends before going to work in New York. After checking various transportation schedules, I chose to ride the bus rather than go by airplane or train to New York. Choosing to travel to New York by bus rather than a train or airplane is a good example of a decision made as a consequence of my central decision to work in New York. 'While on my job, I slept nights in a tent, wore a camp uniform on certain days, and had specified days off. These are not examples of deci- sions, but were pre—established policies at the camp. These policies resulted in no choice of sleeping arrangements or on-the-job clothing. A decision I had to make concerned my bedding for the summer nights in camp. Since I was to sleep in a tent, this limited my alternatives. My decision was to use a sleeping bag. Had you not known I was going to be sleeping in a tent this summer, the decision to "use a sleeping bag“ seems incomplete, and gives no reference as to why the sleeping bag was used. A more complete answer would be that 123 I chose to use a sleeping bag this summer because it seemed warmer and less bulky than bedding or bedroll for sleeping in a tent. These are only examples of a very few of the decisions I made in regard to my summer occupation. However, these examples are given to help illustrate to you the difference between a decision, an incomplete decision, and a stipulation resulting from the central choice. Please note: when you start part three, it is ask— ing you to look at all_your decisions and sequence them in totality rather than sequencing each task area section individually. (The explanatory comments were given verbally to the students prior to their answering the questionnaire.) Subject No. [[3 124 Date QUESTIONNAIRE PART I 1. Sex (circle) M F 2. Age 3. Marital Status (check) Single - Married ____.Separated Divorced 10. ll. 12. Education (check the highest level at present) First year college __'_ Second year college ____ Third year college - Fourth year college ____.Graduate Other Are you a major in the College of Home Economics? Yes No If No is checked in question # 5, please specify the college in which you major is located. College major Check the source of income for your education. Self supported Parental support Scholarships or study grants Other What was your 1967 summer occupation title? Are you still engaged in this occupation? Yes No How long (a number) have or were you engaged in this occupation? Weeks Mbnths Years Have you ever worked at this occupation befc:e this past summer? Yes No n. v . . —.. 7““ g I . I l ' I .1 ‘ ' .‘ ‘ 'l l ".. v. I ‘ - ..'-I- u w. n- p ;n N 1', . r u‘\_' ‘ > . . w - a. .» . - , y - 'I o ‘3‘} W .- I ., I u‘ R nu r. l I ' .p . ’ I ’ . a I p. l b. . . -... In}. - ‘ . ' - ' ' ‘4 ' L‘ 'I . .v o . , . 0‘ t l i u- . . . y . -‘ . '. . ‘ .- 3 ‘ ~‘l I h "' rum . . .' ' ‘ .0. ' ‘ s. \ 'l ' . I‘ ’ . _, _. ‘. , .. _ ‘ }‘§.,“I. - ‘ ‘. l" f '. . .. .. .. .- ~ . . _' o - . . , l ' - -I' I. _ h . ‘ o‘ I Q . h. .u v I . .. a O \ N... . . I I I II a - ‘ Y x l‘ r v ._ . n ’- ’ - § :9‘, 3 flag. ‘ ‘ ; ' . - ~. . . . ~ I : r. i i . ._.. .1. r . . ' I , » n H.-.- ' A n ,3 , L‘."‘l .0 ,‘ '. 5'1 - .- ‘ I . ~ . . .. c. ,... u.‘ - 0' . . Q. .. .. 3 . : , . ’ \-l .' - " 3‘ . . . . . . ‘3..- ‘- . . . I .' " I ".‘1 II ‘ " i". ,' - . flu»..