“-155!" 5 S‘s-33m; ‘Vz-Z‘ CONTRASTING ORIENTATIONS AND CAREER PATTERNS OF EXECUTIVES AND LOWER MANAGERS Thesis for the Degree 0‘ Db. D. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY Thomas R. O’Donovanr 1961 ABSTRACT CONTRASTING ORIENTATIONS AND CAREER PATTERNS OF EXECUTIVES AND LOWER MANAGERS by Thomas R. O'Donovan This research studied the career patterns and certain sources of orientations to achievement of two organizational scalars, executives V . and lower managers. The career pattern data con51sted of the occupa- tional background of the respondents including such areas as inter-firm mobility, geographic mobility, changes in functional area, and career / ' . . . . speed. The hypothe51s established was that executives Will be char- acterized by a higher occupational origin of their father and wife's father than that of lower managers; that executives will have attained a higher level of education than lower managers; and, for those respon- dents with military experience, executives will have been discharged at v a higher rank than lower managers. The central purpose of the study was to establish whether or not clear differences or contrasts exist in the background of individuals that serve to distinguish high status achievers from lower status people while such groups are still in their twenties. If such relationships hold, then it may be possible that these and other sources of orientation may vary directly with other class or status arrangements. Thus education and family class, among others, may be shown to vary upwardly from manual occupations to white collar non-supervisory positions, on through lower, middle, and executive 2 Thomas R. O'Donovan levels. No person's eventual career level can be predicted with cer- tainty, but the range of error might be reduced if the approach estab- lished here is successful. Three-hundred twenty-six usable mailed questionnaire responses were obtained from a random sample of executives and lower managers from four major multiplant industrial corporations. The net response was 58%; the average age of both groups was 46. Chi square compu- tations indicated no statistical difference among the major career pattern background factors between the executives in this study and the American business leaders in the classic Warner and Abegglen 1952 study. Substantial differences did exist, however, in almost all areas established for study among the 178 executives and 148 lower managers. The occupational level of father and wife's father, education of respondent and members of the respondents' family, and military exit rank level tended to vary directly with the occupational scalar level of the sample group. For example, more than twice as many executives . as lower managers came from high status occupational origins, nearly twice as many executives married into high status families as lower managers, 69 per cent of the executives graduated from college versus 2.5 per cent for lower managers, six times as many executives obtained a post-graduate degree as lower managers, and 45 per cent of the executives who had military service were discharged as Captain (or equivalent) or higher, compared to 14 per cent in the case of lower Thomas R. O'Donovan managers. The hypothesis was confirmed within the limitations of the study. However, these differences in orientations and career patterns among the scalars studied were not extreme. A certain minority of o the respondents in both groups possessed a similarity in the career pattern and orientation level of each other; therefore, it must be con- cluded that certain factors other than those studied in this research design are operating to influence the career achievement level of indi- viduals. If it were deemed desirable to predict high and non-high status achievers from a group of individuals in their twenties, the results of this study, applied realistically, could narrow the range of error in making such predictions. CONTRASTING ORIENTATIONS AND CAREER PATTERNS OF EXECUTIVES AND LOWER MANAGERS by THOMAS R. O'DONOVAN A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOC TOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Personnel and Production Administration 1961 ii ACKNOWLEDGMENT Many people have given their time unselfishly to the completion of this dissertation. I wish to thank the committee for its constructive guidance: Professor David G. Moore, Chairman; Professor W. Lloyd Warner, and Professor William H. Form. In addition, Professor Orvis F. Collins provided a good deal of valuable aid and encouragement. The research was completed while teaching at the University of Detroit. I thank the administration of the University for its assistance in the project, particularly Professor Edward D. Wickersham. I owe my deepest gratitude to the four participating firms, which must go unnamed. I also wish to thank the International Business Machines Corporation for having allowed me to use their electronic facilities for the processing of the data. This help was made possible through the courtesy of Martin C. Martin, Manager, Detroit Education Center, IBM. This work is dedicated to my wife. Her total understanding and sacrifice made this dissertation possible. Chapter II. III. IV. VI. VII. TABLE OF CONTENTS ORIENTATIONS AND CAREER PATTERNS OF EXECUTIVES AND LOWER MANAGERS ......... THE RESEARCH DE SIGN ........................ THE OCCUPATIONAL ORIGINS OF EXECUTIVES AND LOWER MANAGERS ...................... THE EDUCATION OF EXECUTIVES AND LOWER MANAGE RS .................... . ............. MILITARY EXPERIENCES AND THE MARRIAGES OF EXECUTIVES AND LOWER MANAGERS ..... THE CONTRASTING ORIENTATIONS AND CAREER PATTERNS OF EXECUTIVES AND LOWER MANAGERS ........ p. . . . .............. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .................. BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................ iii Page 23 41 57 81 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. LIST OF TABLES Text Tables Background Material of Participating Firms--1959 Data . . . The First-line Supervisor's Position in the Management Hierarchy ............................................ Analysis of Questionnaires Sent, Returned, and Actually Used for Executives and Lower Managers in the Four Corporations Studied .................................. Chi Square of Differential Contrasting Career Patterns for 1960 Executives and Lower Managers ................ Occupational Level of the Fathers of the Respondents Both at the Time of the Respondent's Birth and at the Time the Respondent Became Self— supporting .................. Occupational Level of the Respondent's Father's Father, Mother's Father, and Oldest Brother .......... . ........ Intra-generational Mobility of Respondent's Father ...... . Inter-generational Mobility of Respondent's Father ........ Intra-generational Mobility of Respondent ................ Relationship of Father's Occupational Level to Father's Father's Occupational Level ............................ Education of. Executives and Lower Managers and Certain Members of Their Family Together with the Warner and Abegglen Sample and the U. 5. Adult Male Population 30 Years or Over in 1950 and 1957 ........................ Type of High School Training ........................... Major Subject Area of University Training ............... Extent of Formal Business Training .................... College Scholastic Honors .............................. Portion of Bachelor's Degree Educational Expense Paid by Respondent ........................................ iv 27 45 47 51 53 54 54 55 "59 62 63 65 66 67 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. Academic Rank in High School and College ............... Occupational Level and Educational Level of Respondent's Father ................................................ Father's Father's Occupational Level Compared with Father's Educational Level ............................. Comparison of Education of Respondent and Occupational Origin of Respondent's Father .......................... Age at Completion of Bachelor's Degree ................. Extent of Education and Geographic Mobility ............. Education of Respondent and Respondent's Father ........ Education of Respondent and Respondent's Wife .......... Military: Rank of Entrance and Rank at Exit .............. Mobility in the Military Service and Military Decorations . . Occupational Level of Wife's Father .................... Year Respondent Married ............................. Age When Respondent Was Married ..................... Relationship of Year Married to Year Respondent Obtained Bachelor's Degree ........................... Relationship of Year Married to Year Respondent Entered First Line Supervision ........... . ............. Comparison of Sources of Orientation for Executives and Lower Managers ...................................... Comparison of Age of Becoming Self-supporting and Age of Obtaining First Full-Time Job in Occupational Career . . Number of Firms or Organizations That Respondents Have Been Associated with During Their Occupational Careers ............................................. Occupational Level of Respondent's First Job at Present Firm ................................................ 67 68 69 71 73 73 77 77 86 86 89 89 89 90 92 96 96 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. Geographic Mobility at Five Points During Respondent's Career ............................................... Geographic Mobility Comparisons Between the State of College Attendance and State of Birth, and Between the State of College Attendance and the State of High School Attendance ........... . ............................... Geographic Mobility Comparisons Between the State of College Attendance and State of Acquiring First Job, and Between the State of College Attendance and the State of Obtaining Present Job .......... . ...................... Geographic Mobility Comparisons Between State of High School Attendance and State of Obtaining First Job, and Between State of Birth and State of High School Attendance . Geographic Mobility Comparisons Between State of Present Job and the Areas of: First Job State, High School State, and State of Birth ......................... 4 Functional Area of Respondent's First Job in Career, First Job at Present Firm, and Present Functional Area . . Analysis of Changes in Functional Area During Respondent's Career Broken Down by Five Functional Areas ............................................... Relationship Between Respondent's Educational Level and Respondent's Functional Area of First Job in Career. . . Relationship Between Respondent's Educational Level and Respondent's Present Functional Area ......... . ..... Comparison of Changes in Functional Area and Geo- graphic Mobility ...................................... Age Respondent First Entered the Lower Management Level....... ........ . ................................ Age That the Executive Group First:.Became Executives-- Executive Career Speed Analysis ........................ » Relationship Between Executive Career Speed and Sources of Orientation and Between Lower Management Career Speed and Sources of Orientation for Executives Only ..... The Four Sources of Orientation--Chi Square Computations 105 107 107 109 109 114 115 117 117 119 122 .123 126 vi 2. Appendix Age Analysis of Respondents ........................... Appendix Table vii CHAPTER I ORIENTATIONS AND CAREER PATTERNS OF EXECUTIVES AND LOWER MANAGERS This research studied the career patterns of two groups of . \/ organizational levels, executives and lower managers. The purpose of the study was to determine the extent to which the social, educa- tional, and occupational backgrounds of these individuals differed. It is expected in our society that there is a relationship between occu- pational status and educational level, as well as between the occupa- . . . . 1 tional origins and the occupational status of the son. Many researchers have shown that these relationships are not perfectly correlated, but they do show that the more highly educated groups do not occupy the lower status occupations, and the sons of high occupational origins do not dominate the lower scalars of industry. However, research is lacking on the contrasting of career patterns of different status-level 1W. Lloyd Warner, and James C. Abegglen, Occupational Mobility in American Business and Industry, 1928-1952 (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1955); Mable Newcomer, , The Big Business Executive (New York: Columbia University Press, 1955); ROger V. Clements, Managers: A Study of Their Careers in Industry (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1958); Delbert G‘. ‘Miller, and William H. Form, Industrial Sociology (New York: Harper and Bros. , 1951); Suzanne I. Keller, "Social Origins and Career Lines of Three Generations of American Business Leaders, " Ph. D. thesis, New York, Columbia University Press, 1954 (microfilm); Natalie Rogoff, Recent Trends in Occupational Mobili_ty (Glencoe: Free Press, 1953). groups in our American occupational social structure. 2 The groups most often studied are high level executives and blue collar workers (though these groups are studied independently). In this study, the "executive group" consists of people largely in upper-echelon management of large bureaucratic, multi-plant, indus- trial corporations. 3 Thus the sample group represents people from the top four scalars of their respective firm's organizational structure. Generally, the first scalar of a firm consists of only the president and board chairman; scalar two normally includes the vice-presidents. The next largest scalar is the third which engrosses those executives reporting to vice-presidents, such as directors (not necessarily mem- bers of the board of directors). When only four firms are studied it is necessary to dip into scalars three and four in order to come up with a useful sample size. Most other studies have concentrated on the top two scalars, but have enlarged the number of firms represented. So that while the definition of the executive group in this study is of a slightly lower organizational level than those executive studies previously referred to, the comparison of findings can still be justified on the grounds that executives in scalars three and four of a large firm donot ZThe notable exceptions are the researches of Form, Miller, Coates, and Pellegrin. 3The four participating firms are all larger than more than eighty per cent of the firms represented in the 1952 Warner and Abegglen study. See Table 1. (Also, one of the firms studied is more a service than an industrial firm. ) have a significantly smaller impact on our society than executives in scalar two of firms somewhat smaller in size. The major purpose of this study was not, however, to gather data to compare with the findings in the literature. General comparisons will be made but the limitations of sample size negate valid conclusions from such comparisons. The research design is described in Chapter II, along with the limitations of the study. TABLE 1. --Background material of participating firms--1959 data m = Number of Firm Total sales Total assets Net worth employees 1 $360,000,000 40, 000 $326, 000, 000 $120, 000, 000 2 5, 360, 000, 000 160, 000 3, 460, 000, 000 2, 600, 000, 000 3. 2, 640, 000, 000 100, 000 1, 380, 000, 000 680, 000, 000 4 1, 050, 000, 000 22, 000 470, 000, 000 320, 000, 000 Total $9, 410, 000, 000 322, 000 $5, 636, 000, 000 $3, 720, 000, 000 Source: Moody's Industrial Manual The "lower management group" consists of individuals in first and second line supervision in both line and staff positions. In most corporations the following basic groupings are generally agreed upon: 1. Non-management A. Blue collar workers: These are hourly employees, such as production workers. B. White collar workers: These are non-production workers who usually are in staff positions and are salaried. 2. Management A. The size and nature of the firm and department within the firm helps to determine the number of managerial scalars. The lowest scalar is referred to as "first line supervision. " In the shop the first line supervision group is often composed only of foremen. Second line supervision would include the superior of the foremen, or general foremen, or possibly superintendent. Job titles differ widely between firms making it impossible to generalize with assuredness. In the office or staff positions, first line supervision often includes the title of unit supervisor; second line supervision, the section 4 supervisor. B. Middle management C. Executive. An operational definition is necessary in order to describe the executive group for a firm. If the corporation has management salary grades, executives in such firms are those that fall above a certain salary grade number. For example, at Chrysler Corporation the executive group consists of those Thus, our sample of lower management includes those individuals in part "A" of this outline. See Table 2. 5"The 'Middle management man' is one of the most talked about but one of the least well defined figures in United States business. The term is used for everything from assistant vice-presidents to senior foremen." Business Week, May 7, 1960, p. 89. TABLE 2. --The first-line supervisor's position in the management hierarchy BOARD OF DIRECTORS TOP MANAGEMENT (Policy Maker 5) 1960 Executives MIDDLE MANAGEMENT (Administrator 3) SUPERVISORS M 1960 Lower / Managers SALARIED FOREMEN >Hour1y rated foremen Asst. foremen, lead man or group leader WORKERS Paul Pigors and Charles A. Myers, Personnel Administration (Fourth Edition; New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc. , 1961), p. 110. individuals in salary grade nine or above. An operational definition means that the definition of an executive group is that group of people regarded as executives by the individual firm in question. This is the definition of "executive" for the purposes of this study. In other words, when a sample of the names and addresses of the executives of the parti- cipating firms was requested, the individuals included were those defined as executives within each firm, by each firm. In two firms the sample consisted of executives only from scalars three and four. In the remaining two firms, the universe of scalars one, two, and three were obtained. Justification of the Study The importance of the factors associated with executive success 5W-wfm . has been a crucial subject of study and debate since the executive first appeared in American industry less than 100 years ago. Biographies of great men have been examined to shed light on the mystery of achieve- ment but the bias of the biographer limits the usefulness of such an approach. The pseudo sciences have offered nothing. Astrology, 61n each of these firms the total employment exceeded one hundred thousand. 7Employment here exceeded twenty thousand in each firm. numerology, among others, have been victimized by a problem that has faced many research attempts, that of attempting to "prove" a hypothesis rather than to test it. Erwin Taylor mentions that the "finest flowering" of this problem appears in the "fantasies of the psychoanalysts. " It is easier to create distorting devices than to abandon cherished theories. The somatotypes of Sheldon's Harvard researches examined the relationship between body type and behavior with no real success. Even the pontifications of the successful offer little scientific data that are useful in achievement prediction. Erwin Taylor remarks: "A good example of the sterility and confusion that results from the attempts to use unsubstantiated executive opinion as research data may be found in 8 the report entitled What Makes an Executive. " One of the important ways to contribute to our knowledge of industrial management is to study industrial managers. According to Clements, The study of industrial management may, therefore, be justified on the grounds that it will assist in improving industrial efficiency, in advancing our knowledge of an important and interesting body of men, and in adding to our understanding of the changing structure of society. 9 In order to develop and improve existing theories in the field of management it would be fruitful to study the educational, social, and occupational backgrounds of management people. Again as Clements has noted, 8Erwin K. Taylor, "The Unsolved Riddle of Executive Success, " Personnel, Vol. 37, No. 2(March-April, 1960), pp. 8-17. 9Clements, op. cit., p. 9. For instance, just as it has been shown that older historians, owing to a theoretical obsession with party politics, obscured the importance of groupings, family and otherwise, in 18th century politics so it may appear that management principles as enunciated so far have neglected the importance of family influence in management structure and practice. The social, educational, and career backgrounds of managers are the straw with which to make the bricks that may make it possible to construct useful theories. As it is, management principles are so far removed from reality as to darken the subject more than they illuminate it, or else are too narrowly concerned with the application of specific techniques.l Clements justified his research on British executives partly on the following bas e s: A good deal has been written about management and adminis- tration but not very much about managers. Discussion has largely taken a form of attempts to construct principles and theories of management. Lists of desirable, or even necessary qualities in managers, have been compiled and much advice on improving their effectiveness has been offered to managers. Plans of management education have been drawn up, courses instituted, and managers exhorted to acquire and practice a wide range of skills. Most of this writing is not very illum- inating. The importance of discovering and using all the latent ability in the country prompted the question whether social factors appeared to influence the extent to which the management potential had been drawn upon. 11 Clements further justified his study on this basis: In so far as investigations of this kind can give answers to questions about the mobility of managers, their transferability, their specialization, their types of background, and their career, then some sort of judgment might perhaps be passed upon the appropriateness of the agitation for recognition of industrial management as a profession. Such a finding could be of some import in programmes of training for managers. It seemed possible, too, that some evidence would be gathered upon which might partially be based a fresh appraisal of the belief that industrial managers form in a significant way a homogeneous elite in the social body. 12 11 10329.. p. 10. Ibid., p. 9 and 13. 121bid., p. 15. Since knowledge is already at our disposal that illustrates that the American business elite is more educated than the general popu- lation and that such people tend to come from higher social origins than the general population, it may be wondered whether or not there is a relationship between all scalars of American business and such factors as education and occupational origin. In other words does educational achievement tend to correspond directly with the occupa- tional level of individuals in today's American business and also do the occupational origins of individuals in American business vary directly with the organizational scalar which they occupy? If such a question were answered affirmatively, it would mean that there would be a tendency for people in the upper scalars of management to be more educated and have higher occupational origins than those in middle scalars, and also that the middle scalars would have members whose education and occupational origin are higher than those in the lower scalars. In our study, only two levels were compared, namely, executives and lower managers. In an enlarged design a study could include inter-comparisons between executives, middle management, lower management, white collar non-supervisory people, and blue coflar‘workers. The specific goals or purposes of this research were as follows: 1. Based on the research design described in Chapter II, the career patterns of executives will be described and analyzed. 10 2. The executive career patterns will be compared and contrasted with existing studies in literature, with primary emphasis on the work of Warner and Abegglen. 3. The career patterns of lower managers will be described and analyzed. 4. The orientations and career patterns of executives and lower managers will be contrasted; this is the central purpose of the research. Before developing the theoretical structure of this study, certain definitions of "career patterns" will be established first. Super provides the following definitions of a career pattern: The sequence of changes in occupational level or field made by an individual during his working life.1 The nature of the career pattern, that is the occupational level attained and the sequence, frequency, and duration of trial and stable jobs, is’ determined by the individual's socio-economic level, mental ability, and personality characteristics, and by opportunities to which he is exposed. 14 ' The sequence of occupations, jobs, positions, as all of these are defined by Shartle throughout a person's working life. The structured sequence of events in the life of a person as he progresses in a job or as he changes from one job to another in the occupational structure. The sequence of changes in occupational level or field made by an individual during his working life. ' 13Donald E. Super, and associates, Vocational Development, A Framework for Research, Career Pattern Study, Monograph I, New Yorkz'Columbia University Press, 1957, p. 131. 14Ibid., p. 14. 15Ibid. , p. 131. 11 Lipset and Bendix have examined career patterns of individuals in their research and have offered the following comments and definition: The pervasive influence of a common occupation on the mentality of all who are in it is unquestioned. And presumably, the more uniform the career of individuals, the easier it should be to predict their thoughts and actions. It is curious, however, that with all the interest in social mobility in America, and the recognition that a large proportion of the population do actually move up and down the social hierarchy and that an even larger proportion move horizontally by shifting jobs and occupations at the same social level, there has been little effort to refine the character of occupation as an interpretive variable by securing data on past occupational experiences of individuals. As most current research is done, the man who has been a skilled worker or an independent businessman for the past twenty-five years is classified in the same category as the man who has been in the occupation for six months. A person's characteristic pattern of mobility was determined by ascertaining the frequency with which he changed from one job to another, shifted from one occupation to another, or moved from one community to another. A person's occupational career pattern includes all those factors that serve to influence his job history. It would probably not be useful to go back beyond his social heritage, that is his family's socio-economic status. The total scope will begin, for purposes of this study, with the person's parental background, including education and socio-economic status, and end with the present point in time in the respondent's life. . A working definition will be as follows: The career pattern of an indi- vidual will refer to those changes in job structure that characterize the individual's occupational history, such as the nature of his first job, geographic moves, intra-organizational moves, transfers and promotions 165. M. Lipset and Reinhard Bendix, Social MobilitLin Industrial Society (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1959)., p. 157. 