- I...a. ..I~., Kef. --vb .. I ‘0'.’. '1'. ~ I ' -. ~¢'.\ p1 _ '1 if I O '0‘...- _ ' ‘ .-.-oe-' - ' '\ e - t ' ' q . . -. . . .2 ' I p . . . .‘.‘ . ~ 9. . u .. "I r I I, 0 .OH .. K v . . _ IF- I.. .l' ’ . , :5 o ' ’ a: \.' Subject No. 125 13. Where was your 1967 summer occupation located? City State 14. List below the reasons why you chose this particular occupation for the summer of 1967. Please list the reasons in order of importance, first being the most important and others in decending order of importance. n .— on n-—— _. n ‘r‘ u " -o- -H A e o' . - ... . :- ... . . .. .4- I'” ..,,. v1- -- r a .~, _ , . . v I." - u .. - ‘. . u- .4 -.. . 7,. .u .. u. v iv. . _- a. on... e “w . . u . He . "v . v' , u. .. , ., . . . .4' a n -— o-- -~ . e . o .. . .. - u" o' sv -.. ac. . a- . n- o v - . . r. -— .u u -— ~ ....—. H u. - .. .gH.-H — .- .. o. .n- . —._- r- - ~ . o v.» u a . .- .. .. . .u. . a- .7 o m. . , . . _ - . .. .- a“ u.. . . no... . .. -vo ~. - . - _.._. .1 .- ‘ . .rI‘ 3: .' ~ I .— .- .~ . ... o- , .-. n. -. .u a. s c-. . o - —. p....- .. .. . u. .. 0.H” . - v I .. . 0-H-H .~ ..-.. .9- C-~--~- - v-. H- u. a. .. - o . H .- .- I ~ '.| ‘ ' - ~ '. .‘ ' I p , ~ ' v . . ' . ,, 5.. 4 . o-o. ' . _ ' - Ir ' l ' . . . . I a Q. ~ ; I v ‘ ‘ _ , . , - . . v v ‘ ‘ . ‘r . ' a‘ ’ ’ ‘l ‘I ~ . -_ a ‘ . - -v. H~. ~- . . ".1 ‘ ' . .-. *-O nu. -. .A‘-|.... . I ' . ‘ .. a *- .' .4 ' ' s... . c .- UIOQ~A .O.I"l. .. _ L- ' . ,. .‘.. . .- ‘ . '.' '_ .- I p s .- - .-u . 4.... _ . 'v‘| , - , . l _ . . .. . ‘ ‘0‘--- . . — -. n. . . h > .‘ ' .. . '._ 00 . .. - . -. - .5 - . -. . 0- our q -... ..‘ . ' . . .‘ . ' - a. so... . . -~ - .o - . , O‘ 3. '0' . - ' ."‘ .f‘ "‘ u...- .- . . | . — 0"... I .. . _. 4. .II'UJQ. ‘. . . _ . .. . .... . . . . -. . ~ .. . . a- . . .P' 5‘ - ““2" .o---§\. . ...'-'.‘-‘~— - . - -» - - -- . ~ - . - -,-r1. “'1. - . .2. . O. o a. .- . s o. . e - 9 '.'-.l. .- . 0‘ ~ . ' - ,\- e ' l - Up. 1 . .. . . " W."."-'-".‘.' ' . - -- . I ..’~0 '. . . tl . I Pl I- .‘.".(.'— I .. " .... .. _ . u. - . ~- \. FA ..; . a l ‘.' ..- ~ ‘1'. '- .- ‘.’- ... . - - co , .0 - — - J. . i ' ‘ - -- . "‘9 ."‘ m . r -. "‘ . . - _ .- . .l .. -_. an? “- ,.... .‘3 Ha... . . . -| . 0 -.-..-'~- ..a...— ‘ ' '»--.~.- "- ' - . I, - . .~ I . ..v-‘o .,_~ u--y-_¢- -. v 4. . a. s . . ~ ., H u pa..-o--e - y. . ,fi ' .k- "' .. ~— .._. . ~ - . _..-.- .vw -. I -. th-uaove .. .9 ' . - w. . - -. a - .— .~~- .p x .10 . .. ¢ .-. . - ' - l. M -- .l~a . A M. _. . 4‘ ooh... n-_of‘- .._s .. .<-...- . ' "‘ 126 PART II Let's go back to the time when you made your summer occupational choice. What kinds of decisions did you have to make to get ready for your summer occupation? Would you trace these decisions as they were made. The decisions will vary in content and in the sequence or time order they were made following the initial choice of occupation. Some probable areas in which decisions were made might be: housing, meals and other maintenance, income and investments, transportation, clothing, leisure, "on the job" decisions, etc. between Egg 25 more alternatives. Please list each decision in a separate 225 and ignore the columns labeled Code and Sequence Number. (Note: If more chart space is needed than provided on the pages, there are blank charts attached at the end of the questionnaire. If these blank charts are used, please fill in at the top the content area and use a separate sheet for each different content area.) Now let's go back and trace these decisions in one area at a time. 127 Subject No. The first area to be considered is clothing. Some probable decisions in the clothing area might be: Clothing purchases made as a consequence of the occupational choice, other decisions related to these purchases such as color, cost, etc. Please list on the chart below your decisions (one in each box). CODE SEQUENCE NUMBER DECISIONS . ' '. l ,_ _. . ~. . ‘ ‘ ' . - . , . , Q... N r. ,._ J: \ ' . v , - I . > ' |0 o - _. , . . . " O I l h ' . I 1" ~ ' ‘ ~ . . . _ . ‘ .y ' ‘ ‘ ( )- . u . . . . . . ‘ I ' ' . V - ' I .. . ' o a. 0‘ . '5‘ . . . ' . . . I- ‘ ' ._ ' . I ' I l ‘ I, ~ . . . .. . . . .‘ " .' \ . a I, . . I l . ‘ .. I . ‘ . . . .'.. , . O‘ . ‘ I v u “a .. l-v -"... - - - -. ._ , . “-1 ‘ - . _ . - .- . -. ... .-. V .- . I I v I s ' n ' a . ‘ ‘-- u s! . u . I 0‘. I O I c I . -. fig}. 4 _- .' .- v ‘c -— - - _. .- .. — ,- . - g . .- . - . - .-n ' ~ a r .‘I ' ~r'o . . J . .. _ I -‘-u . « .. . ‘ . ciao 'I I up" van». . ~._ ..<> .. .— -— v :‘ . . a o.“- . , . o r ..- - . ‘ r " p-...o. - . . ‘ u ‘ ' ' ' * ‘I -' . ' O I . ‘- i I - < . ~ .. - .- -. - l --- -- 1 , '~... .‘ .> . , . . —-. n ‘u - . .. , I ‘V . I ' ‘ ‘ w-v-n- § ...-.... . . n ‘. | v . l .o.~o.~ .. ,.. ..- . .7 .o‘ . .. -.-— . -, . -. , ‘- . 0 ---~ .— sn .. .,. |t ' . . - v. , . . l .s. ‘ .s I .0 . n. q ; ‘ Oav -. . I s . I ‘ - .a..- .‘.‘r. .71- ~ . On“ . . .. - _ , .. . .. ._ . --... .1 ..-- -... — . u. . ‘ ‘I|~ - . _ ' ' Q-l--- ‘ _. . -‘ -o- t «‘ ’......,, . ~ I . | . n- . q ‘ Q . ' . ~..,._ .. .....,, .. .. , . . .- . . _- _, _ _ ,,..-.g _ 'Vvo ' ‘ ' 's '1‘. , n . ' “ .‘ ‘ "- "-'- U - Ip<. ( ' ». . .. ‘ I V H — .' . ~o .- . I ‘ I ... .~.- '-_..I. .. . - . . . : ... — .--... , -. .- ‘ ‘ "' 4 . n . ' n _ . ... .. . . . . ‘ I ‘..__ . a..- --... . -_ _ . , v. . - m. . - . . . ‘ l‘ . .. , . . ' .. Q a- ’ .' . I > ‘ ' I an... . . . . . .. . - - . . . . - . _ . . l~ b I .- e ~ . ' “ “- ..-n-n . .. . . I e I "' wt. '-. ."‘> — ~ . - - - c. ... ._ . v , . . .. -.— .- ~-.. . - — ‘ ' s . .. . .. . , ' ' .. ' ‘ '. "~‘ I [-1 II 1" i l l . l I [I .. I . on. .il“. .g. - .. . ‘ . ’ . W I. -' ‘ ‘. ' ' ' ' ‘ . - ~9‘ - ‘ v - ~ ---. i ' 1| n.... . 4... .: .._. l .' i . . . ' I. .. _ ' ‘ -“ - s _ . . . . .. . . ' . - . ,- . . Q " '- -9 '0..-ol - -. ‘ ' I I l I : .1 . . . . . .._ . .. - . .1. |.. .. . -. ‘ ' ‘ -‘ : - I .1 . . . ! “"‘ ‘ -. soul- .. ._ _ 128 SUbjeCt NO. Please consider the area of housing. As a consequence of the occupational choice, some probable decisions in the housing area might be: location of housing in relation to occupation, shopping centers, etc.; cost of housing; type of housing desired; selection of people with whom to livu; etc. Please list on the chart below your decisions (one in each box). CODE SEQUENCE NUMBER DECISIONS -. o - .. . -.- u. a .- - 7 u. b a. n u .— . o ..o .. .-.., g . u, 't ~ -~ ,- -v . . ..... u a I‘D< i I b 3 ._4— i I . . ' < 'v . . :; .- . I k r 3 u . __ .- . —'.~ . ~ . . . . ..-. . I l . . I . I". “I. < ’- . . 1" . .| ,‘a‘ ‘ 2., ' o . ~ \ F . ' l ......‘.r‘- ... .-- . . .u ... , .. . . . . . . .. .A . .. -. . ... .- .... . ....,.. ....-... . . . . _... , _ l.. . . , r- . - . . V .