12 and all occupational changes, and the factors that influence the career and career pattern, such as parental background, education, intelligence, aptitudes, interests, personality, "connections," drive, health, hobbies, race, religion, economic environment and many others. The literature does not offer many lists of career pattern determinants, and those influences that are mentioned have not, for the most part, been scientifically validated. Any such list of determinants would have variable effects on particular individuals, and would vary in significance from one time period to another. Theoretical Development . l7 . . Coates and Pellegrin in the report of their research have discussed various theories which influence or determine career progress of individuals. In the literature on climbing the occupational ladder there are two distinct, and even contrasting, general explanations of "career causation. " On the one hand, there is the "individual causation" theory which centers in the traditional belief that career progress results from native ability and a variety of other individual attributes, hard work, and the demonstration of merit. On the other hand, there is the "social causation" theory which maintains that career progress results from social factors and occupational opportunities arising from historical circumstance. Coates and Pellegrin then go on to show that Miller and Form have comprised these theories into an "equilibrium theory of career 17Charles H. Coates and Roland J. Pellegrin, "Executives and Supervisors: A Situational Theory of Differential Occupational Mobility," Social Forces, Vol. 35, No. 2 (December, 1956), pp. 121-26. 18Ibid. , p. 121. 13 causation, " in which various factors influence career patterns with varying intensities and at different points in the person's occupational history, such as individual attributes, social background, historical circumstance, and native ability. The theory developed by Coates and Pellegrin is called a "situational theory of career causation. " But they seem to differentiate "career causation" from "career progress sources of influence, " the primary one of which is the individual's definition of the situation. This definition is supposedly, according to Coates and Pellegrin, primarily determined (notice that they say ”determined" rather than "influenced, " by his occupational experiences following initial work placement, and the attitudes, values, and behavior patterns he acquires as a member of his occupational group. Coates and Pellegrin developed their theory largely from the 22 20 21 research and writings of Thomas, Merton, and Miller and Form. 23 They allude to Merton's concept of a "self-fulfilling prophecy" as a 19Delbert C. Miller and William H. Form, Industrial Sociology (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1951), pp. 738-741. 20William I. Thomas, The Unadjusted Girl (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1923), p. 42. 1Robert K. Merton, Social Theory and Social Structure (Glencoe: Free Press, 1949), pp. 179-95. 2Miller and Form, Industrial Sociology, op. cit. 23Merton, op. cit., p. 181. l4 variation of Thomas' concept: ". . . and actually, not only concrete acts are dependent on the definition of the situation but gradually a whole life-policy and the personality of the individual himself follow from a series of such definitions. " Following the framework of Thomas, Coates and Pellegrin de- scribe how the successful andmobile executives in their study "adjusted and readjusted their levels of aspiration upward as they redetermine their life goals according to a series of subjective definitions of their career situations. " The research design employed by Coates and Pellegrin estab- lished two sample groups for detailed interviews: Top level executives and first line supervisors, from a diverse rangeof southern firms and industries. Fifty respondents from each organizational scalar were interviewed in 1954 and 1955. Some of the more important con- clusions they derived from their data included: 1. Executives and supervisors defined career success quite differently, and thus possessed differing value systems. 2. The social origins and educational level of the groups were 24Thomas, op. cit., p. 42. 5Coates and Pellegrin, "Executives and Supervisors: A Situa- tional Theory of Differential Occupational Mobility, " Social Forces, op. cit. , p. 125. Thirty different enterprises characterized their sample. , 15 substantially different. 27 3. Levels of aspiration and motivation are not revised upward for all groups as goals are achieved; executives did revise their goals upward as they progressed up the occupational chain while other managers contented themselves with the achievement of first line supervision and defined success "largely in terms of happiness and security on the job and being respected as a worker, family man, citizen. " For the executive, in contrast, the "job itself is at the very core of the executive's life, resulting in intense involvement with and personal commitment to his job and career."29 Both the research completed for this dissertation and certain works reported in the literature, notably Warner and Abegglen's, suggest that‘the theoretical framework of Coates and Pellegrin is incomplete. Perhaps their theory itself is not in error, but their explanation leaves out certain crucial variables that are known to influence an individual's career progress. What these theories pur- port to accomplish is to list and explain factors that cause the shapes 27The conclusions of this dissertation confirm these findings with our slightly larger sample size and with larger corporations in our sample. 8Roland J. Pellegrin and Charles H. Coates, "Executives and Supervisors: Contrasting Definitions of Career Success, " Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 1, No. 4(March, 1957), p. 512. 29 Ibid. , p. 512. 16 of careers, and when a different list is found to be strongly associated with career development, a new or modified theory emerges. Donald Super and associates have begun a ten-year study of the factors that influence careers and suggest the following tentative listings: Possible determinants of career patterns —— ——‘ m l m _ I. INDIVIDUAL CHARACTERISTICS AND EXPERIENCES 'A. Psychological Characteristics 1. 2. 3. 4 5. 6. 7. Intelligence Special aptitudes Interests Personality a. Attitudes (e. g. , toward work, toward authority) b. Values (e. g. , work values) c. Specific traits (introversion—extroversion, etc.) d. Needs (e. g. , achievement needs, nurturance needs) Temperament Self-concept Drive (level of aspiration) B. Physical Characteristics H .OOQKIO‘mpbWNH Height Weight Body structure Physical strength General health Constitution Endocrine balance Adequacy of physiological functioning Special physical assets Special physical handicaps C. Experiences 9. 10. 11. Amount and quality of education Amount and quality of specialized training Special skills Prior work history Hobbies Organizational membership Social and recreational activities Amount and quality of interpersonal relationships estab- lished (e. g. , acceptance of others, acceptance by others) Identification with role models Rejection of role models Concept of others 30 Super, op. cit. 17 II. INDIVIDUAL'S PERSONAL SITUATION A. Parental Family Background HH hay—a o P‘PPP’B‘QP‘PPPE‘ HOOCDQO‘ Socioeconomic status of parents Family financial situation Father's job (Possibly) mother's job Occupational mobility in family background Reputation of family in community Placement in family (only child, oldest, youngest, etc.) Number of siblings Parental aspirations Cultural stimulation Interpersonal relationships in family n Family Situation Married, single, separated, or divorced Number of dependents Health, age, and sex of dependents Aspirations of spouse Interpersonal relationships in family eneral Situation Current socioeconomic status Current financial situation Current job Personal reputation Geographic location a. Region b. Urban-rural Military service obligation Citizenship Race Religion Competition encountered (in school, job, etc.) Attitudes of significant others a. Toward the individual himself b. Toward work III. INDIVIDUAL'S ENVIRONMENT “9‘5"?ow Economic conditions in: country; area; community Occupational structure of the area and community Occupational trends of the area and community Community attitudes about occupations Peace or war Technological developments Characteristics of the era IV. NONPREDICTABLE FACTORS 9:59P!” Accident to self or to important others Illness of self or important others Death of important others Unanticipated opportunities Unanticipated liabilities (e.g., property loss through theft, fire, storm) 18 However, the purpose of this study was not to seek to confirm or deny existing career causation theories, nor to develop an original theory of career causation, but to obtain empirical data that would serve as the basis for describing and explaining the social, educational and occupational backgrounds and career patterns of executives and lower managers and to contrast the differential orientations of these two established groups. In achieving these purposes, a modification of Coates and Pellegrin's theory of career causation has emerged. This suggested modification will be explained here. It is hoped that the conclusions of this study will constitute at least part of the additional knowledge necessary to develop a useful theory of career causation. A sound theoretical framework must be built on existing facts. The few studies in the literature may have developed theories of career causation somewhat prematurely. There is now beginning to appear a series of integrated research findings on the study of occupational career patterns. As new knowledge is obtained, the present theories of career causation, and the one presented in this study, will be modified. This is as it should be. The test of a theory is not its durability. A useful theory must be built on sound facts; that is why the accumulation of new data through competent research procedure often modifies existing theories. The "individual causation theory of career causation" was not wrong; it was merely incomplete as new knowledge required the modification of that theory. The theory to be developed here will be an enlargement of the l9 theory presented by Coates and Pellegrin. In addition to the factors that they formulated as being associated with an individual's career progress, we shall add certain orientations and career factors that characterized a person's background. The four primary orientations that were studied in the research for this dissertation were: 1. Occupational origins of the executives and lower managers. 2. Occupational origins of the wives of the respondents. 3. Military experiences of the respondents. 4. Educational attainments of the respondents. Other orientations and psychological characteristics could have been studied, as suggested by Super. When a fairly complete set of sources of influence upon the progress of careers of individuals is obtained, a more complete theory will be developed. This is part of the reason why it is so important that future research be built upon existing knowledge and integrated data. A theory is a usefully interrelated set of facts. The facts making up the theory, from which our guiding hypothesis was formulated, are mentioned and discussed in the conceptual framework established in this chapter. What has actually been done in this study is that some of the factors that are known to be related to occupational achievement have been added to other factors not as yet proven to be associated with occupational achievement, and these factors tOgether have been tested on a sample of executives and lower managers in order to find out if 20 sources of orientation are related to the occupational scalar achieved within the four corporations established for study. Thus far we know that executives typically come from higher status families and are often well educated, but it has not been demonstrated that such factors as these vary directly within the various occupational scalars of the corporations in the United States. That is why the dimension of lower management was added to the often studied executive group. Guiding Hypothesis In Clements' study of British executives, he suggested that ". . . the extent of opportunity may be related to the degree of success."31 Miller and Form have suggested essentially the same idea. 32 In the analysis of his data, Clements suggested that certain sources of orien- tation (the extent of opportunity) were, in fact, closely related to the degree of occupational achievement. In our study, an enlarged set of orientation sources was established and tested empirically. Based on existing research data, such as that which has been previously mentioned, and following from the theoretical development previously described, the following hypothesis was established for this study: Within the limits established in Chapter II, executives will be characterized by higher occupational origins than lower managers, higher educational attainments 31Clements, op. cit., p. 11. 32Miller and Form, Industrial Sociology, op. cit. , p. 739: "As opportunities are enlarged, the possibilities of occupational mobility are increased." ‘ 21 than lower managers, higher occupational origins of their wives than lower managers, and for those respondents with military experience, executives will be characterized by a higher rank at the termination of such experience than lower managers. Thus a man starts his life with an uncontrollable variable-- occupational origin--proceeds to three major controllable variables that may serve to strongly influence the shape of his career pattern and eventual advancement; namely, education, military experience, and wife's occupational origin. 33 The above-mentioned factors are defined as sources of orientation that characterize the career pattern of individuals and tend to be asso- ciated with varying degrees of occupational achievement. The statement of the hypothesis is built upon the inference of Clements, Form, and Miller (previously quoted), and Coates and Pellegrin. Other (sources of orientation were established and tested empiri- cally; these will be discussed primarily in Chapter VI. Some of these were: 1. Comparisons of management training or executive develop- ment program participation by executives and lower managers. 2. Career speed. 33In a strict sense a man obviously cannot control the occupational origin of his wife, or determine his own promotion and starting rank in the military, but these associations occur long after his birth and he has far more choice as to the wife he will marry (or the girls he will associate with in choosing a wife), and far more control over his behavior that may influence military promotion, than he has over his own occupational origin. 22 3. Geographic mobility. 4. Inter-firm movement. 5. Changes in occupation functional area. In addition to contrasting the orientations to achievement of executives and lower managers, which is the major task at hand, an analysis of the career patterns of executives will be described, and the comparative career patterns of the executives in this study and the Warner and Abegglen executives will be presented. In summary then, the purpose of this dissertation is to study the four established sources of orientation and career patterns of executives and lower managers to gage the difference and contrast for these two occupational scalars. Both groups will be approximately the same age, approximately the same number of cases will be studied in each group, and all respondents will come from the same four corporations. We will now proceed to a description of the research design that was estab- lished in order to test the hypothesis previously asserted. 23 CHAPTER II THE RESEARCH DE SIGN Introduction In order to test the hypotheses and achieve the purposes described in Chapter I, four major multi-plant corporations were asked to par- ticipate in the study. A mailing list of a random selection of executives and lower managers was obtained in July of 1960. The participating corporations were selected on the basis of their size and nature of operations. As will be pointed out later in the discussion of the limi- tations of the study, we will not be able to state that the career patterns of the executives and lower managers within these firms reflect the career patterns of executives and lower managers of corporate industry throughout the United States. However, the data from the participating firms will give at least a partial insight into the total picture. The firms are very large with operating plants throughout the United States. In 1959, the total sales of the four participating firms reached nearly ten billion dollars.1 Total employment was 322, 000; their combined total assets exceeded five billion dollars, and their combined net worth was nearly four billion dollars. Three of the firms are industrial manufacturing corporations and the fourth represents the food industry, with divisions in most of the fifty states. 1See Table 1. 24 The Development of the Questionnaire Before the firms would agree to participate, a description of the study, together with the questionnaire to be used, had to be presented. The early stages of the development of the questionnaire began a year prior to the time when the firms were actually contacted. Based upon the hypotheses established for the study, the questionnaire was modeled closely on the one used by Warner and Abegglen in their 1952 study of American business leaders. In this way, the results of the study could be tied in, at least generally, to their classic work in the literature. The first questionnaire prepared was quite different from Warner and Abegglen's in that it was twenty pages long and was used as a pilot study. The purpose of this first questionnaire was to seek out the most useful kinds of questions that would tend to yield the most fruitful results. The twenty page schedule was distributed to thirty executives. Somebf the items were essay-type. As a result of this procedure and two similar follow-up attempts, it became partially evident as to which items to add or combine. Thereupon ten interviews were conducted. At this point it became evident that the questionnaire should follow quite closely the one used by Warner and Abegglen. The results of the pilot study pro- duced a questionnaire that was ready for pre-testing. The questionnaire was pre-tested on ten executives and ten academicians, and following this, five interviews were conducted. Very little changes were made and the questionnaire appeared ready for distribution. As will be seen when the individual items are discussed, there were still some minor 25 limitations to the questionnaire, but these limitations did not impair the major purposes of the study. The Distribution of the Questionnaire At this point the questionnaire and a description of the research goals were submitted to the firms chosen for the study. Approval was given in July of 1960 and the schedules were mailed out within two months. The mailing list given by the first firm consisted of their president, vice- presidents, and major people reporting to the vice-presidents;1 the list also included the names and addresses of a random sample of fifty-six lower managers in first line and second line supervision. The executive listing included all of the firm's top ninety executives so that the sample equalled the universe for that corporation. No control on our part was available to insure that the sample given to us of their lower management people was truly random. Thus, it is quite possible that a bias existed there. However, the people who approved the project and who prepared the list of lower managers verbally stated that they chose the names from their personnel files on a random basis. Therefore, at the first firm, we have a sample consisting of all the top executives, a possible sample of part of their lower management people, and few names of people 2In both the 1928 Taussig & Joslyn study and 1952 Warner & Abegglen study, the following definition of executive (or business leader) was held to: "for the purposes of this inquiry . . . a 'business leader' is regarded as a person occupying a position as major executive, partner, or sole owner in a business of such size as to be of more than local im- portance in its field. " (Occupational Mobility, p. 229.). As will be seen, our executive group comes fairly close but does not possess the “power" of these two sample groups of business leaders. See Table 2. 26 in middle management. The same situation holds for the fourth4 participating firm, except that the top 63 executives were used and 89 lower managers were sampled. In the second and third firm, m the executive group and lower management group were sampled. Thus, in these two firms, the executive mailing list did not comprise all the top executives, but only a sample of that group. Again we were assured that the names were drawn randomly but a bias could have existed in either or both of the executive and lower manager listings in either firm. The Que stionnaire Returns A total of 563 questionnaires were mailed out during August and September of 1960. As can be seen from Table 3, 64% of these ques- tionnaires were returned. Thirty-four of the returned questionnaires were thrown out, either because the schedules were incomplete, or be- cause the respondents were not within the established age brackets of between the age of 35 to 58. This left 326 usable responses. Of that total 178 were executives, and 148 were represented in lower manage- ment. The per cent of response was fairly high for each firm. 3 The purpose of the study was to contrast the career patterns of the extremes within corporate management. 4See Table 3 . 5In each firm the per cent of return was somewhat higher for exec- utives than for lower managers. It may be wondered why executives tend to respond more than lower scalars. 27 TABLE 3. --Ana1ysis of questionnaires sent, returned, and actually used for executives and lower managers in the four corporations studied -: -------------- Analysis of returns --------------- Corporation by Questionnaires Questionnaires Questionnaires level of position sent received used No. No. % No. % Corporation 1 Executives 90 72 82% 66 73% Lower Managers 56 38 68% 37 66% Corporation 2 Executives 60 45 75% 45 75% Lower Managers 100 48 48% 46 46% Corporation 3 Executives 47 30 64% 27 58% Lower Managers 58 29 50% 28 48% Corporation 4 Executives 63 43 68% 40 64% Lower Managers 89 55 62% 37 42% Total-~all corporations Executives - 260 190 73% 178 68% Lower Managers 303 170 56% 148 49% Total--all corporations and both levels 563 360 64% 326 58% Accompanying each questionnaire was an individually typed cover letter that was prepared by an autotypist machine. In addition to the cover" letter, a self-addressed, stamped envelope was included. Within about 30 daysyafter the first mailing, 50 per cent of the questionnaires were returned. At that point a postcard was sent to each of the remaining people. Very few additional responses were obtained as a result of having sent the postcard. About 60 days after sending the original 28 questionnaires out, a follow-up questionnaire was sent, with a new cover letter. Within approximately thirty days after that our total of 360 questionnaires were returned. Both the questionnaire and the cover letter are presented in Exhibit 1. At this point we will discuss the specific items in the question- naire itself. There were 26 items in the questionnaire. Most of these questions presented no problems. Certain other questions that could bear revision will be discussed in the order in which they appear in the questionnaire. Items 2 and 4 asked respectively, "At what age did you become self-supporting 2’", and "At what age did you obtain your first full-time job which marked the beginning of your occupational career ?" At first glance these two questions may appear to be asking for the same thing. However, in the results that were tabulated it was found that the executives tended to become self-supporting at a later age than did lower managers, and that both groups tended to become self- supporting at an earlier age than they marked for the age that they obtained their first full-time job that marked the start of their occu- pational career. Sometimes the respondent became self-supporting in the sense that he left home in order to begin his college training. He may have worked his way through college, in which case he was self- supporting, but would not have obtained his first full-time job until the completion of his college work, and a large number of the respondents in this study did graduate from college. 6 Item 3 asked, "How many One—fourth of the lower managers and almost 70 per cent of the executives. 29 firms have you been associated with since your first full-time job when you began your occupational career, including your present firm ?" It would have been better if this question were worded as follows: "How many firms have you been associated with during your business career, including your present firm ?" This latter statement of the item corre- sponds exactly to the statement as it appeared in the questionnaire used in 1952 by Warner and Abegglen. The problem with the way it was worded in our 1960 schedule was that the respondent may have been confused as to whether he should include the firms that he has worked for since his first full-time job, or including his first full-time job. This presented no problem because on page 4 of our questionnaire each respon- dent listed certain information regarding each firm that he had worked for during his career, and in this way we can validate how many firms the respondent actually did work for during his career. As far as the idea is concerned, it is accurate as to the number of firms that the respondents have worked for, but this is only because we were able to validate this item 3 by looking at the question on page 4. Item 7 asked, "What was your first job where you are now working? The purpose of this question was to obtain the functional area, such as marketing, finance, or production, in which the respondent was engaged when he began working for the firm where he is presently employed. There are two other periods in the respondent's career that we obtained the functional area. The first functional area of the respondent was 7 determined from page 4, in which he described the first job that he had 7This is item 26 of the questionnaire. 30 in his career, and also on page 4 we can obtain his functional area of his present position at his present firm. For most of the respondents this represents three different points of time, although for some of the respondents it could present a problem, especially if they changed their functional area three times while working at a particular firm. For example, if a man started out as a salesman and worked for twenty years for a particular firm, it is possible that he may have gone into some form of general administration, or perhaps even into personnel work in the middle of this twenty-year period, and his present job could be vice-president of production. If this were the case, it would only be possible to measure the change from his beginning functional area to his present functional area without knowing what he did during the 20- year period. Item 8 asked for the respondent to check the occupational level in his first position with the firm where he is now working, relative to the following six areas: Hourly worker Salaried, white collar and non-supervisory Supervisory, lower management Middle management . Upper management . Major executive WW9??? The purpose of this question was to determine whether or not the respon- dent entered executive status laterally, that is by starting as an executive in his present firm, or did he work his way up from the bottom, so to speak, by starting as an hourly worker or salaried white collar, non- 31 supervisory, or in lower management. All people that started in lower management or below were classified as having been promoted from within. Everyone that started in middle, upper, or major executive status were classified as a ”lateral entry executive. ” It is very difficult to quantify and define terms such as middle management, and some of the respondees did put a question mark here as to what we meant by the difference, for example, between middle and upper management. But on the whole, the vast majority of the respondents did mark this, and we have at best, the respondent's perception of where he stood when he started, relative to other people within the firm. Item 9 asked for their age when they first entered the following occupational levels (leave blank those parts of this question that do not apply). The three areas here that the respondent filled in were: Age: A. First line supervision B. Middle management C. Major executive level Some of the executives did not fill in first line supervision age either because they by-passed lower supervision in becoming an executive during their career, or because they felt that first line supervision did not apply to them because they were an executive at the present time. What was intended here was to get a breakdown of the ages at which they were promoted in their careers from first line supervision on through to the major executive level. This perhaps could have been stated more clearly in the questionnaire, but it would be difficult to 32 amplify the item without making the questionnaire appear to be exces- sively lengthy. Item 12 asked whether or not the respondent was a veteran and, if he was, the questions "Your rank when you entered the military and rank when discharged 7'", were entered in order to obtain two things: (1) to find out at what level the respondents tended to enter the military, and we found, as we will see later, that the executives tended to enter the military at a higher level than did lower managers, and, (2) we wanted to get an index of the mobility that the respondent experienced in the military and to determine this within the time period in which they were in the military (we found that most of them were in during World War II), and also to find out how long it took them, in terms of number of years in service that they were in. Item 14 was thrown out. It asked for the type of high school attended; the four types were public, parochial, other private, and did not attend high school. The vast majority attended public high school. Very few attended any other types of high schools. Item 16 asked for the city and state in which the respondent attended high school. This question was gaged to determine two things. One, to find out if there was any relationship between the size of the community in which the respondent attended high school, relative to executives and lower mana- gers, to see if large communities had any effect on the career patterns of executives and lower managers, and secondly, this question was added to determine one of the five points of location at various points in the respondent's career. For example, item 10 asked for the location 33 of the respondent's birth place, city and state. Item 16 gives us the location of his high school. Item 17 gives us the location if he attended college. Then on page 4 we can determine the location of his first job, and his location, city and state, of his present job. Thus we were able to examine the geographic mobility of the respondents relative to these five particular points in his career. Item 19 asked for the respondent's highest academic rank in high school, and college, if he attended. It was surprising to note the very few respondees who did not answer this question. Perhaps it is not valid to state that each of the responses given to this question was exactly correct, for a man in his forties or fifties may not remember whether he was in the upper ten per cent, or the upper quarter, or upper third of his class. But in general it would appear that they did have a fairly good idea of their academic rank for high school and college. Item 20 asked the respondent to describe briefly any scholastic honors or scholarships that he may have received during his college study. This question did not reveal useful results because it is difficult, without interviewing, to assess the extent or nature of college honors. Item 21 presented a problem because it asked for the amount of educational expenses that were earned and paid for by the respondent during his bachelor's degree. The problem that became evident here was not so much that they couldn't remember how much they had paid toward their college expenses, but whether or not the GI Bill benefits should be classified as the respondent having earned the expenses because 34 he was a veteran, or whether or not this was the fact that he didn't have his college expenses paid by himself because the Veterans' Administration paid the bill. In general, it would seem that if a person received any outside assistance for college expenses, such as tuition, from any source other than what he has either earned in the past, or along the way by working on jobs, then he should classify this as having been paid by himself. Thus if a'person had his college tuition and certain expenses paid by the GI Bill, he should classify this as having earned none of his expenses on his own. It is true that he has earned the right to this money through his military experience, but it is not true that he has, therefore, paid it out of his own pocket if the Veterans' Administration actually did pay it. Question 22 asked for the amount of specialized study courses taken, other than formal education, such as adult education classes. It was difficult to assess whether or not the respondent had a large amount of- education that was of a non-formal nature, or a medium amount, or a low amount. This question actually gave us o_nl_y a yes or no answer. 8 Question 22 asked whether the respondent had ever participated in a Management Training or Executive Development Program, and also it asked for the dates of such participation. This question presented many problems. It is very likely that many of the respondents, especially the lower managers, included some two-week foreman classes, as 8Without interviewing, this item would tend to yield little useful value. 35 having participated in such a program. Also many of them may have gone to a seminar held at a university for a week end, or a week, or more, and classified this also as participation. The problems with this question, then, were (1) they did not give (in many cases) the dates of the participation, so that we could not examine its length, and (2) they did not give the nature of it, so that we cannot assess whether or not this question gives us any contrast in the background of executives and lower managers. This question could be revised to ask the respondent to give the information relative to his participation in any formal, company sponsored management training or executive development pro- gram. At least this would have added to its usefulness. Question 25 asked the respondent to check the principal occupations of others in their family, and if deceased or retired, it asked them to indicate previous occupation. The horizontal headings were as follows: Your Father at the Time of Your Birth, Your Father When You First Became Self-supporting, Your Father's Father, Your Mother's Father, Your Wife's Father, and Your Oldest Brother. Vertically, 16 occupa- tions were listed. These occupational listings corresponded very closely to those used by Warner and Abegglen in their 1952 study. In the code book, many of these were combined. They were reduced from 16 down to 9 categories in order to facilitate the usefulness of differentiation of executives and lower managers. These were further reduced to Low, N, and High occupational origin. 9See Chapter III. 36 Page 4 had question No. 26 involved, and asked for certain facts regarding the respondent's occupational career. The statement at the top of the page said that a certain number of management people were being asked to fill out a supplementary questionnaire on their work experience at various firms during their career. "Please complete the following by starting with your present employer and work backwards." Actually, all of the respondents received page 4 of the questionnaire. For each firm the following information was obtained: The dates of employ- ment, month and year, from and to. The place of employment, city and state; the size of firm or organization, such as: less than 100 employees, 100 to 1000, 1000 to 10, 000, or more than 10, 000. "Your approximate yearly salary or earnings" was included, and they were asked to check one: A.) Less than $5000; B.) $5000 to $10, 000; C.) $10, 000 to $15, 000; D.) $15, 000 to $25, 000 and E.) more than $25, 000. Next, the job title of position was asked. Then, the kind of business or organization, such as: private firm, government, or self-employed. Then the respondent's highest occupational level was asked for, such as: hourly worker, salaried employee and non- supervisory, first line supervision, middle management level or executive level, and lastly the description of work was requested. This type of question could have been improved if an additonal question had been included. The question that should have been added was for the respondent to give the date that he first obtained his present job title, or the job title that he gave for the position that he held; because if a person worked at only one firm for his entire career, 37 he naturally listed the job title of his present position, and in this way it would be impossible to obtain the age in which he entered lower management or middle management, except through reference to item 9 on page 1 of the schedule. Also, if a person worked for two firms in his career, and if he worked for that first firm for, let's say, 20 years, we would know only the job title of his position at the time that he left 9.1.3:} firm, and, therefore, we would know his occupational level only at the time that he left that firm, and we would not know the occupa- tional level or title at the time that he first Egan; at Ella} particular firm. In summary, then, the supplementary question on occupational career was very useful, except for certain areas in which additional informa- tion could have been obtained if the question had had this part on it that was mentioned previously, namely: for the date at which they obtained the job title of their position, and also it would have been good to have a question as to the starting occupational level of each firm that he had worked for. Limitations of the Study The most significant limiting factor in this study relates to the relatively small size of the sample that was obtained. Only four firrns were utilized. In total, less than‘330 cases were obtained through the use of mailed questionnaires. For the total number of usable responses these had to be broken down into various sub-groupings in order to analyze the implications of the data. For example, they were broken 38 down into executives and lower managers, so that we obtained 178 executives in the sample, and 148 lower managers in the sample. In constructing the tables it would be necessary to break down each of these two groups into smaller and smaller cells in order to come up with useful tables. But the greater the extent of the breakdown, the less the weight that can be placed upon the conclusions drawn. However, it is unlikely that the trends and conclusions established from the data gathered in this study are highly different from what results might be expected elsewhere, both in smaller corporations, and for the rest of the United'States in general. No attempt, however, can be made in this study to generalize from the sample obtained to the real case as it may exist in the United States. It would be difficult to evaluate the present social status of the respondent. All the lower managers are in first line or second line supervision“, and all the executives are in the upper echelon of their respective firm's corporate management, but as Clements noted in his study, 10 "It is to be expected that the managing director, the works engineer, and the company accountant will not be awarded the same social recognition. " The social recognition is unquestionably different for the two established groups in this research, but the intra—group 11 social status may also be different. Again, as Clements had indicated, 10Roger V. Clements, Managers: A Study of Their Careers in In- dustry (London: George Allen 8: Unwin, Ltd. , 1958), p. 21. 11Ibid., p. 11. 39 "To take an obvious point; there is no reason to believe that power and influence lie very frequently elsewhere than in those people in whom they are supposed to reside, but this sometimes happens and this piece of research cannot point out the occasions when it does occur. " There are other limitations. No attempt was made to assess the psychological implications of the personalities of the respondents. A study of the value system of various social classes would seem to be highly fruitful to integrate with this type of study and, other than the work done by Hyman13 there has been little done. Again, no attempt was made to measure intelligence, and although the role of intelligence is by no means agreed upon in the literature, it would nevertheless have been useful to examine this at least to the extent that it may show a difference in the contrast of the executives and lower managers. The inner dynamics of the social structure within each participating firm were not ascertained. According to Roethlisberger:14 "There are certain types of structures which prevent the right kind of men from reaching the top rather than facilitating their progress. In other words, the social structure of any particular company determines the kind of collaboration, the kind of people who will stay in the company, and the 13H. H. Hyman, "The Value Systems of Different Classes, " in Bendix and Lipset, Class, Status and Power (Glencoe: Free Press, 1953), p. 428. 14 F. J. Roethlisberger, Management and Morale (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1941), p. 45. 40 kind of people who will reach the top. " Obviously there is a dynamic milieu of factors that influence career mobility. The role of chance, physical limitations, intelligence, psychological variants--all these mitigate and influence the "rising" manager. We cannot fully predict human behavior, but if we can quantify the association of extent of orientations and eventual achievement, we can shed light on the nature of the types of people that most likely will achieve executive status. In summary, then, our purpose was to obtain the difference in the backgrounds and career patterns of executives and non-executive achievers who are roughly the same age, and who are from the same corporations. 41 CHAPTE R III THE OCCUPATIONAL ORIGINS OF EXECUTIVES AND LOW E R MANAGE RS Perhaps the most significant orientation to the achievement of high occupational status is the social origin or occupational heritage of the individual. The familial environment undoubtedly conditions the value structure and level of aspiration of each offspring. This study did not attempt to gage the impact of such an orientation, but it did follow closely the model of Warner and Abegglen1 and other studies in establishing the framework for analyzing the occupational origins of certain members of the executives' family and, in addition, the occu- pational backgrounds of lower managers. In mobility studies, occupation has been the most frequently used _' indicator of rank; a change in occupation has been the most fre— ' quently used operational definition of mobility. 2 . a family's socioeconomic position is largely dependent on the father's occupational place in the economic order . . . Social origins and occupational level of background may be treated as interchangeable terms even though, as Miller has pointed out, a 1Occupational Mobility, op. cit. 2Raymond W. Mack, ”Occupational Determinantness, " Social Forces, Vol. 35, No. 1(October, 1956), p. 21. 3Occupational Mobility, op. cit., p. 6. 4S. M. Miller, "Concept of Mobility, " Social Problems, Vol. 3, No. 2(October, 1955), pp. 65-73. 42 person's occupation is only one major index of social class (though the most important one). A person's family background is certainly one of the more powerful sources of orientation that can affect the career pattern of any member of the work force. Many factors in the career pattern of individuals are directly related to social origins. As will be shown in this chapter, the social heritage of executives and lower managers is closely related to organizational scalar achieved. "It is likely also that the father's occupation is still entered by the children in a greater proportion than any other. " In analyzing his data, Sorokin found a high relationship between the occupation of sons and their fathers. Since the early 1900's, the ten- dency is not so much for sons to enter the occupation of their father as it is for sons to enter at, or possibly above, the occupation l_ey_<3_l of the father. Many changes have taken place in the occupational structure of our society in this century; industry has become more complex and job classes have been broken down in large detail which has resulted in a far greater number of jobs and occupations in today's complex techno- logical industrial period. Thus, it is less likely that sons will enter the same occupation as their father for these and many other reasons, and more likely that social class will be inherited more than the specific occupation. 5Pitirim A. Sorokin, Social Mobility (New York: Harper and Bros., 1927), pp. 428-40. 43 A large amount of research has taken place since 1927 on the subject of occupational origins of the business elite. In 1928 Taussig and Joslyn studied the careers of business executives. 6 Davidson and Anderson studied the relationship of family status to the occupational careers of sons in their 1937 San Jose study. They compared the regular occupations of 1547 sons (over 30 years of age) with their fathers (610), and found the same general conclusion as all other major occupa- tional inheritance studies, namely that ”the children of fathers of the same occupation, and often of the same family, are dispersed among the most different occupational groups. " However, the most useful area of knowledge in this type of occu- pational research is whether or not opportunities for rising from the bottom into high status occupational levels is becoming more or less prevalent over time. As far as the first half of the present century is concerned, the findings of Warner and Abegglen provide this answer, namely, that our society is becoming slightly more open and the Horatio Alger "American Dream” is tending more toward fact than myth. The research for this study will tell us nothing about trends over time regardless of whether we are considering occupational origins, education, or others. The study is merely a snapshot of a limited section of our corporate management taken in 1960. However, the career patterns do confirm, modestly and independently, the same 6F. W. Taussig and C. S. Joslyn, American Business Leaders (New York: The Macmillan Co. , 1932). They found that of the 7, 361 business executives studied, 58 per cent were sons of minor executives, major executives, and business owners. 7Miller and Form, Industrial Sociology, op. cit., p. 718. 44 general picture shown in existing studies. The chi square results between certain backgrounds of our executives and lower managers, and between our executive sample and that of Warner and Abegglen appear in Table 4. The important issue at hand, though, is not how statistically in- significant is the difference between Warner and Abe gglen's result and ours, but whether or not there is a statistically significant difference be- tween the executives and lower managers studied in this research design. The differential occupational origins of executives and lower managers will now be discussed. Occupational background information was obtained for the executive and lower management respondents' fathers (both at the time of respon- dent's birth, and when respondent became self-supporting), wife's father, father's father, mother's father, and oldest brother. In a more complete study of occupational origins, many other members of the respondent's family could be included. Certainly that would yield a wide array of useful data, but the limits of the present study precluded such data gathering. In order to analyze the occupational background of the executives and lower managers, three levels were established; the first level was classified as low, the second "neither high nor low, " (N), and the last level was designated as high. Even though such classification systems are arbitrary, their adequacy can be defended if the delineations are internally consistent and logical. The reason for limiting the classes to as few as possible, results from the relatively small size of our sample. TABLE 4. --Chi square of differential contrasting career patterns for 1960 executives and lower managers Warner and Abegglen . g a: 8 f3 .‘3 ‘5 3 3 u .3 5° 1" ‘H H 0‘ 3 e:~%§83 ”e Factor to be compared for 1960 o 503 13.8 73 m 5 .—« executives and lower managers: .9. '5; *" ,9,” <1) 1’ 3 ‘1’ '2 “’ > I; 31 N .> 5 “5 > S Q’ '2 “8 3% co '8 a: § .§ 8 5 co :3 8 :3 g 35 § .23 :33 : 8 3. 5 5:.” :3 ‘3 3.5 :3 a: 3 3'0 ES 5 > 3 2 t; :3 .9. é: o e e Nx 5 Age at entry into the lower manage- . . . ment level 16. 81 179. 97 ----- Education of respondent 16. 81 161. 33 12 19 Military exit rank 9, 21 121, 29 ..... Education of respondent's father 16. 81 99. 76 3. 96 Education of respondent's wife 18. 48 90. 75 ----- Education of respondent's mother 15. 09 77. 91 ----- Education of respondent's oldest brother 16. 81 75. 06 ----- Occupational level of respondent's oldest brother 9. 21 52. 77 ----- Geographic mobility 13. 28 50. 41 ----- Occupational level of father when son became self-supporting 11. 34 43. 19 2. 30 Occupational level of father when son was born 9. 21 39. 98 ----- Size of community of high school attendance 16. 81 34. 35 ----- Academic rank in high school 11. 34 29. 99 ----- Occupational level of father's father 11. 34 22. 80 2. 47 College scholastic honors 9. 21 19. 17 ----- Academic rank in college 11. 34 17. 92 ----- Age of becoming self-supporting 11. 34 17. 81 ----- Year of marriage 16. 81 15. 97 ----- Occupational level of wife's father 11. 34 15. 73 5. 15 Age obtained first job 11. 34 13. 22 ----- Occupational level of mother's father 11. 34 12. 26 ----- Inter-firm mobility 15. 09 8. 04 1. 82 Age 9. 21 0. 69 ----- 46 Since 326 useful questionnaires were returned, it would be statistically unwise to divide, and sub-divide into smaller and smaller cells. The low category included manual or blue collar, hourly occupa- tions, such as unskilled laborers, skilled and semi-skilled workers. The high category consisted only of high status occupations, such as major executives, minor executives, owners of large businesses, and pro- fessionals. The least defensible classification was termed "N, ” and consisted of all occupations between those exampled in low and high. Perhaps unfortunately, the range of level here stretches from a clerk or retail salesman to members of lower management and owners of medium businesses. It would appear logical that the extremes of level in category "N" could have greater relative effect on the orientation of the incumbent than the range of level in either the high or low categories. Thus, there may have been some justification to the expansion of the three categories utilized, but the limitations of sample size were adjudged more significant than the number of categories agreed upon. In summary then, it may be concluded that the system used here is the most useful for the size of sample obtained. Within the limitations of the classification system used in this. study, there is a clear difference in the occupational origins of the executives and lower managers studied. The fathers of the executive 8For larger samples, the low category could be expanded to farm and nonfarm manual labor; "N" to: white collar nonsupervisory, lower management, and small and medium business ownership; and high to: executive (major and minor), professional, and owner of large business. This system would yield eight sub-systems. However, other re-classifi- cation systems should be considered also. 47 group were predominantly from the middle and upper status levels. As can be seen from Table 5, more than twice as many lower managers' fathers as executives came from the low level, and, in total, one of five executives came from low occupations, and the total for lower managers approached one-half of all the fathers of lower managers that were in the lower occupations. However, about one in three for both scalars came from the middle category. A wider breakdown of the "N" level, coupled with a larger sample, would have shown whether or not the same relationship would hold there as held for the low and high classification system in which more than twice as many executives' fathers came from the high level as did lower managers' fathers, and more than twice as many lower managers' fathers came from the low level as did executives' fathers. TABLE 5. A-Occupational level of the fathers of the respondents both at the time of the respondent's birth and at the time the respon- dent became self-supporting At time of respondent's At time respondent Occupational birth became self-supporting level of father Executives Lower Executives Lower managers managers LOW 2570 5570 1970 43%) N (neither high nor low) 46 33 37 37 High 27 12 39 17 No answer 2 0 5 3 Total 100% 100% 100% 100% Number of cases 178 148 178 148 48 Speaking in a relative sense, there has been little differential inter- generational mobility for the executives and lower managers studied. 9 In fact, the incidence of downward mobility is the most significant factor (17%), in the case of the lower managers. The full implications of down- ward mobility will not be discussed here because of our classification system; also if the father was a minister or public schoolteacher, for example, he was classified as professional (high), and since some of the lower managers are in second line supervision (such as general foreman or section supervisor), it would be difficult to argue how "downward" this intergenerational mobility is, if it is. The important point here is that the vast majority of the high categories are unquestionably of higher status than all those in the remaining two categories (and vice-versa). A partial indication of the significance of the difference in the occupational origins between our executive sample and lower managers, and between these executives and the group studied by Warner and Abegglen in 1952 is provided by the chi square computations. In Table 4, 11. 34 was the maximum number for no statistical significance at the 1% level, with three degrees of freedom. The figure of 43. 19 indicates that the difference between the occupational origins for executives and lower managers is significant and not likely to be due to chance. The chi 1' square of 2. 30 shows that there is probably little difference in the occu- pational origins of the 178 executives studied here and those of Warner 9Thirty-seven per cent of executives moved up one level (inter- generationally), from "N" to High, and 43 per cent of the lower managers moved up one level. In addition, 19 per cent of the executives moved up two levels. 49 and Abegglen. There are, of course, many limitations to these con- clusions, and the conclusions can only be stated tentatively. First of all, the sample size in this study is only 178 compared to 8, 300 for Warner and Abegglen. Also our system of categorizing brings forth a narrow breakdown into only three occupational levels; throughout the published results of the 1952 Warner and Abegglen study, the authors refer to a minimum of six occupational categories which has the advan— tage of not only providing occupational "level" analysis, but also an analysis of the major occupations themselves as partly tied in with the data of the United States Bureau of Census. Occupational Origins of Other Members of Respondent's Family The occupational origins of the respondent's father's father, mother's father, and oldest brother, were obtained in the questionnaire that was used. Generally the same relationship held for all of the occupational levels of other members of the respondent's family. For example, there was a tendency for the father's father of the respondents to have been in a higher occupational level, in the case of executives, than for lower managers. As can be seen from Table 6, twice as many fathers' fathers' of lower managers were from low occupational origins than executives' fathers' fathers, and while there are only a few cases of high father's father for both the executives and lower managers, still the relationship was that more than double the number of executives' fathers' fathers who came from high occupational origins as did lower 50 managers. Also, this same situation held in the case of the mother's father of the respondents, although not quite as pronounced in this case as in the case of the father's father. In considering the father's father, mother's father, and oldest brother, a consistent relationship can be deduced by examining the per cent of executives' and lower managers' members of the family, relative to having a high occupational level. In checking the relationship between the members of the respondent's family who were high, executives versus lower managers, we find that in the father's father relationship, executives were 11 per cent high, whereas five per cent of lower manager's fathers were high. This is a 2 to 1 ratio. The same 2 to 1 ratio held in the case of the mother's father. Also, the ratio held almost exactly for the oldest brother. This relationship did not quite hold as being the same for all three of these family members, in the case of occupational origin being low. For example, the father's father, 21 per cent of the executive's father's father were in low occupational origins; while 43 per cent of the lower manager's father's father were in lower occupational levels. This is approximately a 2 to 1 ratio, but the 2 to 1 ratio does not exist for the mother's father because 23 per cent of the executive's mother's father was low occupationally, and 36 per cent of the lower managers, so this is about 1-1/2 to 1 ratio. In summary, then, it can be stated that for the results that were obtained in this study, we find that there is a strong tendency for the occupational origin of all members of the re- spondent's family to vary somewhat proportionately to the occupational 51 TABLE 6. Occupational level of the respondent's father's father, mother's father, and oldest brother I Occupational level Executives Lower managers Occupational level of the respondent's father's father Low 21% N 58 High 11 No answer 10 Total 100% Number of cases 178 Occupational level of the respondent's mother's father Low 23% N 54 High 12 No answer 11 Total 100% Number of cases 178 Occupational level of the respondent's oldest brother Low 10% N 36 High 54 Total 100% Number of cases 103 43% 44 U1 100% 148 36% 49 100% 148 40% 34 26 100% 89 52 scalar of the respondent. In other words, those that were executives in our sample had members of their family in higher occupational levels than did the lower managers in our study. Intergenerational Mobility of the Respondent's Father For the three occupational levels established in our framework of "Low, " ”N, " and "High, " we find that 28 per cent of the executive's fathers experienced upward mobility between the time that the executive was born and the time of becoming self-supporting. For the lower managers, 19 per cent of their fathers experienced mobility between these two points in their career. Thus, there is little contrasting dif- ferentiation between executives and lower managers relative to this point. The most important conclusion that can be obtained from Table 7 is that , ll . . the fathers of executives tend to start at a higher occupational level, relative to lower managers, and that the lower managers' fathers tend . 