- uu—on n.. -I-~ .A-.c - "<. - -» . ..-.'.‘..., I V ’ 1) ‘- -.- --‘ O .n, ... . , a . . 3 ‘. t D .0 i. - a‘. I 3 . - IUD-y U . 1". 'I n . }. ' l ' 2 o I J 1 ,_... . ..- - . ' . o . ‘ Q ' I I l P... - I - -- , u -. i. . . o ‘ I . n . V ‘ . v V , . . . . . -»,-oa . 7 , a . . n, . . . . - o. u u .. . u a. u ’ -.-— —III 4... a. .. . .‘Q"- ‘I ‘.. . ti. - _ n . . - r . 'bv - .4-.o ' n a n -. ”~0.'~o‘ ..- . , ’- . . - . "_ 3' , n ”r o . .4 .4 Hi” . ' . . . - . . l- O Q ’9 ...._. . .‘ ... .A - 1. ..-_ c o-q- .- . o ..A u ‘ I— - a Subject No. 129 Please consider the area of meals and other maintenance. As a consequence of the occupational choice, some probable decisions in the meals and maintenance areas might be: cost of food, eating out, purchasing food and preparing one's own meals, possible equipment and or utensils meeded for cooking or other activities in which one engages, etc. Please list on the chart below your decisions (one in each box). CODE SEQUENCE NUMBER DECISIONS . I ‘ \ v. ‘ t ‘ -. .v. -.\I A-a-v . . i . v 1 - - -. . g . u o 0' I. C... _ - , a . - . ' . w ‘ g . . . , . A ' .- . v - pl ‘ A an . I - , ‘ . , ' ‘9 ' - ' i - ' a, . . . - - . . ,; fi - 9: u ~ , r. A. ' ‘ . ‘ ‘ o ' v n ‘ . ' ' . I u - - A . ‘ , . ' :fi. . . ‘0 . ‘ . - . « s . ' I ‘ . ‘ ' . , — . . ' ‘ . n, ‘ ' ‘ . 1 u ° ' - ' I a _ . - l n ‘ ‘ . . A , I, . . s ‘. . -' ‘>' , v 1 I . u a u ' , . . o - I . I , . . . r o I f . \ s v '. u ' .. '. - ..' - » ' . ‘. ‘ 1 , - ‘ t . I . ‘ 1 . - _ . . P .' ' \ ~ . ‘ I ' - n g I » ¢ A I ‘ :-- . .,~ , . ~. . 5 \ . l .. .- a . . . .. . - . . o‘ I“ ‘( . . ,_ . ,. . 4 - , ‘ , . I . I - , c ,i o “ w , x ,_ l ‘ , _ A. . . r . I i -. . _ . ..- . . - _ _ ‘ . . .. .- ~-»-.-‘.—c- -- ~-:--l&°'-- . . ‘ . .c o.- - .»-— -.-. u . .o.c¢v‘ - ---—. -~-. 0 I ‘ l . . _ . '9 . ,, ,.. . o . . . .- -. . I - ~ ‘«---. -.- a- . ->'hd"“ .-.._. . . . . . .-.4. . ...e~.. . ,. . ..-.. ..-... I l ‘ I | l n .‘ l . v ‘ _ . .- I ' ‘l. _.... - A . _—- .I- ' ~ 0 " s I. ,,.. v , A' v , .- «...—..-.— ...--..... .L.A. v ~-J .1 ,. . .,.. . -_.. ._. . . ...-.. . - a. . -i - A. - .-. .. .. .. .... . . ~u- - . r . . , . . . . . _ . —o . - - ‘ W . , . I .. I- ' " . . .—-... ..~.- ov-wm- ' ,...‘~-‘- 1‘.-. .. -. i . ' - .A -. . -. e - - A. . o. r .c. a — . . - u .. V . ~ . ~ ' . .- n ‘ ' .. - «nu-n-. ' - n. . .—*- - ‘ i . . . ._. .0 -A ~ 0 7 V- m . ‘.- I . w so ~ - n , . I l _ . - ~ ' 4 ' ~ ,. - u < o - - “ " ‘ u- A -o o...- -l- A . .,.§~..fi. ‘— -. _. .. r. . . _ e - w —. . - .. . a .' ._ . -, A .. . i . . n x J y . ' . a .o _ . I ‘ ‘ ‘ , fl .. . v i. . .- “saw, »- . . g..- u — r i . . . .. ~... - 4 c. -. —. .. .- A - or - ‘A VA—wr- - a , ~«-.r A»- . I f . . .,,. .--..:...o < --o--- . ... ‘ ’ t 1.. a...” A- a . ,--- e .‘v p ' — .- ..<«7--~ , .. r u . . a A . , -— - . -. . .. .. i - v d ‘ '> I- g _ ‘ _ . . . . o - a u - ‘ - I - - e -. - ' I h " v. .' ‘va an~u ‘- . . . . . .‘s ~ . . . . . . .. N . e ._.. . ' ' '- - n.- . 1 i l I ‘ O - Io- - ' _ . . . ‘ ‘ A I . . . I L I» ‘ " o q- a . . -_ . \ \ I . . ... . 5 . u‘ .o,.-.- . .. . - - ... -t v ~. .‘ . . . .. I "‘ a'l‘ '.0 ll.- . . . . , --~ ago. 0 I . I . . a... - r -..J .. 