12 . to move less, occupationally, than do the fathers of executives. Table 8 examined the intergenerational mobility of respondent's father; that is, the relationship between the occupational level of the fathers of the respondents in that sample, and their father's father. The intergenerational mobility of the fathers of the executives showed that 0 . . . Respondents from the executive scalar in this study. 1Definition of "start" here is the time of the birth of the son who responded in this study. 2Inter - level; occupationally. 53 TABLE 7. --.-Intragenerational mobility of respondent's father Occupational mobility Executives Lower managers No answer 4% 2% Low to low 13 39 Low to N 12 13 Low to high 1 0 N to N 25 , 24 N to high 15 6 High to high 27 11 Some evidence of downward mobility 3 5 Total 100% 100% Number of cases 178 148 34 per cent were mobile from either "low" to "N, " "Low" to "High, " or "N" to "High. " Eleven per cent were downwardly mobile, and 42 per cent did not move upward or downward occupationally. For the lower managers, 23 per cent of their fathers experienced upward mo- bility, 15 per cent experienced downward movement, and 52 per cent were not mobile. Again, there is very little contrasting difference between the execDutives and lower managers relative to the inter- generational mobility of their fathers. There was a slight trend, how- ever, for the fathers of executives to experience more upward mobility and less non-mobility than the fathers of lower managers. Table 9 examined the intragenerational mobility of the respondent. Information from page 4 of our questionnaire was obtained relative to the occupational level of the respondent's first job in his career. Most of the lower managers started in low occupations, while the vast majority of executives started in occupations between high and low. Of 54 the executives, 15 per cent started low, while 55 per cent of the lower managers started low. In starting at the ”N" level, we find that 75 per cent of executives started at this level compared to 41 per cent for the lower managers. Seven per cent of the executives started high, and no lower manager started high, as there was no sound evidence of downward mobility for the lower managers. TABLE 8. --Intergenerational mobility of repondent's father -—‘ - Occupational mobility Executives Lower managers No answer 13% 10% Low to low 8 24 Low to N 6 13 Low to high 8 4 N to low 10 14 N to N 25 24 N to high 20 6 High to low 0 1 High to N 1 0 High to high 9 4 Total 100% 100% Number of cases 178 148 TABLE 9. —-Intragenerational mobility of respondent Occupational mobility Executives Lower managers No answer 3% 4% Low to N 0 55 N to N 0 41 High to N 0 0 Low to high 15 0 N to high 75 0 High to high 7 0 Total 100% 100% Number of cases 178 148 55 Table 10 examined the relationship of father's occupational level to father's father's occupational level. There was a tendency for the father's occupational level to be somewhat similar to the occupational level of the father's father for both executives and lower managers. 13 TABLE 10. --Relationship of father's occupational level to father's father's occupational level Father's father's Fathers of executives Fathers of lower managers occupational level Low N High Low N High Low 4570 1970 2170 63% 36% 27% N 55 75 56 36 62 50 High 0 6 23 l 2 23 Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% No. of cases 29 59 66 59 53 22 Almost one-half of the executive's fathers who were in low occupational levels had father's fathers in low occupational levels (45%), while only one in five of the father's occupational level that were high had father's fathers who were low (21%). Generally, the tendency for the occupational level of the father to agree with the occupational level of the father's father was stronger for executives in this sample than for lower managers. In summary then, we see that within the limitations of the study, the first part of our guiding hypothesis can be accepted, namely that 13This conclusion follows closely'that found by Warner and Abegglen, and Clements' 1955 study in Great Britain. 56 executives are characterized by higher occupational origins than lower managers. By adding the dimension of lower management it is strongly possible that in comparing other organizational scalars with the lower management scalar and executive scalar, such as blue collar and white collar non-managerial levels, that we would find that all major occu- pational levels of achievement are related to their occupational origin. We shall now turn our attention to the second part of our established hypothesis which is a contrast of the educational attainments of executives and lower managers. 57 CHAPTER IV THE EDUCATION OF EXECUTIVES AND LOWER MANAGERS Introduction Thus far we have examined only one of the four major sources of orientation to achievement established for'study. The occupational origins of executives appeared to be significantly different from the origins of the lower managers studied. In this chapter it will be demonstrated that the greatest difference among the four orientation sources lies in comparing the educational attainments of the two scalars. Clearly then, education is the royal road to success. This point is discussed by Warner and Abegglen: One of the fundamental tenets of our early democracy that has persisted through the development of our nation is the right of the individual to equal opportunity. One reason that this prin- ciple has survived in fact, in spite of the many fictions about it, is that we have provided the opportunity for higher education to almost all who would seek it and have the capacity to profit by it. Because of the value placed on education, the demand for it, the recognition given to it, the opportunity to get an advanced education has become one of the great equalizing forces in our social system. Not everyone has the capacity to profit by this opportunity; not everyone has the motivating drive to take advantage of it. But formal education has in- creased for the general population. It has increased in much greater proportions among the men who are the present heads of our large corporations. Three-fourths of these men at least attended college, over half of them graduated and a third of these men went on to post-graduate work. 1 lW. Lloyd Warner and James C. Abegglen, Big Business Leaders in America (New York: Harper and Bros. , 1955), p. 34. 58 A person's value system is largely established by the time he reaches the age of twenty. Decisions on making the necessary sacrifices for higher education are formulated around this age level. Value systems, of course, are modified in many cases throughout a person's occupational life but the tendency is for such systems to be somewhat firm by the time a person is at the college age. Even though our society has made it generally possible for most people to obtain an education it is still a fact as is demonstrated in this study and in many other studies that the educational level of the son tends to agree with both the educational level of his father and the occupa- tional origin of his father. In this chapter we will examine the educational attainments of executives and lower managers and their wives, fathers, mothers and oldest brother. We shall seek to answer such questions as: What is the difference in the backgrounds of executives and lower managers relative to such issues as attending a trade high school versus a college prep high school, major subject area for bachelor's degree study, the age at the completion of a bachelor's degree, and the extent of their formal business training if any. 59 TABLE 11. --Education of executives and lower managers and certain members of their family together with the Warner and Abegglen sample and the U. S. adult male population 30 years or over in 1950 and 1957 1960 1960 1952 1950 1957 Educational exec- lower Warner U.S. adult U.S. adult level utive managers and males males Abegglen No answer 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% All or part of grammar school 0% 5% 4% 55% 46% Some high school 3 14 9 16 17 Graduated from high school 7 22 11 16 21 Some college 21 34 19 6 7 Graduated from college 33 13 W 7 Some post- graduate study 16 9 > 57 7 >9 Completed graduate degree 20 3 J J Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Ed t' 1 Wife Father Mother Oldest brother “I“ ‘fna 1960 1960 1960 1960 1960 1960 1960 1960 eve exec. L. M. exec. L. M. exec. L. M. exec. L. M. No answer 1% 4% 2% 6% 2% 5% -- -- All or part of grammar school 0 7 29 55 24 48 8 14 Some high school 5 18 17 15 17 22 8 19 Graduated from high school 34 42 24 12 31 18 17 27 Some college 22 16 11 7 l3 4 27 22 Graduated from college 33 9 9 4 10 3 25 6 Some post- graduate study 3 1 2 0 1 O 4 4 Graduate degree 2 3 7 1 2 0 11 8 Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 60 Education The level of formal education obtained by executives and their families was significantly higher than the level of formal education obtained by lower managers and their families. In addition to relative levels of attainment, it was interesting to note that executives, and even wives of executives, who start college work tend to finish a uni- versity degree rather than drop out along the way, while lower managers and their wives tend to terminate without finishing, in much greater proportion than executives. 2 This point suggests the need for further study because if people in their early twenties show signs of quitting what they start to complete, then perhaps these people would quit other endeavors during their career. Certainly they have stopped moving organizationally in a sense that they have not moved beyond the lower management echelon. Seven out of ten executives obtained a college education, while one lower manager in four completed a college degree. One executive in five obtained a master's degree, and one lower manager in 33' graduated with a master's degree. The same contrast holds for wives, fathers, mothers, and their oldest brother. As can be seen from Table 11, the educational level for each member of the family (that was asked for in Twenty-one per cent of the executives had "some college" while 33 per cent finished at the bachelor's level. For lower managers 34 .per cent had "some college" and only 13 per cent finished at the bachelor's level. The same relationship holds for graduate school and for the wives of the two groups, and their oldest brother. 61 the questionnaire) is higher in the case of executives than for lower managers. These findings suggest a hypothesis that educational level tends to vary directly with the organizational scalar considered within corporate industry. It might be worth-while to sample the educational attainments of people from unskilled labor, white collar nonsupervisory positions, lower management, middle management, and the upper echelon to test the suggested hypothesis. While this study did not attempt to determine reasons behind this relationship, part of the answer may lie with the recent increase in bureaucratic recruitment and pro- motion in today's corporate setup. Type of High School Training The respondents were asked to give the type of high school training that they had relative to general, trade, or commercial, and college prep. In Table 12, the results of this item are presented. As can be seen, the majority of the executive group attended college prep high school. The next highest group was the general which was 29 per cent. For lower managers college prep occupied 41 per cent of the group and 33 per cent for general. The most significant fact that can be obtained from this table is that the difference between the lower ' managers and executives lies in the trade or commercial group. The 41 per cent figure for lower managers who attended college prep is 3Joseph R. Gusfield, "Equalitarianism and Bureaucratic Re- cruitment, " Administrative Science Quarterly, March, 1958, pp. 521- 41. 62 TABLE 12. --Type of high school training Type Executives Lower managers General 29% 33% Trade (or commercial) 3 16 College prep 65 41 Other answers 3 10 Total 100% 100% Number of cases 178 148 significantly larger than the executive figure. The contrast is partially made up in the difference in commercial high school attendance, where five times as many lower managers attended a trade or commercial high school as did executives. Attendance at a college prep high school may give the graduate a slightly better chance for college entrance, and possibly even for college success. However, the type of high school training certainly doesn't give any substantial differential advantage to the incumbent; rather, the level of aspiration and motivation make up for any relative deficiency in the type of high school attended, once the person is in his college work. Table 13 gives the major subject area for the bachelor's degree and master's degree for executives and lower managers who graduated from college. Approximately one respondent in three who obtained a bachelor's degree majored in business administration. This relationship was constant for both executives and lower managers. In comparing the type of major that was most significantly different for executives and 63 lower managers, we find that liberal arts and engineering stood out somewhat prominently. More executives than lower managers obtained their bachelor's degree in the liberal arts area--20 per cent versus 5 per cent--while in engineering twice as many lower managers obtained their bachelor's degree in engineering as did executives. Almost four out of ten lower managers, who graduated from college, obtained their degree in engineering, while only one person in five did so for executives. TABLE 13. --Major subject area of university training Bachelor's degree Master'sldegree Major area Executives Lower Executives Lower managers managers No answer 6% 0% 2 0 Business Administration 31 30 9 1 Economics 15 8 2 0 Liberal Arts 20 5 6 0 Engineering 20 38 8 0 Law 3 3 7 0 Other 5 l6 1 3 Total 100% 100% 35 4 Number of cases 123 37 It is difficult to draw many sound conclusions as to the major subject area for bachelor's degree, in contrast of executives to lower managers, because only 37 lower managers obtained a college degree compared to 123 executives who obtained a bachelor's degree. Thus the percentage Seven executives obtained a doctoral degree; none of the lower managers obtained a doctoral degree. 64 breakdowns of the various major areas within the bachelor's degree for lower managers are based on very small numbers and it would be very unwise to draw strong conclusions with such a limited size of sample. Since only about three per cent of the lower managers obtained a master's degree it would not be useful to describe the various areas in which these respondents obtained that degree. However, for executives we find that 20 per cent of them obtained a master's degree. Most of these were in business administration but it was very close as to the dominancy of liberal arts, engineering, law, and business administration. These were all relatively about equal. In their 1952 study, Warner and Abegglen found an increasing trend for the executives to obtain formal business training since 1928. As can be seen from Table 14, this research has substantiated that conclusion. In Table 14 more executives have business training in college than do lower managers but part of this is explained by the fact that executives tend to have more college training than do lower managers. All in all, slightly more than half of both the executive and lower manager group have had some formal business training and while the lower managers have had less formal college business training than the executives, they have had more correspondence courses. In Taussig and Joslyn's 1928 study they found that 71 per cent of the executives had no formal business training. In Warner and Abegglen's 1952 study they found that 42 per cent had had no formal business training. In our 1960 study the executives that have had no formal 65 TABLE 14. --Extent of formal business training Taussig and Warner 8: 1960 1960 Extent Joslyn Abegglen exec- lower sample sample utives managers No answer 0% 0% 6% 10% None 71 42 36 36 Correspondence courses 22 25 10 21 College business training 7 33 48 33 Total 100% 100% 100% 100% Number of cases 178 148 business training amounted to 36 per cent. An additional six per cent of the 1960 executives did not answer this question so that the most we can conclude is that approximately the same amount, of business training is had by executives in 1960 for our sample as did the group studied by Warner and Abegglen in 1952. One slight trend that is indicated in comparing the 1960 study with that of Warner and Abegglen in 1952 is that in our study there has been an increase in the per cent of those executives that have had formal business training in a college, and a decrease in the per cent of those executives that have had correspondence courses as their source of formal business training. Table 15 presents the contrasting of college scholastic honors for executives and lower managers. One the whole, executives who went to college obtained more scholastic honors than lower managers did. About half of the executives obtained no honors or scholarships, while three out of four lower managers obtained no honors or scholarships. 66 TABLE 15. --College scholastic honors Extent of scholastic honors Executives Lower managers No answer 4% 0% No scholarships 55 73 Some (hard to tell the extent) 10 11 High honors 31 16 Total 100% 100% Number of cases 123 37 About twice as many executives obtained high honors relative to lower 5 managers. The conclusions to Table 16 leave something to be desired because, in asking for the portion of bachelor's degree educational expenses paid by respondent, some of the people in answering have included a payment by the Veterans' Administration, through the GI Bill, as having earned this by serving in the military and therefore having paid it themselves; while other people who responded tended to classify this as having earned none of their educational expenses if the GI Bill had paid it. The table indicates that the executive tended to pay more, percentage-wise, of their bachelor's degree educational expenses relative to lower managers. In conclusion, this study cannot give any valid answers to the question of whether or not executives or lower managers tend to pay more relative to one another, of their educational expenses. 5This finding ties in with Table 17 following, which shows that executives fared better scholastically than lower managers during both high school and college. TABLE 16. --Portion of bachelor's degree educational expense paid by respondent 67 Portion paid by respondent Executives Lower managers No answer 2% 3% None 14 22 Less than one-half 21 ' 27 About one-half l4 8 More than one-half 19 24 All 30 16 Total 100% 100% Number of cases 123 37 TABLE 17. --Academic rank in high school and college High school College Execg- Lower Exec- Lower utives managers utives managers No answer 2% 11% 1 % 5% Upper 10% 45 20 35 22 Upper 25% 24 24 27 19 Upper 33% 12 20 19 22 Upper 50% 13 22 12 19 Lower 50% 4 3 6 13 Total 100% 100% 100% 100% No. of cases 178 148 123 37 In Table 17 the academic rank of executives and lower managers for high school and college is presented. Regarding the high school academic rank, about twice as many executives were in the upper 10 per cent of their class as were lower managers, and on the whole, executives tended to place higher academically than lower managers 68 for their high school. This same relationship held for college, but not quite in as marked a degree. The relationship between the educational and occupational level of the fathers of the executives and lower managers studied in this research is presented in Table 18. TABLE 18. --Occupational level and educational level of respondent's father ------ Executives------ -----Lower managers---- . Did not Grad. More Did not Grad. More Occupational . . . , level of finish from than finish from than father high high high high high high school school school school school school Low 32% 15% 2% 53% 28% 6% N 45 41 27 38 44 33 High 23 44 71 9 28 61 Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% No. of cases 76 41 48 100 18 18 For breakdowns of education and occupation utilized, there is a remarkably close relationship such that the lower the occupational level of the respondent's father, the lower the educational attainment of the respondent's father. This close relationship held for both the executives and lower managers. Thus, it may be hypothesized in our society that regardless of the social class or occupational level studied, fathers of such people tend to obtain education to the same (or nearly the same) extent as their occupational level of achievement. Put another way, for 69 the sample studied here, for the past two generations there has been a tendency for the educational level to agree with a person's occupational level of attainment. It would not be wise to draw such conclusions for levels lower than lower managers because the farther down we go the smaller becomes the per cent of fathers who obtained high education or high occupational status, and, therefore, the less valid become the conclusions. If the sample size were as large as Warner and Abegglen's in lower organi— zational echelons, much greater support could be given than what can be substantiated here with our relatively small sample size of lower managers. Table 19 depicts the relationship between the father's educational level and the father's father's occupational level for executives and lower managers. TABLE 19. --Father's father's occupational level compared with father's educational level Father's education ------ Executives--—-—- -—---Lower managers---- u ' . D'd d. M Father's fathers Dld not Grad More 1 not Gra ore t' I finish from than finish from than occipa 11°“ high high high high high high eve school school school school school school Low 36% 20% 6% ‘ 53% 50% 11% N 64 63 67 45 38 72 High 0 17 27 2 12 17 Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% No. of cases 70 40 48 97 16 18 70 The relationships that were evident in the previous table hold nearly the same in this table in that the higher the occupational level of the father's father, the higher the education of the father. This relation- ship too, is in close agreement with the findings of Warner and Abegglen's 1952 study. It is difficult to draw significant contrasting conclusions between executives and lower managers here, because so few lower managers had a high father's father's occupational level or a highly educated father (with university training). Again the sample size of lower managers impairs the certainty of conclusions. It should be noted though, that a greater per cent of lower managers whose father's father's occupational level was low had fathers that did not finish high school than did executives. This reflects the higher education obtained by the family members of the sample studied of executives relative to lower managers. It is perhaps somewhat unfortunate that most of the occupations fall in the "N" category which, if this category had been expanded into two divisions, the contrasting relationship between execu- tives and lower managers would have been brought into clearer focus. This would not have changed the relationships as previously described; it would have merely sharpened the contrast. Table 20 presents an analysis of the generation that follows that generation that was included in Table 19, namely the relationship between the education of respondent and the occupational level of his father. 71 TABLE 20. --Comparison of education of respondent and occupational origin of respondent's father Education of respondent ------ Executives------ -----Lower managers---- 0 . High Some Post High Some Post ccupation school college grad. school college grad. of father or or B.S. study or or B.S. study less degree less degree Low 4770 2070 1070 54% 3870 3370 N 35 38 42 39 38 39 High 18 42 48 7 24 28 Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% No. of cases 17 93 59 59 68 18 In general it can be seen from Table 20 that there was close agreement between the education of respondent and the occupation of his father, such that the higher the occupational level of the father the higher the education that was obtained by the son. About half of the executives whose father's occupation was low obtained either a high school education or less. Also, about half of the executives whose father's occupational level was high obtained some post-graduate study in their educational level. This relationship held similarly in the case of lower managers, except that the relationship was more pronounced in the case of executives. In other words, while there is a tendency for the educational level of the son to agree with the occupational level of the father, this relationship is more pronounced for executives than for lower managers that were 72 included in this study. 