135 PART III Let's go back and look at all these decision areas again, but this time consider the areas or parts all together gg‘g whole. Would you now trace your decisions in a time sequence. Place the number 1 in the Sequence Number column next to the decision that was made first after making the major occupational choice. Place number 2 by the second decision made after making the major occupational choice. Procede numbering in this manner until every decision that is written on the charts has a Sequence Number beside it. The last or highest number written down should be the decision that was made the furthest time wise from the major occupational choice. .- nu I .Vn 136 Subject No. Area(s) Content CODE SEQUENCE NUMBER DECISIONS APPENDIX B II 137 CRITERIA FOR DECISION PROFILE REPRESENTATION COMBINATION OF DECISION CLASSES ON DECISION PROFILE Decision Classes Respondent Number Tactical, Program, Policy, Control, X 52 Tactical, Program, Policy, X 48 Tactical, Program, Policy, Control 9 Tactical, Program, Policy 32 Tactical, Program 59 COMBINATION OF LINKAGE FORMS ON DECISION PROFILE Linkage Forms Single Single Single Single Single Single Single Single Single Single Single Single Radial Radial, Radial, Radial, Radial, Radial, Radial, Radial, Radial, Radial, Radial, Radial, Multiple Radial Inverted Radial Compound Single Series Multiple Series Single Series, Multiple Series Multiple Radial, Single Series Multiple Radial, Multiple Series Multiplex Radial, Multiple Series Inverted Radial, Multiple Series Multiple Series Single Radial, Multiple Series Single Radial, Multiple Compound Single Radial, Compound Single Radial, Compound Single Radial, Multiple Multiple Series, Multiple Radial, Single Series, Inverted Radial, Single Series, Radial, Inverted Radial, Multiple Radial, Single Series, Multiple Radial, Multiple Series, Radial, Single Series, Inverted Radial 23 55 26 73 54 21 33 39 46 51 64 27 15 57 43 138 @Cmm MO m NN mEoocH omchm mocmc coflpmu mo mom: cam Iopcamz Hmnuo :QOb mnp :0: madmfimq.lnommcmua. mucmfiumm>cH .ucm mammz mcflmsom mcH£u0H0,.oz Ham _ s cm >H_ma. ma m m BA m A \\\\\\ .///HH////lr_ _ Emmmmr \ Em A/ 3939 o m e mm H NH m VA \\ e. m m/ mefi/ m m mammmammomm m e m \39 H935 A . , 1 \ // / ::\\\\\I\Nw\ \\ \\ \\ \ mm Hmuoe Hmuoa omuuomoucb x ucsomfioo OH Emumoum m amaomm umuum>cH Houucoo o WMHmwwwm 33mm V8333: a moaaom m om m Hmaomm mamauasz Ha Hmoauoma B Hmflumm mamcam MMM ZOHmHUHQ m mmmEDZ BZmQZOmmmm m A H h 0 m m 2 O H m H U m Q moflnom mmmao mamfluasz mmflumm mmmHU mamcflm mzmom m0cH .ucm mammzflmcamsom mcflnuoHU .oz HNB > mHB mHB mam HHfi/Il / \ / S/Nom mane 3 3 m 3 3 #a/ 7 m / o v/m , m m e e e m ,m e .H. MHMzm/z / f r\ \\ \\\w\\\ \\\\. .\\\\\ Hm Hmuoa Hmpoa omuuomouco x oodomfioo n Emumoam m . Hmflomm ompnm>cH Houucou U ZOHMHUMQ Hmflomm xmamauasz H aoaaom m oHomemmem Hmaomm mamauasz ma HMUHuumB B amapmm mamcflm Max chmHoma mmflnmm mmmao mamfluasz mmfiaom mmmao mamcam w mmmZDz Bzmnzommmm m A H m 0 m m z O H m H U m G mzmom m0¢MZHA 140 oEoocH cucumm mucmc comm cofiumu mo womb 0cm Imucamz mo umnuo =QOb one c0:.musmflmq.luommcmua. mpcmEumm>cH .ocm mHmmz mcflmsom madneoHo .oz m ¢ mmhm m /w hHU OHmmmom mHBHHB m _ / / \ mH mH I r m M/ \ ogmmmmw/xsammam mm mm m as H 0H Hmuoa Hmpoa HH oopuommucb x ousomfioo NH Emumoum m Hmaomm ompum>cH H Houucoo U “MWHMMUJM Hoaumm memeHsz N moaaom m om «m m Hmaomm mamabflsz m w Hmofluoma a Hoapmm mHmch m wax onmHqu moflnmm mmMHU mHmHuHDE H mmflumm mmmHo mHmch m mummZDZ Bzmnzommmm m 1H H .m 0 m A Z O H m H U m D mzmom mw§ZHH oEoocH nmcnmm momma ocmm 141 COHgmp mo womb was Imecflmz Ho “capo :QOb msu c0: mHSmHoH.IHommcmHB. mucmfipmm>cH .vcm mHmmzvmcflmsom.mcH£uoHo .02 m a a me], m essay m f\, e t mm an we was as m e i h I < :9/ am a? \\ a \s H Hmuoe . Hmuon. m Umuuommucb X @CSOQEOU H Emumoum m Hmflomm ompum>cH Homoeoo o “mmmmmmmw Hmaomm xmamfluasz onHom m Hmflomm mHmHuHsz H Hmofluoma B Hafiumm onGHm m wmx onmHqu moHHmm mmmHU mHmHquz mmfluom mmMHo mHmGHm m mmmZDZ Bzmflzommmm m H H m 0 m m 2 O H m H U m G mZMOm MO¢MZHH 142 oEoocH omcumm mocmc comm coflumu Ho moms cam Impcflmz mo umzeo :QOb mfip :0: mHSmHoA.IHomm:MHB. mucoapmo>cH .pcm mHmmz.mchsom mcHQDOHU .oz , m q m o m m E N hM/// mM/Wm mflr WW\\\\\. .\\HWm \\\\W% H m Hmuoe Hmuoe n oopuomoHCD x ocsomaoo m Emumonm m Hmapmm pmuum>cH Honucoo o onmHqu HMHUmm memHuHsz m moaaom m oHomammem Hmaomm mamaoasz m Hmofluome B HMHUmm onch m wmm onmHumn moflumm mmmHo onHuHsz m mmfluom mmMHU mHmch HN mmmEDZ Bzmnzommmm m A H h 0 m m z O H m H U m G mimom mw¢MZHA 143 mfioocH pmcumm mocmc ocmm coHumu mo mom: can Impaflmz Ho Hmnuo :QOb on» :0: mHDmH A luommcmua. mucmEpmm>cH .ocm mHmm2,mCHmsom mcHfiuoHo .02 m u m N NH HH MHB he mB we OHA//WA, HB wHB mm \LE m8 NB H m \ // / m/ / \ \ \ 3 1309 1.509 3 omuuomwucb x UGDOQEOU o Emumoum m HMHUmm Umuum>cH Hoficoo o {MMHmwomM 33mm 33332 moaaom m on «m m Hmacmm mHmHuH52 m HmoHuomB B HMHUmm mHmch uH Nam onmHUmn mmHHmm mmMHU mHmHuHDS mmHuwm mmMHU mHmch mm mmmZDz BZmQZOmmmm m H H m 0 m m Z O H m H U m G mEmOh m0cH .pcm mHmozsmchsom mGHSpoHU .OZ m w m8 m 144 3.... // omuuomoHCD Hmuoa n x pcsomfioo Emumoum m HmHUmm umuuo>cH H Houbcoo o wwwmwmmmw Hmaomm xmamauasz onHom m HmHomm mHmHuHsz HMUHuoma B HmHumm onch @ wmx ZOHmHUMQ moHumm mmmHU onHpHsz mmHuom mmmHU mHmch mmmEDZ BZMQZOmmmm m H H h 0 m Z Z O H m H U m Q mEMOh MG¢MZHH 145 5N MHZ ZOHmHUmQ mmmZDZ BZWQZOmmmm m A H m 0 m m Z O H m H U m G moHHmm mmmHo mHmHuHsz mmHumm mmMHo mHmch mZMOh m0¢¥ZHH mEoocH Umcumm mocmc ucmm coHump mo mom: can Imechz mo Hmsuo :Qop mnu c0: mudeoH.IuommcwHB. mecmfiumm>cH .pcm mHmmz_mchsom mGHSuoHU .OZ m w mHAFOHm m 2/ H NH on/j mHmeHm m m4 nHuuMW\WB N / < me\ . _ mHAHHm, HMWWWWMWW \\W% H mH Hmuoa Hmuoa b oouuommucb X vasomfioo H m Emumoum m HmHomm Umuum>cH H Homoeoo o hmwmwmmmw Hmacmm memHuHsz H moaaom m Hmaomm mHmHuHsz m m Hmuauume e Hmaomm mHmcam m GEOUGH @OCHMM OUCMG Uflmm 146 coHumu mo womb mam Imchmz mo nonuo =90b may :0: onsmHmH.IHommcmue. mucmaumm>cH .Ucm mHmwzmmchsom mcHSuoHU .02 m v NHB m A hHmlIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL HHB OHBmmhm. me mHm 09 N 0H 3 «H s /m m N H /m_ .H. m/ m m m m m \ .H. \H. H j , Hmuos Hmuoa m owuuommuca x ucsomsoo Emamoum m HMHpmm uwuum>cH Houucoo U “MWHmHUma HMHomm memHuHsz 5:8 m omeéem HmHomm 333:: m. HmUHuUmB B HMHUmm mHmch m wmm onmHumn moHumm mmMHU mHmHuHoz moHme mmMHU mHmch H mmmZDZ BZNQZOmmmm m H H m 0 m m Z O H m H U m G .mZMOh m0¢MZHH 147 oEoocH omcumm mocmc ocmm coHumg Ho womb pom louchz mo umnuo =90b on» :0: ousmHoH.|HommcmuB. mucoEpmo>cH .ocm mHmozrmchdom,mcH£uoHU .oz NHm m HHU e U B MHZ m9 mall/IIIIIWH N / Z 3 _ / _ / mH m m, N e m H h 3 wH m .H. m \\_H. EH. H m/ as / \ \ K \x \, mH Hmuoa Hmuoe 0H omuuommucb x ocsomfiou m Emumoum m HmHUmm umuHm>cH m Houucoo o onmHomo HmHumm memHuHsz H soHHom m oHomemmem HmHomm mHmHuHsz b HMUHuomB B HmHumm mHmch 0 mm mmmZDZ BZMQZOmmmm MHZ ZOHmHUMQ moHHmm mmMHU mHmeHsz r—l mmHHmm mmmHU mHmch m m A H m 0 m Z Z O H m H U m D mzmom m0cH .ocm mHmm2,mchdom mcanoHU .OZ m .v m 0H4 m4 we N HHm mm .