6 To the extent that a college education aids the career progress of an individual, it would be a greater advantage to obtain such education as early as possible. Executives, as can be seen from Table 21, obtained a slight "head-start" over lower managers in obtaining their university degree. By the age of 24, three out of four of the college trained executives had graduated, compared to only one-half of the lower managers. Also, 26 per cent of the university trained lower managers graduated at the age of 29 or older; almost all of the executives had finished their bachelor's degree by this time. Since many of the execu- tives went to post-graduate school, and since graduate school training tends to further aid the career progress of individuals, especially in large bureaucratic organizations, it was helpful, apparently, to have the bachelor's degree tucked away at a relatively young age. Perhaps one of the reasons that far fewer lower managers went beyond undergraduate There was a tendency for the occupational level of the wife's father to agree with the respondent's father's occupational level but this relationship was more pronounced in the case of executives than for lower managers (see Appendix Table 2). In their 1952 study, Warner and Abegglen found that American business leaders ”. . . tend to marry a higher proportion of women from the levels of their origin than from any other level, but men from every level . . . marry women from all other levels in sizable percentages. " Occupational Mobili_ty, p. 180. Thus our findings are in close agreement with those of Warner and Abegglen and, by showing the same general conclusion for an additional scalar, this shows that it may be possible that all stratifications marry near their origin independent of where they, themselves, end up. This research cannot support this statement but merely suggests it. 73 TABLE 21. --Age at completion of bachelor's degree Executives Lower managers Age Percent Cumul. Percent Cumul. Age 20 or under 7% 7% 3% 3% 21 29 36 22 25 22 24 60 5 30 23 7 67 14 44 24 8 75 8 52 25 7 82 14 66 26 2 84 0 66 27 2 86 0 66 28 3 89 8 74 29 or older 5 94 26 100 No answer 6 100% 0 100% TABLE 22. --Extent of education and geographic mobility Executives Lower managers . High Some Post- High Some Post Geographic mobilit school college grad. school college grad. y or or B.S. study or or B. S. study less degree less degree All locations similar 18°70 24°70 110/0 45°70 3570 2770 All similar but one 47 21 21 33 35 45 All similar but two 29 36 36 13 19 17 Three or more moves 6 19 32 9 11 11 Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% No. of cases 17 90 61 54 65 18 74 schooling was due to the older age in which they graduated at the bachelor's level. Also, a much larger majority of lower managers who started college tended to quit school than did executives. Certainly the demands of work and family make it difficult to continue education into middle age. Also, as will be pointed out, high occupational achievers start promotions earlier in their career than people who do not go beyond lower management for the sample studied. If education facilitates such advancement, it stands to reason that executives obtain one more plus factor if they finish their education sooner than lower managers. The greater the extent of such established typolOgies, 7 the more significant become the contrasts between occupational scalars, but also the larger the sample size that is needed in order to bring forth valid conclusions. The limits of the present sample size reduce the number of complex cross—relationships that will be attempted here, and this is why it will be recommended that a more complete study with even additional scalars be attempted. 8 Table 22 shows an examination of the relationship between educa- tion and geographic mobility. As described in Chapter II, the research design provided data on the geographic location of executives and lower managers at the time of their birth, when they attended high school, college, their first job, and their present location. It might be asked For example: relating organizational level to education to career speed to age at completion of bachelor's degree. 8See Chapter VII. 75 whether executives move about the country more than lower managers during their career and, regardless of this, is the extent of education related to such mobility. Chapter VI examines geographic mobility in greater detail than is presently discussed here, but in Table 22 we see the relationship between the extent of education and geographic mobility for executives and lower managers. It is difficult to draw strong conclusions on the relationship between education and geographic mobility for executives and lower managers because so few executives obtained lower education, such as "high school or less, " and few lower managers attended post-graduate study. In these two educational classifications only 17 out of 178 executives went _o_n_l_y_as far as high school or less. Also, out of 148 lower managers only 18 had some post-graduate study, or completed a post-graduate degree. Therefore, in relating the extent of education to the extent of geographic mobility for executives and lower managers, these points have to be borne in mind. For those executives who did not change their location at the five points in their career previously mentioned, there appears to be little relationship to their extent of education. Eighteen per cent of the executives who obtained high school or less had all their geographic locations similar. As we increased the educational scale to some college or bachelor's degree, 24 per cent of the executive's had all their locations similar, and then the per cent goes down again to 11 per cent in the case of post-graduate study being related to "all locations similar. " However, in the case of lower managers there is a slight 76 trend that is evident. This trend is that the higher the education, the less the likelihood that all their locations will be similar. In other words, geographic mobility for lower managers is related to the extent of educa- tion in such a way that those that have low education tend more to have all locations similar than those that have higher education. Also included in Table 22 is an examination of the effect of the various educational levels on all locations being similar but one, all being similar but two, and whether or not three or more geographic moves were obtained by the respondent. In examining the executives, as was mentioned previously, there is very little relationship between the extent of education and the extent of geographic mobility. However, the data do suggest that there is a slight tendency for low geographic movement being associated with low education, and that the higher the education of the executive the higher the geographic movement that accompanies it. This relationship is only very slight, however. In the case of lower managers, the same relationship holds except that it is more pronounced. The implications of geographic mobility upon the . career pattern of executives and lower managers will be discussed in more detail in Chapter VI. Table 23 presents the data that describe the relationship between the education of the respondent and the respondent's father's education. There was a tendency for the educational level of the son to agree closely with the educational level of respondent's father, though not so much in absolute terms as in relative terms. Thus, the higher the education of TABLE 23. -—Education of respondent and respondent's father 77 Education of Education of respondent ------ Executive------- -----Lower managers---- respondent's father High Some Post- High Some Post- school college grad. school college grad. or less or B. S. study or less or B.S. study Did not finish high school 65% 45% 45% 92% 63% 61% Graduated from high school 24 29 17 8 19 6 More than high school 11 26 38 0 18 33 Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% No. of cases 17 93 64 53 68 18 TABLE 24. --Education of respondent and respondent's wife Education of respondent Education of ------ Executives ----------- Lower managers---- respondent's High Some Post- High Some Post- wife school college grad. school college grad. or less or B. S. study or less or B.S. study Did not finish high school 17% 6% 2% 43% 12% 23% Graduated from high school 72 37 19 47 49 12 More than high school 11 57 79 10 39 65 Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% No. of cases 18 95 63 58 67 17 78 the father the higher the educational attainment of the son. This relation- ship was more pronounced in the case of lower managers than for executives. For example, the executives who were the sons of lower educated fathers tended to have the least education of the executive group, but the relation- ship did not vary directly as the level of the respondent's education tended to increase. Sixty-five per cent of the executives, whose fathers did not finish high school, had a high school education or less. Forty- five per cent of that group had some college or bachelor's degree, but the relationship did not go down for those that had post-graduate study, because that relationship was also forty-five per cent. But in the case of lower managers, 92 per cent of the lower managers, whose fathers had an educational level of less than high school, did not finish high school or finished high school; whereas 63 per cent of the lower managers whose father did not finish high school had some college or a bachelor's degree, and 61 per cent of the lower managers whose fathers did not finish high school had some post—graduate study. Thus, when we compare the 61 per cent here with the previously mentioned 45 per cent, in the case of executives relative to post-graduate study, we find that only eighteen cases were included in the case of lower managers, which reduces the validity of the statistical comparisons between executives and lower managers relative to this point. But in general the trend does show up that the educational attainment of the son does tend to agree with the educational level of the father. The same relationship holds for the comparison of the education of the respondent and of the respondent's wife. 79 In Table 24 it can be seen that the tendency is for the education of the executives to agree closely with the educational level of the execu- tives' wives, such that the higher the education of the executive, the higher the education of the wife, or vice versa. This is not a cause and effect relationship, it is merely a relationship that has been shown to exist. In the case of lower managers, however, there was a slight discrepancy in that for those lower managers whose wives did not finish high school, 43 per cent of the lower managers had high school or less, 12 per cent had some college or a bachelor's degree, but then the relationship increases as 23 per cent of them had some post-graduate studies. Again though, the problem here partially results from the fact that only 17 lower managers, out of the 148 in the sample, had some post-graduate study, and by the time that we subdivide the 17 cases into the "did not finish high school area" for the wife, "graduated from high school" cell, and "more than high school" cell, we find that the statis- tics tend to yield conclusions that are not as valid as would have been obtained in a larger sample size. However, in both Tables 23 and 24 we do find a relationship such that the education attainment of the son tends to vary with the educational level of his father and also of his wife; in the case of the comparison of the education of son and the education of respondent's father there was a greater tendency for this agreement to take place for lower managers than for executives. How- ever, when you compare the education of the husband with the education of his wife, there was a greater tendency for the educational level of 80 the executives to agree with the education of the wife than that of the lower managers. In summary, then, it can be concluded that the education of the son tends to agree both with the education of his father and with the occupational level of his father for both executives and lower managers. Thus we have established the verification of the second part of the hypothesis, namely, that the educational attainment of executives tends to be higher than the level of education obtained by lower managers. We shall now turn to the two major remaining phases of the contrasting orientations of executive and lower managers: military exit rank and the occupational level of wife's father. 81 CHAPTER V MILITARY EXPERIENCES AND THE MARRIAGES OF EXECUTIVES AND LOWER MANAGERS The purpose of this chapter will be to examine certain areas relating to two major orientations that were established for the study. The first is the military experience. The second of these is the occu- pational level of the respondent's wife's father. Military The vast majority of the respondents in this study, that were in the military, were in the service during World War II, and were mostly discharged very close to the year of 1946. Also most of them were in about three years. Eighty-four executives were non-veterans and 93 executives were veterans. Seventy-seven lower managers were non- veterans and 70 lower managers were veterans. We examined the rank that executives and lower managers entered the military, the rank at exit, and the extent of military mobility in the service. There was also an item included in the research design to obtain the military decorations obtained by the respondents. In assessing the implications of the military experience on the career development of an individual, it would be desirable to place each person within the appropriate framework of the following structure: Obtain the educational level of the respondent at the time of his entrance; 82 obtain his previous work experience, his age, his marital status, and the way he was inducted, such as being drafted versus a volunteer. The number of years in service should be known as well as wartime versus peacetime, combatant versus non-combatant, and the branch of service. There were a large number of military implications that were not ex- plored in this study, and some of these will be recommended for further study. We might ask ourselves in what way might the military experience affect the value system and orientation of the individual, and also how did this military experience tend to differ from other types of organizational experiences, such as in large, private multi-plant industrial corpora- tions. Some of the considerations will be brought out at this point. It may be suggested that a person in his twenties who goes into the military for three years winds up being three years behind his fellow American who may not go into the military. This cannot be generalized because the nature of the military experience may have little or strong effect upon the subsequent career of the individual, and also the person who does not go into the military may not use that three-year time period to advantage in furthering his career, or he may use it to great advantage. Since most of respondents' military experience was during World War II, it might be argued that the non-veterans had exceptional opportunities for promotion in expanding wartime industries plagued with manpower shortages. 1 It might have been an advantage to have been a part of an 1 . . 7 The executive non-veterans tended to have a high lower manage- ment career speed and a low executive career speed. 83 organization that was participating in such expansion rather than having been in the military during this time. Military experience may have forced some people into command positions that they may not have gotten had they stayed in private business, or at least they may not have gotten it as soon. This exper- ience with command may have had influence on the person's later per- formance in management. The military tends to use different motivational techniques than are used in industry, for example, in the area of status and compensation, and even authority. The war itself may have challenged or modified individual philo- sophies. The fight for democracy influenced American ideals about such things as individual liberty, the importance of the group effort, and proper motivation for service above and beyond the call of duty. The GI Bill enabled many people to finance higher education. The wartime military experiences of individuals may have further influenced the desire for education. The war uprooted people from their home towns and introduced them to other ways of life, other geographic areas, and diverse oppor- tunities for marriage. It may have given them a new viewpoint on the relative importance of survival versus affluence, versus prestige, con- formity, and dedication to ideals. The military organization tends to be far more autocratic than most business organizations and this may have acculturated many individuals to their reaction to the demands of authority. The military 84 itself is characterized by a lack of profit motivation in its management, and this may have suggested differing standards for performance and objectives for the enterprise. There was a free intermingling of races, creeds, and social strata within the military organization and this may have changed many of the respondents' opinions as to objectives and career plans, not to mention the fact that the war itself may have interrupted well-planned careers. Status symbols are different in the military compared to industry. In the military you often wear status on the shoulder or sleeve. Industrial status symbols, such as carpets and corner offices, are somewhat more subtle. People that were in the military experienced significant changes relative to organizational concepts, such as line and staff, and this may have given them an insight into profit management that would have aided their career progress. In Table 25 we see the contrast of the entrance rank and the exit rank for executives and lower managers. Two-thirds of the executives entered the military at a rank of less than commissioned officer. In contrast, 93 per cent of the lower managers entered at this level. At the rank of lieutenant, or equivalent, can be found 32 per cent of the executives, and only 7 per cent of the lower managers. Only two people 2The military is not a non-economic organization and consequently possesses certain characteristics of private firms, such as pressures to cut costs and stay within allotted budgets, but it would depend on the level within the military that a person is working as to whether he would gain "transferable" knowledge and experience. 85 entered the military at captain or its equivalent, or higher, and these were both executives. Thus, there was a tendency for executives to enter the military at a slightly higher rank than lower managers. On the other side of the coin we see the exit of these respondents. Here, one out of four of the executives terminated their military experience at a rank of less than commissioned officer, compared to 72 per cent for lower managers that left the military without becoming a commissioned officer. More than twice as many executives as lower managers ter- minated their military experience at the rank of lieutenant or its equivalent, and 45 per cent of the executives, versus 14 per cent for lower managers, terminated their military experience at the rank of captain, or its equivalent, or higher. This suggests that executives not only began slightly higher when they entered the military, but they ended that time period of their life at a much higher rank, on the average, than lower managers. In Table 26 we see that twice as many lower managers as executives experienced no military mobility, and also almost twice as many execu- tives as lower managers achieved high mobility. Regarding military decorations, there was very little difference in the extent of decorations achieved by executives versus lower managers. There was a slight tendency for executives to have more decorations but so small a difference that it shall not be commented on here. It would require an enlarged research design and sample size to examine the full impact of military experiences upon the subsequent 86 TABLE 25. --Military: rank at entrance and rank at exit - -— M r .3 —‘ m r Rank ------- Entrance ------------- Ex1t -------- . Lower - . Lower Executives Executives . managers managers Rank less than commissioned officer 66% 93% 24% 72% Rank was lieutenant or equivalent 32 7 31 14 Rank was captain (or equivalent) or higher 2 0 45 14 Total 100% 100% 100% 100% Number of cases 93 70 93 70 TABLE 26. --Mobility in the military services and military decorations Executives Lower managers - ----------- Mobility ---------- ‘--—- No mobility 33% 66% Some mobility 48 23 High mobility ' 19 11 Total 100% 100% Number of cases 93 70 --------- Decorations------------- No military decorations | 57% 61% Some military decorations 43 39 Total 100% 100% Number of cases 93 , 70 87 career development of individuals. Only a few of the crucial areas that could be studied were attempted in this research. It does indicate, in summary, that the military had a significant impact in that the higher the exit rank from the military, the higher the subsequent occupational scalar achievement that a person would tend to obtain. The Marriages of Executives and Lower Managers We shall now turn our attention to the last of the four major sources of orientation that were established and studied in this research. The first source of orientation studied was the occupational origins of executives and lower managers. We found in Chapter III that there was a tendency for lower managers to come from lower occupational origins than execu- tives. The chi square for this source of Orientation was 43. 19, while the minimum necessary for no statistical significance at the one per cent level, was 11. 34. The second source of orientation was education, and we found in Chapter IV that executives as well as their family were characterized by higher education than lower managers and their families. The chi square on education was the highest of the four orientations, namely, 161. 33, which indicates a very great statistical difference in the array of executive education and lower management education. The third source of orientation was the military. This was almost as high a chi square as for education. The chi square for military exit rank be- tween the array for executives and the array for lower managers was 121. 29. 88 However, we find very little difference in the occupational origins of the wife's father for executives and lower managers. 3 The chi square here was 15. 73, which means that there .13 a statistical difference, because only a maximum of 11. 34 is necessary for no statistical difference at the one per cent level, but this is the lowest statistical difference of the four primary sources of orientation studied. Twenty-five per cent of the executives married a wife whose occupational origin was low, compared to 41 per cent for lower managers. Thirty per cent of the executives married a wife whose occupational origin was high as contrasted with 18 per cent for lower managers. Thus, there is a difference between the occupational origins of the wives of executives and lower managers in that executives clearly marry into a higher occupational status family than do lower managers, at least for the size of sample that was used in this study. This point also verifies that point that was made in Chapter 111 when we said that the occupational origins of the executives and the members of their family, such as oldest brother, father's father, and mother's father, was higher than for lower managers. In Tables 28 and 29, the'year of marriage and the age of marriage is presented. These tables are included mostly to describe some of the relationships relative to marriage for lower managers and executives. Since the ages are approximately equal for our sample scalars, and since, as is indicated in Table 29, there is no marked difference in the age which the respondent was married, for executives and lower managers, 3See Table 27. 89 TABLE 27. --Occupational level of wife's father —_——‘ _ J —l— 1 _— I _'_. Occupational level of wife's Executives Lower managers father No answer 5% 4% Low 25 41 N 40 37 High 30 18 Total 100% 100% Number of cases 178 148 TABLE 28. --Year respondent married Year Executives Lower managers No answer or not married 2% 5% Before 1929 (prior to depression) 4 6 1929-1934 (during lst half of Depression) 15 20 1935-1940 (during last half of Depression) 36 21 1941-1945 (during World War II) 26 32 1946-1950 (between World War II and Korean War) 14 12 l951-present 3 4 TABLE 29. --Age when respondent was married Age Executives Lower managers No answer or single 2% 4% Age 23 or under 34 34 24 - 27 45 39 Age 28 or older 19 23 Total 100% 100% Number of cases 178 148 90 we would not expect that there would be any great difference in the year in which the respondents were married. Also, since there isn't very much difference as to the relative ages of becoming married, and since executives entered first line supervision faster than lower managers, then the key factor is not that executives delayed marriage to further their career speed but that attention should be focused on the factors 4 associated with fast entry into lower management. TABLE 30. --Relationship of year married to year respondent obtained bachelor's degree Executives Lower managers Married 4 or more years before graduation 7% 29% Married 1, 2, or 3 years before graduating 11 12 Married same year as obtained degree 13 0 Married 1, 2, 3, or 4 years later 42 32 Married 5 or more years after graduating 27 27 Total 100% 100% Number of cases 115 34 In Table 30 we see the relationship of year married to the year that the respondent obtained a bachelor's degree. Since very few lower managers obtained a bachelor's degree, such a contrast will not yield results of high usefulness. But it does indicate that executives tend to 4[See Chapter VI. 91 marry later than lower managers, relative to the time in which they graduated from college. Thus, if there is any advantage to having the opportunity to devote full time to academic studies, and to career advance- ment while being single, this advantage is given slightly more to executives than to lower managers. Thirty per cent of the lower managers were married four or more years before graduation compared to only seven per cent for the executives. However, for both groups, 27 per cent were married five or more years after graduation from college. In Table 31 we see the relationship of year married to the year that the respondent entered first line supervision. Executives tended to marry later than lower managers relative to the time at which both groups entered first line supervision. Seventy per cent of the lower managers were married four or more years before entering first line supervision, compared to 42 per cent for the executives. Almost three times as many executives as lower managers were married in the same year that they entered first line supervision, or later. This research has attempted neither to gage the impact of military experience upon the value system of individuals, nor to assess a wide view of the role of the wives of the respondents as was accomplished by the research design of Warner and Abegglen. 5 The primary purpose of the chapter was to bring into focus the contrast of two hypothesized orientations to achievement among the executives and lower managers studied. We found that 'a high exit rank from the military was far more prevalent among executives than among lower managers. We cannot say 5Big Business Leaders in America, op. cit. , Chapters Six and Seven. 92 TABLE 31. --Relationship of year married to year respondent entered first line supervision Relationship Executives Lower managers No answer 2% 3% Not married 2 2 -4 or more years before 42 70 -3 or -2 12 -1 9 4 Married same year as entered first line supervision 10 2 +1, 2, 3, or 4 years later 14 6 +5 or more years later 9 4 Total 100% 100% Number of cases 178 148 that high military achievement causes high occupational mobility for such incumbents, but if a person is "oriented" to handle large issues and gains experience and possibly contacts, it is likely that such a situation should have substantial effect in his later career development. Within the limitations described in Chapter II, this research has shown this to be true. Of course many factors associated with occupational mobility other than those studied in the research design remain outside of our spectrum because a number of the executives' careers were character- ized by having none of the four sources of orientation established. 6Thirty-three per cent of the executives possessed none of the sources of orientation. See Table 32. 93 In regard to the effect of a person marrying into a high social class we found no great difference in the occupational origins of the wives of executives and lower managers. Though the difference was significant at the 1% level, it was the smallest difference of the four sources of orientation studied. For executives, marriages were close to, but slightly lower than their own occupational origins, while lower managers generally married girls whose origins were the same as their own occupational origin. The educational attainments of the wives of both scalars were somewhat less than the level of their husbands but the contrast was even more pronounced between executives and their wives than between the lower managers and their wives. In other words, the wives of the executives were more highly educated than the wives of the lower managers, but there was a smaller disparity between the lower manage- ment couples than between the executive couples. Also, more of the wives of the executives who start college tended to finish than for lower managers' wives as most of the wives of lower managers quit before finishing. 8 As for why this happens, it would be a separate, though highly fruitful area of subsequent investigation. 7See Tables 5 and 27, and also Appendix Table 2. This same relationship held for executives and lower managers as was described in Chapter IV. 94 CHAPTER VI CONTRASTING ORIENTATIONS OF EXECUTIVES AND LOWER MANAGE RS We shall now turn our attention to whether or not the hypothesis established for study has been validated within the limitations ascribed in Chapter II. We have now examined the four1 major sources of orientation to the attainment of high status positions among executives and lower managers. In this chapter we shall draw upon the conclusions previously described in the light of the major hypothesis, and then pro- ceed to the discussion of other contrasts between the career patterns of executives and lower managers. We were interested in the social, educational, and occupational backgrounds of the groups established for study. Most of the basic factors involved in the social and educational backgrounds have been analyzed and will be summarized here. In addition, factors related to occupational origins and education will be presented. Following this, an analysis of the factors related to the occupational careers of the groups will be analyzed. One of the areas of study will be an analysis of the factors associated with executive career speed and the factors associated with their lower management speed of career. Other areas of importance 1Occupational level of father and wife's father, education and military. 95 include inter-firm movement comparisons between executives and lower managers, geographic mobility, and functional occupational changes. In Table 32 the major sources of orientation as compared for executives and lower managers are presented. Twice as many lower managers were characterized by having no sources of orientation as compared to executives. That means that twice as many lower managers as executives did Ii_o_t have any of the following: exit from the military as captain or higher; high occupational origin of father; high occupational origin of wife's father, or the completion of a master's degree or higher for their educational attainment. In regard to the military source of orientation, more than three times as many executives as lower managers terminated their military experience at the rank of captain or its equivalent, or higher. More than twice as many executives had an occupational origin of their father that was high, as did lower managers. Almost twice as many executives married a wife whose occupational origin was high. The greatest difference occurs in education. Twenty per cent of the executives obtained a master's degree or higher, while only three per cent of the lower managers did so. Thus it would appear that education provides the greatest contrast as a sourceof orientation, as compared to any of the other three sources of orientation that were established for specific study for this dissertation. Thus, the major hypothesis estab- 2 lished for study has been validated. 2See Table 49. TABLE 32. --Comparison of sources of orientation for executives and lower managers 96 Sources of orientation Executives Lower managers None apparent 33% 66% Military exit rank high 45% 14% Father's occupational level high 39% 17% Wife's father's occupational level high 30% 18% Educational level high 20% 3% Two or more sources of orientation 36%* 9% Note: because of the overlap among the sources of orientation, the totals will not add to 100. *Most of the members of this group have more than two sources of orientation. TABLE 33. --Comparison of age of becoming self— supporting and age of obtaining first full-time job in occupational career Self-supporting First full-time job Age range . Lower . Lower Executives Managers Executives Managers Age 16 or under 6% 15% 4% 12% 17_ - 19 38 48 28 37 20 - 22 42 29 38 28 Age 23 or older 14 8 30 23 Total 100% 100% 100% 100% No'. of cases 178 148 178 148 97 We shall now address ourselves to the six remaining contrasting areas that will serve to differentiate the career patterns of executives and lower managers. In Table 33, the age of becoming self-supporting for the respondents, and the age of obtaining their first full-time jobs for executives and lower managers, are compared. After discussing this contrasting difference we shall proceed into an analysis of inter- firm movement. Following that, the area of entry analysis will be examined. Thereupon geographic mobility and functional occupational changes will be analyzed and we shall conclude with analysis of executive career speed and the comparison of executives entering lower manage- ment and lower managers entering lower management. In Table 33 the comparison of average age of becoming self- supporting, and the age of obtaining their first full-time job for execu- tives and lower managers is presented. There was a tendency, for the ‘_ executives to become self— supporting at a later age than lower managers, I N“, why-— and also the same tendency held in the case of their obtaining their first full-time job in which executives also obtained their first full-time job (at a later age than did lower managers. This contrasting relationship _‘_ .__1 was not strongly pronounced. Generally there was fairly close agreement -/ ”\x._.L.J/' in the age of becoming-self-supporting for executives and lower managers and of the age of obtaining their first full-time job for executives and lower managers, but there was a tendency for the executives, as was previously mentioned, to obtain these areas at a slightly later age than lower managers. Before the age of 19, 44 per cent of the executives 98 had become self-supporting as compared to 63 per cent in the case of lower managers. Regarding the age of obtaining their first full-time job, 32 per cent of these executives had obtained their first full-time job by the time they were 19 compared to approximately half of the lower managers. Eighty-six per cent of the executives has become self-supporting by the time of reaching the age of 22, compared to 92 per cent for lower managers. As to their first full-time job, 70 per cent of the executives had obtained it at, or prior to, the age of 22, compared to 77 per cent of the lower managers. Thus, comparing age 22 in both these areas, there was not a very great difference between the scalars studied. In contrasting the relationship between the age of becoming self-supporting and the age of obtaining their first full-time job, we see that both the executives and lower managers tended to become self-supporting at an earlier age than they obtained their first full-time job. Part of the reason that would tend to account for this would be in obtaining education. Most of the entire group studied did go on for some advanced training beyond high school. This would delay, in most cases, the acquisition of a full-time job, but would tend to have a lesser effect on delaying the age of becoming self-supporting. A person can become self— supporting, while at the same time obtain his education, but generally you do not obtain your first full-time job until you completed at least your bachelor's degree. The next area of analysis is inter-firm movement, which is presented in Table 34. In the research design for this study the total 99 TABLE 34. --Number of firms or organizations that respondents have been associated with during their occupational careers Number of firms Executives Lower Managers 1 21% 19% 2 24 16 3 26 24 4 ll 14 5 7 10 6 or more ll 17 Total 100% 100% Number of cases 178 148 number of organizations or firms worked for during their occupational career was obtained for both executives and lower managers. This area of inter-firm movement was particularly interesting in the results of the Warner and Abegglen 1952 study. In their study they found that there was a relationship between inter-firm movement and such factors as education of their fathers, occupational level of their fathers, and educational level of the respondent. The relationship in their study was such that the lower the occupational origins of their fathers, the higher the inter-firm movement for the respondent; also the lower the education of both the father of the respondent, and for the respondent, the higher the inter-firm movement of the respondent. 3 If this analysis were carried into greater detail it would have particular significance to such an area as executive development recruiting. In recruiting candidates 3'Warner and Abegglen, Occupational Mobility, op. cit., p. 128. 100 for executive development programs, corporations would tend to be interested in those people who would most likely retain their employ- ment status with the firm that is providing training. To the extent that a person will tend to "job hop" or move from firm, and therefore have a career characterized by inter-firm instability, it would be. highly desirable to be able to predict with greater assuredness who these individuals might be. If it can be shown that such things as occupational origins and education have an impact on the career pattern relative to inter-firm movement, then analysis in this area should be expanded. The research completed for the dissertation did not go into any depth on this point. It is mentioned here only as an area recommended for further analysis. In Table 34 we find that there is a tendency for executives to be characterized by a career pattern of slightly less inter-firm movement than lower managers. Even though one out of five respondents in both scalars worked for only one firm during their career, 29 per cent of the executives worked for four or more firms, while 41 per cent of the lower managers 4The inter-firm movement for the executives in this sample was compared with the inter-firm movement in the Warner and Abegglen 1952 study. The chi square for the difference between the arrays was 1. 82, which indicates no statistical difference at either the 1% level or the 5% level. The coefficient of correlation between the two arrays was plus . 938. Thus there was a high amount of agreement between the inter-firm movement of executives in this study, and the executives in the Warner and Abegglen study. There was also no statistical signifi- cance in the difference of arrays between executives and lower managers (8. 04); see Table 4. 101 worked for four or more firms during their occupational career. Thus, the real contrast in inter-firm movement between executives and lower managers begins to occur mainly as the percentages of movement are analyzed for the larger numbers of firms worked for. Later on in this chapter the effect of inter-firm movement will be related to the career speed of executives in entering lower management, and in entering the executive level. Table 35 presents an analysis of the occupational level of the respondent's first job at present firm for executives and lower managers. In order to analyze Table 35 it will be useful to integrate the findings obtained when we analyzed Table 9. In Table 9 the intragenerational mobility of the respondent was analyzed. That means that we were able to tell the occupational level of the respondent's first job in his career. In Table 35 we are able to tell the occupational level of the respondent's FHM' first job at his first firm. . For lower managers, 55 per cent started .—~.l H——" their working career in the low occupational level, such as unskilled labor, skilled labor, semi-skilled labor, or mechanics. Forty-six per cent of the lower managers started low at their present firm; thus almost all of the lower managers who started their career in lower occupational levels also started in a low occupational level at their present firm. For executives, 15 per cent of them started their career in lower level occupations and 13 per cent started their present job in a low occupational level. The most significant point here is that the executives tend to begin their career at a higher occupational level than 102 do lower managers; so it would seem that this head start would certainly have effect not only upon career speed but upon the eventual degree of achievement that they will obtain. Of course other factors will influence the degree of achievement, such as the other orientations previously described in this chapter, but certainly it should not be overlooked that starting one's career in white collar occupations has a greater effect upon occupational mobility than if one starts in blue collar occupations. TABLE 35. --Occupational level of respondent's first job at present firm L Occupational level Executives Lower managers Hourly 13% 46% White collar 47 39 First line supervision 17 15 Middle management 9 0 Upper management 10 0 Major executive 4 0 Total 100% 100% Number of cases 178 148 Seventy-five per cent of the executives began their career in white collar occupations, such as white collar non-:upervisory or in first line supervision, compared to only 41 per cent for lower managers. Of that group of executives who started their careers in white collar occupations, 47 per cent began their first job at their present firm in white collar occupations. This 47 per cent was not necessarily drawn entirely from the same 75 per cent that started their career in white collar occupations. 103 Certain of the people who started in white collar occupations at their present firm may have begun their career in lower occupations although certainly the vast majority of them did begin both their first job in their career and their present job at the firm where they are now working in white collar occupations. About the same per cent of lower managers who began their occu- pational career in white collar occupations also began their first job at their present firm at the white collar level. Only fifteen per cent of the lower managers obtained their first job at their present firm in first line supervision. Some of this group may have had their first job in their career in either lower occupational levels or in white collar, non- supervisory occupational level. Seven per cent of the executives began their career in high status occupations, such as a middle management executive position, major executive position, owner of a large business, or professional. In examining the occupational level of the executives' first job at their present firm, we find that about one in four began in middle management or above. For purposes of this study, middle management, upper management, and major executive classifications constitute lateral entry. This means that 77 per cent of the executives were promoted from within, so to speak, within the firms that they now work for. The remaining 23 per cent are said to have entered laterally. Only four per cent of the executives began their job at their present firm as a major executive, but if they began their job at their present firm in either 104 middle, upper, or major executive level, they were classified as having entered executive status laterally. Even though this designation is not totally accurate it does indicate that some of the respondents entered their present firm at a relatively high status level. It would have been highly desirable to have examined the relationship between lateral entry and "up from the bottom" intra-firm mobility as associated with such factors as career speed, occupational origins, and educational attainment. These relationships were not attempted in this study for the reason of low sample size. Only 23 per cent of the executive group began their first job at their present firm in a high status position. This gives us only forty cases. If we relate these forty cases to such areas as career speed it would break down into very small cells which would yield statistical data of low significance. Within a larger sample such an analysis would be strongly recommended for further research. The next major section for study is geographic movement of executives and lower managers. As mentioned in Chapter II, the geographic location of all the respondents was obtained for five major points within their careers. These five points were the state in which they were born, the state in which they attended high school, the state in which they attended college, the state of their first job, and their present job location state. As can be seen from Table 36, almost twice as many lower managers as executives were characterized by not having moved the state of location relative to any of the five points previously mentioned. If we defined high geographic mobility as three 105 TABLE 36. --Geographic mobility at five points during respondent's career GeOgraphic mobility Executives Lower managers All locations similar 18% 36% All similar but 1 22 33 All similar but 2 3.3 15 All but 3 or all different 21 9 Questionnaire incomplete 6 7 Total 100% 100% Number of cases 178 148 or more moves, then more than twice as many executives would be characterized by high geographic mobility as lower managers. This movement was broken down into various relationships and the compared for executives and lower managers. These will now be analyzed. In Tables 37 and 38 the relationship between the similarity and dissimilarity between the state of college attendance and four other states, such as birth, high school, and first job, is presented. The vertical delineations were: no answer, locations similar, locations different, and no college degree obtained. As an example, when the relationship between the state of college attendance and the state of birth is analyzed, we find that 54 per cent of the executives went to college in their state of birth compared to 62 per cent of the lower managers who went to college in their state of birth. In contrasting the geographic mobility relative to the state of attending college, for executives and lower managers, it must again be borne in mind that 106 only 37 out of the 148 lower managers studied graduated from college. Therefore, the statistical significance of such a low number reduces the importance of any tendencies that would be apparent. There was approximately a ten per cent difference for the similarity of locations for executives and lower managers relative to college and birth state, college and high school state, and college and first job state. The largest difference occurred when an analysis was obtained for the difference in geographic mobility of executives and lower managers relative to the state in which they attended college and the state in which they hold their present job. Twenty-nine per cent of the executives went to college in the same states where they are now working, while almost half the lower managers went to college in the same state where they are now working. Thus the largest evidence of geographic mobility occurred for both executives and lower managers when we examined the state of college attendance and the state in which they are now working. Therefore, it can be stated that there was not a great deal of difference in the similarity or dissimilarity of location when we compare the state of college attendance with four other major points in a person's career. The locations being different showed up in a more pronounced way when other geographic areas were examined. Table 39 examined the similarity of location of high school state and first job state for executives and lower managers. About half of the executives did not move to obtain their first job from the state in which they attended high school. For lower managers, only one in 107 TABLE 37. --Geographic mobility comparisons between the state of college attendance and state of birth, and between the state of college attendance and the state of high school attendance College and birth state College 8: H. S. state Geographic mobility . Lower . Lower Executives Executives managers managers Locations similar 54% 62% 68% 78% Locations different 42 33 30 19 No answer 4 5 2 3 Total 100% 100% 100% 100% Number of cases 123 37 123 37 TABLE 38. --Geographic mobility comparisons between the state of college attendance and state of acquiring first job, and between the state of college attendance and the state of obtaining present job. College and first job College and present Geographic mobility state job state , Lower , Lower Executives Executives managers managers Locations similar 48% 57% 29% 49% Locations different 37 4O 66 49 No answer 15 3 5 2 Total 100% 100% 100% 100% Number of cases 123 37 123 37 four moved to a different state to obtain attended high 3 chool. their first job from where they Thus, executives were geographically more mobile than lower managers when we compare the state of high school attendance with the state in which they obtained their first job. In analyzing the state 108 of birth and the state of attending high school we find very little difference between executives and lower managers, except that there was a slight tendency for executives to move more than lower managers. Thirty per cent of the executives moved to a different state, while 33 per cent of the lower managers moved to a different state to attend high school than from where they were born. In Table 40 we see that nearly twice as many executives as lower managers moved to a different state for their present job as compared to the state in which they obtained their first job in their career. Regard- ing the relationship between high school state and present job state, we find the same relationship holding, namely, that about twice as many executives are working in a state different than that of their high school attendance. We find that both executives and lower managers exhibited greater mobility for high school state and present job state than for first job state and present job state. This is partly explained by the difference in time periods. Most people complete their high school before obtaining their first full-time job. Also it would further lengthen the time period for those people who went on to college. The longest time period that was analyzed was the relationship between the birth state and the state in which the respondent is presently working. Here we find that nearly seven out of ten executives are working in a state different than that in which they were born, compared to only half of the lower managers who are working in a state different from that in which they were born. In summary then, we have examined the inter- 109 TABLE 39. --Geographic mobility comparisons between state of high school attendance and state of obtaining first job, and between state of birth and state of high school attendance High school and first Birth and high job state school state G . . . eographic mobility . Lower . Lower Executives Executives managers managers Locations similar 55% 72% 68% 72% Locations different 34 18 30 23 No answer 11 10 2 5 Total 100% 100% 100% 100% Number of cases 178 148 178 148 TABLE 40. "Geographic mobility comparisons between state of present job and the areas of: first job state, high school state, and state of birth ‘fi - Present job and birth state Present job and high school state Present job and first job state Geographic mobility Execu- Lower Execu- Lower Execu- Lower tives managers tives managers tives managers Locations similar 43% 69% 33% 61% 29% 49% Locations different 47 25 64 33 68 49 No answer 10 6 3 6 3 2 Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% No. of cases 178 148 178 148 178 148 110 relationship of nine comparisons of geographic location for executives and lower managers. In all nine of these cases executives exhibited more geographic mobility than lower managers. Clearly, the career patterns of executives tend to be characterized by greater geographic mobility than lower managers. It is quite possible that the relation- ship between the extent of geographic mobility varies directly with organizational scalar considered. Thus, the higher the organizational scalar considered for occupational levels considered, the higher the geographic mobility that will tend to accompany this. Functional Ar ea Analysis The training department of one of the major automobile firms is completing a research study in the area of functional occupational analysis that is especially significant. Most studies reported in the literature that examined the functional backgrounds of high administrative people merely established which functional areas, such as marketing versus production, dominated their career patterns. Thus, it has been established that in the early part of this century production was the most common route into the upper managerial echelon; in recent years it has been shown that marketing, and to some extent, finance, have been more common back- grounds of upper level executives than production or industrial engineering. However, the research work of the training department referred to has taken a different and far more useful approach. They have divided 6An expanded research design would be necessary to validate this hypothesis. 111 the major corporate functional areas into various sub-areas, such as breaking engineering down into design and drafting. Briefly, what they have done is to establish as many major sub-areas as the functional area would logically call for, and then divide each functional. area into scalar levels and trace the individuals through their sub-area type and level of functional experience during their career pattern formation. In this manner they are able to conclude which area within marketing characterized successful advancement rather than merely which functional area dominated the person's career experience. Tentatively they have found this approach to shed far more light on the role of functional background experience than the traditional approaches. It is likely that the results of their research will be published and this would appear to constitute a solid contribution to career pattern analysis. The work is at present held confidential. The data obtained for this dissertation relative to functional analysis, followed somewhat the traditional7 approach, in which we determined the general functional area of the respondent's occupation at three points in his career: his first full time job; first job at present firm; and present functional area. We are interested in contrasting the 7Fortune, "The 1700 Top Executives, " November, 1959, pp. 138- 143; and Fortune, "The Nine Hundred, " November, 1952, pp. 235-37. This dissertation did not undertake the detailed functional analysis outlined above because of inadequate sample size and lack of access to the intimate details of internal corporate operations. This disser- tation extended the traditional functional analysis, however, by com- paring the functional histories of an executive group with a lower manager group. The functional histories were expanded by a consideration of educational attainments, geographic mobility, and mobility between functional areas. 112 starting and present functional area for executives and lower managers, changes in functional areas, the relationship between the extent of education and type of functional area for the respondent's first firm and present area, and the relationship between functional changes and geographic mobility for executives and lower managers. The most dominant functional areas for both executives and lower managers were manufacturing, marketing, and engineering. Table 41 presents the various functional areas for executives and lower managers at their first job in career, first job at present firm, and present functional area. For those executives in marketing there appeared to be very little change in the total number of executives in marketing from point to point in their career. There was a general tendency for more executives to enter progressively personnel work as we examined the 178 executives at these three points. Manufacturing exhibited a little instability but there was a slight downward tendency. 9 There was very little change in the per cent of executives in engineering at these three points. For the executives in finance, accounting, and purchasing, there was a slight 8Charles Walker, Steeltown (New York: Harper and Bros. , 1950). He found a greater tendency for the disemployed steelworkers of the particular town that he studied to change their occupation, such as from steelworker to factory worker in general, or gardener, or electrician, or some other such area, rather than move geographically, so that we could say that they found a greater resistance to geographic movement than to occupational changes. In our study, of course, we were interested in levels somewhat higher than the skilled and unskilled factory workers, but we can at least approach the general area and use this study for comparison. 9Executives, from 13% to 16% to 9%. 