\\\©B H / , \ . \\\\ HH Hmpoe Hmuoe o omuuomoHCD X UGSOQEOU m Emumonm m HmHUmm pmuum>cH Houucoo o onmHomo HMHomm meoHuHsz N NoHHom m oHomaamem HmHumm mHmHuHsz v HmoHuomB B Hmemm onch mm VmZ ZOHmHUMQ mmmEDZ BZMQZOmmmm m H H m 0 m Z Z O H m H U m D mmHHom mmmHU mHmHquz mmHHmm mmMHo mHmch mSMOh mUcH .ocm mHmmzrmchsom mcano U .OZ m.H.IJ jr/ mN_m fie as [VsMAYma as My \er oflHmNme/NfiHmm om? :1 39 39 En NH.H H.H rhymeNeOHH. mNNNHNON N N \\\ \ x Bl/ml,M/,m/U/M/ mi / L\\\\\\AUV\HV\\\\ // / Hm Hmuoa Hmuoa oouuommuco X UGDOQEOU m Emumoum m HmHUmm ©muum>cH Hoaucoo o “WOHmHumn HmHumm memHuHoz o moHHom m Homemmem HmHomm mHmHuHsz 5H HmoHuomB B HMHomm mHmch flux ZOHmHUmn mmHuwm mmmHo mHmeHsz moHHmm mmMHU mech mu mmmZDZ BZmQZOmmmm m A H m 0 m A Z O H m H U m D mEMOm MOcH cam mHmm2.mch:om.mcH£uoHU .OZ m w mm M No mHm/l mHm hHm ONE mHB N x , \ / oN H N o NNmNHm m e H N m LH/WMNH H M(\N .H. .H. .H. .H. / I m m .H. m m m m m .e .H. .H. H //fiJ// HHmOHm // \W\AV\\‘ e\\\ \P \\\\\ /,/ \ 0N HmuOH. HmpOB mH oouuomoHCD X ocsomfioo HH Emumoum m HmHUmm Umunm>cH H Houucoo U ZOHmHUmn HMHomm memHuHSZ s NuHHom a oHomecmem Hchmm mHmeHsz N CH HNUHuomB B HMHUmm mHmCHm 0H MHZ ZOHmHUMQ moHuom mmMHU mHmeHsz H moHumm mmmHU mHmch 0v mmmEDZ BZmQZOmmmHm m .H H .m 0 m m Z O H m H U m G mZMOnH m0§ZHH 151 .pmuuommn Hmouo on“ cH mmmum Xmmp cHfluH3 mconHooo oouonfid: Honoummmou “onHmEoocH mm3 mocmsvmm GOHmHumo m.Hchcommmm mEoocH Umcumm ovum: ocmm GOHHmu Ho mom: was Imuchz Ho “mayo =QOb on» GO: mNSmHmH luommcmua mucmEpmm>cH cam mHmmS.mCHmsom.mcH£uoHU .OZ m w m HN ONE mH m OHB we us me he N / _ \ 4y i _ _ //T\ // Ill/LHAHHM //dv H m LfluwHIm; mNe NNm2/Ha m Nm Hm \m m \e a x H /, . mm Hmuoe \\\\\\\\\ Hmuoe NH H oopuommHCD X vasomfiou HH Emumoum m HmHUmm oouum>cH Houucou U ZOHmHUmQ Hw\ HMHomm onmHHHsz e NoHHom a oHomecmem HmHomm mHmHuHsz m NH HmUHbome e HmHomm mHmch HH me ZOHmHUmQ moHumm mmMHU mHmHquz N moHHmm mmMHU mHmch m mu mmmZDZ .HZMQZOmmmHm m .H H .m 0 m Z Z O H m H U m G Hwy—mom mwfivHZHqH 152 .umuuommn Hoouo on» CH mmoum Xmmu cquHB mconHuoo omumnfioc Honoammmmu “muonEoocH mmB mucosvmm conHomo m.pcmocommom mEouaH cucumm mono: 6Com coHumu Ho mmmD pom Imuchz mo umsuo :Qon mnu c0: musmHma Inommcmua mucmfipmm>cH paw mHmmS.mchs m mcHfluoHU .OZ m v m L/ _ m m fi/M N r H _ B Hm mmNmHm Hm Nm Hm Nm Hm H6 H9 H mH Hmuoe Hmuoe NH umuuommHCD X UGDOQEOU m Emumou m m ZOHmHUmQ HMvam Umuum>cH Houscoo o oHomecH cam mHmoz.mchsom.mcH£uoHo .OZ m v m mo Nm NB JV N N H mm H_ . m(\ H d X B N H m./ m m m m HE m H 1 “MM/ / \ \5 //¢M// /,/, \ .\ OH Hmuoe Hmuoa NH H oouuommHCD X UGSOQEOU NH. ”Mmmmmw M 28302 38mm @332: HMHUmm onmHquz N NoHHom m oHomammem HmHumm mHmHuHsz m HMUHuuma B HmHUmm mHmCHm moHHmm mmmHU onHuHsz moHumm mmmHU onch Nm mmmZDZ BZMQZOmmmm m .H H .H O m m Z O H m H U m D mZmOnH mOHHXZHH NMM ZOHmHUmQ I—lr-IO‘r—l 154 .Umuuommu Hmono on» CH mmmum Xmmu CHSHHB mConHomU UoHoQECC Honoumomou uonHQEooCH mm3 moCoCUmm COHmHumU m.quoCommmm mEooCH UmCumm ooCMC UCmm CoHpmu mo mom: OCm ImuCHmS Ho HoCHo =Q0b esp CO: mHCmHoHIIHommCmua mquEHmm>CH oCm mHmoz.mCHmCom.mCH£uoHu .02 m8 m «B e m8 M NH ea N m i i m NB H9 NmHm, H9 mm NB Hm HB we me He H \ ,//////, /V//7/ / \\ \\.