113 downward trend but the net effect was very little change. For the lower managers there was a slight increase in the total per cent of lower managers in marketing when we examined the three points; but in general, a good deal more of the executives were engaged in marketing activities than lower managers. In comparing any changes in the per cent of people in personnel work, at the three points for executives and lower managers, it would not be advisable to examine the lower managers in personnel because there were so few people in lower management engaged in personnel activities. The same situation holds in examining general administration, and also in finance, accounting, and purchasing. However, in comparing the manufacturing group, we find that most of the lower managers are engaged, and have continued to have been engaged, in manufacturing. As we examine the three points in their careers we find that there was a slight tendency for there to be about the same per cent of lower managers engaged in manufacturing at the three points in their careers, with perhaps a very slight upward trend. Engineering was also somewhat unstable but there did tend to be a slight increase over the three points in the careers of lower managers. The purpose of Table 41 is to describe the various functional areas of the present sample. In this way, further insight is obtained on the career patterns of executives and lower managers. Table 42 provides some useful contrasting relationships. This table examined the tendency, or lack of tendency, for executives and 114 TABLE 41. --Functional area of respondent's first job in career, first job at present firm, and present functional area Firstjob in career First job at Present functional . present firm area Fun:1tie:nal Exec- Lower Exec- Lower Exec- Lower utives managers utives managers utives managers Manufacturing 13% 40% 16% 46% 9% 44% Marketing 24 5 24 8 25 12 Engineering 13 12 13 9 13 19 Finance 2 1 4 2 8 4 Accounting 10 5 6 5 1 1 Personnel 8 1 15 3 20 7 Purchasing 2 0 1 1 2 3 Professional 8 1 2 0 2 1 General administration 6 l 7 1 17 3 Other (including no answer and hard to ‘ classify) 14 34 12 25 3 6 Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% No. of cases 178 148 178 148 178 148 lower managers to change their functional area during their careers. Five functional areas were examined; manufacturing, marketing, engineering, accounting, personnel. There was a pronounced tendency for both execu- tives and lower managers to change their occupational functional area at least once during the three career points that we examined. Sixty—two per cent of the executives who started their first job in their occupational career in the functional area of manufacturing, changed functional areas one or more times during their careers, compared to 53 per cent for lower managers. In marketing, 67 per cent of the executives changed 115 their functional area at least once, compared to 71 per cent for lower 10 . . . managers. The greatest change occurred in the accounting area in which almost all of the executives and lower managers, who started in accounting, changed their occupational functional area at least once during , ll . . . their career. The area of personnel was examined for executives in Table 42, and this area presented the least amount of functional change for the executive, in which only 36 per cent of the executives who started in personnel eventually changed their functional occupational area. TABLE 42. --Analysis of changes in functional area during respondent's career broken down by five functional areas Executives Lower managers 53 U) 2° ‘30 m (U 1% 2: a, 8 Fe 2 m 53 . U “3 0 3 fi “3 0 3 Functional g a g g :1 a a 5 :3 '2 area g ,9 3373 0 ° ,9 So '8 ° ... c: e s. E .4 e C‘. s a) a 0 g 8 E o 3 U 9 53 8 Ct C: O :3 O :1 G C: 0 g o :3 Manufacturing 62% 38% 100% 24 53% 47% 100% 59 Marketing 67°70 33°70 10070 42 7170 2970 10070 7 Engineering 57% 43% 100% 23 65% 35% 100% 17 Accounting 94% 6% 100% 17 100% 0% 100% 8 Personnel 36% 64% 100% 14 - - - 2 Total--all , functional areas 72% 28% 100% 168 70% 30% 100% 133 , 0 This could mean that salesmen that are s u c c e s s ful tend to obtain promotion into other functional areas at the managerial level. This may indicate that accounting is an important functional area at the outset of a corporate career but the data here cannot support any con- clusions in this regard; a different research design would be necessary. 116 The significance of Table 42 is that there is very little contrast that shows up between executives and lower managers relative to which functional areas tend to occupy the greatest change in functional areas. Therefore, such an analysis will not serve to differentiate the career patterns of executives and lower managers. Tables 43 and 44 depict the relationship between educational levels and functional area for the respondent's first job in career and present functional occupational area. In examining manufacturing, it can be seen that this functional area had the highest amount of non-college graduates for both scalars, executives and lower managers, at both points in the respondents' careers. Engineering had the lowest amount of non-college graduates at the first firm for both scalars, but at present firm only half of the executives have a bachelor's degree and only about one quarter of the lower managers have such a degree. About 85 per cent of the lower managers did not graduate from college who were in manufacturing at both first and present firm; this compares with 50 per cent for the executives. 12 Regarding the engineering area, the college degree appeared to be important in order to start one's career there, but not quite as necessary later on because for those people in engineering in their present firm, only about half of executives have a college degree, and three-fourths of the lower managers, who are in engineering in their present firm, did not graduate from college. Some of the other functional fir 12In total, 69% of the executive sample graduated from college compared to 25% for lower managers. TABLE 43. --Relationship between respondent's educational level and respondent's functional area of first job in career 117 Executives Lower managers to 3 ii 3 ii 2: 9 :3 S 3.3 2 .0 9° '8 ‘33", 0 go ",9, go 9 m o H "U .9. H 3 13 'U .93. H 3 B c: "'5 Q) 8 .-—1 00—: SH 60—. .53 .. v «s 8 *4 8 33 «3 ° *4 ° 8 +4 0) H :3 O .O :5 U 0 U .Q o f; a 'o g s g '55 'o g ‘3 g 76‘ 5: U i: o :9. o *5 E to :2 o *5 § Ls. o .5 o 3: c: J: E-« z 0.: a 3:. e-« 2 Manufacturing 50% 50% 100% 24 15% 85% 100% 59 Marketing 71% 29% 100% 42 28% 72% 100% 7 Engineering 78% 22% 100% 23 53% 47% 100% 17 Finance, accounting, personnel& ~ purchasing 71% 29% 100% 38 36% 64% 10070 11 TABLE 44. --Re1ationship between respondent's educational level and respondent's present functional area Executives Lower managers 0 o o o u, no no no on a, H 'U .9, 0 “O 'U Q) 0.) U) ('0 0) e—4 q) :1 Q) :1 Q :1 (0 ‘5 8 ‘5 8 .. 3 ° .. ti 0 .. .. o o 9 .... =3 8 :5 U H .8 m 5 U 8 S U ... “5 m *5 rd '0 E 'o E m g o '0 E "a E «s 2: a a 2’. o :2 2o *5 5:; So is: o *5 0' n. .2 «I o J: c: we t—« z o 03: a the E-' 2 Manufacturing 47% 53% 100% 17 14% 86% 100% 65 Marketing 62% 38% 100% 45 29% 71% 100% 17 Engineering 52% 48% 10070 23 28% 72% 100% 29 Finance, accounting, personnel & purchasing 84% 16% 100% 55 41% 59% 100% 22 118 areas had the same tendency but it was not as pronounced as in the case of engineering. There was a higher number of executives with a college degree in their present firm in the areas of finance, accounting, personnel, and purchasing, than in their first firm. In other words, 71 per cent of the executives had a degree in their first firm for these areas, and the per cent rose to 84 per cent in the present firm. There was not as pronounced an increase in the case of lower managers. The relationship between functional occupational changes and geo- graphic mobility is presented in Table 45. It has already been estab- lished that executives' careers are generally characterized by greater geographic mobility than lower managers, and that there is little difference between these two groups in the tendency to change occupa- tional functional areas. Approximately 70 per- cent of both groups have changed their functional area at least one or more times. In examining Table 45 it can be seen that there tends to be little relationship between the extent of geographic mobility and the extent of functional area change. In contrasting the career patterns of executives and lower managers there is at least a slight tendency for a decreasing per cent of functional change as geographic mobility increases for executives, and the opposite trend is partially evident for lower managers, but the extent of such directional change is so slight as not to warrant a strong conclusion. Again, an expanded sample size might show more light on such a relationship. 119 TABLE 45. --Comparison of changes in functional area and geographic mobility ‘m r Executives Lower managers H u H (0 q, :0 .—« m m Geographic mobility 2 3;, a» 3 g’, ‘3 g, 3 3 g, 2 r: f; O a. r: 0 c: I; OH s: 'o m U E “3 as '13 m U E “3 «s o .c: ‘1 .c o .c: ‘3 .t: c: u on '9 0 o r: u on H 0 o :5 s: 0 '5 :3 t: 0 I.“ '-H CU .i-a Q ‘0 ‘H ‘0 ov-o U (0 o a s 2% a 2 o a 2; 2 a . Z rd '0 O 3 e Z a: "o 03 8 All locations similar 23% 17% 25% 39% One geographic move 19 26 38 33 Two geographic moves 34 32 17 14 3 or more geographic moves 22 20 7 12 Questionnaire incomplete 2 5 13 2 Total 100% 100% 100% 100% Number of cases 47 121 40 93 Career Speed Analysis In examining the career speed of individuals for this study greater attention was directed to the executive group as we examined various factors that are associated or not associated with their speed of career relative to their becoming an executive, and their speed of career relative to entering lower management. Before going into an analysis of the executive group we shall examine, briefly, Table 46. In this table the career speed of executives and lower managers, relative to entering lower management, is presented. As noted previously, one of the purposes of this study was to establish certain differences in the career patterns of executives and lower managers. In comparing the 120 TABLE 46. --Age respondent first entered the lower management level Age range Executives Lower managers Age 23 or under 17% , 2% 24 - 26 19 5 27 - 29 23 18 30 - 32 20 23 33 - 36 16 21 Age 37 or older 3 30 No answer 2 1 Total 100% 100% Number of cases 178 148 age at which executives entered lower management, and the age at which lower managers entered this level, the greatest contrasting difference between these two scalars appears. The chi square value reached almost 180, which indicates a highly significant difference between the ages that the executives entered lower management and the ages that the lower managers entered this level. By the age of 26 more than one third of all the executives had entered lower manage- ment. But only seven per cent of the lower managers had entered the lower management level by the age of 26. Before the age of 30 almost two and one-half times as many executives as lower managers had entered the lower management level. As was brought out in the early part of this chapter, the extent of orientation sources for executives was much higher than for lower managers. By the age of 30, or even 26, most of the respondents will have established what extent of orien- tation level they are going to have relative to occupational origin of 121 father, occupational origin of wife's father, educational level, and military exit rank and, therefore, it might be inferred that such orientations have a greater stimulus upon the lower management career speed of executives than upon the executive career speed of executives. The factors associated with the career speed for entering lower management for lower managers will not be presented here. In Table 47 the breakdown of executive career speed is presented. Slightly more than half of the executive group attained that level by the age of 40. Approximately 40 per cent of the executive group obtained executive status between the ages of 41 to 58. Again the problem should be reemphasized that it was not possible to obtain the exact executive career: speed for all the executives because of the difficulty in defining the point at which a person enters such a level. In our research design we asked in the questionnaire for the respondent to give us the age at which he entered executive status. This constituted, for our purposes, the data on executive career speed. Only through a close knowledge of the individual firms that the respondents were associated with, and through a detailed interview with such people, could we improve upon the task of obtaining true executive career speed, but even that method would present certain problems. 3Part of the reason for this is that, as we shall see, very little insight into the dynamics of the career speed of executives was obtained with our size of sample. It may be that even an expanded sample size would not be of value; a change in research design would be the better approach. In Occupational Mobility, Warner and Abegglen used career speed to refer to the age at which the respondent obtained his present 122 TABLE 47. --Age that the executive group first became executives-- executive career speed analysis f-i __—: Age range Executives Age 31 or under 3% 32, 33 9 34, 35 13 36- 4O 33 41.- 46 24 47 - 51 11 Age 52 or older '2 No answer 5 Total 100% Number of cases 178 The problem of determining the factors that are associated with the career speed of individuals would warrant a separate study by itself with an extensive research design. A case study of one large corporation with numerous and detailed interviews would be recommended. There would appear to be a great many chance or fortuitous circumstances that would surround the dynamics of the promotion rate of individuals within large bureaucratic organizations. Even so, the purpose of such career speed research would not be to explain the entire spectrum. Science cannot explain everything in any area. Within the methodological framework of this disSertation, we can present no useful findings that bear upon the dynamics of the factors position. Thus certain people could have been major executives prior to the time of attaining their present position and the value of relating factors such as occupation of father to such a career speed is somewhat questionable, though their definition of career is operationally correct. Op. cit., p. 129. 123 TABLE 48. --Relationship between executive career speed and sources of orientation and between lower management career speed and sources of orientation for executives only ------------- Sources of Orientation ------------- “as 'Eo :3 ‘3 in m o O .—4 "’ H S 0) H H :3 m > 3’, Q, o ~o : a a : .. .2.» . a 8 8 U 2 «s E .c: *5 .9 CL «S O .c .3 ‘3 c: H 3 U) 0* m on ‘3 .9 O O 8 *4 0-1 >‘ - u-d ‘04 4.) ".1 C a: (I, :6 H ,C U) (d *4 Q) H Q) Q) - Q, “5 0) O u-a a) a) 3;; I; H v :3 o u u u c: H .4 ‘1’ 44 U :3 m 0 o as 0 -~ «3 g .... U "o q, 3 .H o z 2 h. H 3 o m we t—« 0 EXECUTIVE High (age 35 or under) 18% 26% 30% 28% 40% 33% N (age 36-40) 34 37 4O 32 37 34 Low (age 41 or over) 48 37 3O 4O 23 33 Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% No. of cases 56 38 66 53 35 61 LOWER MANAGEMENT (Executives only) High (age 26 or under) 390/0 3070 3770 3970 4070 3470 N (age 27 - 32) 42 48 43 42 43 48 Low (age 33 or over) 19 22 20 19 17 18 Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% No. of cases 59 40 67 52 35 62 124 that determine career speed for executives in entering the lower manage- ment level and in entering the executive level. For those executives that had none of the four established sources of orientation, nearly three times as many had a low executive career speed as those that had a high executive career speed. At first this might appear to be a valid and useful conclusion; however, when we examine the effect of having two or more sources of orientation on executive career speed, we find no difference whatsoever. It does not appear to be logical that having no sources of orientation would restrict career speed while the other end of the pole has no relationship at all. This concludes the detailed description of the conceptual frame- work, research design, and findings for the dissertation. The concluding chapter will summarize the findings and present the implications of the study as the author sees them. 5 See Table 48. 125 CHAPTER VII SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Introduction The purposes of this study were to describe the career patterns of two organizational corporate scalars and to determine the impact of four orientations on contrasting career patterns. It was hypothe- sized that occupational level of father, educational level attained, occupational level of wife's father, and level of military exit rank were significant differential factors in the careers of executives and lower managers. The findings described in previous chapters support the hypothesis. 1 In this chapter we will summarize the typical career background of lower managers and executives and conclude with some of the implications of the findings. Summary of Findings The lower manager in this study is about 46 years old,has worked for his present firm between 15 and 20 years, obtained his first job there in manual work and was promoted into lower management about four years later when he was in his early thirties. He earns about $9, 000 per year. 1Occupational level of father: Chapter III; education: Chapter IV; military exit rank and occupational level of wife's father: Chapter V; see Table 49. 126 TABLE 49. --The four sources of orientation--chi square computations Maximum value Computed 1960 executives Source of orientation at 1% level x2 and Warner 8: Abegglen C. S. Education of respondent* 16. 81 161. 33 12. 19 Military exit rank"‘* 9. 21 121. 29 - Occupational level of father when son first became self— supporting’i‘==‘* 11. 34 43. 19 2. 30 Occupational level of wife's father**** 11. 34 15. 73 5. 15 *Completed a graduate degree; executives: 20%; lower managers: 3%. **Exit rank was captain (or equivalent) or higher; executives: 45%; lower managers: 14%. ***Occupational level high; executives: 39%; lower managers: 17%. ****Occupational level high; executives: 30%; lower managers: 18%. His father was generally a skilled worker who experienced no intragenerational mobility and little intergenerational mobility. Almost all of the members of his family are from working class origins, attained no advanced education, and most did not finish high school. His high school work was completed in a fairly large city; it was a'public high school either of a general or trade nature, and sometimes college prep, and he was in the upper third or upper fourth of his class. He became self-supporting at age eighteen and obtained his first full-time job at age nineteen or twenty. The lower manager started college work but quit along the way. For those few that did graduate, they did so in their middle or late 127 twenties, majored in business administration or engineering, attained no scholarships and were ranked no higher than the upper third of their class. He may or may not have been in the military and if he did see service, he entered as a private and experienced no unusual mobility as he terminated as a sergeant after receiving no military decorations. As a veteran he served in World War II for three years and was dis- charged in 1946. It is unlikely that his military experience benefited him much in his later career development. The lower manager was married in 1940 at the age of 26, about seven years prior to entering his present occupational level. His wife graduated from high school and may have attempted college or nursing study but did not finish. His wife‘s father is in the lower occupational statum. His occupational career began in manual occupations; he has worked for two other firms before joining his present firm in the mid 1940's. He has made one change in his functional occupational area and has changed his state of residence once. Our description of the typical lower manager will now be expanded to include the findings of the typical lower manager by Coates and 2 Pellegrin. According to Coates and Pellegrin: 2Roland J. Pellegrin and Charles H. Coates, "Executives and Supervisors: Contrasting Definitions of Career Success, " Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 1, No. 4(March, 1957). 128 Success is usually defined by the supervisor in terms of liking his job, being well treated by fellow workers and supervisors, having security and fair wages, providing educational oppor- tunities for his children, leading a satisfying and happy life off the job, overcoming his handicaps, enjoying good working condi- tions in a physically safe environment, and having sufficient leisure time and opportunity for rest and recreation . Thus supervisors tend to define success in terms of goals that seem attainable to persons of their own social and occupational levels. Logically the experienced worker, in realistically appraising his career chances, will set a high level of aspira- tion for himself only if he possesses the advantages of a middle class or higher social background. Without such a background, he typically lacks not only the technical qualifications for high level positions, but as Bernard C. Rosen has remarked, he has not been thoroughly exposed during his childhood to those values which encourage behavior leading to vertical mobility. Once he has enjoyed vertical mobility leading to his present position, the supervisor feels that he has made considerable gains in life. He defines success in terms which indicate that he feels suc- cessful and relatively content with his situation. Rather than revise upward his goals or levels of aspiration, 3 he rests on his previous accomplishments. . . . The supervisor typically beginning his career as a wage worker, develops a fairly low level of aspiration. Hence he may not display, either in his attitudes or behavior, characteristics which would lead his superiors to consider him eligible for promotion to a higher 3On this point Hyman notes: "But there are other factors of a more subtle psychological nature which have not been illuminated and which may also work to perpetuate the existing order. It is our assumption that an intervening variable mediating the relationship between low position and lack of upward mobility is a system of beliefs and values within the lower classes which in turn reduces the very voluntary actions which would ameliorate their low position . . . . To put it simply the lower class individual doesn't want as much success, knows he couldn't get it even if he wanted to, and doesn't want what might help him get success . . . . Presumably this value system arises out of a realistic appraisal of reality and in turn softens for the individual the impact of low status. Unfortunately, we have at the moment little information on its genesis. " (Hyman, Herbert H. , "The Value Systems of Different Classes: A Social Psychological Contribution to the Analysis of Strati- fication, " in S. M. (Lipset and Reinhard Bendix, Class, Status and Power. (Glencoe: The Free Press, 1953), pp. 426-27. 129 position than that of supervisor4. . . . Whether or not a person regards career mobility to high levels as essential for success seems to be significantly affected by his social background, training, and early job experiences. The precise influence of these factors upon levels of aspiration is not agreed upon in current literature, however. This completes the description of the lower manager so that we will now proceed to the executive in our study. After describing our typical executive, his career pattern and extent of orientations, we shall integrate our findings with those of Coates and Pellegrin in their research. Many other integrations would be possible but since we used Coates and Pellegrin in the case of lower managers, we will refer to them for the executive group also. The executive is about 46 years old, and has worked for his present firm between 10 and 15 years. He entered the lower manage- ment level at age 28 and became an executive in his late thirties or early forties. He presently earns about $25, 000 per year. Relative to behavior patterns, Moore states: "Also, a large scale organization acquires the characteristics of any social system. The behavior required of employees at various levels is not only functionally and technically different but also socially and ideologically different. There are social exceptions regarding how a man in a particular position ought to behave. Thus, a mobile executive not only must acquire the technical and functional proficiency of higher level positions but also the social qualifications. When they say, "He's a good man, but he just wouldn't fit, " that means that he would not fit socially. A man by his whole nature conveys an impression, has an impact, which is right or wrong for particular social positions." (David G. Moore, "Why Some Win, Others Lose, " Nation's Business, October, 1960, p. 54.) See also: Charles R. Walker, Robert H. Guest, and Arthur N. Turner, The Foreman on the Assembly Line (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1956). 130 His father was generally a member of the upper-middle class and experienced some intragenerational mobility and some inter- generational mobility. Most of the members of the executive's ' family are from middle class origins and though they did not obtain a large amount of advanced education they did tend to finish high schooL His high school work was completed in a fairly large city; he generally went to a college prep high school and was often in the upper ten per cent of his class. He became self-supporting at age 20 and obtained~his first full-time job at age 22. The executive is a college graduate. He graduated in his early twenties, majored in business administration generally or in liberal arts or engineering, attained a moderate amount of college honors, and was ranked near the upper ten per cent of his class. He may or may not have been in the military and if he did see service, he entered as a private or lieutenant and experienced a certain amount of mobility as he largely terminated as a captain or . its equivalent or higher. As a veteran he served in World War II for three years and was discharged in 1946. It is quite likely that the military experience benefited him in his later career development. The executive was married in the 1940's at the age of 26, about a year before the time when he entered first line supervision. His wife generally went beyond high school. His wife's father is a middle class person. 