\\ X\\JW\HU\\\\\\\\ ON HmuOB Hmpoa mH pounommuca X UCComEou m Emumou m m onmHomo HmHomm omuum>cH Houucoo o oHomemmem HmHomm memHuHsz m NUHHON m HmHomm mHmHuHsz CH HmoHuomB B HmHumm onCHm MH wmx ZOHmHUmn mmHamm mmMHU mHmHuHCZ mmHHom mmmHU mHmCHm N Hum mmmEDZ BZmQZOnHmmm m .H H .m 0 m Z Z O H m H U m D mimom m0§ZHnH 155 .pmuuommu Hmono map CH mmmum Mmmu CHCHHB mConHomU pmHmQECC Honoummmmu “muonEooCH mm3 mUCmCUmm ConHoon m.quoCommmm mEOUfiHH ”man—”mm mogmc fivcmm COHumu mo womb oCm ImuCHmz Ho Hngo :QOb on» C0: mHCmHmH luommCmna mUCmEpmm>CHn ow mHmmz.mCHmCom.mCH£uoHU .OZ m e m NE NH Na N o m e m m .m/ /—\ Na Na Hm mwN m Hm Hm Hm He NeHe H // /fl/ / \ \ \ d\\ mH Hmuoe Hmpoa mH pouuommuCD X UCCOQEOU m Emumoam m HmHumm omuHm>CH Houucoo o oflWHMHWC HmHomm memH uHsz N NUHHom m m m HmHomm mHnHuHsz H m HmUHuume e HmHomm mHmch vH me ZOHmHumn mmHHmm mmMHU mHmHuHCS moHHom mmmHU onCHm mm mmmzoz ezmozommmm m H H m o m m z o H m H o m C mzmom momszH 156 .umuuommu Hmouo m£u CH mmoum Xmmu CHQHH3 mConHUmU UmeQECC Honoummmmu “mumHmEooCH mmB mUCvaom COHmHUmU m.quUCommmm oEooCH UmCumm moCmC oCmm COHpmu Ho mmmD qu ImpCHmz Ho umnpo =Q0h oz» Co= mHCmHoH luommCmHB mucmfiumm>CH UCm mHmmz.mCHmCom mCHnuoHU .OZ m u hm.i ma hamamave m ill/I, _ /!/,_\ me me mm 9 ma NB N H \ _ M / \ mmem. < om me LN N H L H Ne,H.H_. NmHm/eemfiNeHH. «H. mm. NH. H.H. m m m m H. .H. H // / / / 1 c x x \ \\\ \ mm Hmuoa HmHoa mN oopHommHCD X UCCOQEOU H HH Emumoum m HMHomm Umunm>CH HouuCou U nmemHomQ HmHUmm memHuHCz N NUHHON a ommmmem HmHomm mHmHuHsz N NN HMUHuomB a HmHUmm mHmCHm mH me ZOHmHUma mmHumm mmmHU mHmeHCz H moHHmm mmmHU mHmCHm hm mmmZDZ .HZWQZOmmmm m .H H .m 0 m m Z O H m H U m 0 mach mO§ZHH 157 .uouaomou Hoono on» CH mmonm Xmmu CHCHHB mCOHmHomU omHmQECC Honoumommu “oumHQEooCH mm3 moCvamm ConHomo m.HCmUCommom wEooCH omCHmm moCMC 6Com COHumu Ho moms OCm ImpCHmz m0 Hmnpo =QOh Gnu CO: mHCmHmH IuommCmHB mquEHmm>CH. UCm mHmmz.mCHmCom.mCH£uoHU .02 m w m NH 4 N m 97/ a _ «a me N.H He Hm Hm He Hm .He Ne He H CH Hmpoa ooHHOQmHCD m Emumoum HouuCou HoHHom m HMUHuomB NmX ZOHmHqu Eim o»m X mm mmmZDZ BZMQZOmmmm ZOHmHUMQ UHGMBcH Hchmm memHuHsz HmHUmm mHmHHHCE HmHomm onCHm moHuom mmmHU onHHHCz wwHHmm mmmHU mHmCHm mzmom mmeZHH NH OH 158 .UmHHOQoH Hmouo on“ CH mmmum Mmmu CHCHH3 mConHooU onoQECC Honoummmmu “oumHQEOUCH mm3 moCmCUmm COHmHomo m.HCm©Commmm =nom may CO: mHCmqu IuommCmHB mEooCH UmCHmm COHump Ho mom: oCm ImuCHmz a Nm HnH He mH N.H He m B m m ,1H \ \u \\ ,\\\\\ HN oxCH HmHomm XmHmHuHCS HMHUmm mHmHuHCZ HmHomm mHmch mmHumm mmmHU mHmHuHCZ mmHHmm mmmHU mHmCHm mzmom m0CHo UCm mHmmz.mCHmCom.mCH£poHo .OZ m mH HH 159 .omuuomou Hoouo opp CH mmoum Xmmu CHSHHB mConHomU UmHmQECC Honoumommu “oumHmEOUCH wm3 mUCmCUmm COHmHomo m.pCm©Commmm mEooCH omCHmm moCmC UCmm CoHump mo moms oCm touCHmE mo Hmzuo =QOb mnu CO: mHCmHoH luommCmua mquEumm>CH oCm mHmmz.mCHmCom_mCH£HoHU .OZ m mm C vm m m m N H ,/ H B B xxg CB mm/ B vN Hmuoa Hmuoa UmuuommHCD X oCsomfioo, mH Emumoum m ZonHUmn HmHUmm popum>CH HoupCoo U HCHUmm memHuHCz NoHHom a oHomeamem HmHomm mHmHuHsz m HMUHuomB B HmHUmm mHmCHm was onmHomo mmHumm mmmHo mHmHuHsz moHHmm mmmHU mHmCHm Mb mmmZDZ EZmQZOmmmm m H H Z O m m Z O H m H U m D mzmom mwdeHH mH "I7'7!1iflifl'7lflijlliflllfl'lfl1ii