131 His occupational career began in white collar occupations; he has worked for two other firms before joining his present firm in the late 1940's. He has made one change in his functional occupational area and has changed his state of residence twice. At this point we will add the description of the typical executive in the research of Coates and Pellegrin just as we did in the case of the lower manager. According to Coates and Pellegrin their typical 5 executives: state that their present conceptions are not nearly as materialistic and involve many more subjective or inner satis- factions. Thus their current statements emphasize a sense of personal accomplishment; a feeling of independence and security; pride in helping others and living up to the expectations of superiors, subordinates, colleagues, and the public . . . . The executive's career is a matter of great concern to him. The job itself is at the very core of the executive's life, resulting in intense involvement with and personal commitment to his job and career- . . . For the executive the job is a goal in and of itself . . . . The executive, originally having a high level of aspiration as a result of his advantaged background, initially defines success in terms of the "American dream. " During the course of his career, he enjoys mobility leading to successively higher positions. Advantaged in terms of opportunities and training, he is more adaptable to changes in status. His flexi- bility permits him to internalize the role expectations and ideologies of each level of the hierarchy to which he accedes. . . . Theexecutive at the commencement of his career is likely to express attitudes and exhibit behavior patterns which mark him as a "comer. " As he climbs the ladder to higher managerial positions, he internalizes continually higher goals which stimu- late him to display the characteristics regarded as vital for those who would play successfully the role of top level executives . . . . In the case of these executives, rapid promotion began early in their careers as a result of their unusual capacity to learn the appropriate role behavior of high statuses. Their quick advance- ment apparently coincided with their assimilation of middle-class Pellegrin and Coates, op. cit. 132 ideologies . . . . Their attitudes and values are presently similar to those of other executives . . . . The executive, typically of middle-class origins, maintains a high level of aspiration and sets continually higher goals for himself as he moves upward in the occupational hierarchy. Implications We may now ask: What is the significance of the conclusion that the orientations and career patterns of executives and lower managers are different? These findings should be helpful in such fields as edu- cation, management, development, corporate selection and promotion activities, and general sociological and economic theory. Certain of these areas will now be analyzed. It has been shown that the lower management group is somewhat removed from the position occupied by the executive level and conse- quently possesses less power and authority. Lower managers tend to . have less impact on the major decisions affecting not only the 300, 000 employees of the participating firms but also on the community and the nation at large. The lower managers are approximately the same age as the executive group. Yet their occupational, social, and educational backgrounds differ from those of the executives. This could indicate that the achievement level of individuals could be predicted, within limits, while such people are relatively young. If this is true it would be highly useful because such information as that which we’ obtained 6It.is not likely that the research design employed by Coates and Pellegrin substantiated all that they claim here, but much of what they say has been confirmed by other researchers. See especially: William E. Henry, "The Business Executive: A Study in the Psychodynamics of a Social Role, " American Journal of Soci‘ology, LIV (Jan. , 1949), pp. 286- 291. 133 through our research design approaches the kinds of information that are or could be included in the traditional employment application form. It would surely be desirable if we could even increase the prediction efficiency that could be obtained with the approach presented in this research. Further research, especially in the area of industrial psy- cholOgy as well as an expansion of the number and nature of the organi- zational scalars wedged in this research design, will bring into clearer focus those factors which tend most to be associated with executive level achievement. A society without efficient leadership contracts; by studying the factors associated with the achievement attained by American business leaders, contributions to our study of leadership accumulate. Such knowledge is of value to corporations engaged in or contemplating executive development programs as was pointed out in Chapter One. Executive development is largely bankrupt7 at the present time in our American society. All have their own views, their own philosophy, and their own sacred set of techniques and few attempt to build on existing knowledge. This is not to overly criticize them because of the paucity of data that is available to all. Business schools can use the knowledge to strengthen their programs. Judging from the wave of recent writings on how to improve and how they have improved business training in American universities, 7 See supplementary bibliography by the author, University of Detroit, January, 1961, mimeographed. 134 wide interest unquestionably exists. Executives, over time, are becoming increasingly trained in business and commerce. Thus a great wealth of knowledge is needed and is being accumu- lated; this study has contributed only a small part of the total. But it is expected that studies of this nature are worthy of and can be repeated, though expanded into the direction advocated. In this way this study becomes one of a network or web of integrated studies dealing with executive behavior. Another area in which the conclusions of this study may have importance concerns additions to our knowledge of the theory of social stratification. Since it has been shown that orientations vary between two occupational scalars in corporate structure, it may also be true that orientations such as levels of heritage and education vary between 1 other stratificationso?‘ our corporate society. Thus it may be hypothe- sized that the orientations and career patterns are different not only for executives and lower managers but also for blue collar workers, white collar non-supervisory employees, lower managers, middle management personnel and executives. According to economists, maximum social utility derives from the fullest possible utilization of resources. A high degree of geo- graphic and/or occupational functional mobility may facilitate the The research conclusions on the amount of business education obtained by executives of Taussig and Joslyn, 1928, Warnerand Abegglen, 1952, and the executives in this sample are presented in Table 14. 135 operation of our economic system. Therefore additions to our knowledge of mobility can indirectly facilitate increased social utility by making known the areas in which concentrated effort may have an effect upon the utilization of resources with regard to labor. If workers tend not. to be geographically mobile then wage rates, for example, may be unduly high in certain sections in the United States where a labor scarcity exists. if our society were fully mobile (responsive) with respect to changes in occupational functional area and to territorial shifting, then we would see an increase in social utility. These are just some of the examples that could be cited. The findings of this study show that executives have exhibited greater mobilities than lower managers in their career pattern in such areas as territorial mobility, occupational mobility, and functional mobility. Also, it can be hypo- thesized that the extent of mobility may vary among other occupational scalars and among the different social classes in general. The society of the United States has generally ceased to be pyra_ midal in shape and has become more of a diamond shaped structure. In this century the number of white collar workers has increased more than the number of people in manual occupations. This fact coupled with an increase in the educational level of our society suggests that a person's origin and education may be less of a differentiating career in the future for such groups as executives and lower managers than for the present. time period. It is likely then that. the educational level of attainment of future executives in the United States will be greater than 136 that which presently exists today. It is also likely that people in first and second line supervision will be characterized by an ever increasing educational level especially because of the advent and upsurge of executive development programs in American corporate industry. The major source of candidates for such managerial training programs is the university. Promotion "from within" will actually start from with- out as manual occupations continue to supply an ever decreasing number of managerial people. College graduates do not start in blue collar occupations. Instead they begin in white collar non-supervisory positions and are “brought along" or developed to where they function well in lower management positions. Even these assignments are rotated intra-plant and inter-plant within the firm and eventually, it is hoped, many function in middle management and even in upper management. The real success of executive development programs awaits validation; it is too soon to tell with substantial assuredness. The old routes to advancement are changing, clear patterns are being modified by ”across—the-board” organizational dynamics. It is generally believed that advancement is strongly tied in with education as bureaucratic recruitment and promotion tends to increase in the larger non-family owned enterprises. We might now ask which career pattern will tend to change most, those of executives or lower managers, during the next generation. It is likely that the career patterns of lower managers will change more than the career patterns of executives in the next few years, 137 primarily because of the increase in the recruitment of: lower managers from training programs versus from the shop, and hence they will have more education than in this sample, and also because of the general relationship between social origin and educational opportunities. There are other career elements that may differ in the lows\r manager of the near future in relation to his 1960 counterpart. But th‘e most important 1 area concerned here is that the future lower manager who stays in lower echelons of management will tend to have an early career pattern that is partially identifiable while he is in his twenties! It is likely that research of this nature could reveal predictable occupational achievement for groups other than lower managers and executives. All career patterns will be influenced by the changing structure of our emergent American society. As research data mount on the character of such societal changes, career pattern analyses can be integrated with increased prediction effectiveness. The military impact on career patterns will undoubtedly shift in future peacetime service or in any nuclear war or cold war, primarily due to the striking differences in war preparation, training, and experiences of people in the ”new" service. Predictions as to the nature and shape of our future American stratified social structure are difficult to make. One reason for this is the internal dynamics of our shifting, emergent society. The Indus— trial Revolution is just beginning. Technological innovation and an advanced state of mechanization are changing the old "blue collar" occupational groupings. Even “white collar" office job descriptions 138 are moving in both directions in the job evaluation scheme. The result, this author maintains, is the concept of a "grey collar" movement, which is a division of our American occupational structure characterized by. people with more skills and responsibility than traditional blue collar workers and therefore a slightly higher social class, yet who have not acquired the prestige and value system of the present white collar employee group. Some of these "grey collar" workers are the mechanics and repairmen who ”man" parts of our complex technological system. Others are merely in the beginning stages of identification, many work in office surroundings, are salaried, and yet work within traditional blue collar systems. This group will be made up of new entrants, people who move up from manual shop work, and a few may move in downwardly from existing white collar responsibilities. Thus the career patterns of the supervisors of "grey collar" workers will be unknown until an identification of the group takes place. Conclusion Within the limitations set forth in Chapter II, it has been found that there is not an extremely large difference in the career patterns of executives and lower managers. Most of the executives, however, were characterized by somewhat higher sources of orientation than lower managers, but since a minority of executives had both a similarity in the general career pattern of lower managers, and a similar relative lack of high sources of orientation, and yet became high status achievers 139 and, since a minority of lower managers possessed a large part of the career pattern of executives, and were characterized by relatively high sources of orientation to achievement, and yet remained in lower manage- ment, it must be concluded that certain factors other than those studied in this research design are operating to influence the career achieve- ment level of individuals. If it were deemed desirable to predict high and non-high status achievers from a group of individuals in their twenties, the results of this study, carefully applied, could narrow the range of error in making such predictions. Even though this is a modest contribution, it is thoroughly evident that further research is needed. If part of the research direction is. based on this study, then both a larger sample size is needed as well as a deletion and addition of certain items in the research design. Other directions that would be fruitful would include an intensive use of depth interviewing and the case study, along with an expansion from descriptive sociology into such areas as psychology and cultural anthr opology. 9Such as those hypothesized by Super, see Chapter I. 140 EXHIBIT I COVER LETTER AND QUESTIONNAIRE 141 ll}: (be wiry of {Oet wit soon It. Ncfllcl-IOLS ROAD 0 UNwawsnv a-eooo ..___.__.. DETROIT 2|. MICHIGAN with the sponsorship and support of Michigan State University and The University of Detroit, you are being asked to take a few minutes of your time to participate in this national research study on management career patterns. Only a limited . number of management people have been selected for the sample, which makes your reply essential. Our present state of knowledge of management is far from- adequate in such crucial areas as executive development, leadership, and methods of identifying.promotable.people. The purpose of this research is to contribute to our.understanding of administrative management. The study is built on the framework and findings of l. Lloyd warmer and James O. Abegglen in their 1952 study of American business leaders. Thus, your cooperation will make the present research’ one of a network of studies that will add to our knowledge of , this important segment of our social structure. Your reply will be held in strict confidence and no firm or person will be identified in the published results. Most of the items can be answered by a checkmank. If you will take a few minutes of your time right now and send us the data on your background, we can begin the interpretation and achieve an early publication date. Needless to say, the success of this research depends upon your cooperation. ~ Sincerely'yours, Thomas R. O'Donovan Assistant.Professor of Management TR03dq enc. 142 STUDY OF MANAGEMENT CARmm.PATTmum STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY l. Whatisyourpresentage? ......... ..... (5-6) 2. At what age did you become self- supporting? ..... . . . . . . . ('7-8) 3. How many firms have you been associated with since your first full time job. when you began your occupational career (including your present firm)? . . . . . . . . (9) 4. At what age did you obtain your first full time job which marked the beginning of your occupational career? ................. . . . . . . . . . (IO-ll) 5. How many years have you worked for the firm where you are currently employed?. . . . . . . . . . (12) 6 . How old were you when you begag working for the firm where you are currently employed?. . . . . . (13-14) 7 . What was your first job where you are now working? (Brief Description): 05-16) 8 . In your f_i§t position with this firm where you are 110w working, what was your approximate occupational level? (Check one) : ( ) a. Hourly worker ( ) b. Salaried. white collar. and non-supervisory ( ) c. Supervisory (lower management) ( ) d. Middle management (17) ( ) 8. Upper management ( ) f. Major executive 9. How old were you when you fir_s_t entered the following occupational levels? (Leave blank those parts of this question that do not apply) Age: a. First line supervision (lower management) b. Middle management level (18-19) c. Major executive level 10 . Where were you born? (20) 11. What is your marital status? In what year were you married? (21-22) 12 . Are you a veteran? Yes No Your rank when you entered the military: Rank when discharged; Date of discharge: (23-24) Number of years in service: Please describe any military decorations you may have received: 13. Extent of schooling of yourself and family, lace an "X" in the hi best level attained) : ( 5) (26) 27) (28) (29) (30) SELF FATHER MOTHER WIFE OLDEST OLDEST SON BROTHER (if above age 21) Completedallorpartofgrammar....( )...( )...()...()...( ).....() school Somehighschool ...... .....( ). .( ). (). (). .( ). ..() Graduated from high school. . . . ( ). .( ) . ( ) . ( ). .( ) . . .( ) Somecollege ......... ....( ). .( ). (). (). .( ). .() Graduated from college . . . . ( ). .( ) . ( ) . ( ). .( ) . .( ) Some post-graduate study. . . ..... ( ). .( ) . ( ) . ( ). .( ) . .( ) Completed graduate degree ...... ( ). .( ) . ( ) . ( ). .( ) . .( ) (IF YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS REGARDING ANY ITEM IN THIS QUESTIONNAIRE. PLEASE ENTER THEM ON THE REVERSE SIDE OF THE PAGE OR IN THE MARGINS) I. Type of high school attended (check one) : ( ) a _ Public ( ) b. Parochial 143 (3,) ( ) c. Other private ( ) d Did not attend high school 5. Type of high school training (check one) : ( ) a General ( ) b. Trade ( ) c. College prep. ( ) (I Not sure (31) ( ) e. Other 3. In what location (city & state) did you attend high school? (32) a . What year did you graduate from high school? (33-34) b . What was the approximate size of the community in which you attended high school? 7 . If you attended college. please complete the following: Institution Location Major Degree Year Degree last Year Attended (City & State) Subject Received kcelved Attended (35-36) (37-38) 18 . How much formal business training have you had? None . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . ( ) Correspondence courses. public school. . . . . . . . ( ) (39) Commercial training in college or university . . . . . ( ) 19. What was your highest academic rank in high school (and college. if you attended)? Rank High School College (Bachelors degree) Upper 10% of class ( ) ( ) Upper 1/4 of class ( ) ( ) Upper 1/ 3 of class ( ) ( ) (40) Upper 1/2 of class ( ) ( ) Upper 3/ 4 or lower ( ) ( ) 20 . Briefly describe any scholastic honors or scholarships you may have received during your college study: ' (41) 21. If you obtained a bachelor's degree. about how much of the total educational expenses were earned and paid for by yourself? ( ) a. None ( ) b. less than half ( ) c. About half (41) ( ) d. More than half ( ) c. All 22. Other than formal education. have you taken any specialized study courses. such as adult education classes. etc. ?' Yes No If yes. describe briefly: (42) 23. Have you ever participated in a management training or executive development program? Yes No Dates of participation: (43) 24. Were any of the following people owners or executives... . .in your present firm when you . . .In the organization which you first entered? first entered It? Yes No (44) Yes No (45) Famer O O O O I ( ) ( ) O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ( ) ( ) Otherrelatives..()(). ......... .......() () FIierEdS I O O O O ( ) ( ) I O O O 0 O O O O O O O I I O O O ( ) ( ) (IF YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS REGARDING ANY ITEM IN THIS QUESTIONNAIRE. PLEASE ENTER THEM ON THE REVERSE SIDE OF THE PAGE OR IN THE MARGINS) fu- 144 25. Creek the rinci a1 occupations of others in our family. (if deceased or retired. please indicate previous occupation) p p (46-4 4'?) (48- 49 ) (50 -5 5) (52- 53) (54- 55) (56- -57) Your Father Your Father Your Father' 3 Your Mother' s Your Wife' s Your Oldest (at the time of (when you first Father Father Father Brother your birth) became self - . supporting) Worker. unskilled or semiskilled . . ( ) . Worker. skilled or mechanic . . ( ) . Farm worker or small tenant . ( ) . Farm owner without paid help . . ( ) . Farm owner or manager with paid help . ( ) . Clerical Employee . .( ) . Salesman . - ( I - Foreman . . ( ) . Other first line supervisor . . ( ) . Junior or minor executive (middle management) .( ) . Major executive . . ( ) . Owner. small business (sales under $50,000). . ( ) . Owner. medium business. (sales be- tween $50.000 & $100. 000) . ( ) . Owner. large business. (sales over $100. 000) - ( ) - Uniformed military service. . ( ) -. Profession: Engineer . . ( ) . Lawyer .( ) . Doctor (M.D.) . .( ) . Minister . . ( ) . Professor . . ( ) . Public Schoolteacher . ( ) . Other (Please specify) OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) . . . . 01 02 03 O4 05 06 07 08 09 00 SUPPLEMICN'I’ARY 145 QUESTION (,‘ON'I‘iNUEli Dates of employment: Job title of your position: Place of employment: Kind of business or organization: Size of firm or organization: Your highest occupational level: Your approximate yearly salary or earnings: Description of work: Dates of employment: Job title of your position: Place of employment: Kind of business or organization: Size of firm or organization: Your highest occupational level: Your approximate yearly salary or earnings: Description of work: Dates of employment: Job title of your position: Place of employment: Kind of business or organization: Size of firm or organization: Your highest occupational level: Your approximate yearly salary or earnings: .L.___~_--__-_ Description of work: SUPPLEMENTARY QUEST ION CONTINUED Dates of employment: job title of your position: Place of employment: Kind of business or organization: Size of firm or organization: Your highest occupational level: Your approximate yearly salary or earnings: Description of work: Dates of employment: Job title of your position: Place of employment: Kind of business or organization: Size of firm or organization: Your highest occupational level: Your approximate yearly salary or earnings: Description of work: Dates of employment: Job title of your position: Place of employment: Kind of business or organization: Size of firm or organization: Your highest occupational level: Your approximate yearly salary or earnings: Description of work: 146 APPENDIX TABLE 1. --Age analysis of respondents Age Executives Lower Managers groqug Number Percent Average Number Percent Average age age 35-42 54 30. 3% 39 47 31. 8% 39. 5 43-48 70 39. 3% 45 54 36. 4% 45 49-58 54 30. 3% 53 47 31. 8% 53 Totals 178 100% 46 148 100% 46 147 APPENDIX TABLE 2. --Executives and lower managers: the relationship between the occupational level of their father and their wife's father Executive's , _ _ Executive's Wife's father's occupational level father's occupational level Low N High Low 49 % 27% 13% N 27% 48% 45% High 24% 25% 42% Total 100% 100% 100% Lower manager's Lower manager's wife's father's father's occupational level occupational level Low N High Low 50% 47% 40% N 32% 36% 30% High 18% 17% 30% Total 100% 100% 100% 148 BIBLIOGRAPHY Acton Society Trust, Management Succession. London: Acton Society Trust, 1956. (Reviewed by N. H. Martin in the American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 63, pp. 325-26). Barnard, Chester. The Functions of the Executive. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1938. Beard, Miriam. A History of the Businessman. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1938. Bendix, Reinhard, and S. M. Lipset(editors). Class, Status and Power. Glencoe, Illinois: Free Press, 1953. Clements, Roger V. Managers: A Stucbrof Their Careers in Industrj. London: George Allen and Unwin, Ltd. , 1958. Coates, Charles H. , and Roland J. Pellegrin. "Executives and Supervisors: Contrasting Self-Conceptions and Conceptions of Each Other, " American Sociologal Review, Vol. 22, No. 2 (April, 1957), pp. 217-220. . "Executives and Supervisors: Informal Factors in Differential Bureaucratic Promotion, " Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 2, No. 2 (September, 1957), pp. 200-215. ”Executives and Supervisors: A Situational Theory of Differ- ential Occupational Mobility, ” Social Forces, V01. 35 (1956), pp. 121-26. Collins, Orvis. "Ethnic Behavior in Industry: Sponsorship and Rejec- tion in a New England Factory, " American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 51 (January, 1946), pp. 293-298. Davidson, Percy E. , and H. Dewey Anderson. Occupational Mobiliiy in an American Community. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press, 1937. Form, William H. and Delbert C. Miller. "Occupational Career Pattern as a Sociological Instrument, " American Journal of Sociolog , Vol. 54, No. 4 (January, 1949), pp. 317-29. Fortune, ”The Nine Hundred, " Vol. 46 (November, 1952). Fortune, "1, 700 Top Executives, " November, 1959, PP. 138-43. 149 Gusfield, Joseph R. ”Equalitarianism and Bureaucratic Recruitment, " Administrative Science Quarterly, March, 1958, pp. 521-41. Henry, William E. "The Business Executive: A Study in the Psycho- dynamics of a Social Role, " American Journal of Sociology, LIV (January, 1949), pp. 286-91. "Identifying the Potentially Successful Executive, " Personnel Series, American Management Association, No. 127, 1949. Keller, Suzanne, 1. "Social Origins and Career Lines of Three Generations of American Business Leaders, " Ph. D. thesis, New York, Columbia University, 1954. Microfilm. Lenski, Gerhard E. ”Trends in Inter-generational Occupational Mobility in the United States, " American Sociolggical Review, Vol. 23, No. 5 (October, 1958), pp. 514-523. Lewis, Gordon F. "Occupational Mobility and Career Patterns of Small Businessmen in an American City, " Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, University of Kentucky, 1958. Lipset, Seymour M. , and Reinhard Bendix. Social Mobility in Indus- trial Society. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1959. Mack, Raymond W. "Occupational Determinateness: A Problem and Hypothesis in Role Theory, " Social Forces, V01. 35, No. 1 October, 1956, pp. 20-25. Martin, Norman H. and Anselm L. Strauss. "Patterns of Mobility within Industrial Organizations, " Journal of Business, April, 1956, pp. 101-110. Merton, Robert K. Social Theory and Social Structure, Rev. ed. , Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1957. Miller, Delbert C. and William H. Form, ”The Career Pattern as a Sociological Instrument, " American Journal of Sociology, January, 1949, pp. 317-329. Industrial Sociology: An Introduction to the Sociology of Work Relations. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1951. Miller, S. M. "The Concept of Mobility, " Social Problems, Vol. 3, No. 2 (October, 1955), pp. 65-73. 150 Miller, William. Men in Business: Essays in the HistogLof Entre- preneur ship. Cambridge, Mass. : Harvard University Press, 1952. See especially Frances W. Gregory and Irene D. New, "The American Industrial Elite in the 1870's. " Mills, C. Wright. "The American Elite: A Collective Portrait, " The Tasks of Economic History (Supplement issue of the Journal of Economic History), Vol. 5, December, 1954, pp. 20-44. Moore, David G. "What Makes a Top Executive ?” Personnel, Vol. 37, No. 4 (July-August, 1960), pp. 8-19. "Why Some Win, Others Lose, " (Keys to Executive Success, I), Nation's Business, October, 1960, p. 40. Newcomber, Mabel. The Big Business Executive. New York: Columbia University Press, 1955. Pellegrin, Roland J. , and Charles H. Coates. ”Executives and Super- visors: Contrasting Definitions of Career Success, " Administrative Science Quarterly, March, 1957, pp. 506-17. ROgoff, Natalie. "Recent Trends in Occupational Mobility, " Ph. D. thesis, University of Chicago Libraries, 1950, published in 1953 by Free Press, under the same title. Rosen, Bernard C. "The Achievement Syndrome: A Psychocultural Dimension of Social Stratification, " American Sociological Review, Vol. 21, 1956, pp. 203-211. Sorokin, Pitirim. Social and Cultural Mobility. Chicago, Illinois: The Free Press, 1959. - Social Mobility. New York: Harper and Bros. , 1927. Super, Donald E. , and associates. Vocational Development, A Frame- work for Research, Career Pattern Study, Monograph One, New York: Columbia University, 1957. Taussig, F. W., and C. S. Joslyn. American Business Leaders. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1932, pp. 233-70. Walker, Charles. Steeltown. New York: Harper, 1950. Walker, Charles R. , Robert H. Guest, and Arthur N. Turner. The Foreman on the Assembly Line. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1956. 151 Warner, W. Lloyd, and James C. Abegglen, Big Business Leaders in America. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1955. Warner, W. Lloyd, and James C. Abegglen. Occupational Mobility in American Business and Industry. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1955. Warner, W. Lloyd, and Norman H. Martin. Industrial Man: Business- men and Business Orianizations. New York: Harper and Bros. , 1959, Ch. 3. ', «- ,, 3:5, USE OM} IW #41,}, USE C.“ 'A 9W A.‘ ‘ \n .. ‘ .h r. ‘_ ... j 1 .4 V #2 i Afiii 1965 nrcnran smTE UNIV. LIBRARIES illiliiiiiillllilmil”HIiiililiiililiiiIliiliiliilil 31293102873027